Finkelstein I Etal 1993 Shiloh - The Archaeology of A Biblical Site

Copyright © 1993. The Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University. All rights reserved.
May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair
uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 1/26/2018 8:32 AM via BEN GURION UNIV
AN: 1537790 ; ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN, SHLOMO BUNIMOVITZ, ZVI LEDERMA.; Shiloh : The Archaeology of a Biblical Site
Account: s4309548
Copyright © 1993. The Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair
SHILOH
THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF A BIBLICAL SITE
NUMBER 10
MONOGRAPH SERIES
TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY
SONIA AND MARCO NADLER INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY
SHILOH
THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF A BIBLICAL SITE
by
ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN, SHLOMO BUNIMOVITZ AND ZVI LEDERMAN
with contributions by
Baruch Brandl, Erich Friedmann, Jonathan Glass, Yuval Goren, Shlomo Hellwing,
Liora Kolska Horwitz, Vered Kishon, Mordechai Kislev, Hanoch Lavee,
Nili Liphschitz, Peter Northover, Naomi Porat, Baruch Rosen,
Ionel Rosenthal, Moshe Sadeh, Benjamin Sass,
Sariel Shalev and Moshe Wieder
ISRAEL FINKELSTEIN
Editor
MONOGRAPH SERIES OF THE INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY

TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY
This publication was made possible through grants from the

Georg and Shulamit Majewski [Israel] Endowment Fund
and the
Friends of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University
Published by the Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology

(Bequeathed by the Yass Estate, Sydney, Australia)
of the
Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University
ISBN 978-965-266-031-2
©
Copyright 1993
All rights reserved
Second printing 2011
Printed in Israel
CONTENTS
List of Figures vn
Preface xi
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
Israel Finkelstein
PART ONE: STRATIGRAPHY AND ARCHITECTURE

Chapter 2 AREA C: THE IRON AGE I PILLARED BUILDINGS AND OTHER
REMAINS
Shlomo Bunimovitz 15
Chapter 3 AREA D: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE STONE AND EARTH WORKS, LATE
BRONZE AGE DUMPED DEBRIS AND IRON AGE I SILOS
Zvi Lederman and Israel Finkelstein 35
Chapter 4 AREA H..-F: MIDDLE BRONZE III FORTIFICATIONS AND
STOREROOMS
Israel Finkelstein and Zvi Lederman 49
Chapter 5 EXCAVATIONS RESULTS IN AREAS E, G, J, K, LAND M
Israel Finkelstein 65
PART TWO: THE FINDS

Chapter 6 POTTERY
Shlomo Bunimovitz and Israel Finkelstein 81
Chapter 7 FLINT TOOLS
Erich Friedmann 197
I
Chapter 8 i SCARABS AND OTHER GLYPTIC FINDS
Baruch Brandl 203
Chapter 9 CLAY, BONE, META~ AND STONE OBJECTS
Baruch Brandl 223
v
Appendix 1: Identification of Bone Raw Material Used in Artefact

Manufacture
Liora Kolska Horwitz 263
Appendix 2: Macroscopic Description of Stone Objects
Naomi Porat 265
Chapter 10 PERSONAL ACCESSORIES AND ORNAMENTS
Benjamin Sass 266
PART THREE: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSES
Chapter 11 PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSES OF MIDDLE BRONZE AGE III, LATE

BRONZE AGE AND IRON AGE I CERAMIC ASSEMBLAGES
Jonathan Glass, Yuval Goren, Shlomo Bunimovitz and Israel Finkelstein 271
Chapter 12 MIDDLE BRONZE III METAL OBJECTS
Sariel Shalev and Peter N orthover 278
Chapter 13 MICROMORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE MIDDLE
BRONZE AGE GLACIS
Hanoch Lavee, Moshe Wieder and Israel Finkelstein 294
Chapter 14 ELECTRON SPIN RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY OF WHEAT GRAINS
FROM AN IRON AGE I SILO
Ionel Rosenthal and Baruch Rosen 303
PART FOUR: ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY

Chapter 15 FAUNAL REMAINS
Shlomo Hellwing, Moshe Sadeh and Vered Kishon 309
Chapter 16 PALAEOBOTANICAL REMAINS
Nili Liphschitz 351
Chapter 17 FOOD REMAINS

Mordechai Kislev 354
Chapter 18 ECONOMY AND SUBSISTENCE

Baruch Rosen 362
PART FIVE: CONCLUSION
Chapter 19 THE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF SHILOH FROM THE

MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II TO IRON AGE II
Israel Finkelstein 371
List of Loci 394
List of Abbreviations 398
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. L l. The location of Shiloh and the boundaries of the Land of Ephraim survey. 2
Fig. 1.2. Shiloh and its environs. 3
Fig. 1.3. General view of the mound, looking west. 5
Fig. 1.4. General view of the mound, looking west. 5
Fig. 1.5. General plan showing excav~tion areas of the Danish Expedition (sectors) and renewed excavations (areas). 6
Fig. 1.6. Aerial view of the mound (looking south) showing areas of excavations. 8
Fig. 1.7. Aerial view of the mound, looking north. 8
Fig. 1.8. Expedition Staff, season of 1982. 9
Fig. 2.1. Schematic plan of Area C. 16
Fig. 2.2. Aerial view of Area C, looking east (1982). 17
Fig. 2.3. General plan of the Iron I remains in Area C. 18
Fig. 2.4. Section A-A through Iron Age I buildings in Area C, looking south. 19
Fig. 2.5. Section B-B through Iron Age I buildings in Area C, looking south. 19
Fig. 2.6. The Danish excavation in the 'Western Sector', 1929. Destruction debris with collared-rim jars (Shiloh 1969:33). 20
Fig. 2.7. Pillared Building 312, looking north. 22
Fig. 2.8. Southern part of Area C, looking south-east. 22
Fig. 2.9. A row of Iron I pithoi in the southern AISLE of Building 335, looking southeast. 23
Fig. 2.10. A row of Iron I pithoi in southern aisle of Building 335, looking west. 24
Fig. 2.11. Three collared-rim jars in southern aisle of Building 335. 24
Fig. 2.12. Group oflron I vessels from southern aisle of Building 335 after restoration. 25
Fig. 2.13. Northern part of Building 335, looking east. 26
Fig. 2.14. A section through Debris 623, looking north. 26
Fig. 2.15. Corridor 611 (background) and Byzantine Installation 621 (foreground), looking east. 27
Fig. 2.16. Hall 306, looking southeast. 28
Fig. 2.17. Hall306 and upper terrace with Building 312, looking northeast. 28
Fig. 2.18. Isometric reconstruction of the Iron I pillared buildings in Area C. 30
Fig. 2.19. General plan of the Byzantine remains in Area C. 32
Fig. 2.20. The terrace of Area C in excavation season of 1981, looking south. 33
Fig. 3.1. Schematic plan of Area D, showing Middle Bronze, Late Bronze and Iron I remains. 36
Fig. 3.2. Aerial view of Area D, looking southwest. 37
Fig. 3.3. General plan of the MB and LB remains. 38
Fig. 3.4. General view of Area D, looking southeast. 39
Fig. 3.5. Outer face of MB fortification Wall L301. 40
Fig. 3.6. Offset N321, looking northwest. 40
Fig. 3.7. MB Wall M332joining Wall L301, looking northeast. 41
Fig. 3.8. Stone Fill417 in Square L31, looking north. 41
Fig. 3.9. Schematic section of the glacis, looking south. 41
Fig. 3.1 0. General view of sectional trench in Glacis 723. 42
Fig. 3.11. Sectional trench in Glacis 723. 42

Fig. 3.12. Late Bronze Debris 407: southern section of Square N32. 44
Fig. 3.13. Detail of Debris 407 in Square N32. 44
Fig. 3.14. Late Bronze Age Debris 407: goblet with ashes and bones. 45
Fig. 3.15. General plan of the Iron I remains. 46
Fig. 3.16. Iron I silos and MB Wall M332 in Square M33, looking west. 47
Fig. 4.1. Schematic plan of the MB III remains in Area H-F. 50
Fig. 4.2. Aerial view of Area H-F, looking southwest. 50
Fig. 4.3. Area H: revetments supporting outer face of fortification wall in Area H (middle) and Wall AA (right),
looking west. 51
Fig. 4.4. Area H: inner face of fortification wall. 51
Fig. 4.5. Plan of the Rooms L-M area. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.) 52
Fig. 4.6. Section D-D through Rooms M and U. 53
Fig. 4.7. Rooms Land M (left), Room U (middle, foreground) and fortification wall in Area H, looking east. 54
Vll
Fig. 4.8. Area H, excavation in Room U (Square K29). 54

Fig. 4.9. A group of MB HI pithoi uncovered by the Danish expedition in Area H (Shiloh 1969:40). 55
Fig. 4.10. General plan of the MB III remains in Area H-F. 56
Fig. 4.11. Section C-C through Rooms 1532 and 1533. 57
Fig. 4.12. Area F, general view, looking south-west. 58
Fig. 4.13. Area F, general view, looking northeast (1983 season). 58
Fig. 4.14. MB III rooms in Area F, looking southwest. 59
Fig. 4.15. Room 1526 during excavation. 59
Fig. 4.16. An assemblage of vessels from MB III Room 1526 after restoration. 60
Fig. 4.17. Two storage jars in Room 1527. 60
Fig. 4.18. Area F: MB III fills and foundations of walls in Square H,J32, looking north. 61
Fig. 4.19. General plan of the Roman remains in Area F. 63
Fig. 4.20. Roman surfaces (L. 810, in the foreground). 64
Fig. 5.1. Area E: General plan. 66
Fig. 5.2. Area E, Square K42. 66
Fig. 5.3. Area G: General plan. 68
Fig. 5.4. Plan of the remains in Lower Area J. 69
Fig. 5.5. Lower Area J: Wall J581, looking west. 70
Fig. 5.6. Upper Area J: Outer face of the Middle Bronze fortification wall. 71
Fig. 5. 7. Area K: General plan of the Middle Bronze and Iron I remains. 72
Fig. 5.8. Area K: Section E-E. 74
Fig. 5.9. Area K: General plan of the Roman remains. 75
Fig. 5.10. Area M: General plan. 77
Fig. 5.11. Area M: Section F-F. 77
Fig. 6.1. Complete MB III vessels from Area F. 82
Fig. 6.2. Distribution of cooking-pots in the three Middle Bronze assemblages (%). 82
Fig. 6.3. Distribution of decorated sherds in the three Middle Bronze assemblages (%). 83
Fig. 6.4. Distribution of complete vessels in the Area F rooms (%). 83
Figs. 6.5-7. Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from Glacis 723. 97
Figs. 6.8-9. Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from earth fills in Areas F, Hand K. 102
Figs. 6.10-ll. Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from stone fills in Area D. 105
Figs. 6.12-21. Stratum VII (MB III) pottery from the Area F rooms. 107
Fig. 6.22. Stratum VII (MB HI) pottery from the vicinity of the Area F rooms. 119
Fig. 6.23. Stratum VII (MB III) pottery from Area H. 120
Figs. 6.24-28. Stratum VII (MB III) vessels from the Area F rooms. 122
Fig. 6.29. Complete LB vessels from Debris 407 in Area D. 127
Figs. 6.30-37. Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407. 137
Figs. 6.38-39. Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407 -imported wares. 148
Fig. 6.40. Imported LB sherds from other loci. 151
Fig. 6.41. Stratum VI (LB) vessels from Debris 407. 152
Fig. 6.42. Complete Iron I vessels from Area C (including finds from the Danish excavations). 156
Fig. 6.43. Ratio of cooking-pots with everted rims to total number of cooking-pots at five Iron I sites (%). 156
Fig. 6.44. Ratio of collared-rim pithoi to total number of jars at five Iron I sites (%). 157
Fig. 6.45. Flattened, thickened and disc bases vs. ring bases at three Iron I sites(%). 158
Figs. 6.46-49. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- Building 335. 164
Figs. 6.50-51. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- Building 312 and Hall 306. 170
Figs. 6.52-53. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- Debris 623. 171
Fig. 6.54. Fragments of cult stand (1-4) a,ld sherds decorated with animal heads from Debris 623. 173
Fig. 6.55. Fragments of cult stand (1-2) and sherds decorated with animal heads from Debris 623. 174
Fig. 6.56. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area E- Installation 519. 175
Figs. 6.57-58. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area D- L. 403-404. 176
Fig. 6.59. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from silos in Areas C, D and H. 179
Fig. 6.60. Stratum V (Iron I) pottery - miscellaneous. 180
Fig. 6.61. Schematic drawings of punctured and incised handles (see Table 6.19). 181
Figs. 6.62-65. Stratum V (Iron I) vessels from Area C. 182
viii
Fig. 6.66. Stratum IV (Iron II) pottery from Areas E and C. 188
Fig. 6.67. Miscellaneous- MB II, Iron I and Iron II. 189
Fig. 6.68. Miscellaneous- MB, Iron I and Persian. 190
Fig. 6.69. Stratum II pottery and stone vessels from Buildings 804 and 810 in Area F and L. 1112 in Area J. 191
Fig. 6.70. Stratum II pottery from various loci in Area E. Stratum I pottery from the upper terrace of Area C. 192
Fig. 7.1-2. Flint tools. 198
Fig. 8.1. Seal impression 14285. 204
Fig. 8.2. Scarab 7257. 205
Fig. 8.3. Scarab 15126. 206
Fig. 8.4. Scarab 17317. 207
Fig. 8.6. Sealing 15125. 209
Fig. 8.8. One of the seal impressions on storage jar 3398. 212
Fig. 8.9. Scarab 10053. 212
Fig. 8.12. Cylinder-seal impression 14001. 214
Fig. 8.13. Scarab 10127. 215
Fig. 8.15. Seal4083. 217
Fig. 8.16. Seal6189. 218
Fig. 8.17. Potter's mark 6084. 219
Fig. 9.1. Ibex-shaped jug spout 14186. 224
Fig. 9.2. Bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel15177. 225
Fig. 9.3. Reconstruction of bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel 15177. 226
Fig. 9.4. Clay objects. 228
Fig. 9.7. Ibex-shaped jug spout 14186; Bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel 15177. 233
Fig. 9.9. Bone objects. 236
Fig. 9.10. Metal objects. 239
Fig. 9 .11. Metal objects. 240
Fig. 9.12. Silver jewellery. 244
Fig. 9.13. Stone objects. 247
Fig. 9.16. Alabaster pilgrim flask 14540. 250

Fig. 10.1. Personal accessories and ornaments. 267
Fig. 11.1-6. Thin sections of collared-rim pithoi of Group A. 273
Fig. 11.7. Collared-rim pithoi of Type A and Type B. 280
Fig. 11.8. Distribution of Group A and Group B collared-rim pithoi in the Area C pillared buildings and in Debris 623. 281
Fig. 11.9. Proportion of the two groups of pithoi in the pillared buildings and in Debris 623 (%). 282
Fig. 11.10. Distribution of the Group A and Group B pithoi in Area C (pillared buildings vs. Debris 623; %). 282
Fig. 13.1. Schematic section of the glacis, looking south. 294
Fig. 13.2. Detail of the southern section of the glacis. 295
Fig. 13.3. Detail of the southern section of the glacis. 295
Fig. 13.4. Burnt organic remnants from Layer 2 (crossed nicols). 296
Fig. 13.5. Dolomite grains in the microfabric of Layer 3 (crossed nicols). 296
Fig. 13.6. Mosaic-like mosepic fabric in Layer 3 (crossed nicols). 296
Fig. 13.7. Skew planes (cracks) characteristic of the microfabric of Layer 3 (plane-polarized light). 296
Fig. 13.8. Dolomitic porous structure characteristic of Layer 4 (crossed nicols). 296
IX
Fig. 13.9. Cross section of a partly decomposed root from Layer 5 (plane-polarized light). 296
Fig. 13.1 0. Grain size distribution of the earthy material of the different layers (see legend). 299
Fig. 14.1. Typical ESR signal of a Shiloh wheat sample. 304
Fig. 14.2. The relationship between the g-value and heating temperature of wheat grains. 305
Fig. 14.3. The relative spin concentration as a function of temperature of a second heating treatment. 305
Fig. 15.1. Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in the four main strata(%). 319
Fig. 15.2. Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in four Middle Bronze sites(%). 320
Fig. 15.3. Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in three Late Bronze sites(%). 321
Fig. 15.4. Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in six Iron I sites(%). 322
Fig. 17.1. Triticum parvicoccum, base of rachis (xiS; SEM micrograph). 358
Fig. 17.2. Hordeum distichon, rachis fragment (xl5; SEM micrograph). 358
Fig. 17.3. Vitis vinifera, raisins (x2). 359
Fig. 17.4. Vitis vinifera, raisin with a stalk (xlO; SEM micrograph). 360
Fig. 17.5. Vitis vinifera, broken raisin showing the pips (xl5; SEM micrograph). 360
Fig. 18.1. Arable land and water-sources around Shiloh. 363
Fig. 19.1. Khirbet er-Rafid, looking northwest. 372
Fig. 19.2. Area Fin the MB HI: schematic reconstruction of the main earth and stone elements. 376
Fig. 19.3. Middle Bronze and Iron Age I sites in the vicinity of Shiloh. 387
X
PREFACE
During the years 1981-1984 four seasons of excavations were conducted under the direction of Israel
Finkelstein at the site of Shiloh by an expedition of the Department for the Land of Israel Studies of
Bar-Ilan University. Assistant directors were Shlomo Bunimovitz and Zvi Lederman.
The excavations were part of a regional project, initiated in 1980, that included a comprehensive
survey of the Land of Ephraim, which encompassed an area of more than 1000 sq. km. in the central hill
country between Ramallah and Nablus. The objective of the survey was to investigate the settlement
patterns of the region, with emphasis on environmental-ecological and socio-economic aspects. 1
The goals of the Shiloh excavation, as defined before and during the campaign, were as follows: to
elucidate the history of the site prior to the Iron Age I and the circumstances of its development into an
Israelite centre; to determine its character during the Iron Age I and its position in the overall settlement
pattern and social system of the period; to gain a better understanding of the material culture of the
central hill country in the Middle Bronze, Late Bronze and Iron Age I periods.
Each season lasted from five to six weeks. Participants, ranging from forty to more than eighty on
occasion, included students from the Department for the Land of Israel Studies of Bar-Ilan University,
foreign volunteers, youth groups and army instructors. Permanent members of the expedition included
Pnina Ben-Hananya and Ariella Cohen (registration), Shmuel Yosef and Ori Rei (administration and
area supervision), Amir Feldstein, Michal Iron-Lubin and Ido Katz (area supervision), Amalia Katze-
nelson (restoration), Bernardina Luttinger and Miriam Waldman (plans and pottery drawing), Moshe
Weinberg and Yoram Weinberg (photography) and Robert Kaufman (organization of foreign volun-
teers). Zvi Lederman served as the surveyor for the expedition}
I would like to express my gratitude to those organizations, institutions and individuals who, through
their financial contributions made this excavation possible: the National Council for Research and
Development (Israel); the Memorial Foundation for Jewish Culture, New York; the Dorot Foundation,
New York; the Cherna and Dr. Irving Moskovitz Chair for the Land of Israel Studies of Bar-Han
University; Dr. Ludwig Jesselson, U.S.A.; Dr. Ernest Strauss, Switzerland; the late Mr. Oved Ben-Ami,
Israel. My sincere thanks go also to Yitzhak Magen, Archaeological Staff Officer for Judaea and
Samaria; to the Mateh Binyamin regional council; to the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund
for their generous logistical support.
The final editing and layout of this volume is the work of Shirley Gassner who invested much time
and effort in forging the diverse literary styles of multiple authors into a cohesive and uniform whole.
I. For preliminary details of the survey, see Finkelstein 1988-89; for some of the results, mainly in the vicinity of Shiloh, see
Chapter 19.
2. Other members of the staff included Tirza Yifrah, Jacob Ben-Ari, Shmuel Azulai and David Gol (administration); Arieh
Bornstein, Yitzhak Adjeman, Tamar Hamer and Shlomo Phiphano (area supervision); Michal Rosh Ben-Ami and Ellen
Zlotnik (photography); Steven Rosenberg and Yigeal Teper (survey).
Xl
I am also indebted to the following members of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University
for their expert assistance in the preparation of this volume: Judith Dekel and Ora Paran (plans),
Nikolai Adani-Tarkhanov and Pavel Shrago (photographs) and Rodica Penhas (plates).
Israel Finkelstein
Tel Aviv 1993
xu
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Israel Finkelstein*
Tel Shiloh (Khirbet Seilun) lies 2.5 km. east of the Jerusalem-Nablus road (G.R. 1775 1626; Figs. 1.1-4,
1.7), at the northern end of a fertile valley. The summit of the mound is 714 m. above sea-level, while the
surrounding hills rise to about 800 m. The ravines around the mound merge on the west into Wadi c Ali,
which descends to the Lubban esh-Sharqiyyeh valley and Nahal Shiloh. The area of the mound is about
3 hectares, including the slopes (but excluding the ruins of a Muslim weli and a Byzantine church to the
south). The eastern and western sides of the mound, which rise about 50-65 m. above the surrounding
terrain, are very steep. Its north is bounded by a natural terrace, part of which was used as a quarry in
antiquity, that extends outward and ends in a steep drop about 100m. beyond the end of the mound
itself. Only on the south is the gradient moderate enough to enable easy access. Here the mound is only
about 20 m. higher than the surrounding terrain, so presumably the ancient entrance to the site was
located here. The mound was thus naturally protected on the east and west, the vulnerable points in its
defense being mainly on the south and to a certain extent on the north.
Many rock-hewn cisterns are scattered over the mound, but the permanent water source of the
settlement was cEin Seilun, a fairly large spring about 900 m. to the northeast, in a ravine descending to
the valley from the village of Qaryut. Thus the choice of location for the settlement took into account
three factors: a wide fertile valley to the south, a copious perennial water supply and an easily defensible
topographic position.
The location of Shiloh was still known in the 14th century C.E. when the Jewish traveller Eshtori
ha-Parchi found it in ruins (Luncz 1897:195-196). The modern identification of Kh. Seilun as ancient
Shiloh was made without difficulty by Robinson during his journey in Palestine in 1838 (Robinson
1891:84-89; see also Enc. Miqr. VII:626). The key source is the description of the location of the site in
Judges 21:19 as being" ... north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to
Shechem, and south of Lebonah". In the course of the Land of Ephraim survey all the sites in the
vicinity of the village of Lubban esh-Sharqiyyeh were visited. It was found that the site of Lebonah
should apparently be identified with a small mound located at the top of the ascent south of the village
(G.R. 17345 16250; Finkelstein 1988:155, picture on p. 156). In fact, Shiloh is situated to the east of the
site of Lebonah rather than to its south. It would therefore seem that by 'south' the author related to the
place at which the approach road to Shiloh leaves the Bethel-Shechem highway. For topographic
* Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.

_.
en
0
.,.,...-·- ............. -·-· ,. /

..,.,..·-. .....
- ARUMAHA..
.,.,..· I
170 t·-·-· eAqrab~ 170
I I
I TAPPUAHA.. I
I I
I Sa!fite I
I I
I A. SHILOH I
I I
160 160
I I
I e'Abud i
I I
I
KH. MARJAMAA.. I
I
I
150 I 150
I
1., A. BETHEL I
.,.
.,
....... . . . _ UPPER r-·
Ramallah
........ ..-·-·-·-· -·I
·-·-·-........ £BETH HORON
" .........
·-·-._.1
\.
A Biblical site
140 140
8 Modern site
10km. -·-·Boundary of the Land

IMiiilil ........,. w WM I
of Ephraim Survey
...... a;
(.1'1
0 0
Fig. 1.1: The location of Shiloh and the boundaries of the Land of Ephraim survey.
2
reasons, the course of the ancient route of the central range should be located on approximately the
same track as the modern Jerusalem-Nablus road.
Also helpful for the identification of Shiloh is the Onomasticon of Eusebius, which placed the site" 12
miles from Neapolis ( =Shechem) at Acrabitene" ( Onomasticon 158, 28), i.e., in the district known by the
town whose name is preserved in that of the Arab village of c Aqrabeh, northeast of Kh. Seilun. The
Madaba Map also shows Shiloh to the southeast of Neapolis (Shechem) in the Acrabitene district.
Finally, the name was preserved in the name of the small mediaeval village which is still mentioned in
172 174 176 178 180
166 166
Qaryut Jalud
® ®
164 164
•EIN SEilUN
~·:;·~·~:*(:jEl SHILOH
?/;{):::\·1M JAMcA ES-SITTIN
162 162
KH. ER-RAFID•
-:·.=.: .••
. . . .. .. ·. ': .. ._=.
. ....
>::::
Sinjil
160 ® 160
··:.·.·.·:
-I
0
l\>\1 Valley
• Ancient site
® Arab village
172 174 176 178 180
Fig. 1.2: Shiloh and its environs.
3
Ottoman tax records from the beginning of the 16th century C.E. (Hiitteroth and Abdulfattah 1977:133)
and in the name of the adjacent spring.
The identification of Shiloh with Kh. Seilun was never challenged except for Richardson's proposal
(1927) to locate it at Kh. Beit Sila southwest of Ramallah (G.R. 164 142), a suggestion which was
promptly dismissed by Albright (1927).
In 1922 Schmidt undertook the first archaeological investigation at Shiloh (Albright 1923) and a
Danish expedition carried on this work from 1926 to 1932. The Director of the expedition was Kjaer
with Albright acting as advisor. The excavator published a number of preliminary reports on the results
of the first two seasons (Kjaer 1927; 1930; 1931) but his sudden death in 1932 caused a delay of several
decades before the final report was published. In 1963 Holm-Nielsen carried out a short season of
excavations at the site in order to clarify unsolved problems. The first final report on the whole
excavation (early periods) was published by Buhl and Holm-Nielsen (Shiloh 1969) and the second report
(Hellenistic to Mameluk Periods) was published sixteen years later (Shiloh 1985).
The Danish expedition worked in five areas (Fig. 1.5). In the southern sector, excavated in 1926 and
1963, only rock-hewn caves with mixed pottery and traces of buildings from the Roman period were
discovered. Exploratory trenches on the summit of the mound dug in 1963 did not reveal any earlier
remains either.
In 1929 the western sector was opened up. Albright suggested to Kjaer that the massive north-south
wall running around the perimeter of the mound (See Chapter 2: Wall E401) might be the city wall. The
area inside this wall was excavated and finds from the mediaeval and Roman-Byzantine periods were
encountered down to bedrock. Kjaer also undertook an examination of the broad terrace extending
outward from this great wall and unearthed two rooms- 'House A' and 'House B' (Shiloh 1969: Pl. E).
Six of the collared-rim jars found by the Danish expedition were uncovered leaning against Wall C422
in the northern room, lying in a deposit of ash. The seventh jar was retrieved by Kjaer from the soil at
the base of the great wall (Room 312 of our excavation). Albright and Kjaer attributed this destruction
layer to the Philistines who presumably razed Shiloh after the defeat of the Israelites at the battle of
Eben-ezer (Albright 1929:4; Kjaer 1930:105), an event that seems to be hinted at in several biblical
passages (Jer. 7:12, 14; 26:6, 9; Ps. 78:60; see Chapter 19). The excavation of this limited area was
abandoned, apparently because it was difficult to interpret (Kjaer 1930:104).
In 1932 an area on the the northwestern edge of the mound was opened. Here a solid city wall was
uncovered and attributed to the Middle Bronze Age. A series of rooms was unearthed inside the city
wall. A group of MB storage jars found in one of these rooms (Shiloh 1969:40) was lost when the
excavation was hastily terminated following Kjaer's death. In one section two casemate-like rooms were
uncovered in the width of the wall. A few Late Bronze Age finds also appeared in this area (e.g. Scarab
194, Shiloh 1969:37). Wall AA, found in the same area running parallel to and just outside the city wall,
was identified as the LB city wall (Shiloh 1969: Pl. G; see below). In 1932 and 1963 excavation of the
northern sector exposed an additional segment of the city wall with a massive tower projecting some
60 em. outside and inside. In both areas the wall had been damaged by stone robbing.
The Danish excavations, and especially Kjaer's preliminary reports, provided our expedition with
primary information regarding the history of the site. From their results it was clear that the mound had
been inhabited in the Middle Bronze Age, that it had witnessed some sort of activity during the Late
Bronze Age and that the Iron I settlement had been destroyed in a massive conflagration. However,
since no stratigraphic sequence had been revealed in any area nor had the size and character of the site
been determined for any of these three periods, it was impossible to get to the root of the historical
4
Fig. 1.3:
Fig. 1.4:
natural' terrace to the north (right).
General view of the mound, looking west.

General view of the mound, looking west. Note the Roman-Byzantine village on the southern slope (left) and the
5
problems associated with the site. The final report on the early periods (Shiloh 1969), based on Kjaer's
field diaries and Buhl's analyses of the finds, did not contribute to the solution of these problems. It
lacks many details (partly, of course, for objective reasons) and also contains several fundamental errors
(see Shiloh 1971; 1973) which have misled other scholars who tried to unravel the history of the site (e.g.
Schley 1989:70-71; see Chapter 19). Resumption of excavation was therefore deemed to be of high
priority.
Fig. 1.5: General plan showing excavation areas of the Danish Expedition (sectors) and renewed excavations (areas).
(Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
6
When choosing the excavation areas, we were faced with two major difficulties:
1. As in many other hill country sites (e.g. Tell en-Nasbeh, Khirbet Rabud) the highest part of the
mound is so badly eroded that bedrock is exposed in several places;
2. Extensive remains of later settlements over large areas of the site are a formidable obstacle to reaching
the underlying strata. The summit is occupied by the ruins of a small mediaeval village while the central
part of the mound, including its southern slope, is covered with the remains of a village of the Roman
period (Fig 1.5). Remnants of the Byzantine period extend even south of the mound where Kjaer
uncovered two churches with mosaic floors, one near to it and the other in the area of the present-day
settlement. Since the hill country settlers usually founded their buildings on bedrock, the early remains
on the summit and southern slope of the mound have been damaged and occasionally even completely
removed (see for example, Chapter 5: Area E). The areas available for excavation of the early strata
were therefore limited to the fringes of the mound and to its northern sector, which was not occupied in
post-Iron I periods.
Taking these limitations into account, we opened up three areas in the first season (Figs. 1.5-6). The
first was Area Con the western slope where Kjaer had discovered the well-known group of collared-rim
jars in 1929. 1 Our area was laid out slightly north of his, with the aim of ascertaining the nature of the
buildings in which these jars were found. As it became clear that they were part of a series of Iron I
pillared buildings, we extended the area and connected it up with the Danish excavations. The second
area (D) was opened in the northeastern sector in order to examine the fortifications that the Danes had
exposed nearby and to determine their date, stratigraphy and nature. 2 Area E was opened east of the
summit on a broad terrace that had not been previously examined, in the hope that not all early remains
were damaged in later periods.
In the second season (1982) digging was extended in Areas C and D and work was halted in Area E,
while five new areas were put under the spade. Area F is located on the northwestern side of the mound
near the Danish northwestern sector (our Area H). Here our objective was to investigate the stratigraphy
inside the city wall. Area H was cleaned, after which a section was cut into its southern edge and several
smaller probes sunk nearby. Area G is located in the southeastern sector, where traces of walls were
observed on the broad terraces on the slope. Since this part of the site had never been examined it was
decided to make several probes here. Area J, in the southwestern sector, consists of two parts. In the
lower part the top of a massive wall of large fieldstones protruded above the surface prior to excavation
and it was decided to investigate its date and function. In the upper part an additional segment of the
MB fortifications was uncovered. Area K was opened in the north between the Roman period settlement
and the northern area of the Danish expedition.
In the third season (1983) our efforts were concentrated on expanding Areas C (including a test square
on the higher eastern terrace), D and F. Work in Areas J and K was also continued.
1. The letters A and B were assigned to the areas excavated by Z. Yeivin (Had. Arch. 77, 1981:18-20) in the vicinity of the
modern settlement south of the mound (Area A) and immediately to the north of the mound (Area B). Yeivin's Area A is
the mediaeval structure called Jamca es-Sittin. Area B is located in an ancient quarry, on the natural terrace projecting to
the north! of the mound. More than a century ago Wilson (1873:37-38) suggested that this was the site of the tabernacle, a
proposal which has been revived in recent years (Kaufman 1988). The earliest finds here were remains of Iron Age II
pillared buildings. Most of the pottery in this area dates to the Hellenistic and Persian periods.
2. We use here, and in other chapters of Part I of this report, the terms 'fortification wall', 'city wall' and 'glacis' for the
massive Middle Bronze Age peripheral wall and the fills supporting it from without. For the function of these elements see
Chapter 19.
7
In the fourth season (1984) digging continued in Areas F and K, in the upper part of Area C and in
one square in Area D. Work was resumed in Area E. Two new areas were opened up: Area Min the
north between Areas D and K, where we wanted to examine several details concerning the boundary of
the Middle Bronze and Iron Age settlements, and Area L in the southeast, to recheck whether any early
structures remained here.
At the end of four seasons of excavation at Tel Shiloh, the principal remains in each area are
summarized below in stratigraphic sequence.3
STRATUM VIII: mid-MB II- early MB III4

ca. 1750/1700-1650jl600B.C.E.
Area C: Pottery in glacis (the latter laid in Stratum VII)

AreaD: Pottery in lower component of the glacis (the latter belonging to Stratum VII)
Area F: Pottery in earthen fills in Squares H/ J32; pottery in earthen fill under floor of
Room 1526 (the latter laid in Stratum VII)
Area H: Pottery in earthen fill under floor of Room U (the latter built in Stratum VII)
Area K: Pottery in earthen fill laid in direction of summit, south of room built against city
wall (all constructed in Stratum VII)
Area M: Pottery in earthen fill laid in direction of summit, south of room built against city
wall (all constructed in Stratum VII)
STRATUM VII: late MB III

ca. 1650/1600-1550 B.C.E.
Area C: Segment of city wall and glacis; supporting wall in upper square
Area D: City wall and glacis; stone fills against city wall
Area F: City wall and adjoining rooms; stone and earth fills
Area H: City wall and adjoining rooms; earthen fills
Area J: City wall in upper area; rem~ins of edge of glacis in southern part of area
Area K: City wall; adjoining rooms; earthen fills
Area M: City wall; adjoining room; earthen fills
STRATUM VI: LB 1-IIA

ca. 1550/1500-1350 B.C.E.
Area D: Dumped debris

Area H: A few finds, not in situ (Danish expedition)
3. Final correlated stratum numbers are used throughout the report rather than a separate set of numbers for each area of
excavation.
4. Throughout this report we use the terms Intermediate Bronze Age (IBA - Albright's MB I); Middle Bronze I, Middle
Bronze II and Middle Bronze III (MB I, MB II and MB III -Albright's MB IIA, MB liB and MB IIC respectively). For
convenience, Stratum VI.II is defined as 'MB II' throughout the report although it was probably still occupied at the
beginning of the MB III.
8
STRATUM V: Iron Age I

ca. 1150-1050B.C.E.
Area C: Pillared buildings

Area D: Silos; paved area
Area E: Walls on bedrock; rock-cut installation
Area H: Silo in southern part of area; robber trench in city wall
Area J: Dump in southern part of area
Area K: Silos
Area M: Silos and pits
STRATUM IV: late Iron Age II

8th-7th centuries B.C.E.
Area C: Scant remains of structure
Area E: Scant remains of walls; pottery
Area G: Scant remains
Area H: Construction of Rooms L and M (?)
STRATUM Ill: Hellenistic Period

Area G: Pits and structure (?)
Area J: Pottery
STRATUM ll: Late-Hellenistic-Early Roman Period

1st century B.C.E- 1st century A.D.
Area C: Walls in upper squares

Area E: Remains of structures
Area F: Remains of buildings; fills
Area H: Few walls
Area J: Structure in northern square; supporting wall in lower part of area
Area K: Structure in southern square
AreaL: Traces of building activity
Area M: Plastered installation
STRATUM 1: Byzantine Period

Area C: Structure in upper square; terrace wall and kiln in main area
Area F: Silo
Area H: Wall AA (Danish expedition)
AreaL: Traces of building activity
9
Fig. 1.6: Aerial view of the mound (looking south) showing areas of excavations. (Yeivin's excavation on the natural terrace
to the north of the mound is seen at the lower right).
Fig. 1.7: Aerial view of the mound, looking north. Note the weli on lower right, the Roman-Byzantine and mediaeval villages
on the summit and southern slope, Area J (mid-left), and the terrace of Area C in the west (left).
10
Fig. 1.8: Expedition Staff, season of 1982. Seated (from right to left): Pnina Ben-Hananya, Zvi Lederman, Israel Finkelstein,
Shlomo Bunimovitz and Ido Katz. Standing (from right to left): Ariella Cohen, Shmuel Yosef, Tirza Yifrah,
Yitzhak Adjeman, Shlomo Phiphano, Amir Feldstein, Moshe Weinberg and Michal Iron-Lubin.
REFERENCES
Albright, W.F. 1923. The Danish Excavations at Shiloh. BASOR 9:10-11.

Albright, W.F. 1927. The Danish Excavations at Seilun- A Correction. PEFQSt:157-158.
Albright, W.F. 1929. New Israelite and Pre-Israelite Sites: The Spring Trip of 1929. BASOR 35:1-14.
Finkelstein, I. 1988. The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement. Jerusalem.
Finkelstein, I. 1988-89. The Land of Ephraim Survey 1980-1987: Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv
15-16:117-183.
Hiitteroth, W.D. and Abdulfattah, K. 1977. Historical Geography of Palestine, Transjordan and
Southern Syria in the Late 16th Century. Erlangen.
Kaufman, A.S. 1988. Fixing the Site of the Tabernacle at Shiloh. BAR 14(6):46-52.
Kjaer, H. 1927. The Danish Excavation of Shiloh. PEFQSt: 202-213.
Kjaer, H. 1930. The Excavation of Shiloh 1929. JPOS 10:87-174.
Kjaer, H. 1931. Shiloh. A Summary Report of the Second Danish Expedition, 1929. PEFQSt: 71-88.
11
Luncz, A.M. 1897. Caftor va-Pherach par Eshtori ha-Parchi. Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Richardson, A.T. 1927. The Site of Shiloh. PEFQSt: 85-88.

Robinson, E. 1891. Biblical Researches in Palesttne Vol. III. London.
Schley, D.G. 1989. Shiloh: A Biblical City in Tradition and History (JSOT Supplement Series 63).
Sheffield.
Shiloh 1969. Buhl, M.-L. and Holm-Nielsen, S. 1969. Shiloh, The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailun,
Palestine in 1926, 1929, 1932 and 1963. Copenhagen.
Shiloh 1985. Andersen, F.G. 1985. Shiloh, The Danish Expedition at Tall Sailun, Palestine in 1926,
1929, 1932 and 1963 II: The Remains from the Hellenistic to the Mamluk Periods. Copenhagen.
Shiloh, Y. 1971. Reviews: Marie-Louise Buhl & S. Holm-Nielsen: Shiloh 1969. IEJ 21:67-69.
Shiloh, Y. 1973. The Camp at Shiloh. In: Aviram, J., ed. Eretz Shomron: The Thirtieth Archaeological
Convention 1972. Jerusalem. pp. 10-18. (Hebrew)
Wilson, C.W. 1873. Jerusalem. PEFQSt: 37-38.
12
PART ONE
STRATIGRAPHY AND ARCHITECTURE
Account: s4309548
CHAPTER2
AREA C: THE IRON AGE I PILLARED BUILDINGS

AND OTHER REMAINS
Shlomo Bunimovitz*
Area C is located on the western slope of the mound, on a wide terrace supported on the west by a
retaining wall built by the Danish expedition (Kjaer 1930:92, 94; 1931:74; Shiloh 1969:30; Fig. 2.2). Here
in 1929, in their western sector, the Danes uncovered 'House B' (Room 317 of the present expedition)
which they dated to the Middle Bronze Age, and 'House A' (southern end of the present Locus 306)
where they discovered six collared-rim jars and a few other vessels in a destruction layer that they
attributed to the Philistines (Kjaer 1930:92-112, Figs. 5-6; 1931:73-76, Fig. 4; Shiloh 1969:30-35, Figs.
9-10, Pls. D-E). While excavating 'House A' the Danes encountered stratigraphic difficulties and hence
terminated the work in this area (Kjaer 1930:104; 1931:75). In the renewed excavations, parts of Area C
were opened up to the north and south of the Danish excavation area and later were expanded to
include it.
A series of Iron I pillared buildings was uncovered in Area C (Fig. 2.1). An eastern extension of Area
C (Squares F, G37-38, H38 - 'Upper Area C' in Finkelstein 1985:156) was excavated on a higher
terrace inside the Roman-Byzantine perimeter wall (E401). This area was opened in order to clarify
whether there was an additional terrace of Iron I buildings to the east, and to check the Middle Bronze
Age remains south of Area F. A little to the south of 'Upper Area C' the Danish expedition had dug
down to bedrock in 1929 but encountered only later remains (Kjaer 1930: Pl. II). Our expedition too
found that the nature of the Iron I settlement could not be studied in this part of the mound, since
bedrock was uncovered close to the surface with Byzantine remains built directly on it (see below).
In our four seasons of excavation more than 350 sq. m. were excavated in Area C and four strata were
distinguished. The results are reviewed below in chronological order.
STRATUM VIII: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II

In Area C, as in other parts of the mound, no architectural remains could be assigned to this stratum. A
few sherds found in the remains of the glacis in Squares CjD43 (south of Building 312) and in the
earthen fill found in Square G38 ('Upper Area C') are the only evidence for its existence.
15
Copyright © 1993. The Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher,
-
0 '\
37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1.4
~
F F
::. ROMAN
ByzANTJN£ P£RIM£T£R
(£ 407) E
E WA
·::·
··· ... ,;~
I I E472 •
I I
I I
I I
D 611 0 ~~I M". D
"''
0
<"4 G!ac1s
I
I _ ~G-cr- ~~L.::)!;;.l......__ci42,j. ~ --=-- -v.
except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
I
I
~MIDDLE BRO~ZE
306
c AGEIII
---------, c
~IRON AGE I :
I
j:·~·t\1 ROMAN-BVZANTINE L----------------~-~ . r-------
---EDGE OF EXC.
l I 1
B 9 ~m.
[_--------~-.0 ---'
37 38 39 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.1.
Fig. 2.1: ScJlematic plan of Area C.
Account: s4309548
STRATUM VII: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE III
An impressive segment of the MB III fortification wall (E381) was exposed under the Roman-Byzantine
perimeter wall (E401) which runs in a north-south direction along the eastern side ofthe area (Fig. 2.13;
for the dating of the latter wall, see below). The massive MB III wall, built of very large fields tones and
founded on bedrock, has been preserved to a height of 2.5 m. It is impossible to determine its width at
this point because its eastern face is hidden under Wall E40 1. The uppermost course is levelled and well
finished on the top, which may mean that the stone base of the wall, or the entire wall, has been fully
preserved here.
Another segment that probably belonged to the Middle Bronze fortification is Wall E412. At first it
appeared that this was the eastern wall of Iron I Structure 312, and that the MB III wall might have
passed further to the east. However, it turned out that the MB III fortification wall itself served as the
back wall of the Iron Age buildings, and apparently also as a terrace for the second building level higher
up. The shape of the corner of Wall E381 at the back of Structure 335 shows that the MB III fortification
wall in Area C was probably built with offsets and insets rather than in the 'sawtooth' style seen in Area
D (Chapter 3).
Stretches of the MB III glacis still remained to the north and south of the Iron I buildings whereas
between them it had evidently been removed by the Iron Age builders. The surface of the glacis was
revealed in two strips in Squares C/043-44 (Fig. 2.8). After excavating a pit (Locus 315, Square C43)
that had been dug into it during Iron II and making a section along the southern face of Wall D433, we
obtained a clear picture of the glacis in this part of the mound. It was composed here of a single layer of
Fig. 2.2: Aerial view of Area C, looking east (1982).
17
.....
00
37 38 39 40 41 42 1.3 t.t.
T
I
+ -'-
1
I
-~-
I
T
I
-~-
E E
r-·-·---,
I .
. I
I .
0 . I 0
I j
MB I MID<l.E i
' BRONZE ·
I GLACIS I
~5:
~\j:
iE:~.-.J
c c
37 41.
Fig. 2.3: General plan of the Iron I remains in Area C. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
9.00
BUILDING 312
HALL 306
A-A
Fig. 2.4: Section A-A through Iron Age I buildings in Area C, looking south. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
9.00
WALL
10.00
......
0
--.1
l!.J
11.00
CITY WALL
.-
12.00
co
M
l!.J BUILDING 335
13.00
14.00
B-B
Fig. 2.5: Section B-B through Iron Age I buildings in Area C, looking south. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
19
yellowish-white clay laid on bedrock, retained at its foot by a low wall (C432) built of a single course of
large fieldstones set on bedrock and back-filled with medium-sized stones. The gradient of the glacis is
similar to that in Area D. It is now clear that the large fieldstones uncovered by the Danish expedition in
'House B' (Kjaer 1930: 110; Fig. 11 a; Plan II; Shiloh 1969:35; Pl. E) belong to the retaining wall of the
glacis which was encountered when they dug under the floor of the Iron I room. A similar stretch of the
glacis was exposed in the north ofthe area, next to Wall D371, the outer wall of the Iron Age complex.
At the bottom of Square G38, on the upper terrace, foundations of a massive wall (G383) running
north-northeast - south-southwest were exposed. Founded on bedrock, the 1.8 m. thick wall was
preserved to a height of one course only. To its east, and perhaps also to its west, was a light-coloured
MB III fill, which resembled the fills found in Areas F, K, and M. The purpose of this wall, which ran
parallel to the MB III fortification wall (E381), was probably to support earthen fills.
STRATUM V: IRON AGE I

The predominant remains in Area Care from Iron Age I (Figs. 2.1, 2.3). A complex of several structures
had been inserted into the MB III glacis and thus projected from the main core of the settlement toward
the western slope. In order to erect the Iron Age structures the builders had to remove a section of glacis,
Fig. 2.6: The Danish excavation in the 'Western Sector', 1929. Destruction debris with collared-rim jars (Shiloh 1969:33).
20
including some of the stone fill and retaining wall at its foot. The walls of the buildings were founded on
bedrock, and in some places the lower layers of the glacis were used as make-up for the floors. Walls
D433 and D371, which close off the Iron I buildings to the north and south, were erected without
foundation trenches since they were built up against the sides of what was left of the glacis. The inner
faces of these walls (i.e., those seen from inside the rooms) are dressed, while their rough outer faces are
supported by the glacis. No Iron Age remains (except for two silos see below) were found overlying
the glacis to the north or south of the buildings.
To compensate for the steep slope of the mound the Iron Age builders created a system of retaining
walls backed by fills and erected their buildings on the wide terraces formed thereby. Two building
levels, separated by a terrace wall, were unearthed here: Structures 312 and 335 on the upper level and
Hall 306 on the lower level.
The buildings on the upper level extended over Squares D37-43. In the northeastern corner of Square
D42 the Danish expedition uncovered a collared-rim pithos and other vessels at the foot of Wall E401
(Kjaer 1930:106; Fig. 10; 1931:76; Shiloh 1969: 30, n. 156). We easily identified their small test pit at the
beginning of our excavation. The rest of the area had not been excavated previously.
The southern building on the upper level, Structure 312, extends from Wall D433 in the south to Wall
D402 in the north. Terrace Wall D423 on its west separated it from the lower level (Hall306). The MB
III fortification wall (Segment E412) was exploited as the rear (eastern) wall of the Iron I building and
apparently also served as a retaining wall for an additional building level to the east.
There are four units in Structure 312, separated by three rows of pillars built of stone drums (Fig. 2.7).
Two pillar bases of flat stones were preserved in the southern row, three bases of medium-sized fieldstones
(30~m. high, their tops cracked) in the central row and only one base (a single stone 70 em. high) in the
no~hern row. Some of these and other pillars were incorporated in Terrace Wall D423, thereby assisting
at least partially in the roofing of Hall306. The floor of Structure 312 is composed mostly of compacted
chalky-white material, probably the remains of the MB glacis, although some parts are paved with flat
stone slabs and in the eastern part of the building flat bedrock served as the floor. Where the floor had
been destroyed it was possible to distinguish a make-up of small stones that filled the triangular space
between the sloping bedrock and Terrace _Wall D423. Two small installations built of flat stone slabs
were found in this structure. The one located between the two easternmost pillars of the middle row may
have been used for cooking as it was found full of ash.
The Iron I buildings of Area C were destroyed by a severe conflagration as evidenced by the deposit of
ash and burnt mudbrick debris covering the floor of Structure 312. Only a few pottery vessels were
found here. Since the deposits are very shallow, it may be assumed that most of the material was washed
down the slope to the west. In any case, it seems that the main storage area of the complex was in Hall
306 on the lower level.
Structure 312 did not have a proper wall on its western side and only a narrow partition (Wall D422)
separated it from Terrace Wall D423. The latter was built of medium-sized fieldstones with eight pillars
made of drums incorporated into its western face (Fig. 2.16). This segment of the terrace wall extends
northward to Wall D401 where it joins Terrace Wall D393, which projects further west and supports
Structure 335.
Passage 611, which separates Structures 312 and 335, has a beaten earth floor laid on a fill of small
stones behind Terrace Wall D423 (Fig. 2.15). The entrance to Hall306 probably lay at the western end
of the corridor which was badly damaged by a Byzantine industrial installation (621).
The northern building on the upper level, Structure 335, extends from Wall D401 in the south to Wall
21
Fig. 2.7: Pillared Building 312, looking north. Note patches of ashes on the floor, Roman-Byzantine peri-
pheral Wall E401 (right) and lower terrace with Hall 306 (left).
Fig. 2.8: Southern part of Area C, looking southeast. Note the remains of the Middle Bronze glacis (student
sitting on its surface), upper terrace with pillared Building 312 (to her left), Roman-Byzantine
peripheral Wall E401 (behind her) and lower terrace with Hall306 and Room 317 (foreground).
22
Fig. 2.9: A row of Iron I pithoi in the southern aisle of Building 335, looking southeast.
D..371 in the north. The structure has two side units (with perhaps an additional unit to the east) and a
central courtyard. The southern side unit is bounded on the north by a row of five drum-pillars, one of
which has been preserved to a height of three drums - more than 1 m. high. There is a low stone partition
(D391) between the pillars and access into the courtyard was probably between the two easternmost of
these. On the west it is bounded by Wall D392 which stands on the fill behind Terrace Wall C393. The
eastern wall of the room, presumably the MB fortification wall, was not unearthed since it is buried
under the Roman-Byzantine perimeter Wall £401. On the eastern side of this unit the bedrock served as
the floor while on its western side the sloping bedrock was levelled up with a fill of small stones and
carefully paved with large, smooth flagstones.

Eight pithoi, seven of them of the collared-rim type, were discovered leaning against the inner face of
Wall D401 with their bases sunk into the floor (Figs. 2.9-12). The eighth storage jar, smaller than the
others, stood on a rock ledge so that the mouths of all the vessels would be on the same level. There was
no clue as to the contents of the pithoi. 1 In addition to the pithoi, two storage jars, a bell-shaped bowl, a
multi-handled krater, a grooved-rim bowl, a baking tray, sherds of jugs, a cooking pot, grinding stones
and hammerstones were found in the southern unit of Structure 335.
A large courtyard with a compacted chalk floor occupied the centre of Structure 335. Rock-hewn
Cistern 1320 was discovered in its northeastern corner. Two installations near the rows of pillars
1. The same apparently applies to the pithoi found by the Danish expedition in Hall 306.
23
24
Fig. 2.1!:
335.
Three collared-rim jars in
southern aisle of Building
2.10:
ashes of destruction layer in foreground.

of Building 335, looking west. Note black
A row of Iron I pithoi in southern aisle
enclosing the courtyard were built of flat stone slabs standing on their narrow edges. Most of the
western part of the courtyard was covered with brick debris.
The side unit to the north of the courtyard, separated from it by a row of four drum-pillars, is almost
identical to the southern unit. The two easternmost pillars stand to a height of two drums while the bases
of the two on the west consist of large boulders about 90 em. high. The pillars are joined by a low
partition wall (D381). The entrance from the courtyard into the unit was either near the cistern or to the
west of the westernmost pillar. As in the southern unit, the floor was partly bedrock, hewn away in order
to level it. The centre of the unit was neatly paved with flagstones which abutted onto the northern wall
(D371). The floors of the courtyard and northern side unit were at a lower level than the floor of the
southern side unit. Wall D371 was preserved to a height of more than 2m. It is more massive than Wall
D433 since the glacis was higher here and needed additional support.
The northern side unit was covered by a deposit of brick debris containing carbonized remains of
collapsed roof beams and large chunks of clay, probably used in the construction of the roof. A thick
layer of ash lay under this debris. Several pottery vessels were found on the floor including a strainer, an
intact pinched-lip jug, a beer jug, pyxides and two bowls. The bases of a collared-rim pithos and a huge
krater leaned against Wall D371. Hammerstones and a large pile of carbonized raisins were also found
here.
On the eastern side of the courtyard stood an additional row of two drum-pillars incorporated into a
low partition wall (E394). Between this wall and the MB fortification wall is another unit, but this was
mostly left unexcavated for fear that the overlying Roman-Byzantine perimeter wall might collapse.
Fig. 2.12: Group of Iron I vessels from southern aisle of Building 335 after restoration.
25
Fig. 2.13: Northern part of Building 335, looking east. Note Wall D371, supporting the MB glacis (left) and reused MB
fortification Wal~ E381 (background).
Fig. 2.14: A section through Debris 623, looking north. Note the top of a stone pillar of Building 335 projecting from
the fallen bricks, and MB fortification Wall E381 (right).
26
Structure 335 is supported on the west by a wide terrace wall (D393) which resembles Terrace Wall
D423 in its construction, i.e., it is built from large fieldstones with drum-pillars incorporated into it.
However this is a more solid wall since the slope is steeper to the north and required greater support. A
stone fill, which formed a base for the western part of the building, was laid behind the wall. Only one
segment of the western wall (D392) of Structure 335, which closes off the southern unit, was preserved.
Its northerly continuation may have collapsed down the western slope together with the continuation of
the terrace wall that had supported it. The western edge of the floor of the northern side unit is also
broken off here. Excavation of Square C39 proved beyond any doubt that there was no additional
building level west of Structure 335. Only stone and brick debris from Structure 335 was found here and
apparently most of this came from the above-mentioned terrace wall.
Thick deposits containing a large amount of Iron Age I pottery sherds and animal bones (Debris 623)
covered the brick debris in the northern side unit and the northern part of the courtyard of Building 335
(Fig. 2.14). Among the sherds were fragments with animal figures in relief: a cooking pot rim with the
head of a lioness, a krater handle with a ram's head on its underside, and fragments of a cultic stand with
applied decoration of a horse, a lioness and a scene of a leopard attacking a deer (Chapter 6). An
engraved bone ring was also found (Chapter 9). Since there was no evidence of an alluvial layer between
the brick material and the dump, we may assume that this debris was probably thrown from a higher
building level east of the Middle Bronze fortification wall onto the ruins of the building shortly after its
destruction.
Fig. 2.15: Corridor 611 (background) and Byzantine Installation 621 (foreground), looking
east.
27
28
Fig. 2.16:
Fig. 2.17:
Hall 306 and upper terrace with Building 312, looking northeast.
Hall 306, looking southeast. Note stone pillars incorporated into terrace Wall D423.
The architectural units of the buildings on the lower level of Area C are Room 317 ('House B' of the
Danish excavations of 1929) and Hall306 ('House A'; Figs. 2.16-17). The southernmost wall on this
level, which is the continuation of Wall D433 and forms the outer wall of Structure 312, was also built
against the MB glacis. At the beginning of our work in Area C, while cleaning the pit left by the Danish
excavations, we found large fragments of three collared-rim pithoi that had been left behind by the
Danes in 'House A' (the southern part of our Hall306), probably part of the group of pithoi unearthed
here in 1929.
Most of 'House A' was still sealed by debris that the Danes had not removed because the remains were
"difficult to understand" (Kjaer 1930: 104). Immediately below the surface a deposit of collapsed bricks
and stones containing a very large amount of pottery sherds was encountered. The bricks were fired to a
reddish yellow colour by the conflagration that destroyed the settlement. Flat, thin bricks characterized
the upper layers ofthe debris, while thicker bricks predominated in the lower layers. Under the debris a
thin layer of ash covered the hard-packed chalk floor. Where the floor was disturbed an underfloor
bedding of small stones could be seen. A round shallow pit (336) dug into the floor was found full of ash
and burnt animal bones as well as four crushed cooking pots.
Wall C413, which was found beneath a Byzantine terrace wall (see below), encloses Hall306 on the
west. Since the slope was very steep at this point it was built very solidly of large fieldstones (probably
taken from the MB fortification wall) in order to support the structures standing on the terrace above.
Most of its upper courses collapsed down the slope when the settlement was destroyed and in later
periods. On the outer side of the wall a section cut down to bedrock disclosed debris of large stones,
bricks and pithoi fragments. This debris came from Hall 306 or from its (conjectured) upper storey, a
continuation of Structure 312. It is therefore clear that Wall C413 is the westernmost wall of the Iron
Age I structures uncovered in Area C and thus marks the western boundary of the settlement. The
segment of wall that continues Wall C422 towards the slope has a purely supportive function. It was
intended to retain the MB glacis that still projects on its south (and which was removed down to bedrock
on its other side).
Hall 306 was closed off on the north by Wall C393, the continuation of Wall D40 1. This wall was
hidden under a large quantity of ash from a Byzantine industrial installation (621) which was constructed
at the western edge of Passage 611. It was along Wall C422 of Hall 306 that six complete collared-rim
pithoi were found in 1929 by the Danish expedition. Additional bases of such jars, standing in a row
along the inner face of Wall C413, were found in our excavations. Another row of pithoi leant against
Terrace Wall D423. All the pithoi bases were embedded in the floor.
Obviously Hall306, where parts of 15 such pithoi were uncovered, was used mainly for storage. It is
on a lower level than Structure 312 which possibly extended westward to form a second storey above it.
Thus it might well have served as the cellar of this house. The thin bricks discovered in the upper part of
the debris sealing Hall306 are different from the thick ones found elsewhere in the complex. They could
have been used for the roofing or walls of the second storey.2 The many sherds found in the upper layers
of the debris in all likelihood originated in the storey above Hall 306 as did some of the pithoi sherds
mixed in the debris on the slope to the west of this cellar.
According to our reconstruction (Fig. 2.18) Structures 312 and 335 differed somewhat in architectural
concept although not in function. Structure 312 had two storeys. The upper level (312) was divided by
2. The 'tiles' discovered by the Danish team among the collared-rim pithoi in the destruction layer of 'House A' (Kjaer
1930:99-100, 102) are probably bricks of this type.
29
rows of pillars into four rooms while the lower level (Hall 306) served as a storage cellar. Structure 335
stood on one level with two or three side units partitioned off from a central courtyard by rows of
pillars. Since this building did not have a cellar, storage vessels were kept in the side units.
The entrances to both buildings were apparently from the higher level on the east. It is quite clear that
they could not have been entered by climbing up the western slope and our excavation showed that there
were no openings in either of the walls built against the glacis on the north and south. We were unable to
check the claims of the Danish expedition that there were steps leading down from the upper eastern
terrace into the corner of Structure 312 (Shiloh 1969:31) since this part of the building was covered by
later walls. For the same reason it was impossible to determine the type of entrance, nor is it clear how
one descended from Structure 312 to Hall306. Possibly, there were steps at the western end of Passage
611, subsequently damaged by the Byzantine Installation 621. Another possibility is the use of ladders.
In any event, it is obvious that access to Room 317 was by ladder. No direct connection between
Structures 312 and 335 was identified either. Perhaps there was a way down into each building separately
'. \\
\\. \
....... :,
\ \
0 Sm
S ROStNSE'RG- L RlTHEYER
Fig. 2.18: Isometric reconstruction of the Iron I pillared buildings in Area C.
30
from the east. Alternatively, access could have been from Structure 312 through an opening in Wall
D402 into Passage 611 and then from its eastern end into Structure 335.
Two silos were dug into the MB glacis; Silo 309, of which only the lower courses were preserved, was
unearthed slightly south of Wall D433 and traces of Silo 311 were uncovered nearby. Both should
probably be dated to the Iron Age I.
STRATUM IV: IRON AGE II

Very little evidence of this phase was discovered in Area C. A corner of a building (Walls D431-432)
was exposed under the Roman-Byzantine Wall E401 in the southeast of Square D43. It was constructed
above the MB glacis on top of a thin ash layer. Iron II pottery sherds were collected from this corner. Pit
315 in Square C43, slightly west of this corner, should also be attributed to Iron Age II. This pit, which
was full of numerous stones, animal bones and sherds, had been dug into the MB glacis. The stones were
probably the remains of another Iron I silo located adjacent to Silos 309 and 311 that was destroyed
when the pit was dug into it.
Additional evidence of Iron Age II activity was discovered arounq: rock-hewn Cistern 1320 in the
courtyard of Structure 335. When the site was resettled in Stratum IV the inhabitants knew the location
of the cistern and reused it. In order to do so they had to dig through the destruction debris and support
it with retaining walls. A tightly packed layer of ash and small fieldstones filled the space between the
opening of the cistern and these retaining walls. Iron Age II sherds were also discovered west of Square
D38 in the badly disturbed area where Terrace Wall C393 of Stratum V had collapsed down the slope.
STRATA II-I: ROMAN-BYZANTINE PERIOD

There are several indications of Byzantine activity in Area C. However at that time the area east of Wall
E40 1 was outside the inhabited area so that no houses were found here.
As noted above, Wall E40 1 runs the entire length of the eastern side of Area C. At the outset, on
Albright's advice, the Danish team presumed that this was the defense wall of the biblical city. They
were particularly impressed by the projecting 'bastion' in Square D43 (Kjaer 1930:92, Fig. 2; 1931:73-74,
Fig. 3; Shiloh 1969:30). However, as excavation progressed, they realized that the wall must be later
than the Iron Age remains since its foundations were dug into Iron Age debris. Moreover, they did not
find any Iron Age architectural remnants on the inner side of the wall, on the higher terrace to the east
(Kjaer 1930:105-106, 109; 1931:76). Accordingly Kjaer concluded that the wall should be dated to the
Roman period or even later.

Our excavations confirmed these conclusions. The foundations of Wall E40 1 were uncovered along
the eastern side of Structure 312. As Kjaer (1930: 106) had already observed, the foundations of the wall
were constructed of small fieldstones while its upper courses are built of large stones, some of them
dressed. The foundations do not go down to bedrock but lie on the Iron Age destruction debris. In two
places Wall E401 was built directly on segments of the MB fortification wall (E381; E412). A few
Roman-Byzantine sherds were collected from the foundation trench.
Following the destruction of the Iron Age I buildings Area C was covered with thick layers of stone
and brick debris and the western wall of the building complex collapsed down the slope. In order to use
the area in the Byzantine period, which by then lay outside the boundaries of the settlement, a new
terrace wall had to be erected to retain the debris. This north-south terrace wall (C381-391), unearthed
31
w
N
38 39 ~1 42 43 L.L.
I I _I_ I
-i- -i- I
-i-
E E
_I_
I
I
& g
~
I I 11.59
L__j
iD 0
I
I
I I
--~:-, _ _ j +i
I
I
I
I I .
~-~
!36s : C391 l
c c
J
~~· ,..,, . I
~
I
'·"_J
---
-
I
~
I_
I
'---·----·~:-~- TLI I
-·~·-
0 3m
---=-~
37 38 39 t.O 41 42 43 ~t.
Fig. 2.19: General plan of the Byzantine remains in Area C. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
Fig. 2.20: The terrace of Area C in excavation season of 1981, looking south. Note the top
of Byzantine terrace Wall C381 (in the excavated area) and Roman-Byzantine
peripheral Wall E401 (upper left).
along Squares C38-42, was built into the Iron Age I brick debris (Figs. 2.19-20). 3 Wall C381-391 had no
foundation trench. Its inner face was built of an agglomeration of small fieldstones, while its outer face
(towards the slope on the west) was built properly of dressed stones. Hence it is obvious that this was not
a free-standing wall but a terrace wall built against the Iron Age debris on its east. The Byzantine pottery
retrieved from between its stones is evidence for the date of its construction. This north-south wall
created a broad terrace to the west of the Roman-Byzantine perimeter wall (E401) that probably served
as an industrial zone. At the western end of Passage 611 a round installation (621) built of small
fieldstones and divided into two elongated, plastered C{)mpartments was uncovered. The northern end of
Hall306 was used as a rectangular ash pit.

In Square G38 on the upper terrace of Area C and east of Wall E401, a Byzantine building lying over
Roman remains was uncovered very near the surface. Most of the walls and floors have been eroded but
two perforated stone basins found in situ seem to attest its industrial nature. The Roman remains on
which the Byzantine building was founded comprised a few walls and patches of a flagstone pavement.
SUMMARY
Area Cis the main source of information concerning the nature of Shiloh in the Iron Age I. The pillared
buildings are among the most elaborate architectural remains found in any Iron I highland site. From
3. Part of it was removed and Wall C413, which closes off Hall306 on the west, was uncovered directly beneath it.
33
these buildings comes the richest assemblage of Iron I pottery known from the hill country. The finds in
Area C also provide valuable information regarding the MB III fortification system.
REFERENCES
Finkelstein, I. 1985. Excavation Results in Other Areas. In: Finkelstein, I., ed. Excavations at Shiloh
1981-1984: Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 12:146-158.
Kjaer, H. 1931. Shiloh. A Summary Report of the Second Danish Expedition, 1929. PEFQSt: 71-88.
Shiloh 1969. Buhl, M.-L. and Holm-Nielsen, S. 1969. Shiloh, The Danish Excavations at Tall Seilun,
Palestine, in 1926, 1929, 1932 and 1963. Copenhagen.
34
CHAPTER3
AREA D: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE STONE AND EARTH WORKS,

LATE BRONZE AGE DUMPED DEBRIS AND IRON AGE I SILOS
Zvi Lederman and Israel Finkelstein*
Area D is located on a broad terrace on the northeastern margin of the mound. It was opened in order to
investigate the nature of the fortifications of Shiloh exposed by the Danish expedition in Areas H and K
to the west. These areas were excavated in 1932, the year Kjaer died, and therefore were not described in
a preliminary report. In the final report of the excavations Buhl and Holm-Nielsen c<;mcluded that the
fortification was built in the Middle Bronze Age, but the evidence they published (Shiloh 1969) was
neither clear nor sufficient.
Area D consists of two parts: the main terrace where ca. 375 sq. m. were excavated, and a sectional
trench ca. 3 m. wide and over 20 m. long which was cut into the steep slope outside the wall in order to
check the outer components of the fortification system. Area D was excavated in all four seasons and
revealed remains from Strata VIII-V. The main finds were the Middle Bronze Age fortifications, a Late
Bronze Age debris dump (the only trace of this period found at Shiloh) and Iron Age I silos (Figs.
3.1-2).
STRATUM VIII: MIDDLE BRONZE II

The only remnants of Stratum VIII found in any part of the mound were MB II pottery sherds mixed in
fills laid in the MB III. The richest assemblage of these sherds was found in Area D in the lower element
of Glacis 723 (see below and Chapter 6).
STRATUM VII: MIDDLE BRONZE III

Large-scale Middle Bronze Age stone and earthworks were uncovered in Area D (Fig. 3.3). Their main
features are the fortification wall surrounding the site, stone fills leaning on the wall from within and a
glacis which supports the wall from without. 1 No remains of MB III buildings were discovered anywhere
in Area D.
* Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University and Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv
University respectively.
1. The terms 'fortification wall', 'city wall' and 'glacis' are used here for convenience. For the function of these elements see
Chapter 19.
35
K' L' o'
28
29
30 30
t.:.:...:._~
I
I ...
I·
I
31 I 31
I
I·
I
I...,
I.
I
1.
I.r:
1.· .
I··
1 .. ·.
I
I
33 I
I 33
I
_____ II
\ I
-./
§ MIDDLE BRONZE AGE ]Ic 34

FORTIFICATIONS
LATE BRONZE AGE DEPOSIT

IRON AGE I
,-------~
35 D Me STONE FILL I
I
I
I 35
0 5m. I I
I I
K' l' M' N' 0'
Fig. 3.1: Schematic plan of Area D, showing Middle Bronze, Late Bronze and Iron I remains.
36
Fortification Walls L301-N321 and M332

The main architectural feature in Area Dis a 34m. long segment of Wall L301-N321 which is 2.8-3.8
m. wide (Fig. 3.4). Both faces of the wall were built of large fieldstones, sometimes partially dressed, laid
in levelled courses (Fig. 3.5). Some of these stones are more than 1 m. in length, although the average
dimensions are 40x40x70 em., and their weights range from 200 to 300 kg. The stones between the outer
and inner faces of the wall range from medium-sized to large. Founded on bedrock, the outer face of the
wall stands to a height of 6.7 m. (in the sectional trench) while on the inner side of the wall digging did
not reach bedrock. In Squares K28 and K/ L29 the top of the wall was found to be level. Since no brick
material was discovered near the wall, we are inclined to suggest that it was preserved to its full height.
The wall was built in the 'sawtooth' technique. Four such 'teeth' were found along its outer face at
intervals of 5-7 m., each projecting about 60-80 em. outwards. Only two 'teeth' were exposed on the
inner face.
In the south Wall L301 bifurcates. A massive wall (M332) of similar width and building technique but
without 'teeth' turns southwest towards the interior of the site (Fig. 3.7) and a second, narrower wall
(N321) forms a sort of offset in the city wall and continues southward along the perimeter of the mound
(Fig. 3.6). This offset is built in a technique similar to that of the northern segment except that the
'sawteeth' point in the opposite direction and it is somewhat narrower. In this topographically low spot a
drainage channel was discovered passing through the wall (Square N31 ). Wall M332 is bonded to Wall
L301 at the corner where they meet, whereas 'offset' Wall N321 adjoins it without bonding (see also
Chapter 19).
Stone Fill417
The space between Wall L301, Wall M332 and the sloping bedrock was occupied by a massive fill (417)
of medium-sized stones without any soil between them (Fig. 3.8). In Square L30 the fill came up to the
Fig. 3.2: Aerial view of Area D, looking southwest.
37
31
38
28
30
32
33
Fig. 3.3:
K
K
L
M
General plan of the MB and LB remains. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)

N
I
_I_
0
0
31
29
30
28
levelled top of the wall. Although our excavations penetrated this fill to a maximum depth of only 1 m.,
our experience in the other areas indicates that it probably continues down to bedrock. Judging from
the topography of this section of the mound, it is estimated that the depth of the fill may reach 5 m. A
similar fill was found in Square N32 inside the 'offset' of the fortification wall. Embedded in this fill are
walls L302 and L331, each about the width of a single stone. Since their faces were left undressed, it is
obvious that they were buried in the fill in order to strengthen it. A limited quantity of MB III sherds
was found in the fill.
In Square N35 an earthen fill of light-coloured chalky material similar to that found in Areas F, K
and M was discovered under a thick layer of Late Bronze Age dumped debris. It is possible that Wall
M332 separated Stone Fill417 on its northwest from earthen fills to its southeast. Wall K312 played a
similar role in Area F (Chapter 4).
Fig. 3.4: General view of

Area D, looking southeast.
Note surface of MB fortifi-
cation Wall L301 (left) and
adjacent Iron I Surface
403-404 (foreground).
39
40
Fig. 3.5:
Fig. 3.6:
Offset N321, looking northwest.
Outer face of MB fortification Wall L30l.
Fig. 3.9:
Fig. 3.7:
northeast. Note Iron I silo at lower right.
MB Wall M332joining Wall L301, looking
Schematic section of the glacis, looking south.

Fig. 3.8:
Stone Fill4l7 in Square L31, looking north.
o..._~=-~=~-5m
41
Fig. 3.10: General view of sectional trench in

Glacis 723.
~
I
Fig. 3.11: Sectional trench in Glacis 723 . Note

Retaining Wall M291 and outer
face of fortification Wall L301
behind it. I
I
42
Account: s4309548
Glacis 723
The glacis was examined in five different places around the site. Its most impressive portion was
uncovered in the deep sectional trench which was cut at right angles to the outer face of the fortification
wall in Area D . The width of this trench varied from 2.8 to 3.4 m. over a length of 23 m. along the
downslope. Its maximum depth, next to the wall, was more than 6 m.
The stretch between fortification Wall N30 1 and supporting Wall M291 was excavated entirely by
hand. The lower part of the sectional trench (downslope from Wall M291) was dug by a bulldozer,
except for two probes and straightening of the sections which were done by hand. Bedrock was reached
in three places: between the city wall and supporting Wall M291 and in the two probes in the lower part
of the section (L. 1427 and 1428). From the fortification wall to the foot of the slope the base of the
glacis now measures 22.5 m. , but since the lower part was apparently washed down the slope its original
length was probably about 25 m. Its maximum depth, next to the city wall, is 6.3 m. The gradient of the
bedrock surface on this side of the mound is ca. 15°, the gradient of the surface of the glacis is 280, and
the gradient of the ground surface today is 220.
In Area D the glacis comprises five main elements. These are from bottom to top (Figs. 3.9-11; see
also Chapter 13):
1. A heavy compacted layer of yellowish-grey clay soil containing a large quantity of MB II sherds,
animal bones and a few small artefacts. This layer was found between the city wall and supporting Wall
M291 and just outside the latter. Below this layer, on the bedrock, is a mud-brown layer about 80 em.
thick in which no sherds were recognized.
2. A grey ash layer about 0.2-0.3 m. thick.
3. A large lens about 0.9 m. thick made up of thin layers of different colours. This element does not
appear along the entire length of the glacis. Its component layers, each a few centimetres thick, are
formed alternately of reddish-brown earth and a friable white material. They were laid at an angle
opposite to that of the slope and the deposition of the other components of the glacis.
4. A crumbly chalky white material containing numerous small stones. This appears along the entire
length of the glacis and seems to be its predominant element. It varies from 0.7 to 1.8 m. in thickness.
5. A muddy-brown terra rossa soil forming the surface of the glacis with white 'fingers' of Layer 4
penetrating into it.
Except for one scarab, no pottery, bones or artefacts of any kind were found in the top four elements.
Wall M291 , which is about 0.9 m. thick and 3.2 m. high, was discovered buried inside the glacis. Built
of medium-sized stones and founded on bedrock, it was preserved to its full height. The purpose of this
wall was to stabilize the glacis and prevent it from being washed down the slope. A similar function
seems likely for the large boulders uncovered in two places at the foot of the glacis.
STRATUM VI: LATE BRONZE AGE

A stratum of dumped debris containing an enormous amount of Late Bronze Age pottery and animal
bones overlies the MB III city wall, Wall M332 and Stone Fill417. It is the only deposit of this period
found at Shiloh and was not associated with any architectural remains. The debris (L. 407) is composed
of a light-coloured grey material, mostly ash, with piles of stones of various sizes in several places (Figs.
3.12-13).lt was exposed in an oval area of about 150 sq. m. (ca. 18m. on the northwest-southeast axis
and 10 m. on the northeast-southwest axis) in Squares L/ M31, L/ N32 and M / N33 (Fig. 3.3). We
succeeded in defining its northern, eastern and western boundaries, while on the south it continues at
43
Account: s4309548
44
Fig. 3.12:
on the left.
Fig. 3.13:
in Square N32.
Detail of Debris 407
Late Bronze Debris 407: southern section of Square N32. Note MB fortification Wall N321
Fig. 3.14: Late Bronze Age Debris 407:

goblet with ashes and bones.
least up to Square N35 (where there were fewer bones in the deposit). Its depth varies from about 0.5 m.
on its perimeter to about 1.5 m. in Square N32, next to the MB III city wall. No layers whatsoever were
distinguished within it.
Fragments of hundreds of vessels were found in Debris 407. Many were broken into a few large pieces
but in most cases they were not found in concentrations permitting restoration. Only in two places were
there sherds of bowls lying one inside the other, but even here complete bowls could not be easily
reconstructed. Some vessels were found filled with bones and solidified ash (Fig. 3.14). There were also
several dozen Cypriot sherds. Most of the pottery is of the LB I horizon. There is also a small quantity of
LBII pottery, although not from the end of the period. The bones recovered from Debris 407 shed
considerable light on the economy and social organization of the hill country people in the Late Bronze
Age (Chapters 15, 19).
Among the small objects found in this deposit are a fragment of a female figurine, a fly-shaped gold
pendant, a handle with a cylinder seal impression and a rough stone bowl with traces of pigment inside
(Chapters 8-10).
In view of these finds, the Late Bronze Age debris is interpreted as afavissa of offerings which were
brought to a shrine (Chapter 19). Before the debris was dumped the stones of a section of the MB III city
wall M321 and Wall M332 were robbed. This evidence indicates thatthefavissa is not in situ, but was
moved here at a later date. The fact that Debris 407 is cut by Iron I silos leaves two possible periods for
its deposition here - a later phase of the Late Bronze Age or an early phase of Iron I. In the Late
Bronze Age there was no large scale building activity at the site, while the Iron I construction projects
must have required stones which were apparently robbed from the MB III fortification. Hence the
following course of events may be suggested: The MB III fortification system was partly damaged
during the Late Bronze Age when the site was not occupied by a settlement. In the early Iron Age I some
45
46
31
3L.
32
33
30
35
Fig. 3.15:
K
K
I
i
I
-~-
~
L
L
r;::----
,--~1
I
I
I
M
M
/
/
/
-i-
/
/
General plan of the Iron I remains. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)

N
/
/
I
-i-
0
0
31
31.
29
35
33
32
28
30
.-----------------,-------,---------,-----::----,
of its stones were robbed. In a later phase of the Iron Age I, during construction work on the mound, a
Late Bronze Age favissa was found and removed to the robber trench in Area D. In a yet later phase of
this period silos were dug into this debris.

The Iron Age I remains in Area D include a stone-paved platform in the northern part of the area, a
dense cluster of silos in the southern part, and stubs of a few walls (Fig. 3. 15).
Rough stone paving (L. 403, 404; Fig. 3.4) was unearthed close to the surface in Squares K28, K/L29,
L30 and M30-31. In L. 404 and 737 it represents no more than a resurfacing of the MB Stone Fill417
and abuts against the inner face of the MB III city wall. The top of this segment of the wall (Squares
K/L/ M28-29-30-31) was paved with small stones laid on a fill about 40 em. deep (L. 403). The upper
course of the northern part of this section of the wall was found to be level. Crushed fragments of
collared-rimjars and other Iron I vessels lay on this 'floor'. A large conical seal of black stone was found
on the pebbles of L. 403 near the city wall (Chapter 8).
The Iron I silos are concentrated in Squares L/N31-33, sixteen being uncovered in an area of less
than 150 sq. m. An additional ruined silo was found in Square N35. Lined and in some cases also paved
with small and medium-sized stones, these silos are very similar to those found in Iron I strata at other
sites (see, for example, TBM Ill: plan of Stratum B; McCown 1947: plan; Yadin 1972:129-30; Biran
1980:173; Finkelstein 1986:18-20; 1988:264-269). They vary in diameter from 1.5-1.9 m. and one has
been preserved to a depth of 1.6 m. (Fig. 3.16). In one or two places two silos abut on one another. The
silos were dug into Deposit 407 of the Late Bronze Age, and some go down to the top of the MB III
Fig. 3.16: Iron I silos and MB Wall M332 in Square M33, looking west.
47
fortification wall. No complete vessel was found in any of the silos but there was a large quantity of
carbonized wheat in two of them (Silo 1400 and the ruined Silo 1462 in Square N35 Chapter 17).
Several walls and surfaces are related to the silos. Wall N332 is an Iron I terrace wall constructed in
order to support the debris to its north. Its free-standing southern face is carefully built whereas its
northern face, which supports Silo 1436, is rough. Silos 424 and 425 lean against a similar wall. Sparse
remains of a few other walls without any stratigraphic connection were found in the area. They should
be linked to this stratum or to Stratum IV. In Square M33 a surface on which lay Iron I pottery was
found near the surface and above the Late Bronze Age deposits. It should probably be interpreted as an
open work area around the silos.
Since there is no stratigraphic link between Floor 403-404 which was found in the northern part of
Area D and the silos it is impossible to determine definitely whether they belong to the same phase of the
Iron Age I. It is however quite feasible that Floor 403-404 served as a work area associated with the
silos.
STRATUM IV: IRON AGE II(?)

Four stone pillar bases projected above the ground in Squares L31-32 and M32-33. They are higher
than the Iron I surface of the silo work area in Square M33 and therefore later. However their associated
floors have been eroded so that it is impossible to date them firmly. Iron II sherds·found in Area D close
to the surface may hint at the date of these pillars.
REFERENCES
Biran, A. 1980. Tell Dan- Five Years Later. BA 43:168...::182.

Finkelstein, I. 1986. cizbet Sartah: An Early Iron Age Site Near Rosh Hacayin, Israel. BAR S299.
Oxford.
McCown, C.C. 1947. Tell en-Nasbeh I, Archaeological and Historical Results. Berkeley.
TBM III. Albright, W.F. 1943. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim III, The Iron Age. AASOR 21-22.
Yadin, Y. 1972. Hazar. London.
48
CHAPTER4
AREAS H-F: MIDDLE BRONZE III FORTIFICATIONS

AND STOREROOMS
Israel Finkelstein and Zvi Lederman*
Area H of the present expedition was a renewal of the excavation of the northwestern sector of the
Danish expedition. In 1932 the Danes uncovered the solid Middle Bronze city wall and a series of small
rooms built against it. In the west of the area, Rooms L and M which were built into the remains of the
city wall were recognized by the Danes as postdating it (Shiloh 1969:41-42). Wall AA, defined by Buhl
as the Late Bronze Age city wall (ibid.:60; cf. Kjaer's opinion, ibid.:48, 54), was uncovered north of the
Middle Bronze wall. 1
The date of Rooms Land M, the layout of the rooms adjoining the city wall, the construction method
of the fortification, and to a certain extent even the date of the city wall itself required clarification. We
therefore cleaned Area H (from Walls J291, 1292 and K301 eastwards) and in the second season (1982)
sank several probes. The work included straightening the southern edge of the Danish excavation to
make a section; cutting narrow sections next to the outer face of the city wall; examining Wall AA and
continuing the excavation of Rooms Land M built into the wall and Room U adjoining it on the inner
side. At the same time Area F was opened up immediately to the southwest of Area H (from Walls J292
and K30 1 to the southwest, and Square N31) to enable independent examination of the stratigraphy and
architecture in this part of the mound. Area F was one of the major fields of the dig in the 1982-1984
seasons, with ca. 250 sq. m. being exposed.
AREAH
The Danish expedition exposed an impressive stretch of the city wall, ca. 12 m. long, with a series of
small rooms adjoining its inner face. Built of large fieldstones, the wall {L281) is about 4.8 m. wide at
this point. Two revetments strengthen its foundations on the outer side, thereby increasing the overall
width of the wall to 6 m. (Fig. 4.3). Two 'teeth' on the inner face (Squares K29 and M28) create an
inward projection of about 1 m. beyond the line of the wall. The inner face is preserved to a maximum
height of 2m., higher than that of the outer face which was damaged over the ages (Fig. 4.4).
* Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University and Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard
University respectively.
I. Kjaer did not publish anything from this area since work was still in progress at the time of his death. The results were
published by Buhl (ibid.:36-42).
49
50
Fig. 4.2:
Fig4.1:
G
Aerial view of Area H-F, looking southwest.

Schematic plan of the MB III remains in Area H-F.
D
!'IDJ STONE
FILl
EARTHEN FILL
0
0
=~;m;EE""""''"'
--·EDGE OF DANISH EXC.
Sm.
--EDGE OF RECENT EJtC.
32
Fig. 4.3: Area H: revetments supporting outer face of fortification w~ll in Area H (middle) and Wall AA (right), looking
west.
Fig. 4.4: Area H: inner face of fortification wall. Note offset in the wall and rooms adjacent to it, looking west.
51
Two trenches, each ca. 1 m. wide, were dug down to bedrock at right-angles to the outer face of the
wall, one in Square K/ L27 and the other in Square J28. The foundations of the wall, built on bedrock,
were found in the eastern trench where the wall was preserved to a height of 1.~ m. Although light
material was uncovered in both sections, there was no clear evidence for the existence of the glacis in this
part of the mound. However all the pottery retrieved from the trenches was from the Middle Bronze
Age.
The cleaned and straightened section that we cut parallel to the city wall at the southern edge of the
Danish excavation passes through the rooms adjoining the wall. Mudbrick debris more than 1 m. deep
was discernible, with a conflagration layer containing broken MB III vessels lying on the floors of the
J K L
/ -~ .
11.82
/ \
28 \,~ \\ 28
\
29 29
30 30
Q 3m
--1111111::==:::11-.....l
K L
Fig. 4.5: Plan of the Rooms L-M area. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
52
rooms. Light-coloured earthen fill, similar to that found under the floors of the Middle Bronze Age
rooms in Area F, could be seen under these floors. A stone-lined Iron I silo cut into the Middle Bronze
debris. Most of the rooms were dug by the Danes down to the yellowish fill which was laid beneath their
floors, but in several places traces of ash representing the floors were still discernable. Excavation in this
fill below the floor of Room N revealed MB II pottery.
Excavation of Room U (L. 1717) revealed that Rooms M and L had been built inside a trench dug in
order to rob the stones of the Middle Bronze city wall (Fig. 4.5). The robber trench cut through the brick
debris of Room U, its floor and the fill under the floor (Fig. 4.6). Below the level damaged by the robber
trench, the inner face of the city wall was encountered at a lower elevation than the inner wall of Rooms
L and M (Fig. 4.8). Remains of the core of the city wall were unearthed within these rooms beneath their
foundation leveL Walls K301, K302 and J291 were built together with or later than Rooms Land M.
Wall K30 1 overlies Wall K307 which belongs to the Middle Bronze system. It is difficult to determine
the exact date of the robber trench or of Rooms Land M. 2 The fill of the robber trench (which was, in
fact, the foundation trench for the two rooms) revealed Middle Bronze and Iron I sherds, a large
quantity of Iron II pottery and a very few Roman sherds. It seems therefore that the Iron I material
represents the robber trench which was dug for stones to be used in the construction of the pillared
buildings in nearby Area C, and that the Iron II material represents the foundation trench dug for the
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
Fig. 4.6: Section D-D through Rooms M and U. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
2. The material from the rooms was all removed by the Danes, but it seems that the latest sherds belong to the Roman period
(Shiloh 1969:41).
53
Fig. 4.7: Rooms Land M (left), Room U (middle, foreground) and fortification wall in Area H, looking east.
Fig. 4.8: Area H, excavation in Room U (Square K29). The inner face of the MB III fortification wall appears
under the foundations of Rooms L and M, looking northwest.
54
construction of Rooms Land M. 3 The few Roman sherds would then be related to the construction of
Walls J291, K301 and K302 which are part of the Roman stratum of Area F.
In a section cut through Wall AA, described by Buhl as the Late Bronze city wall (Shiloh 1969:60),
Byzantine sherds were found in the crevices between the stones. It is therefore obvious that this is a late
terrace wall.
To sum up, the following strata were observed in Area H:
Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery in fills under the floors of the rooms adjoining the
fortification;
Stratum VII (MB III) - construction of the city wall and adjacent rooms;
Stratum V (Iron I) silo in the southern section; robber trench;
Stratum IV (Iron II) - construction of Rooms L and M;
Stratum II (Roman) Walls K30 1, K302 and J291;
Stratum I (Byzantine) - Wall AA.
Fig. 4.9: A group of MB III pithoi uncovered by the Danish expedition in Area H (Shiloh 1969:40).
3. They were probably connected with the Iron Il buildings unearthed on the natural terrace immediately to the north (Had.
Arch. 77, 1981:19-20).
55
G H J K I L I M I N
Vl
0\ I \
\
\
\
27 \ \
&"~'~l,?r,n 127
I
-~-
28 28
I
-~-
~ y
/
29 /
/
129
/
I
-~-
30
""& """d'"-"~~,,-
~ D 1532 9.17 >0<11.10
30
~"' Qo 1522 f-..?.
tl~/7<!)/l::. ' >0<11.00 9.41 0

I
-~-
_I_
I
\'1-.\,.'[h(Z: I 31
~.::~
31 I I
i
9.85 . I
L _____ J
_I_
I
321
~ 132
0 Jm
-===
G ___J _ _ =:j K
I L
I M
I N
I 0
Fig. 4.10: General plan of the MB III remains in Area H-F. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
8.00
c-c
Fig. 4.11: Section C-C through Rooms 1532 and 1533. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
AREAF

No architectural remains could be attributed to this stratum. The only intimation of its existence is the
pottery found in the earthen fills of Squares H/ J32 and K31 and in the fills under the floors of the rooms
adjoining the fortification. Both fills were laid in Stratum VII.

The MB III remains of Area F continue the layout of Area H., the main elements being the city wall and
the adjacent rooms (Fig. 4.10).
The segment of the city wall excavated in Area F (J291) is about 5 m. wide. Built of large fieldstones,
its inner face is well preserved. In Room 1522 it stands to a height of 2.3 m. above floor level and in
Room 1526 to about 2.2 m. On the downward side of the slope, however, it is badly damaged, and the
topmost course preserved on its outer face is more than 2 m. lower than that of its inner face. The exact
line of the outer face of the wall is therefore difficult to detect in some places. Where the wall was
damaged by stone robbing both faces are destroyed. Since by the Roman period it was necessary to level
this area with fills, it appears that the stones were robbed in the Iron Age I when extensive building
operations were undertaken in nearby Area C and building material was in demand. 4 One 'tooth' was
found on the inner face of the wall in Square H32. Evidence for the existence of a glacis here was
observed in a limited narrow probe dug by a bulldozer at right angles to the outer face of the wall (not
marked on the plan).
4. The stones of the city wall in Area C were not available for construction since this segment of the wall was exploited as the
eastern wall of the Iron I buildings.
57
Fig. 4.12: Area F, general view, looking southwest. For-

tification wall J291 (right), adjacent rooms
(middle) and Wall 1314 (left, partly under the
baulk).
Fig. 4.13: Area F, general view, looking northeast

(1983 season). Fortification wall J291
(left). Note robber trench with Roman
fill, adjacent rooms (Room 1527 with
storage jars), and Wall 1314, closing
the rooms on the east (right).
58
Fig. 4.14:
looking southwest.
MB III rooms in Area F,
Fig. 4.15:
excavation.
Room 1526 during
59
60
Fig. 4.17:
Fig. 4.16:
Two storage jars in Room 1527.

An assemblage of vessels from MB III Room 1526 after restoration.
Fig. 4.18: Area F: MB III fills and

foundations of walls in Square
H,J32, looking north. Note the
fortification wall on the left.
A row of five rooms (1526, 1527, 1522, 1532 and 1533) was uncovered adjoining the inner side of the
city wall (Figs. 4.12-13).
Wall K307 separates Rooms 1532 and 1533 of Area F from Room U excavated both by the Danes and
by our expedition in Area H. The floor of Room U was slightly higher than that of Room 1532, thus
needing a step at the opening between them. This opening served as the entrance to the entire set of
rooms uncovered in Area F. Room 1526 is bounded on the south by Wall H312 which is preserved to a
height of 2.4 m. above the floor of the room. An earthen fill was encountered on the other side of this
walL The wall enclosing the rooms on the east (1314) is well finished only on the side facing the rooms.
Apart from closing off the rooms, this wall also supported earth and stone fills which were laid further
up the mound to its southeast and thus its inner face was left rough. The rooms of Area H-F were
therefore bounded on one side by the city wall and on the other by earth and stone fills, creating a row of
basements in the space between the sloping bedrock, the fortification and the fills to their southeast
(Chapter 19).
The partition walls between the rooms are well preserved and the doorjambs stand to a height of
about 1.5-2.0 m. above floor level (Fig. 4.14). A ladder was probably used to gain entrance to Room
1533. A similar situation can be seen in several rooms in Area H. The compacted earth floors were
plastered in several places (e.g. in Room 1522). In Room 1526 a probe was made under the floor. A
light-coloured chalky fill, about 1 m. thick, was discovered down to bedrock. Underneath the floor the
foundations of the walls broaden slightly to give them more stability. Similar fills were found under the
rooms of Area H. These fills served as a make-up for the floors, serving to level the 'pockets' created
between the floors, the fortification wall and the sloping bedrock. The rooms of Area F, like those of
Area H, were found full of brick and stone debris to a depth of 1.2 m. There are also traces of burning as
evidence of the destruction of the site at the end of the Middle Bronze Age.
61
The five rooms of Area F contained a rich assemblage of vessels, mainly storage jars, most of them
pithoi, as well as a large number of small artefacts (see Chapters 8-9). In Room 1526, for example,
which is only about 6 sq. m., there were seven pithoi, eight large jars (about 70 em. tall), a small jar, a
large cult stand and several smaller vessels (Figs. 4.15-16). Room 1527 yielded 14 pithoi and storage jars
and a few small vessels (Fig. 4.17). In all we retrieved 42 pithoi and storage jars from the five rooms of
Area F, to which should be added the group of eight pithoi uncovered by the Danish expedition in Area
H, six of them in Room P (Shiloh 1969:40; Fig. 4.9).
A rich assemblage of copper-alloy weapons and silver jewellery came from the floor in the
northwestern corner of Room 1527 (Finkelstein and Brandl 1985; see Chapter 10). In addition, there
were three toggle pins, two 'Hyksos' scarabs, a sealing with a scarab impression, a white-slipped and
burnished bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel decorated with red stripes (Chapter 9) and a group of tiny
votive bowls, 5-6 em. in diameter. Beads, stone artefacts, raisins and olive seeds were also found.
The contents of the rooms adjoining the city wall in Area H-F show that most of them served as
storerooms. There were enough storage jars and pithoi to fill several of the rooms completely. Moreover,
the ceramic repertoire consists almost exclusively of storage vessels. Bowls, kraters and other domestic
vessels were very few in number.
South and east of the row of rooms (Squares J I H32, K31 and N31) earth and stone fills containing a
large quantity of MB II sherds were exposed (Fig. 4.18). The fills were part of the MB III construction,
the pottery most probably having been taken from the dump of a small previous settlement. A light-
coloured chalky fill appeared over the entire area of Squares J I H32. It is similar to the main component
of the glacis in Area D. The fill, which was laid on bedrock, is about 1 m. deep. Two walls of a MB III
building (H323 and H325) were sunk into this fill. The plan and function of the building is difficult to
determine since only the foundations of the walls were preserved. In Square K31, earth and stone fills
were encountered. The solidly built Wall K312 separates the earthen fill to its south (which is the
continuation of the earthen fill in Squares J I H32) from a fill of medium-sized stones to its north. Since
the wall was buried in the fills, no care was taken to keep its faces straight. Similar earthen fills were
exposed in Areas K and M and a similar stone fill was uncovered in Area D.
Square N31 is located on a slightly higher terrace to the south of Area H and to the east of the main
part of Area F. Under Roman remains a massive wall appeared (N314), apparently of MB III date. A
stone fill similar to that uncovered in Area D was found on both sides of this wall.
STRATUM V OR IV: IRON AGE

Traces of two silos were unearthed near the southern section of Square K31. They contained mixed
material but may have been constructed in the Iron Age.
STRATUM H: ROMAN PERIOD

Traces of Roman buildings (804, 810 and 1700) appeared near the surface in Squares J IK30-31, H/ 132
and K30 (Figs. 4.19-20). Their foundations were built of large fieldstones, probably robbed from the
Middle Bronze city wall. Some of the walls of the buildings were founded directly on walls of the Middle
Bronze rooms. Wall H321 was built on the Middle Bronze city wall. Since the ground surface was
uneven at the time of construction, and especially as there was a robber pit in the city wall (at the corner
of Squares H/ 130-31), the area was levelled with fills. In some places, particularly under the western
part of the structures, these fills were more tnan 1 m. thick. A large quantity of Roman pottery was
62
found in them. The stone and pebble-paved floors yielded various pottery vessels, mainly storage jars, as
well as some stone 'measuring cups'. Roman remains were found in Square N31 too.
H J
I
30 9.05 30
9.58
31 31
32 32
H J K
Fig. 4.19: General plan of the Roman remains in Area F. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
STRATUM I: BYZANTINE PERIOD

Some disturbances, dated to the Byzantine period, were discerned in Area F, especially a pit in Square
K31.
63
Fig. 4.20: Roman surfaces (L. 810, in the foreground). Note the light fill near the slope
(upper right).
REFERENCES
Finkelstein, I. and Brandl, B. 1985. A Group of Metal Objects from Shiloh. The Israel Museum Journal
4:17-26.
Shiloh 1969. Buhl, M.L. and. Holm-Nielsen, S. 1969. Shiloh, The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailun,
64
CHAPTERS
EXCAVATION RESULTS IN AREAS E, G, J, K, LAND M

Israel Finkelstein*
AREAE
Area E, excavated in 1981 and 1984, is located on a broad terrace, about 50 m. east of the summit ofthe
mound. Ten squares in all were dug here: nine in one group and one a short distance to the north. The
area has been severely eroded. Bedrock was very near ground surface in the west, while its eastern part
-the direction of the slope was badly disturbed by later terrace walls. Hence the ceramic material in
many loci was mixed and it was difficult to determine the date of some of the remains.

Iron Age I remains were encountered in one spot only - in a 'pocket' in the bedrock in Square K42.
They consist of Wall K422, and possibly also Wall L424 which may have been its continuation, and a
circular rock-cut installation (L. 519) (Figs. 5.1-2). The latter has a diameter of about 1.25 m. and is
about 20 em. deep. Iron I pottery, including collared-rim jars, was found inside and around this
installation. Due to the limited size of the area it was impossible to clarify the nature of the installation
nor the relationship of the remains to the rest of Iron Age I Shiloh.

In Squares K/L42 where bedrock was slightly lower than in the rest of the area, some pre-Roman walls
were preserved. Iron II pottery predominated in most loci but was never found in a clean context. Hence
it was impossible to decide whether any of the architectural remains can be attributed to that period.
There are two possibilities. The first is that Buildings 517 and 1604 (see below) belong to the Iron Age II,
but this seems to be contradicted by the evidence from the adjacent squares. The second, and preferable,
possibility is that all Iron II remains were removed when the Roman period buildings were constructed.
STRATUM II: ROMAN PERIOD

Foundations of Roman period buildings were discovered just beneath the surface, preserved in most
cases only below floor level (Fig. 5.1 ). All the remains in Squares J I K/ L43 and K44 seem to date to this
stratum.
65
66
Fig. 5.1:
by Zvi Lederman.)
Area E: General plan. (Surveyed
J
0
42
3m
K42! (right).
43
,_, _ _j
I
I
I
Fig. 5.2: Area E, Square K42. Iron I

J
L
(with pottery, centre) and Roman Wall

Wall K422 (diagonal), Installation 519
Walls L421, L422 and L432 belong to Building 517 which extended eastward and was destroyed by
erosion of the slope and by the construction of later terrace walls. Walls K421 and J431 belong to
another building (1604) which extended to the west. It was destroyed by erosion and bedrock is exposed
here today. Both buildings were found below floor level. Judging from the remains in the nearby squares
it is reasonable to assume that they were constructed during the Roman period. The large quantity of
Iron II material which was found in Squares K/ L42 is apparently associated with earlier remains. It
seems that Silo 508 was built between the two buildings, leaning on Wall K421, but it is also possible
that it dates to an earlier stratum. Mixed pottery, mainly Roman with a few Iron II sherds, was found in
it. Wall L423 was constructed as a terrace wall with only one well-laid face. It is possible that it was built
in the Roman period in order to form two building levels on the eastern slope. Indeed, west of it a fill of
earth and small stones was uncovered.
In Squares J I K43 and K44 the remains stood on the bedrock, which had been levelled and in few
places even hewn to facilitate construction. In Square J43 patches of a floor made of small and
medium-sized stones were found. In Squares K43-44, in the area where the bedrock drops eastward, a
fill of medium-sized stones was uncovered.
Two parallel walls were unearthed close to the surface in Square 138. Most of the material found here
dated to the Roman period. This area was also badly disturbed and excavation was stopped before
reaching bedrock.
AREAG
Area G, excavated in 1982, is located in the southwestern part of the mound on a terrace halfway up the
slope. It was opened in an attempt to clarify the stratigraphy in this part of the mound, which was not
excavated by the Danish expedition. No less important was the necessity to trace the layout of the
Middle Bronze and Iron I settlements. Three squares were opened and some fragmentary walls were
found (Fig. 5.3). Unfortunately, this part of the site too has been badly disturbed by erosion and later
building activity. Most of the pottery was from the Iron Age II and the Hellenistic periods.

Fragments of a building (907) were uncovered in the southern part of the area (Squares T53-54). They
consist of Walls T532 and T541. The eastern continuation of the building was eroded. A whitish earthy
material, probably a floor, was encountered between the two walls (L. 907). A few grinding stones were
found on this surface. Most of the pottery dates to the Iron Age II, although the material was mixed
with some later sherds.
Building 903, built parallel to Building 907, consists of two walls (T531 and U531). The rest of the
structure was not preserved nor were any floors found. The similar orientation of the two buildings may
indicate that Building 903 too was constructed in the Iron Age II, although most of the material found
around its walls dates to the Hellenistic period (see below).
STRATUM HI: HELLENISTIC PERIOD

Hellenistic pottery found near the walls of Building 903 seems to indicate that it was reused in that
period. This would make it the only location on the mound where Hellenistic architectural remains were
found.
67
T u
:·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·:
52 52
13.87
.,
I
I
53 I 53
14.55
k?O
f532
o, 14.54 ii
ilf:>____ -·-·14.78_ _ _ _ _ , - · _j
I
-j--;:_. __________ ---, I
-i-
. I
I .
i I
i 907
Jl(tS.OO
1
I
St. Sl.
I
I
I
-'~·-·-·-·-·j
I
T
. . . .-==--
0
u
3m
Fig. 5.3: Area G: General plan. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)

AREAJ
Area J, in the southwestern part of the mound, was excavated in 1982 and 1983. Prior to excavation the
top of a massive east-west oriented wall (J581) built of large fieldstones could be seen projecting from a
terrace on the lower part of the slope. Judging from the topography of the mound and the construction
method of this wall, we speculated that this might have been a retaining wall for a road leading up to the
Middle Bronze city gate. The lower part of Area J was opened in order to examine this possibility. At
the same time, two squares were dug further up the slope, at the estimated location of the city wall, in
order to investigate its nature in this part of the site. Another aim of the work in Area J was to study the
occupational history of this previously unexcavated part of the mound.
68
Lower Area J

A probe ca. 4 m. deep was sunk in Square H57-58 next to and outside Roman Wall H571. At the bottom
of the probe, under thick Iron I accumulation, a short stretch of the MB III glacis was uncovered (the
upper part of the glacis was at level20.20). This must be the foot of the glacis since the city wall lies more
than 20m. to the north (see below, Upper Area J). The glacis was uncovered in a section 2 m.long but is
preserved to a thickness of only 1 m. It is made up of light-coloured material containing small stones,
similar to Layer 4 in the sectional trench of Area D. Since the glacis is distinguishable in two
perpendicular sections (baulks) of the probe (north and east), it is possible to determine that its layers
were thrown from northeast to southwest. Thus it seems that the glacis did not meet the city wall at right
angles. A possible explanation is that the material was thrown up against a tower that projected from
the city wall at the centre of the southern slope. It is also feasible that this was the location of the city
gate, especially since this is the most suitable place for it topographically.

After digging down a~out 0,5 m. in the probe, we encountered a 'clean' accumulation of earth and ash
more than 1.5 m. thick containing a large quantity of Iron I sherds (L. 1108). Since the deposit slopes
H J K L
57 57
58
59
0 3m
---====-......
H J K L
Fig. 5.4: Plan of the remains in Lower Area J. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
69
Fig. 5.5: Lower Area J: Wall J58l, looking west.
from north to south, it seems reasonable to assume that the material was thrown down the slope from a
higher level. Therefore this could well have been a dump of the Iron I settlement, whose southern
boundary was probably located near this spot further up the slope. A noteworthy find was a rim of a
collared-rim jar decorated with three "rosette" impressions (Chapter 6) resembling some of those found
on vessels at Sahab in Transjordan (Ibrahim 1983).

A bulldozer was employed to remove a late terrace which was clearly post-Byzantine since it incorporated
a stone inscribed with a cross in relief, probably taken from the church uncovered by Kjaer south of the
mound. This terrace covered the earlier wall described above (J581) which turned out to be about 19m.
long (Figs. 5.4-5). It turned two corners (Walls H571 and M591), thereby forming a structure that
continues northward within the terrace.
Upon examining the foot of Wall J581, its foundations were traced very close to the surface. The best
preserved section is 3 m. high (eight courses). It was built of well-levelled courses oflarge and medium-
sized fieldstones, leaning slightly inwards in order to stabilize it. Small probes were made on both sides
of its corners (to the west in Squares H57-58 where the above-mentioned Middle Bronze and Iron I
remains were found, and to the east in Square M59). They were begun by a bulldozer and continued by
hand. Another probe was sunk in the western part of the interior of the structure, near its corner
(Squares J I H57 -58).
Roman material was found in the probe outside the structure near its eastern wall (L. 1106). Inside
near the western corner (L. 11 02) mixed material was encountered all the way down. At the outset the
latest sherds found were mediaeval but later mixed Roman to Iron I pottery began to appear. Wall J581
was found to be about 80 em. thick (width of one stone). Wall H571 continued northward at its full
height for only 3 m. or so. The inner face of both walls was not properly finished. This, together with the
fact that they inclined inwards, led us to conclude that Wall J581 was a terrace retaining wall. The latest
sherds found in the fill inside the structure, or extracted form the crevices between the stones, indicate
70
that it was built in the Roman period. The probe made to the west of Wall H571 revealed that the
foundation trench of this wall penetrated an accumulation of Iron I debris (see above).
Upper Area J
Two squares (F52 and E/F53) were opened on a terrace halfway up the slope at the presumed location
of the Middle Bronze city wall, which was indeed encountered here.

Except for the Middle Bronze city wall, all earlier remains in this area were removed in the course of
Roman construction activity. This wall was exposed along a stretch about 5 m. in length which formed
the southern edge of a wide terrace. The outer face of the wall is preserved to a height of 2.4 m. (Fig. 5.6).
The inner face of the wall was not clearly identified but it may be estimated that at this point also its
width was about 4.5-5 m. An east-west join is seen in the heart of the wall on its surface. This is
probably an instance of one of the building techniques used in the construction of the wall; similar joins
were found in Area H. The wall was built of large fieldstones, some of them partially dressed. Its
Fig. 5.6: Upper Area J: Outer face of the Middle Bronze fortification wall.
71
-.1
tv
28 27 26 25
I
T I T
I
I
I
10.64
1812 ':::::::-- Jl
•c::::
I. EI
-=-+
1811f!S~ :::>
u CJ~ I I u
1805 1 1 i
LJ 1.0
N
-~-
I :::>
I
._,. i M '0$', ,_, I
I ~~ I
I I l '/I r---\ 12.73
1D.o4f A262 I
I
~
I
1815 I
A I
I I lA
:k;:::--a
~~
0 3111. A261
28 27 26 25
Fig. 5.7: Area K: General plan of the Middle Bronze and Iron I remains. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
Account: s4309548
foundations stand on bedrock. Its eastward continuation was destroyed in antiquity when its stones
were robbed for later construction. The bedrock surface outside the wall was cleaned off and its gradient
was found to be quite moderate. A thin layer, 5-10 em. thick, of light-coloured material was found on
the bedrock but no real remains of the glacis were present.
A limited bulldozer trench, about 1 m. wide by 5 m.long and 2m. deep, was made about 10m. to the
west of Upper Area J next to the conjectured location of the corner of the city wall. The Middle Bronze
glacis was traced in this trench and here too, as in Area C nearby, it was composed solely of a whiteish
material. It would therefore seem that the glacis on the entire western side of the mound was constructed
in the same fashion, less solidly than on the northeastern side (Area D).

Traces of structures from the Roman period were found built above and against the Middle Bronze city
wall. Walls F521 and F522 form a corner of Building 1109, built inside the Middle Bronze fortification
on bedrock which apparently served as the floor of the building. Wall E531 was built on the Middle
Bronze city wall. A rich assemblage of Roman period pottery was found in association with these
remains.
AREAK
In 1932 and 1963, in their 'northern sector', the Danish expedition exposed a segment of the MB III city
wall with a massive tower built of enormous fieldstones incorporated in it (Shiloh 1969:47-55). The
remains inside the wall were difficult to interpret partly because the area had been disturbed by later
building activity which involved robbing out of the city wall. Following our practice in other areas, we
opened up two independent squares here in 1982 (U28 near the Danish area and U31 on a higher terrace
to the south). In 1983 and 1984 we extended our dig northward to connect up with the Danish
excavation area. The results are of importance for understanding the layout of the site both in the
Middle Bronze and Iron I periods.

Middle Bronze II pottery was found in the earthen fills under the floor of Room 1812 and to the south of
Wall U275, both constructed in the MB III. There were no traces of architectural elements of this
stratum.

This is one of the most impressive stretches of the Middle Bronze fortification of Shiloh. The city wall
(U25l) was built of large boulders with its foundations laid on bedrock. At the western end of the
Danish excavation area it is ca. 4 m. wide. In the rest of the area offsets to the outside and to the inside
create a sort of tower, ca. 5.25 m. wide. The stones of the wall were robbed in antiquity. In the southern
part of the section the entire wall disappeared, while in the rest of the area only a few courses remained.
Since bedrock is close to the surface it is impossible to check whether there was a glacis in this part of the
mound (see Area F-H).
The layout of Area K inside the fortification is identical to that of Areas F and M. A row of rooms
adjacent to the wall is bounded on their southern side by Wall U275 which also served to support a
73
BOO
-~-
E- E
Fig. 5.8: Area K: Section E-E. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
light-coloured earthen fill that lay behind it, higher up towards the summit of the mound (Fig. 5.7-8).
Hence the rooms, which were built in the pocket created between the sloping bedrock and the
fortification, look like cellars. The rooms were badly damaged in antiquity as well as by the Danish
excavation. However, three original elements were still visible:
1. Partition Walls U261, A262 and A261 join the city wall at right angles and separate Rooms 1812, 1814
and 1815. They are made of small and medium-sized stones. Their southern parts are moderately well
preserved while their northern end was damaged when the city wall was robbed.
2. In the southeastern corner of Room 1812 a small patch of the make-up of the Middle Bronze floor
was preserved. It is made of light earthy material similar to that exposed beneath the floors of the rooms
in Area F-H. The thickness of the fill is 0.3 m.
3. Middle Bronze bricks are visible in the west of Room 1814, leaning on wall U261.
Wall U2?5 closes off the rooms on their southern side. It was built as a terrace wall, i.e., with a
well-laid face on the side of the rooms (north) and a rough face towards the fill on its south. It is slightly
inclined in order to sustain the pressure of the fills. In Room 1812 six courses are preserved above the
floor. Later terrace walls (U276 and U274, which does not appear on the plan in Fig. 5.9) were built on
the Middle Bronze wall.
South of Wall U275 lay a light-coloured chalky fill, sloping from the upper part of the mound
northwards. It was unearthed in Squares U27,28 and T27. A trench 1.5 m. wide was dug into the fill in
the western end of Squares U27 ,28 in order to reveal its nature and relationship to the other elements
uncovered in this area. Here, as well as in other parts of Area K, all later remains such as Iron I silos and
later terrace walls were cut into it. The fill (L. 1807) comprises four layers: brown debris at the bottom,
followed by a grey ashy layer, a yellowish layer and a light layer of earth and small stones on top. The
internal components of the fill also slope from south to north. Any other layers which might have lain
on top of these were washed away by erosion during the ages. In the north the fill leans on Wall U275.
Wall U281 should also be dated to the MB III. Eight courses of this wall were preserved in the
above-mentioned section. It was constructed on a foundation of small and medium-sized stones and
brown earth. The relationship between the fill and Wall U281 is not clear. In the eastern part of the
74
31 30 29 28 27 26 25
Tl
~~~
I
1. 8.83 Q fQ I
II I IT
8.46
9.13
I
-~-
-:- -:- _I_
I
_I_
I I I-
I
;:)~ ?i:J I I IU
9.11~ ~-
.
-~-
..
· -·-·-·-,-I 8.66
_I_
- I_
I
I_ L._.
I
9.26
I I - I-
I
A A
~
~ ~m
31 30 29 28 27 26 25
Fig. 5.9: Area K: General plan of the Roman remains. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
-:a
VI
trench it seemed as if the fill material abuts onto the wall, but in the west a narrow foundation trench
was visible in the fill material. Since Silo 1207 of the Iron Age I abuts on the wall, and in view of the fact
that in the Iron Age I the area was used solely for storage, it may be assumed that Wall U281, which is
parallel to the city wall and to Wall U275, was erected in the MB III as support for the earthen fills in
mid-slope in the same manner as ·that uncovered in Upper Area C. At a later period it was reused,
perhaps after it had been partially robbed. This was apparently the cause of the disturbance in the fill
next to it.
South of Wall U281 the earthen fill continues in the direction of the summit of the mound (L. 1206).
Intensive building activity in later times, particularly in the Roman period, has removed all earlier
remains south of this point down to bedrock.

Four Iron I silos were unearthed in Area K (Fig. 5.7-8). It seems that this part ofthe mound lay outside
the main building complex of Iron I Shiloh and served for grain storage only. The silos (1203, 1207, 1805
and 1813) penetrated into the Middle Bronze earthen fill. Silos 1805 and 1813 were damaged by later
walls. A small quantity of Iron I pottery was found in the silos.

Remains of later structures, which were partially washed down the slope, were found in SquaresT I U27
(Fig. 5.9). These are Walls T271, U271, U272, U273, U274 and U276. The foundation trenches of these
walls penetrated into the Middle Bronze fills and Walls U271 and U272 also damaged two Iron I silos
(1805 and 1813). There are several phases of construction here. The east-west oriented walls are plainly
terrace walls as only their outer face was wdllaid. Wall U271 was widened to form Wall U272, which
was then made even wider (Square T27). Walls T271 and U273 were built later than these terrace walls.
In any event, no floors connected to these walls were found. The ceramic material related to these
remains is mixed, with a large quantity of Roman pottery including an intact Herodian lamp. Three
walls (U311, U312 and U313) incorporated into each other were found in Square U31. Their foundations
were laid on bedrock and on a fill of large and medium-sized fieldstones. The latter were laid where the
bedrock drops away. Mixed material was found in this square down to bedrock (L. 1808) with the
majority of the sherds belonging to the Roman period. All early remains in this part of the mound were
removed when the Roman buildings were constructed with their foundations penetrating all the way
down to bedrock.
AREAL
Two half-squares (in N58 and 061) were opened in 1984 in this area. This was another attempt to trace
early remains in the southeastern part of the mound, which is important for the reconstruction of the
layout of the site in the Middle Bronze and Iron I periods. In both places there was an accumulation of
stones and earth with numerous disturbed patches. No clean stratum could be found. The pottery was
all from the Roman period or later.
76
AREAM
Area M, excavated in 1984, is located on the northern edge of the mound between Areas D and K. One
complete square (F28) and a long, narrow trench (about 1.4 x 10 m.) extending northward were
excavated.

In this area too, a few MB II pottery sherds were found ~n the MB III earthen Fill2006 (see below).
28 27 26
~~~ ~~0~53 z:::::::=

iI . 10.68
L
F . +E-
I ·-~
1o.9o
·-· F
i 2006 0 2008
i 11.17
0 3m
L·-·-·-·-· 12.23
28 27 26
Fig. 5.10: Area M: General plan. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
10.00
F-F
Fig. 5.11: Area M: Section F-F. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)
77

The MB III city wall F272 was encountered at the northern end of the trench extending from Square
F28. More than 3.5 m. of its width are traceable. Its outer face was destroyed, probably by the erosion of
the slope. A later wall (F271) was built along the line of its inner face, but the latter was traced behind it
with a possible inward projection of the type known in nearby Area D. The fortification was built of
large fieldstones. As in Areas F and K, there seems to have been a room adjoining the wall on the inside,
bounded on its south by Wall F283. Reddish brick material with MB III pottery was found between the
two walls (L. 2008). The northern part of the room was disturbed by Silo 2009 of the Iron Age I.
Excavation was terminated before the floor of the room was reached. South of Wall F283 and leaning
on it, a light-coloured MB II earthen fill was encountered (L. 2006). Like that in Area K, here too it
sloped upwards to the south, in the direction of the summit of the mound. An attempt was made to
examine its continuation southward, but later disturbances precluded this.
Although the area is too limited to draw detailed conclusions, it is quite clear that the layout of Area
Min the MB III was identical to that of Area K to its west (Figs. 5.10-11) and very different from that
of Area D to its east.

Silo 2009 was dug during the Iron Age I into the Middle Bronze brick material of L. 2008. It was built of
relatively large stones and is the biggest Iron I silo uncovered at Shiloh. Many Iron Age I body sherds of
storage vessels were found in it. The silo leans on Wall F271 which should be dated to the Iron Age I
since it was built above and near the inner face of the Middle Bronze city wall (F272). Two pits (2003
and 2005) were dug into the MB II fills of L. 2006 during Iron Age I.

Silo 2009 was reused as an installation in the Roman period. White plaster sealed the Iron I surface of
the silo and seems to have covered its upper courses as well. The area was too limited to clarify the ,
nature of this installation. Roman pottery was found on the plaster.
REFERENCES
Ibrahim, M. 1983. Siegel und Siegelabdrticke aus Sahab. ZDPV99:43-53.

78
PART TWO
THE FINDS
CHAPTER6
POTTERY
Shlomo Bunimovitz and Israel Finkelstein*
The excavations at Shiloh yielded the richest pottery assemblages from the central hill country for the
Middle Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age and Iron Age I (Strata VIII-V). This chapter deals with the
pottery of these three periods, with a brief communication on the pottery of later periods.
The material available for comparison with the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze assemblages is
limited. The excavators of Shechem, the most important site for these periods, have published only the
MB II pottery, and that mainly sherds (Cole 1984). Other assemblages unearthed in the region (e.g. at
Tell el-Farcah, Bethel, Gibeon, several sites in Jerusalem and Beth-zur) are very limited or sepulchral in
character.
When evaluating the Shiloh assemblages, the cultic nature of the site must not be forgotten (see
Chapter 19). However only the Late Bronze Age assemblage can be defined as cultic per se, while the
Middle Bronze and Iron I assemblages are more domestic in nature with emphasis on storage.
The Shiloh pottery analysis follows the type-percentage quantitative seriation method (McClellen
1975:13-43) recently utilized in the excavation reports of Giloh (Mazar 1981:18-32), Tel Qasile (ibid.
1985:21-108), Shechem (Cole 1984), cizbet Sartah (Finkelstein 1986:38-98), Kh. ed-Dawwara (ibid.
1990: 176-195), Mount Ebal (Zertal1986-1987:124-147) and Tel Qiri (Hunt 1987). All complete vessels
were registered according to type. All rims, bases and slipped, burnished and painted sherds were also
recorded for the statistical study. A list of the main pottery types was prepared and all sherds were
tabulated by loci. Care was taken to avoid registering more than one sherd from the same vessel. In the
case of sherds, the majority of types was defined according to rim morphology. Had we been dealing
with complete vessels some of the classifications would probably have been somewhat different. Only
undisturbed loci were counted. Since very elaborate classifications of MB I-III (Jericho IV: Ch. VI;
Cole 1984) and Iron I (Finkelstein 1986; 1990) pottery have recently been developed it seemed superfluous
to enter into another detailed typology. Our pottery types are defined so as to enable meaningful
statistical analysis, but whenever needed our groups were broken down into sub-types to facilitate
comparison with more elaborate typologies (Cole 1984; Lachish II: Ch. VI; Lachish IV: Part III;
Pritchard 1963:8-9; Oren 1973:68-87; Finkelstein 1986; 1990).
Since recent studies have demonstrated clear regional differences in pottery traditions, the Shiloh
pottery was first compared with assemblages from neighbouring sites. Comparative material from
81
regions outside the hill country was taken into account only when closer comparisons were not available,
or when imperative for the typological discussion.

Drawings of the pottery give a fair idea as to the principal types of vessel found in each of the three
main assemblages, but by no means exhaust all the sub-forms represented in the sherds.
THE MIDDLE BRONZE AGE POTTERY
The pottery (sherds only) analyzed (Table 6.1) was retrieved from three main features of Middle Bronze
Age Shiloh:
1. From the lower layer of Glacis 723 in Area D. 1
2. From earthen fills unearthed in Areas C, F-H, K and M and from Stone Fi11417 uncovered in Area
D.2
3. From the storerooms of Stratum VII in Area F.
JUGS AND JUGLETS 3

STORAGE JARS 7
Fig. 6.1: Complete MB III vessels from Area F.
OTHER VESSELS 8
PITHOI 30
60
56
52
Fig. 6.2: Distribution of cooking-pots

in the three Middle Bronze
assemblages (%).
2 2
GLPCIS 723 FILLS AREA F ROOMS
-FLAT BOT. ~ HOLEMOUTH [ ] ] EVERTED - L I D DEV.

llllffil OTHERS
1. The glacis was laid in Stratum VII, but most of the pottery belongs to Stratum VIII (see Chapter 3).
2. In this case too, the fills were laid in Stratum VII whereas most of the pottery found in them belongs to Stratum VIII.
82
68
58
Fig. 6.3: Distribution of decorated
sherds in the three Middle
41 Bronze assemblages (%).
GLPCIS 723 FILLS AREA F ROOMS
- Fl&.INTED &\\\\'! OOMBED E] INCISED -ROPE DEO.

ffiliD! SLI P+BURN.
Fig. 6.4: Distribution of complete

vessels in the Area F ROOM 1526 ROOM 1527 ROOM 1522 ROOM 1582 ROOM 1583
rooms(%).
- BOWLS+KRAT, &\\\\'! VOTIVE BOWL. E] OOOKING POT. - JUGS+JUGLET,
ffiliDI OULTIO STAND. 0 STORAGE VES.- OTHER VE88:,
The earliest pottery in the first two features should date the beginning of occupation of the site
(Stratum VIII), whereas the latest pottery would date the construction of the Stratum VII earth and
stone fortifications. The latest pottery found in the storerooms in Area F-H dates the destruction of
Stratum VII.
The complete or nearly complete vessels found in the storerooms of Area F (Stratum VII) are
presented in Table 6.2 and all appear in the drawings. To these should be added the eight storage jars
found by the Danish expedition in their Northern Sector (our Area H) in 1932. These vessels were lost
and the only remaining documentation is a photograph published by Buhl and Holm-Nielsen (Shiloh
1969: Fig. 13). Altogether 38 large storage jars/ pithoi were found in Areas F-H.
83
TABLE 6.1: MIDDLE BRONZE POTTERY (SHERDS ONLY)
Type Glacis Fills in Area: Rooms

723 c D F H K M Total Area F
(St. VIII) (Stratum VIII) (VII)
A. Bowls and Kraters

Shallow bowls, plain rim 32 13 5 2 20 27
Shallow bowls, inverted rim 29 22 13 8 45 82
Small rounded bowls 13 7 I 4 12 8
Carinated bowls 11 4 3 9 9
Small carinated bowls 55 22 11 11 45 42
Small votive bowls 3 1 1 10
Other bowls 3
Kraters 18 5
B. Cooking- Pots
Flat-bottomed cooking-pots 5 9 5 16 1
Holemouth cooking-pots 10 3 2 2 8 22
Cooking-pots, everted rim 24 21 4 5 30 31
Other cooking-pots 4 4 2
C. Jars and Jugs
Small jars/ jugs 57 2 15 18 2 3 40 26
Storage jars with thickened 'square' rim 14 II 31 2 9 53 10
Storage jars with ridge under rim 39 2 7 7 17 36
Other storage jars 16 9 13 4 26 19
D. Other Vessels
Juglets 3 3 5 5
Stands 2
Other vessels 19 5 7 4 17 16
E. Bases
Flattened bases 46 2 12 15 9 38 40
Disc bases 35 4 9 14 15
Ring bases 25 8 8 4 22 8
Trumpet bases 15 8 9 6
Pointed bases Guglets) 5 3 5 9 2
F. Decorated Sherds
Painted sherds 3 2 1
'Chocolate-on-White' ware 3
Combed sherds 19 8 10
Incised sherds 5 3 4 4
Sherds with rope decoration 2
Red and white slip and/ or
Burnished sherds 47* 12 13** 11***
G. Imported Pottery
Total 552 12 191 178 II 77 5 474 441
24 more in other categories

•• 5 more in other categories
*** 2 more in other categories
84
TABLE 6.2: COMPLETE OR NEARLY COMPLETE VESSELS FROM THE AREA F ROOMS
(STRATUM VII)
Number of
Type vessels
Bowls 5
Small votive bowls 7
Small rounded bowls 2
Small carinated bow 1 1
Pedestal vase
Large kraters with handles 2
Krater
Ju~ 2
Juglet
Smalljars 2
Storage jars with one handle
on shoulder 5
Large storage jars/ pithoi 30
Cult stands 2
Cult bowl 1
Stand 1
Other vessels 3
TYPOLOGICAL DISCUSSION
A. BOWLS AND KRATERS
Table 6.3 presents the distribution of the main MB bowl types found at Shiloh.
TABLE 6.3: MIDDLE BRONZE BOWLS
Type Glacis 723 Fills Area F Rooms

No. % No. % No. %

Shallow bowls, plain rim 32 22 20 15 27 15
Shallow bowls, inverted rim 29 20 45 33 82 46
Small rounded bowls 13 9 12 9 8 5
Carinated bowls 11 8 9 7 9 5
Small carinated bowls 55 39 45 33 42 23
Small votive bowls 3 2 1 1 10 6
Other bowls 3 2
Total 143 100 135 100 178 100
85
Shallow bowls. Large, shallow (platter-like) bowls comprise between half to two-thirds of the bowls
repertoire. These bowls are characteristic of MB II-III pottery assemblages throughout the country.
The Shiloh bowls can be divided according to their rim profiles into two main sub-types: plain rim bowls
(e.g. Fig. 6.5:1, 3; see also Shiloh 1969: Pl. 14:171) and inverted rim bowls (e.g. Fig. 6.5:4; Shiloh 1969:
Pl. 14:164, 168). Cole (1984) demonstrated that most of the sub-forms of these two types appear at
ShechemJhroughout the MB II-III time range (see also Seger 1974: Figs. 3-5; Dever 1974: Figs.
13-14). This picture is apparently repeated in other hill country sites, including Shiloh (e.g. Tell
el-Farcah- Mallet 1988; Bethel- Kelso 1968: Pls. 49-52, 77; Gibeon Pritchard 1963: Figs. 20-61;
Beth-zur- Sellers 1933: Pl. V; Funk 1968: Fig. 5; see also TBM !A: 79, Pls. 10, 12; Jericho /V:384-387).
In the fills and in the ro?ms of Stratum VII, the bowl with inverted rim seems to be much more
numerous (two to three timrs) than the bowl with plain rim, while in Glacis 723 their number is almost
equal. The implications of 1this observation cannot be fully assessed yet, since relevant statistical data
from neighbouring sites is lacking. It should be noted, however, that while this fact is consistent with
Albright's observations for Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM /:23; TBM /A:79), it does not concur with Cole's
conclusions regarding shallow bowls at Shechem (1984:41-42, Fig. 1; see also Gezer II: n. 129). One may
also wonder whether the absence of certain rim forms from the Shilop shallow bowls material (e.g.
elongated inversions; everted external edges, cf. Cole 1984:42, Pl. 5, Bp. 61, Fig. 2) and the scarcity of
others (bulbous rims - see e.g. Fig. 6.8:6) has any chronological significance or whether these
phenomena reflect regional differences (Kempinski 1983: 127). The excavators of Shechem regarded all
these forms as characteristic of the MB III period (Cole 1984:42; Dever 1974:45), but in Shechem, as
well as at other sites, they already appear in the MB II period (e.g. TBM !A: Pl. 10, Level E; Gibeon, T.
20, T. 36 Pritchard 1963: Figs. 28:1; 40:1; see also Cole 1984: Fig. 3).
The complete shallow bowls found in and near the Area F rooms (Figs. 6.12:4; 6.22:2-3) provide a
nice illustration for the above discussion, which was based mainly on sherds. The bowls have straight or
slightly rounded walls, simple or slightly inverted rims (for a parallel for the upstanding rim of the bowl
in Fig. 6.12:10 see Jericho IV: Figs. 104: 11; 107:27), and flat, simple or elaborate disc bases (cf. Pella 1:
Pl. 117:4-5, 14-16, all MB III).
Small rounded bowls. Simple,,rounded rims (e.g. Fig. 6.5:6-7) were collected in all three assemblages.
The majority of these rims seem to belong to saucer-like bowls similar to the two intact specimens
unearthed in Stone Fill 417 in Area D and in one of the Area F rooms. Small round-based bowls have
been found in other MB II-III strata (Cole 1984:60, Pl. 19:d-e and references there; cf. Pritchard 1963:
Figs. 21:37-38; 43:1; Jericho IV: Fig. 120:1-2, 4-5). However some of the Shiloh rims may belong to
round-based lamps typical of these periods throughout the country (e.g. TBM /:25, Pls. 8:4; 10:26;
43:3-4; TBM IA:80, 86; Fig. 3:a-c; Pis. 10:12; 15:18-20; Pritchard 1963: Figs. 33:31-34; 41:33; 48:10;
Megiddo II: Pl. 47: 1-5). In fact, some of them bear soot marks.
Carinated bowls. Sherds of this type of vessel and its sub-forms are found in the three Shiloh assemblages
in similar quantities. Though it is difficult to determine the exact shape of every piece found, it seems
that the whole typological range of the flaring carinated bowl is present: sharply angular and rounded
shoulders (e.g. Fig. 6.5: 15) as well as 'goblets' on a trumpet base. 3 Some of the specimens are made of
well-levigated ware, slipped and/ or highly burnished. The chronological range of this type and its
3. Some of the trumpet bases retrieved in the dig probably belong to this type of vessel.
86
various sub-forms is MB II-III (Cole 1984:56-59, Pis. 17-19, and references there; see also Lachish
IV:l78, Bowl Class A; Kempinski 1983:97). It should be emphasized that MB III forms seem to be
present in Glacis 723 and in the earth and stone fills.
Small carinated bowls. Small carinated bowls comprise the second most important component of the
bowls repertoire. Most are characterized by rounded shoulders, upper wall only slightly curved inward
and rim sharply everted. None are slipped or burnished (e.g. Fig. 6.5:10, 14; see also Shiloh 1969: Pl.
18:231). Such degenerate carinated bowls are typical of the MB II-III in southern Canaan (Kempinski
1983:127; Cole 1984:56, Pl. 16c-i; Dever 1974: Fig. 14:1,4, 5, 7; TBM I: Pls. 41:8,42:4-6, 8; TBM IA:76,
Pls. 8:2-9, 12:1-5, Levels E & D; Funk 1968: Fig. 5:1; Lachish IV:l79-180, Bowls Classes B-C; Jericho
IV: PI. 109:25-29, from the last phases of the Middle Bronze Age at the site; Fig. 157:3-4, from Tomb
Groups II-V; Mallet 1988: Pl. 17:3).
Pedestal vases. An almost complete pedestal vase was found in the Area F rooms (Fig. 6.13:13) and a
piece of another one may have come from Glacis 723 (Fig. 6.5:21). A few unstratified pieces also came to
light. The first vessel has a cordon around its neck, while in the second there is a rope decoration at the
junction between base and body. This type of vase is characteristic of the southern part of the hill
country and the lower Jordan Valley during the MB II-III (Kempinski 1983:128, 187-188; Cole 1984:54),
while scarcely appearing at Shechem, Tell el-Farcah (N) and other sites outside its main distribution
zone (for full documentation see Cole 1984). The modest presence of the pedestal vase at Shiloh seems to
confirm this observation. According to Dajani (1960: 102) and Cole (1984:55) the cordon on the neck of
the vase and at the top of its base, both exhibited by our specimens, are late MB II-MB III features.
Small votive bowls. These small bowls (mostly ca. 6 em. in diameter) were found in all three Middle
Bronze Age assemblages, but were especially well-represented in the Area F rooms (17 bowls). Most are
actually miniature copies of the normal-sized shallow bowls of the period, with straight or rounded walls
(Fig. 6.13). Two are cup-like or diminutive versions of the period's small carinated bowl (e.g. Fig.
6.5: 13). They all have flat or disc bases, usually carrying marks of string-cutting, sometimes quite crude
with excess clay still adhering. Several of the specimens are somewhat larger than the others (Fig.
6.13:8-9) but still display the same qualities. Similar bowls are known from MB II-LB I sepulchral and
cultic contexts throughout the country (e.g. Jericho, Gibeon, Shechem, Nahariyah, Razor, Megiddo)
and parallels to our material are especially conspicuous in MB III-LB I assemblages. 4
Other bowls. 1) The round bowl with profiled rim from the Area F rooms (Fig. 6.12:1) has parallels in
the MB III assemblage of Beth-zur (Funk 1968: Fig. 5: 14) and in the last phases of the Middle Bronze
occupation at Jericho (Jericho IV: Fig. 112:9-1 0).
2) Two large bowls with rounded walls on a pedestal base (only one intact) found in the Area F rooms
(Fig. 6.12:11-12) have close affinities to bowls from Tell Beit Mirsim Levels E-D (TBM IA: Pls. 8:16;
12:8), Tomb R 13 (Group V) at Jericho (Jericho I: Fig. 209:1), Megiddo Stratum X (Megiddo II: Pl.
44:30) and Razor Stratum XVI (Hazar/: Pl. CXIV:6). 5 These fairly rare bowls, or rather chalices, may
reflect the influence of the 'Chocolate-on-White' ware on the local potters at the end of the Middle
4. For similar bowls from the LB I temple in Area H at Hazor see Yadin 1975:115. For discussions and references see Cole
1984:60; Dever 1974:43, n. 28; Hazar lll-/V:239; Negbi 1989:44.
5. For the stratigraphic context of this type of bowl see Kempinski 1983:112.
87
Bronze Age (Kempinski 1983: 127) and are evidently forerunners of this type of bowl in LB I Shiloh and
elsewhere (see below).
Kraters. A variety of kraters was found in both Glacis 723 and Area F rooms. The main types are
discussed below:
Kraters with two handles. This type of vessel seems to be confined to MB III contexts although Cole
recorded some earlier specimens at Shechem (1984:49: Pis. 11; 12:a, and references there; see also
Kempinski 1983:99; Funk 1968 Fig. 5:23; Jericho IV: Fig. 170:3)). By his typological criteria the krater
from the glacis (Fig. 6.5: 18) may be earlier than the two complete kraters from Area F (Fig. 6.13:10, 12).
The krater in Fig. 6.5:20 with profiled rim and lack of carination may also represent an early specimen
(cf. TBM IA: Pl. 10:6, Level E, a bowl-krater combination). Additional rim sherds probably belong to
this type of krater.
Globular krater with rilled rim. This small krater (Fig. 6.6:3) is covered on its outer side with a thick
white slip or lime wash. In Shechem similar kraters occur in the MB II but become more frequent in the
MB III (Cole 1984:47, Pl. 9:c; see also Jericho IV: Fig. 113).
Holemouth kraters. Cole (1984:48-49) thoroughly discussed this type of krater (Fig. 6.6:5) including
the differences in ware from the holemouth cooking-pots. Apparently it spans the MB II-III periods.
Large carinated krater. A large carinated krater found in Area F (Fig. 6.13:11) seems to belong to a
type known from Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM I: Pl. 12:12) and Bethel (Kelso 1968: Pl. 52:1-2). However the
Shiloh krater lacks the incised decoration. Another possible specimen of this krater may have been
retrieved from the fills (Fig. 6.10: 12).
Other Kraters. Noteworthy among these are handleless carinated kraters (e.g. Fig. 6.6:4, cf. Hazar
III-IV: Pls. CCLIX:l8; CCLXXXVII:9) and globular kraters (e.g. Fig. 6.5:19; cf. Cole 1984:Pls. 7:e-j; 8;
Jericho IV: Fig. 115-116). Of special interest is the presence in the fills of the high necked bowl/ krater
(Fig. 6.8:7; cf. Shiloh 1969: Pl. 14:183, 185). This type of vessel seems to be especially popular in the MB
II period (Cole 1984:52-54 and references there; Jericho IV:166-167; Mallet 1988:Figs. 1:3; 7:1-3; 9:1;
10: 1; 12:3) although it may appear in late MB contexts as well (ibid.: Fig. 14:1; 16:2; 17:2; Hazar II: Pl.
CIX:37).
B. COOKING-POTS
Table 6.4 presents the distribution of the main cooking-pot types in the Middle Bronze assemblages
from Shiloh:
TABLE 6.4: MIDDLE BRONZE COOKING-POTS

No. % No. % No. %
Flat-bottomed cooking-pots 5 12 16 28 2
Holemouth cooking-pots 10 25 8 14 22 39
Cooking-pots with everted rim 24 60 30 52 31 55
Cooking-pots with lid device 3 1 1 2
Other cooking-pots 3 5 2
Total 40 100 58 100 56 100
88
Flat-bottomed cooking-pots. Flat-bottomed cooking-pots with rope-like moulding below the rim occur
in all three assemblages. The popularity of this type decreased from 12% and 28% of the cooking-pot
repertoire in Glacis 723 and the fills respectively (Stratum VIII) to only 2% in the Area F rooms
(Stratum VII). It seems that this type of cooking-pot, which from the outset of MB II was less popular
than the round bottomed holemouth cooking-pot (Cole 1984:63), was eventually superseded by the
latter type.
Two main sub-forms are discernable in the Shiloh material:
1) Straight walls, rope-like moulding below the rim with vestigial thumb impressions (Fig. 6.6:12).
Occasionally remnants of thick white lime wash can be seen on the outer face of the pot.
2) Incurved walls, rope-like moulding near but still below the rim, with very rude thumb impressions
(Fig. 6.8:17-20; see also Shiloh 1969: Pis. 14:174, 177; 18:234).
Both types are well known from MB II-III contexts, especially in southern Canaan (TBM 1:24;
Kempinski 1983:128-129, 188; Cole 1984:61-63, and references there; Jericho IV: Figs. 144-146; Mallet
1988: Figs. 3:2,6:1, 15:4; Funk 1968: Pl. 14a:6; Kelso 1968: Pl. 51:14; Singer 1983: Pl. 129). Interestingly
enough, no clear examples of the contemporaneous sub-type with rope moulding at the rim have been
found. Numerous specimens of this late sub-form were in evidence at Tell Beit Mirsim Level D (TBM I:
Pls. 8:5; 11:10-13, 15-17; 43:9; TBM /A: Pl. 13:3-6) and at Tel Masos (Singer 1983: Pls. 129:1-3,5, 8;
84:C) but seemingly it was less popular in the north-central part of the hill country, as apparent from its
scarcity in the MB III deposits at Bethel (Kelso 1968: Pl. 50), Shechem (Seger 1974; Dever 1974), Tell
el-Farcah (Mallet 1988) and Shiloh.
Holemouth cooking-pots. Round-bottomed holemouth cooking-pots with folded rim are well
represented at Shiloh by two sub-forms: rim folded round, mainly large pots; rim folded squarely,
mainly small pots (e.g. Figs. 6.6:14-15; see also Shiloh 1969: Pl. 14:178, 181). This type of cooking-pot
appears throughout the MB II-III (Cole 1984:63-65, Fig 18; Dever 1974:44, Figs. 13:2, 4; 14:6, 10-11;
Seger 1974: Figs. 3:1; 6:2, 16) but the Shiloh data seem to indicate a gradual increase in its popularity
during the last phases of the Middle Bronze Age.
Of special interest is the base of a cooking-pot with a hatched cross in a circle in relief (Fig. 6.9:21).
This technique, probably used to stabilize large holemouth cooking-pots, is known from MB I-LB I
contexts at various sites (e.g. Ben-Dor 1950: Pl. X:16; Megiddo II: Pl. 46:7; Mallet 1988: Fig. 15:2;
Lachish II: Pl. LV A:352; Petrie 1931: Pl. 32:54).
Cooking-pots with everted rim. This type of cooking-pot is the most abundant in the Middle Bronze
assemblages from Shiloh, comprising 50-60% of the cooking-pots repertoire. Three main sub-forms
could be discerned:
1) Everted simple rim. This sub-form has many varieties according to the shape of the rim (e.g. Fig.
6.8: 14; see also Shiloh 1969: Pl. 14: 176). At Shechem and Tell Beit Mirsim such cooking-pots were rare
before the MB III, while on the coastal plain and the northern part of Canaan they apparently already
appeared during the MB II (Cole 1984:65-67 and references there). Similar cooking-pots from Bethel
(Kelso 1968: Pl. 50) were dated to the MB III (Dever 1971:466-468) and at Jericho they are attested
mainly in the last phases of the Middle Bronze occupation (Jericho IV: Fig. 150). The Shiloh material
seems to present a typological mixture of simple and more developed rims, possibly forerunners of the
Late Bronze tradition, and we tend to date at least part of it to the MB II (cf. Singer 1983: Pl. 129:9).
89
2) Everted, short thickened rim (e.g. Fig. 6.6:7-8; see also Shiloh 1969: Pl. 18:236). This sub-form was
found together with Sub-form 1 in all three Middle Bronze assemblages. A count of the number of
sherds revealed that both types are equally represented in Glacis 723 and in the fills but that Sub-form 2
is much more abundant (almost triple Sub-form 1) in the Area F rooms. This type of cooking-pot is
missing in the published material from Shechem and also seems to be absent from the Bethel, Beth-zur
and Tell Beit Mirsim assemblages. In Jericho similar cooking-pots were found mainly in the last phases
of the Middle Bronze settlement (Jericho IV: Figs. 148:8, 17; 151). Two specimens were recorded at Tel
Masos (Singer 1983: Pl. 129:10, 12). This sub-type seems to be rare outside the hill country-lower Jordan
valley zone.
3) Profiled rim (e.g. Fig. 6.6: ll). This cooking-pot with an elaborate grooved-rim is typical of the MB
III at Shechem (Cole 1984:66, Figs. 17:h-i; 18: Cu.2; e.g. Seger 1974: Figs. 30; Dever 1974:18) and of the
late MB III at Jericho (Jericho IV: Fig. 151:11, 30). It is hardly attested in MB III contexts outside the
hill country (but see Tel Masos- Singer 1983: Pl. 129:14-16; Tel Michal- Negbi 1989: Fig. 5.3).
Other cooking-pots. Of much interest is the surprising appearance in each of the Shiloh assemblages of
at least one example of the cooking-pot with a lid device (Figs. 6.6: 13; 6.10: 17). This cooking-pot which
is equipped with an additional ridge for holding a lid (sometimes with a hole perforating it) is commonly
considered to be an exclusive LB I type (see e.g. Amiran 1969:135; Hazar Ill-IV:236-237; Lachish II: Pl.
LVB:360; the Shiloh pots have all short ridges, cf. Hazar I: Pl. CXIII:l3; Hazar III-IV:CCXLI:4-5;
CCLXV:l6). The Shiloh examples come from clear Middle Bronze loci and thus prove that this type
began somewhat earlier. It is noteworthy that all known examples of the cooking-pot with a lid device
were found in the vicinity of cult installations.
C. JARS AND JUGS

Table 6.5 summarizes the distribution of jars and jugs in the three Middle Bronze Age assemblages:
TABLE 6.5: MIDDLE BRONZE JARS AND JUGS

No. % No. % No. %
Small jars/ jugs 57 45 40 29 26 29

Storage jars with thickened, 'square' rim 14 11 53 39 10 11
Storage jars with ridge under rim 39 31 17 13 36 40
Other storage jars 16 13 26 19 19 20
Total 126 100 136 100 91 100
Small jars/jugs. All forms of small fine jars/jugs (e.g. Fig. 6.7:1-4) repeat the Shechem MB II-III
repertoire (Cole 1984:77-78; Pis. 40-42; Seger 1974: Figs. 4-6; Dever 1974: Figs. 13-14). It is obvious
that most types span the whole later part of the Middle Bronze Age.
90
The complete small jars and jugs found in the Area F rooms need further comment. The earliest
among the small storage jars with one handle on the shoulder seems to be that in Fig. 6.20:1. This
sub-form is well known from MB II-III contexts at many sites, such as Tell el-Farcah (N) (de Vaux and
Steve 1949: Fig 4:1-3), Lachish (Lachish IV: 187-188, Class B; Pl. 74), Jericho (Jericho IV: Fig. 194:5),
Megiddo Strata XI-X (Megiddo II: Pis. 31:9, 11; 40:4-5) and Razor (Hazor II: Pl. CXII:6-9). The other
jars in this sub-category (Figs. 6.15:2; 6.20:2-4) represent a late variant of the earlier much more graceful
form (cf. TBM I: P1.8:1, from Level D). They all have short necks and wide shoulders, clearly a
diminutive version of the large jars/ pithoi, and their rim shapes are typically late M13 III (e.g. Jericho
IV:126:12,18-19, from the last phases of the MB settlement).
The rim of the jar in Fig. 6.20:6 is missing. It seems to belong to one of the small jar types characteristic
of the MB II-III (e.g. Mallet 1988: Figs. 43:1; 44:4; Jericho IV: Fig. 190:6, 10).
The two jugs in Fig. 6.14:9; 13 are also attested in MB II-III contexts (e.g. Jericho II: Fig. 183:2-3;
Jericho IV: Figs. 174:6; 176: 1-2).
Large storage jars/pithoi. Rim sherds of large storage jars and pithoi are abundant in all three Middle
Bronze assemblages. To these should be added the 38 complete large jars/ pithoi found in the Area F-H
rooms. MB II-III storage jars were briefly reviewed by Albright (TBM I:l9-21; TBM IA:76, 85) and
recently elaborated on by Cole (1984:73-76). It is obvious from these studies that many of the variations
in form (especially in rim and base shapes) cannot be used as chronological indicators since they seem to
appear throughout the MB II-III. Yet certain observations made by the excavators of Shechem may
help to differentiate between jars of these two periods.
Table 5 indicates that the most prominent category of storage jars in the sherds from Glacis 723 and
the Area F rooms is the ridged rim. This category has many sub-forms (e.g. Fig. 6.7:8, 9, 19; 6.9:9-13;
see also Shiloh 1969: Pl. 14:173, 180) which in the main repeat the Shechem MB II-III repertoire (Cole
1984: Pls. 32:g-n; 33-36; Seger 1974: Figs. 4-6; Dever 1974: Figs. 13-14). They are well attested at other
neighbouring sites (e.g. Kelso 1968: Pls.49; 82:1, 4; Sellers 1933: Pl. VI:l6-17, 19-20; Funk 1968: Figs.
1-3; Pls. 14-15; TBM I: Pis. 10:1-2; 13:19-2; 45:4, 8; 46:3,9-11, 13; TBM IA: Pls. 11:3-7; 14:5, 10;
Jericho IV: Pls. 127-132). The appearance in all three Shiloh assemblages of two specific rim sub-forms,
namely the flared or splayed rim (e.g. Fig. 6.7:5-7) and the rilled rim (e.g. Fig. 6.7:12-13), is
chronologically significant since both are dated to the MB III (Seger 1974:123, Figs. 5:14,23-24,25,27,
33-34; 6:13-14; Dever 1974:44, Fig. 13:22-23; Cole 1984: Fig. 22; Pl. 36:j-m; Kelso 1968: Pls. 49:1, 3,
12-13; 82:4; Funk 1968: Figs. 2-3; TBM IA: Pl. 14:4-6, 10; Gezer I/:34-35; Jericho IV: Figs. 128:18,
25-27; 129:3, 10, 19, 23; 130; 131:20-24, 29-30; Hazor I: Pls. XCIV:l2; XCVIII:3; CI:27). It should be
noted that the Shiloh material, as well as many of the examples just cited, exhibits a tendency to shift
from elegant, elaborately shaped jar rims in the MB II to more bulbous or somewhat less profiled rims
in the MB III.
The complete large storage jars/ pithoi from the Area F-H ro0ms echo these observations by displaying
a variety of rims, all within the potter's canon of the very last phase of the Middle Bronze Age. All these
jars are ovoid or pear shaped, with wide shoulders and body tapering towards the base. Most bases are
flattened although round ones also occur. Jars with no handles, two handles, and even four handles are
evident. Decoration includes various designs incised before firing, mainly a framed wavy line or a band
of thin lines around the shoulder. One jar has two incised marks on its shoulder (Fig. 6.19:3). Similar
crescent-shaped marks on large MB II-III storage jars are known from other sites (e.g. Jericho V: Fig.
91
199:1; Hazar I: Pl. CXIII:8). Some of the jars are slipped all over or around the neck. Several jars,
mainly the smaller ones without handles, were slightly damaged while stacked together for firing, as is
evident from the fallen shoulder of one of them and the 'dimples' in the body of the others. All the above
qualities are traceable in large MB II-III storage jars/ pithoi at other sites as well (e.g. TBM I: 19-20, Pl.
41:10, 12, 14-15; TBM IA:76, 85, Pl. 14:10; Funk 1968: Fig. 1:15; Pl. 14:15; Pritchard 1963: Fig. 53; Cole
1984:76; Jericho IV: Figs. 189:3; 191:1-2; 192: 1-2; 193:1-2).
The two types second in popularity at Shiloh are the thickened, 'square' rim jars (e.g. Fig. 6. 7:20; see
also Shiloh 1969: Pl. 13:139) and the plain rim jars, included in our 'Other Jars' category. Both types
seem to span the entire MB II-III time range (Cole 1984:73-74; Pl.32:a-f, k-n) although the former type
may be more restricted to the early-to-middle phases of the MB II while the latter becomes more flaring
towards the end of the Middle Bronze Age. In the fills there are many more 'square' rim jars than
ridged-rim jars, the reverse of the situation in Glacis 723 and the Area F-H rooms. The reason for this
phenomenon is not clear. The former type might represent an early phase (within the MB II) of
settlement at Shiloh since most of the specimens look early by their neat 'square' profile and traces of
fine comb-like marks around the folded-out rim. 6 It is possible that some material for the fills was taken
from an early MB II occupation debris. This hypothesis may also explain the presence of a few sherds of
flat-bottomed cooking-pots with a rope-like moulding on straight walls in the fill material.
D. OTHER VESSELS
Two similar cylindrical cult stands, one intact and the other missing its upper part, were found in the
Area F rooms (Fig. 6.21:4, 6). The stands are open at both ends, with two small oval windows cut in
their bodies. The intact stand is decorated with a rope-like incised pattern around its neck. A piece of a
painted cult stand was retrieved from Glacis 723. The corner of one of its oval windows can still be
discerned (Fig. 6.7:24).
Cylindrical cult stands have been thoroughly discussed by Mazar (1980:87-96 and bibliography).
According to his analysis this type of stand appeared in the Early Bronze Age but became more common
during the Middle Bronze Age.7 Analogous to contemporary ordinary pottery types, stands of the
Middle and Late Bronze Age usually carry rope decoration and various incised patterns, although
painted stands are also known. Various explanations for the function of cult stands have been proferred;
that they were used for libation, burning incense or holding sacred plants. Evidently the function of
cylindrical stands without attached bowls was to support cult bowls, and indeed such a bowl was found
together with the Shiloh stands (Fig. 6.21 :5; for a discussion of cult bowls see Mazar 1980:96-100 and
bibliography). Since the stands from Tel Qasile, Lachish and Beth-shan were found in cult buildings,
sometimes near the platforms on which the deity's figure stood, it is most probable that ritual meals were
served to the deities in the cult bowls supported by the stands (ibid.:95).
The low cylindrical stand (Fig. 6.22:6) and the piece of a conical stand (Fig. 6.23: 15) also found in the
Area F rooms are well known from other MB II/III-LB assemblages (Mazar 1980:96; in addition to the
references there see Megiddo II: Pis. 47:17; 55:17-18; Hazar I: Pl. XCIV:l8; Hazar II: PI. CXV:25-26;
6. They evidently perpetuate MB I traditions, cf. Beck 1975:Fig. 7:3, 20-21; Jericho IV: Pl. 127:4, 12, 16.
7. The stands from Tell Beit Mirsim may be added to the examples cited by Mazar although they could have belonged to the
chalice-like type with attached bowl; see TBM !:30-31, Pl. 44:14, Level D; TBM IA:80, Pl. 10:11, Level E.
92
Hazor III-IV: Pl. CCLX: 14-17). Such stands are usually explained as supports for vessels with rounded
bases. However, their frequent appearance in cult contexts may hint at their use in a capacity similar to
that of the tall cylindrical stands, namely, for carrying cult bowls (Mazar 1980:96).
E. BASES
Table 6.6 presents the distribution of types of bases in the three Middle Bronze Age assemblages from
Shiloh.
TABLE 6.6: MIDDLE BRONZE BASES (MOSTLY OF BOWLS)

No. % No. % No. %
Disc bases 35 47 14 31 15 52
Ring bases 25 33 22 49 8 28
Trumpet bases 15 20 9 20 6 20
Total 75 100 45 100 29 100
Disc bases are most widespread in the glacis and in the Area F rooms, and ring bases are second in
popularity in these assemblages. The reasons for the reversed situation in the fills are not clear, but may
hint that this material originated from a different refuse dump than that of the glacis material. Trumpet
bases seem to have enjoyed a modest, static popularity throughout the MB II-III periods (for a discussion
of Shechem's bowl bases see Cole 1984:60-61).
Small flattened bases are the most popular jar bases in all three assemblages. This situation is repeated
at other MB II-III sites (ibid.:75-76).
F. DECORATED SHERDS
Table 6.7 presents the distribution of decorated sherds in the Middle Bronze assemblages:
TABLE 6.7: MIDDLE BRONZE DECORATED SHERDS


No. % No. % No. %
Painted sherds 3 4 2 6 4 21
Combed sherds 19 26 10 31
Incised sherds 5 7 4 16 4 21
Sherds with rope decoration 2 6
Red and white slipped
and I or burnished sherds 47 63 13 41 11 58
Total 74 100 33 100 19 100
93
Combing and rope decoration, present in the fills material, seem to loose their popularity in the last
phase of the period (cf. TBM IA:76). At that time incised decoration and painting were gaining
precedence. The increase in the amount of painted pottery in the last phase of the Middle Bronze Age
heralds the florescence of this decoration technique in the Late Bronze Age.
From the chronological point of view, the most important painted pieces found in the Area F rooms
are three sherds of closed vessels, apparently jugs, of'Chocolate-on-White' ware (Figs. 6.14:11; 6.21: 1-2).
This ware is usually dated to the late-MB III-LB 1.8 There is still no definite answer as to the location of
its production centres but they were most probably located in the eastern parts of the middle and lower
Jordan valley (Leonard 1986:167).
The relatively large amount of slipped and burnished vessels in all three assemblages contradicts past
observations that these decoration techniques continuously declined during the Middle Bronze Age (e.g.
TBM 1:22; TBM IA:76; Cole 1984:79). The contradiction can be explained by the fact that most of the
Shiloh sherds come from a deposit which represents the early MB II settlement at the site (Stratum
VIII).
G. IMPORTED POTTERY
A piece of a Cypriot White Painted (WP) V closed vessel, probably a jar or a jug, was identified in the
Glacis 723 material (Fig. 6.7:22). Vessels similarly decorated with framed broad bands are known from
eastern Cyprus, e.g. Kalopsidha (A-strom 1966:45, 90; Figs. 30; 43, row 1:1-2; 79, row 1:1-3; 80;
1972a:Fig. IB:31-32; XVI:17; XVIII:lO). WP V ware is assigned there to the Middle Cypriot III period
(A-strom 1972a:177, 277), which corresponds to the MB II-III in the Levant (Saltz 1977:66). Indeed
specimens of this ware appear in MB II-III contexts in Canaan, at both coastal and inland sites. 9
CONCLUSIONS
Chronology
Three chronological questions are of interest:
1. When was the first Middle Bronze Age settlement of Shiloh (Stratum VIII) established?
2. When were the huge Middle Bronze stone and earthworks erected?
3. When was the Middle Bronze site destroyed?

Answers to the first two questions are provided by the pottery retrieved from the fills and Glacis 723.
The lower layer of the glacis consists of settlement debris and rendzina soil, which were placed on the
bedrock after it was cleared of surface debris (Chapter 13). Therefore, the earliest pottery found in this
layer (and in the fills) represents the beginning of activity at the site, while the latest pottery reflects the
end of occupation in Stratum VIII and the date of construction of Stratum VII.
8. For discussions of this ware, its origins and chronology see Amiran 1969:158-159; Oren 1973:68-85; Hennesy 1985; Knapp
1987:17-23; ibid. 1989: 129-148; Knapp et al. 1988:57-113.
9. For catalogue and discussion see Johnson 1982. Also Maguire 1987; Negbi 1989:50, fig. 5.4; Saltz 1984.
94
The bulk of the pottery from both Glacis 723 and the fills should be dated to the MB II-early MB III.
A few pieces of the flat-bottomed cooking-pot with straight walls and some early versions of the 'square'
rim storage jar seem to represent the earliest pottery in these two assemblages. Two facts are of
chronological importance: 1) Most of the flat-bottomed cooking-pots are of the incurved walls type,
with vestigial rope-like moulding; 2) Not one example of the earlier class of these cooking-pots, with
breathing holes pierced above the moulding, was found. Specimens of this typical MB I cooking-pot are
conspicuously present in surface pottery collected in the course of the Land of Ephraim survey in
Middle Bronze Age sites around Shiloh (Chapter 19).
The substantial number of 'square' rim storage jars in the latest Middle Bronze assemblage (the Area
F rooms) seems to reduce their value as chronological indicators. Still, the relatively large amount of
this type of jar and the flat-bottomed, straight-sided cooking-pot in the fills may hint that the fill
material originated in an earlier refuse deposit than the one dug for the construction of Glacis 723. In
any case, due to the general scarcity (or even lack) of unequivocal early MB II pottery types ( cf. Cole
1984:81-82) in the glacis and fills, we are inclined to date the foundation of the Middle Bronze Age
settlement at Shiloh (Stratum VIII) to mid-MB II, namely, to the end of the 18th century B.C.E. It
should be noted, however, that since most MB II pottery types prevalent at Shiloh are not sufficiently
diagnostic from a chronological point of view, a somewhat earlier foundation date for Stratum VIII
cannot be ruled out.
The pottery found in Glacis 723 and the fills contains a significant amount of diagnostic MB III forms
(see above). It is noteworthy that although the MB III pottery from the glacis and the fills is almost
identical with the sherds from the Area F rooms, 'Chocolate-on-White' ware was found only in the latter
assemblage. Therefore, we would date the end of Stratum VIII and the construction of the impressive
earth and stone fortifications of Stratum VII to the first half of the MB III, that is, to the mid-to-end of
the 17th century B.C. E., prior to the appearance of the 'Chocolate-on-White' ware in the hill country.
The sherds from the Area F rooms are characteristically MB III, contemporary with the latest pottery
forms from the refuse dumps of the Stratum VIII settlement and later. The assemblage of intact vessels
found in the rooms dates the last phase of the MB III period at Shiloh. It should be borne in mind,
however, that large storage jars such as the ones found in abundance in the Area F-H rooms are oflesser
importance for dating purposes as they could have served for many years. Analysis of the total
assemblage, complete vessels and sherds alike, leads us to the conclusion that the destruction of Middle
Bronze Age Shiloh took place around the mid-16th century B.C. E. The few 'Chocolate-on-White' ware
sherds found in the rooms do not facilitate a more accurate date, since the exact chronology of this
pottery type within the late-MB III-LBI time span is still not fixed.
Regionalism
The analysis of the Middle Bronze Age pottery from Shiloh fully confirms former observations on
pottery regionalism during this period (Kempinski 1983:181-196; Cole 1984:95; Bienkowski 1986:7).
The Shiloh assemblages are evidently more akin to MB II-III pottery assemblages in other central hill
country and lower Jordan valley (Jericho) sites than to those from the northern part of the country, the
Shephelah, or the coastal plain. Furthermore, the Shiloh material indicates that pottery regionalism
prevailed even within the hill country itself. The Shiloh pottery shows distinct 'southern' qualities (cf.
Kempinski 1983:186-189, 192), dramatically underlined by the premature appearance of the LB I
cooking-pot with lid device. Other qualities, such as the relative abundance of r~d slip and/ or burnish
95
and the scarcity of pedestal vases and flat-bottomed cooking-pots with rope moulding at the rim, are
more 'northern' in nature. This mixture of regional affinities seems to be related to Shiloh's geographic
location and should signify the boundary between Kempinski's MB II-III 'southern' and 'northern'
cultural zones. The pottery testimony seems to confine Shiloh's political and religious role to the hill
country only, in fact, mainly to the close vicinity of the site.
Distribution of Vessels in the Area F_Rooms

Table 6.8 and Fig. 6.4 presents the distribution of vessels in the Area F rooms according to types
(including all 66 complete or nearly complete vessels plus large pieces which are not counted in Table
6.2):
TABLE 6.8: DISTRIBUTION OF VESSELS IN THE AREA F ROOMS
Type: Bowls+ Votive Cooking Cultic Jugs+ Pithoi + Other Total

Kraters Bowls Pots Stands Jug lets Storage Vessels
jars
Room:
1526 4 4 2 15 28
1527 2 12 15
1522 8 2 3 7 21
1532 2 5 3 1 12
1533 3 4
There is no clear distinction in the vessel distribution between the rooms, though certain trends should
be pointed out:
1. There was a preponderance of pithoi and storage jars in Rooms 1527 and 1533. There are two
additional facts worthy of note regarding Room 1527: the large number of pestles/weights found there
may indicate administrative activity; the burnt layer in this room was more marked than in other rooms
in Area F and may give some indication as to the contents of the pithoi.
2. Most cooking-pots were found in Rooms 1522 and 1532, which were not packed with large storage
vessels. Indeed, several grinding stones were also found in Room 1532.
3. There was a relatively large number of bowls in Room 1522.
4. Most votive bowls were found in Rooms 1532 and 1527, which also contained a cult stand.
96
6
1
17
14
ro
~
Fig. 6.5:
fLjl
\C~I
" )=J,/
U I
~17
f$J7
c=c741
7
15
19
20
~
7
7~
T 1-LJl
"-o=-~--_;ocm
Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from Glacis 723.
l
CSf- . I
17
I
2
18
16
22
---=r ~
~C
-
I
~
'
ttJI --
~
fl
l_Q) \:_~11
9
23
m
CD
~
~
7
7~17
97
98
Fig. 6.6:
3
2
15
14
13
! 0
?VI
?LJI
, Nl
, J
f=-.-·-
, r-01 \
~
\
cf=~- EJ
_ _______,
r-~~
t:::JI
J
6
4
Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from Glacis 723 (cont.).

,
ro
\)
.?
.
r.-----re---r-····
/C>I
I
l'
t==r~
· =-=----n------11
1
~
'
\
'fL/1 \
~
-~
~
FIGURE 6.5: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM GLACIS 723
No. Type Reg. No. Locus Description

Bowl 14159 1427 Light brown
2 Bowl 14113/1 723 Brown
3 Bowl 14180/1 1428 Brown
4 Bowl 14134 1428 Brown
5 Bowl 14186/1 1428 Greyish
6 Bowl 14182(1 723
7 Bowl 14136/1 1427
8 Bowl 14113/2 723 Light brown
9 Votive bowl 7271 723 Brown
to Bowl 14063/1 723 Dark grey
11 Bowl 7190/1 723 Brown
12 Bowl 7190/2 723 Brown
13 Bowl 14086/1 1419 Light brown-pinkish
14 Bowl 14148 1427 Reddish
15 Bowl 14160/1 1428 Greyish
16 Bowl 14160(2 1428 Reddish-brown
18 Bowl 14278 1419 Brown
19 Bowl 14136/2 1427 Dark grey
21 Trumpet base 14085 723 Light brown
22 Trumpet base 14086/3 1419 Grey
23 Trumpet base 14063(2 723 Reddish
FIGURE 6.6: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM GLACIS 723 (cont.)

1 Krater 7302/1 1419 Light brown
2 Krater 14116 723 Greyish
3 Krater 14182/2 723 Greyish; white slip on rim

surface and outside
4 Krater 14164/1 1428 Reddish
6 Krater 7302/2 1419 Buff
7 Cooking-pot 14204 723 Grey
8 Cooking-pot 7265 723
9 Cooking-pot 14180/2 1428 Brown
to Cooking-pot 14100/1 1419 Brown
11 Cooking-pot 14164/2 1428 Grey
12 Cooking-pot 14085 723 Brown
14 Cooking-pot 14086/5 1419 Greyish-brown
15 Cooking-pot 14164/3 1428
99
8
5
20
22
100
()
Fig. 6.7:
1
6
2
23
r ()
0
(u ( 151 1
0
~
Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from Glacis 723 (cont.).

I
1
. , _ _ _ __o~
~----.,_~-=,=-
Jcm.
10cm
IJ t
I
r r
')4 (
7
4
21
19
24
=r.c~)
l1
VI
\
Gil f
r
')~~~
r
df Fl t
I =r
FIGURE 6.7: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM GLACIS 723 (cont.)
No. Type Reg. No. Locus Description See Fig.

Jug 14179/1 1428 Greyish
2 Jug 14179/2 1428 Brown
3 Jug 14160/3 1428 Grey
4 Jug 14062/1 723 Grey
5 Pithos 7256/1 723 Grey
6 Pithos 14070 723 Brown
7 Pithos 14133 1427 Light brown
8 Pithos 14181 1427 Reddish
9 Pithos 14143 1427 Reddish-brown
10 Storage jar 14062/2 723 Reddish
ll Storage jar 14219 1428 Light brown
12 Storage jar 14100/2 1419 Brown
13 Storage jar 14259 1419 Light brown
14 Storage jar 14161/1 723 Pinkish
15 Pithos 14180/3 1428 Greyish-brown
17 Storage jar 14063/3 723 Greyish
19 Storage jar 14179/3 1428 Light brown
22 WP V jarjjug 14160/5 1428 Buff; black painting
23 Storage jar 14062/3 723 Greyish
24 Cult stand 14158 1428 White slipped and painted 6.67:1
FIGURE 6.8: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM EARTHEN FILLS IN AREAS F, HAND K

1 Bowl 18020 1807 Grey-brown
2 Bowl 17273 1739 Grey-brown
3 Bowl 17274 1710 Grey
4 Bowl 18027/1 1807 Brown
5 Bowl 17266 1710 Brown
6 Bowl 17262 1738 Reddish-brown
7 Bowl 18038/1 1807 Greyish-brown
8 Bowl 17272 1738 Light brown

9 Bowl 17309 1738 Brown
10 Bowl 17195 1729 Brown
12 Bowl 17238 1738 Brown
13 Cooking-pot 17284/1 1731 Dark brown
14 Cooking-pot 17269 1710 Grey-brown
18 Cooking-pot 18034/2 1807
20 Cooking-pot 17200/1 1729
101
9
5
15
19
13
17
21
102
)
:==
Fig. 6.8:
(
)
\
\=
F----~
I
I
I
.~ I
~I 7
T
7
~
/
10
t=
8
18
"
14
\
)
.~
(
.~
~;
,c:=
Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from earth fills in Areas F, H and K.
11
'
~~-
r ~II
I
I
',
_.10c.m
12
'
t
7
7
~-1 ~
II
rrr v· m
( II N 7
2 3 4
5
TTl' 6
)\ c 7
cy=-~ 7
y: l =r \=-=l r R 1
,
I
8 9 10
11
\ )
I r 12
'\ )
13
(
r (
) ( sl 1-f ¥ I =r
14 15 16
5 { \:
)
I
I r F-9---,
17 18
20
)-
r 0 10cm
~--·---.-o==---...1
,e-)f;}.l
~}·
t"
\
Fig. 6.9: Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from earth fills in Areas F, Hand K (cont.).
103
FIGURE 6.9: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM EARTHEN FILLS IN AREAS F, HAND K (cont.)

1 Juglet 18027/3 1807 Reddish slip; burnished
2 Juglet 17075/1 1718 Red slip
3 Storage jar 18033/1 1807 Grey-brown
4 Jug 18032 1807 Btown
5 Storage jar 17126 1719 Greyish
8 Storage jar 18031 1807 Brown
13 Storage jar 17308 1731 Grey
14 Storage jar 17186 1710 Bmwn
16 Storage jar 17284/2 1731 Grey
17 Storage jar 17134 1712 Reddish-brown
21 Cooking-pot? 18036 1807 D~rk brown
FIGURE 6.10: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM STONE FILLS IN AREA D

2 Bowl 4l15/l 4!3 Light brown
4 Bowl 4169/1 413 Brown
7 Votive bowl 413 1416 Reddish

12 Krater 4169 413 Llght brown
!3 Krater 4181 413 Reddish
14 Cooking-pot 7024 707 Dark brown
19 Cooking-pot 4109/1 413 Brown; hand burnished
104
9
7
4
17
15
13
19
>--
Fig. 6.10:
;
~
)
~11s
I
2
-..
,
ro
0
I
Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from stone fills in Area D.

,'
('
-=-~·-
10cm
(
)
..
~17
(
3
11
18
16
14
20
\
q:
I 1:--
I
~I ....
7
=J
)
===t
105
,m
~T l I 1' ) 1\
2 4
5
(
F r 6
\l
7
) I \
8
9 5 t r
9 10
r=r
,./"'
11
~ tY2 12
~)
13
I =<"
--
0 10cm
Fig. 6.11: Stratum VIII (MB II) pottery from stone fills in Area D (cont.).
FIGURE 6:ll: STRATUM VIII (MB II) POTTERY FROM STONE FILLS IN AREA D (cont.)

Jug 7042 707 Light brown

2 Jug 4152/1 413 Light brown
3 Storage jar 7039 707 Dark grey
8 Storage jar 7027/2 707 Buff
9 Pithos 7067/l 707 Light brown
ll Pithos 4166 413 Light brown
12 Pithos 4163/2 413 Pinkish-brown
13 Pithos 7067/2 707 Light brown
106
15
16
Fig. 6.12:
~
I
7
.~\7
2.
Cl7 \
0
I
Stratum VII (MB III) pottery from the Area F rooms.

-o::_::::.:..~---;::.;;:--"""
10cm
)
3
14
(
I
Cl~
107
8
4
12
10
108
Fig. 6.13:
.~
17
2
0
-.......,.-_=-=--
Jcm
~==-~"''-
Stratum VII (MB III) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).
10cm
3
11
13
\ l7
FIGURE 6.12: STRATUM VII (MB III) POTTERY FROM THE AREA F ROOMS

Bowl 17287/1 1522 Reddish-brown
2 Bowl 17287/2 1522 Brown
3 Bowl 15125/1 1526 Brown
4 Bowl 8085 1525 Brown 6.24:3
6 Bowl 15078 1525 Brown
7 Bowl 15109/l 1526 Brown
8 Bowl 15283 1522 Brown
9 Bowl 15183/1 1522 Grey
10 Bowl 15109/2 1526 Brown
11 Bowl 15170/l 1532 Light brown
12 Bowl 15125/2 1526 Dark grey 6.24:4
14 Bowl 15320/1 1522 Dark brown
15 Platter 15154 1525 Reddish-brown; burnished
16 Bowl 15170/2 1532 Pinkish-brown
FIGURE 6.13: STRATUM VII (MB III) POTTERY FROM THE AREA F ROOMS (cont.)
Votive bowl 15131 1526 Brown 6.24:2
3 Votive bowl 15170/3 1532 Brown
5 Votive bowl 15170/4 1532 Brown 6.24:1
6 Votive bowl 15170/5 1532 ---Brown.___ - - - - - - - - -
10 Krater 15081/1 1522 Brown
ll Krater 15355 1527 Reddish-brown
12 Krater 15183/2 1522 Brown 6.24:5
13 Pedestal vase 15324 1527 Greyish
Cooking-pot 15205 1532 Brown

2 Cooking-pot 15039 1525 Dark brown-
5 Cooking~pot 15320/3 1522 Brown
8 Cooking-pot 15227 1532 Brown-grey
9 Jug 15081/2 1522 Light brown 6.24:6
10 Jug 15297 1526 Reddish clay; pinkish-white slip
11 Chocolate-on-
whitejarjjug 15231 1527
12 Juglet 15114 1526 Light brown
13 Jug 15159 1526 Grey
109
8
I
110
J
I
Fig. 6.14:
{_--
I
I
•
5
7
6
10
r
r
0
~
\
"""-=.=--=:::-
10c.m.
II
I
(
2
)
11
12
'\, F¥
'
\
I
13
\
'
\

Pithos 15251 1533 Light brown
2 Storage jar 15234 1532 Brown 6.28:2
3 Pithos 15148 1526 Brown 6.26:2
4 Storage jar 15356/1 1527 Remains of slip 6.26:5
5 Pithos 15221/1 1526 Light brown 6.27:5
6 Storage jar 15206 1527 Reddish-brown 6.25:3

Pithos 15223 1526 Greyish 6.25:4
3 Pithos 15221/2 1526 Greyish-brown 6.27:4
4 Pithos 15222/l 1526 Reddish-brown
6 Pithos 17287/3 1522 Dark grey
7 Pithos 15335 1527 Light brown 6.25:5
8 Storage jar 15144 1526 Greyish

1 Pithos 15134 1526 Brown 6.26:1
3 Pithos 17232 1533 Brown 6.26:3

1 Pithos 15383 1527 Brown 6.25:2
2 Pithos 15260 1533 Greyish-brown 6.28:5
3 Pithos 15209/1 1526 Grey


1 Pithos 15209/2 1526 Greyish-brown
3 Pithos 15244 1522 Reddish clay 6.28:4
5 Pithos 15327 1527 Brown 6.26:6
111
.4
112
0
Fig. 6.15:
2
5
lOcm.
3
6
Fig. 6.16:
1/
\I
II
,,
II
II
7
2
0
-=--=:;-__,_..j
lOcm
Stratum VII (MB IU) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).
/
5
8
I
'~ :
~
II
,,II
1i
\~~
~!
113
114
Fig. 6. I 7:
2
Stratum VII (MB Ill) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).
3
6
Fig. 6.18:
2
0
-::::;:~-:;---
10cm
Stratum VII (MB Ill) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).
3
115
2
0 10crn.
3 --=--=-- 5
Fig. 6.!9: Stratum VII (MB lll) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).
116
Account: s4309548
•
2 3
0 IOcm
- -=-=--
6 7
Fig. 6.20: Stratum VII (MB Ill) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).

I Storage jar 15059 1526 Grey 6.27:2
2 Storage jar 15344 1527 Dark grey
3 Storage jar 15272 1527 Light brown 6.27:3
4 Storage jar 15356/ 2 1527 Grey 6.27:1
6 Storage jar 15143 / 2 1526 Greyish 6.28:1
117
Account: s4309548
2 5
Jcm.
-~~-
0 10cm.
- ·.:;.;.. - c-..:-
~
~
3 4 6
Fig. 6.21: Stratum VII (MB Ill) pottery from the Area F rooms (cont.).
FIGURE 6.21 : STRATUM VII (MB III) POTTERY FROM THE AREA F ROOMS (cont.)
No . Type Reg. No. Locus Description See Fig.

Chocolate-on-
White ware 15300 1522
2 Chocolate-on-
white ware 15125 / 3 1526
3 Jar 15249 1526 Brown 6.24: 7
4 Cult stand 15278 1533 Reddish-brown
5 Bowl of a
cult stand 15155 1526 Brown 6.24:8
6 Cult stand 15125 / 4 1526 Brown 6.24:8
118
Account: s4309548
~ II 7 2
~ '
I 7
3
~ 'o;;:;::: I
7 4
(
5
6
----=- =- 10cm
7
0
---~~-
10cm
Fig. 6.22: Stratum VII (MB Ill) pottery from the vicinity of the Area F rooms.
FIGURE 6.22: STRATUM VII (MB III) POTTERY FROM THE VICINITY OF THE AREA F ROOMS

Bowl 17289 1740 Brown
4 Small bowl 17113 / 1 1535 Reddish-brown

5 Cooking-pot 15052/ 1 805 Brown
6 Stand 17113 / 2 1535 Light brown
119
Account: s4309548
FIGURE 6.23: STRATUM VII (MB III) POTTERY FROM AREA H

1 Bowl 1019 Reddish-brown
2 Bowl 1017 Reddish
3 Bowl 1017 Brown
4 Bowl 1017 Brown
5 Bowl 1017 Brown
6 Votive bowl 1017 Brown
7 Votive bowl 1017 Brown
8 Cooking-pot 1017 Brown
9 Cooking-pot 1017 Brown
lO Storage jar 1019 Dark grey
11 Storage jar 1019 Reddish
12 Storage jar 1017 Reddish
13 Storage jar 1019 Grey
14 Storage jar 1019 Light brown
15 Cult stand 10058 1017 White slip on both sides
FIGURE 6.24: STRATUM VII (MB III) VESSELS FROM THE AREA F ROOMS
No. Type Reg. No. Locus See Fig.

1 Votive bowl 15170/4 1532 6.13:5
2 Votive bowl 1513 11526 6.13:1
3 Bowl 8085 1525 6.12:4
4 Bowl 15125/2 1526 6.12:12
5 Krater 15183/2 1522 6.13:12
6 Jug 15081/2 1522 6.14:9
7 Jar 15249 1526 6.21:3
8 Cult stand 15125/4+ 1526 6.21:5-6
and bowl 15155
FIGURE 6.25: STRATUM VII (MB III) VESSELS FROM THE AREA F ROOMS (cont.)

1 Pithos 15213 1526 6.18:4
2 Pithos 15383 1527 6.18:1
3 Storage jar 15206 1527 6.15:6
4 Pithos 15223 1526 6.16:1

5 Pithos 15335 1527 6.16:7
FIGURE 6.26: STRATUM VII (MB III) VESSELS FROM THE AREA F ROOMS (cont.)

1 Pithos 15134 1526 6.17:1
2 Pithos 15148 1526 6.15:3
3 Pithos 17232 1533 6.17:3
4 Pithos 15149 1526 6.17:6
5 Storage jar 15356/1 1527 6.15:4
6 Pithos 15327 1527 6.19:5
120
Fig. 6.23:
"""=
~ I
8
9
1
r
7
?=
4
Stratum VII (MB III) pottery from Area H.

) I
I
n ( n r
~
\
5
2
15
12
'
l
r 1
'
t;_J7
I
~r7~1J'ZI~
''
7
~
1:
121
122
Fig. 6.24:
0
2
7
4cm.
Stratum VII (MB III) vessels from the Area F rooms.

Fig. 6.25:
Stratum VII (MB III) vessels from the Area F rooms (cont.)
123
124
Fig. 6.26:
0
Stratum VII (MB III) vessels from the Area F rooms (cont.).
20cm.
Fig. 6.27:
0
;,
.........
2
125
126
Fig. 6.28:
0
........
3
....
.......
20cm.
FIGURE 6.27: STRATUM VII (MB HI) VESSELS FROM THE AREA F ROOMS (cont.)
Storage jar 15356/2 1527 6.20:4
2 Storage jar 15059 1526 6.20:1
3 Storage jar 15272 1527 6.20:3
4 Pithos 15221/2 1526 6.16:3
5 Pithos 152211 1 1526 6.15:5
FIGURE 6.28: STRATUM VII (MB III) VESSELS FROM THE AREA F R00MS (cont.)
l Storage jar 15143/2 1526 6.20:6
2 Storage jar 15234 1532 6.15:2
3 Pithos 15247 1522 6.17:2
4 Pithos 15244 1522 6.19:3
5 Pithos 15260 1533 6.18:2
THE LATE BRONZE AGE POTTERY
The Late Bronze Age pottery (Stratum VI) comes mainly from the dumped debris unearthed in Area D
(Chapter 3, L. 407). Only a handful of sherds from this period was found in other loci around the
mound. 10 The dumped debris contained hundreds of vessels but due to its displacement and further
dumping many of the vessels were shattered. Most of them were therefore too fragmentary to be
restored. Table 6.9 enumerates them according to types. Only 104 vessels could be fully or partially
restored. They are listed according to corresponding types in Table 6.11.
Since virtually all the Middle Bronze Age sites in the central hill country were deserted following their
destruction during the last phase of this period, hardly any stratigraphic deposits dating to the beginning
of the Late Bronze Age are known from this region (Wright 1961:91; Charts 6-7; Kenyon 1973;
Weinstein 1981:2-5; Bunimovitz 1990:259-266). The Shiloh assemblage had therefore to be compared
with deposits which were either later or further afield in order to deduce its date.
BOWLS AND KRATERS

83
OTHER VESSELS
11
JUGS AND JUGLETS

Fig. 6.29: Complete LB vessels from Debris 407 in Area D.
10
10. For the previous excavations see Shiloh 1969: Pis. 6:63-67; 13:140; 14:175; 17:209,211,214,217, 220-222; XXV:l99-201;
XXVI:204, 206, 208, 220-222.
127
TABLE 6.9: LATE BRONZE SHERDS FROM AREA D
Type No. of %offamily % infamily

sherds
A. Bowls and kraters

Shallow bowls with plain rim 1012 65
Shallow bowls with inverted rim 43 3
Shallow bowls with bevelled rim 58 4
Carinated bowls 275 18
Rounded bowls 104 6
Other bowls 14 1
Kraters 52 3
Total of bowls and kraters 1558 60 100
B. Cooking-pots
Cooking-pot with everted rim 259 10
C. Jugs and Storage jars

Jugs/ storage jars 67
Storage jars 24
Total of jugs and storage jars 91 4
D. Other Vessels
Goblets 28
Lamps 47
Juglets 32
Other vessels 30
Total of other vessels 109 4
E. Bases
Flat bases 57 13
Disc bases 290 66
Ring bases 37 8
Trumpet bases 56 13
Rounded bases 2
Total of bases 442 17 100

F. Decorated Sherds
Painted sherds 61
Burnished sherds 11
Cypriot sherds 60
Mycenaean sherds 2
Total of decorated sherds 134 5

Total 2621 100
128
TABLE 6.10: LATE BRONZE DECORATED SHERDS (INCLUDING SHERDS COUNTED IN

OTHER CATEGORIES)
Type No. of sherds % of all sherds

in Stratum VI
Painted sherds 111* 4.2
Burnished sherds 39
Slipped sherds 15
Cypriot sherds 60
Mycenaean sherds 2
* One of them 'Chocolate-on-White' ware
TABLE 6.11: COMPLETE OR NEARLY COMPLETE LATE BRONZE VESSELS
Type No. of %(for bowls

vessels and kraters)
Shallow bowls with plain rim 50* 61
Shallow bowls with trumpet base 12 15
Carinated bowls 13* 16
Rounded bowls 5 6
Kraters 2* 2
Total number of bowls and kraters 82 100
Goblets 4***
Lamps 6
Jugs 3**
Juglets 7
Cult stand
Cypriot BR I bowl
Total 104
* Asterisk marks decorated vessel (altogether 8 vessels, ca. 8% of the total number of complete vessels).
LOCAL POTTERY

Bowls of various kinds are the most prevalent type of vessel retrieved from Debris 407, a phenomenon
also noticed at other cult places, for example the Fosse Temple at Lachish (Lachish 11:79) and at Tel
Mevorakh (Guz-Zilberstein 1984:10, 12).
129
Shallow bowls. Shallow or platter bowls with plain rim comprise about two-thirds of both the sherds
and the complete vessels (e.g. Fig. 6.30). All of these bowls have slightly curved walls, clearly preserving
late Middle Bronze traditions. The restored examples, as well as sherds of bases, clearly testify to the
great popularity of concave disc bases. Flat discs and ring bases are also present but in far reduced
numbers.
In the central hill country the best parallels for the Shiloh plain rim bowls come from the MB III-LB II
burial cave at Dominus Flevit (Saller 1964:55-60) and from Tell el-Farcah (de Vaux and Steve 1947:
Figs. 1:1; 2:13). Such bowls are evidently less popular in LB IIA Tombs lOA-lOB at Gibeon (Pritchard
1963:15, Type B) and are missing from the LB IIA burial deposits ofNahlat Ahim (Amiran 1960) and
Tell Jedur (LB II; Ben-Arieh 1981). A few examples appear in Tomb 4 at Jericho (late LB If early LB
IIA; Bienkowski 1986: Figs. 29:1-2; 37:9), Stratum Cat Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM /:Pl. 47:5), the Lower
Burial Phase of Cave lOA at Gezer (LB IB-LB IIA; Gezer V:75) and in Tomb 42 in the Northern
Cemetery of Beth-shan (LB I; Oren 1973:69, Type Cl; Fig. 27:1-6). Similar bowls are attested also in the
Fosse Temple I-II at Lachish (Lachish II: Pl. XXXVII) 11 and further afield, in Stratum XI at Tell
Mevorakh (LB I; Goz-Zilberstein 1984:13; Fig. 5:11), Megiddo Stratum IX (Megiddo //:Pl. 54:9) and
LB I Hazar (e.g. Hazor I: Pls. CXXII:3, 7; CXXXV:2).
About 3% of the shallow bowls in the sherds have inverted rims and 4% are with bevelled rims,
sometimes thickened internally. Since the first type is the most frequent among the MB II-III bowls of
Shiloh, the appearance of such bowls in Debris 407 must be interpreted as the use of leftovers from the
preceding period, or more reasonably, the extension of MB III pottery traditions into LB I. The second
type (Fig. 6.32:17-19) was popular during LB II (see e.g. Pritchard 1963:15, Type C; Figs. 7:3, 5;
9:10-16; Gezer V: Pl. 14:4, 14).
Shallow bowls with trumpet base. These bowls (Fig. 6.33:1-12, 14), also called pedestal bowls, appear in
substantial numbers among the restored vessels of Debris 407 (15% of the bowls) and are undoubtedly
represented also in the sherds by both rims and trumpet bases (13% of the bases sherds). All of them are
actually shallow plain-rim bowls of the type discussed above placed on trumpet bases. Very similar
bowls are well attested in the Dominus Flevit assemblage (Saller 1964:49-54) and appear also in Tomb 5
at Jericho (Bienkowski 1986: Fig. 30: 1-5), Tomb lOA-lOB at Gibeon (Pritchard 1963: Fig. 10:39), Cave
lOA at Gezer (Gezer V:75-76), Tombs 27 and 29 at Beth-Shan (LB I-IIA; Oren 1973:69-70, Type E2;
Figs. 35:16, 18;39:9-11), Lachish (Lachish II: Pl. XLVI:206-212; Lachish IV:183-184; Pl. 72:634-637),
Stratum XI at Tel Mevorakh (Guz-Zilberstein 1984:15; Fig. 7:6-8) and Hazar (e.g. Hazor l:CXXII:l7).
It has been suggested that early specimens of Late Bronze pedestal bowls tend to retain the elaborate
profiles of the trumpet bases typical of the late Middle Bronze Age ( Gezer V:76). Indeed, most of our
trumpet bases seem to be more akin to MB III types than to the simple Late Bronze straight-sided
trumpet bases. Of special interest are the elegantly up-curled edges of the trumpet foot in some of our
specimens (Fig. 6.33:10-12, 14). This phenomenon can also be observed in several of the pedestal bowls
from Tombs 27 and 29 at Beth-shan (Oren 1973: Figs. 35:15; 39:10-11).
Carinated bowls. Carinated bowls with straight or slightly inclining walls above the shoulder are the
second most frequent class of Late Bronze Age bowls at Shiloh (Fig. 6.32: 1-12). From the restorable
11. See also Lachish /V:JSI-182, Classes G-H. Note that most parallels cited there are from MB strata!
130
examples it can be deduced that most of the bowls had concave disk bases. Similar bowls were abundant
in the Dominus Flevit deposit (Saller 1964:38-44) and appear also in Tombs 5 and 4 at Jericho
(Bienkowski 1986: Fig. 29:10; 37:5; 42:5-6; 45:1-4, 6), Tomb lOA-lOB at Gibeon (Pritchard 1963:16;
Figs. 10:28-29, 32-33), the burial deposit at Nahlat Ahim (Amiran 1960: Fig. 3:37), Fosse Temple I-II
(Lachish II: Pls. XL:74-76, 86-87; XLI:99-101, 104, 106-197, 111, 114), and Cave lOA at Gezer ( Gezer
V:76, 82). Notably, the Shiloh bowls, as well as most of the examples cited, are conspicuously different
from the carinated bowls popular in northern Canaan during LB I-II and seem to constitute a specific
southern class of bowls. They lack the sharp carination or ridge typical of the northern bowls (see
Amiran 1969: Pl. 39 for comparison of the northern and southern examples), and are most probably
akin to the small carinated bowl prevalent in southern Canaan during the MB II-III (Kempinski
1983:127, 187). 12 Apparently the northern Late Bronze carinated bowls represent another line of
typological development and are offsprings of the fine, flaring MB II-III carinated bowl (cf. Amiran
1969:125, 129; Pl. 39:1-3, 8-11).
Rounded bowls. About 6% of the bowls deposited in Debris 407 were shallow rounded bowls (e.g. Fig.
6.33:13, 15). According to the restored examples most of them had disc bases while only a few had
flattened bottoms. Similar bowls are attested at Dominus Flevit (Saller 1964: Fig. 20:2, 4, 7), Tombs
lOA-lOB at Gibeon (Pritchard 1963:15, Type A), Stratum Cat Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM I: Pls. 43:11-12,
14; 47:1; TBM /A: Pl. 16:1-2,5,8, 11) and Fosse Temple II-III (Lachish IV:176; Fig. 71, top five rows).
Other bowls. In this category we would emphasize the appearance of:

1. A few examples of flaring carinated bowls, with or without loop handles (Figs. 6.33: 18; 6.34: 1). This
type of bowl clearly retains Middle Bronze Age traditions and is found mainly in LB I assemblages
(Amiran 1969:129; Pl. 39:1; Megiddo II: Pl. 53:18-19; Hazor /: Pls. CXXIII:l0-11; CXXXVI:9-11)
2. A shallow, two-handled bowl (Fig. 6.33:19), also of Middle Bronze Age tradition, which is known
from other Late Bronze Age assemblages (see e.g. TBM 1:39, Fig. 47:12, Stratum C; Lachish /I:Pl.
XXXIX:67, Fosse Temple III).
Kraters. Among the kraters found in Debris 407 most abundant are two-handled kraters with everted
rim, clearly retaining Middle Bronze Age traditions (e.g. Fig. 6.34:2, 8, 9; cf. Amiran 1969: 134; Pl.41: 1;
Lachish II: Pl. XLIII:l51; Hazor I: Pls. CXXIII:12-13; CXXXVII:3, 5; Hazor III-IV: Pl. CCXLIII:II).
Also found are a few examples of kraters with an upright rim (e.g. Fig. 6.34:7, 10), more typical of the
Late Bronze Age tradition (Amiran 1969: Pl. 41).
Of special interest are two painted kraters with a gutter-rim (Fig. 6.34:3, 5). This type of rim is usually
considered to be unique to a certain class of LB I cooking-pots. In the light of our kraters it seems now
that lid devices were occasionally applied to other types of food preparation vessels.
B. COOKING-POTS
About 10% ofthe sherds retrieved from Debris 407 belongs to cooking-pots. Most are of the everted rim
type, with either rounded or squat triangular section (Fig. 6.35:8-14; 6.36:1-7) which is characteristic of
the LB I period (Amiran 1969:135). Some specimens, however, show a more prominent triangular rim,
12. For the continuation of this pottery tradition in the central hill country down to the end of the Late Bronze Age see Kelso
1968: Pl. 53-54.
131
typical of the later part of LB I and the LB II period (ibid.:140). Notably, no examples ofthe unique LB I
cooking-pot with lid device were found (for its presence in Shiloh in the MB III see above).
C. JARS AND JUGS

Storage jars rims found in Debris 407 belong to the two main storage jar classes typical of the Late
Bronze Age in Canaan: the commercial 'Canaanite jar' and the decorated 'domestic jar' (Amiran 1969:
140-142). The first type is identified by a thick plain rim, slightly inclining outward (Fig. 6.37:1-5, 7).
Some of the rims, more bulbous at their tip (Fig. 6.37:1, 7), are presumably later and may represent the
next step in the typological development of the 'Canaanite jar' (ibid.: Pl. 43). Notably, however, even
those rims are not of the upright type characteristic of late LB I/ early LB IIA (see e.g. Gezer V:75, and
references there).
Distinction between rims of our second class of jars and those of jugs is not easy since both are thin,
delicate, and often painted (cf. Amiran 1969: Pls. 44; 46). For example, the rim in Fig. 6.37:8 probably
belonged to a jug (cf. Megiddo II: Pl. 48:17; Saller 1964: Fig. 24:1) while the rim in Fig. 6.37:6 was part
of a jar.
The biconical two-handled jug (Fig. 6.36: 14) is a well-known Late Bronze Age vessel. It was discussed
by Oren (1973:79-81) who distinguished an early, LB I group and a degenerate LB II (mainly LB IIA)
group. According to his criteria our jug should be assigned to the second group, characterized by a short
neck, squat body, flat or disc base and a decoration of red bands and wavy lines. Similar jugs were found
at Dominus Flevit (Saller 1964:19-29), Tomb lOB at Gibeon (Pritchard 1963:14; Fig. 12:74), Tomb 5 at
Jericho (Bienkowski 1986:70; Figs. 32, 36) and the assemblage of Nahlat Ahim (Amiran 1960: Fig.
3:38-39).
D. OTHER VESSELS
Goblets. Four restorable goblets and sherds of others (Fig. 6.35:1, 3-4, 7) were found in Debris 407. Two
of the goblets (Fig. 6.35:1, 4) are almost identical in their outline and are decorated by horizontal paint
lines, one on the rim and the other on the body. Such simple goblets are rare in the repertoire of Late
Bronze Age goblets found in Palestine, which exemplifies more elaborate and sharply carinated forms.
The third goblet, of which only the upper part survived (Fig. 6.35:6), belongs to a well known class of
carinated goblets with tall concave sides; see e.g. Tel Mevorakh (Guz-Zilberstein 1984:14-15; Fig. 7:1),
Tel Kittan (Eisenberg 1977: Color Section, Pl. D, Top), Beth-shan, Stratum IX temple (Rowe 1940: Pl.
LXXA:3-4) and Fosse Temple II (Lachish II: Pl. XLVII:231). Our goblet, however, is much less
impressive than all these richly decorated examples since it is merely burnished and decorated with only
a few horizontal paint strips.

Another body sherd of a goblet retrieved from Debris 407 is white slipped and red-brown painted
(Fig. 6.35:7). Its very sharp carination and inclined upper walls seem to be unique. It may however be
considered as a predecessor of somewhat related goblets found in Fosse Temple III (Lachish II: Pl.
XL VII:238-239).
Lamps. Almost all the lamps found in Debris 407 (e.g. Fig. 6.37:11) are of Tufnell's Classes C and D
(Lachish /V:185-186; Lachish II: Pl. XLV:l84-191; see also Amiran 1969:190; Pl. 59:10-12) and are
clearly closer to Middle Bronze Age types than to the more developed lamps found, for instance, in
Tomb lOA-lOB at Gibeon (Pritchard 1963:16), Cave lOA at Gezer (Gezer V:77, 82) and at Tell Jedur
(Ben-Arieh 1981:118, 120; Fig. 4). A few examples only show a pinched spout more typical of the LB
132
IIA (cf. the above cited assemblages and see also Lachish IV: 186, Class E; Lachish II: Pl. XLV:193-199;
Amiran 1969: Pl. 59:14).
Juglets. Only dipper juglets were found in Debris 407. All have a squat short body, ovoid or elliptical in
shape, high neck and slightly pointed or rounded bottom (Fig. 6.36:8-13). They correspond to Oren's
Type B2, which according to his analysis is typical of LB I (1973:76, with references to Beth-shan tombs
and other sites). Indeed, similar juglets were found in the assemblages of Dominus Flevit (Saller 1964:
Figs. 42-45), Tomb 5 at Jericho (Bienkowski 1986: Fig. 34:13-14) and Cave lOA at Gezer (Gezer V:76,
with references to LB I levels in other sites).
Cult stand. One cylindrical cult stand was found in Debris 407 (Fig. 6.37:14). It has two large ear
handles and was probably open at both ends (for references concerning Late Bronze Age stands see
Mazar 1980:93, n. 35).
IMPORTED POTTERY
About 90 sherds of Late Cypriot pottery and 4 Mycenaean sherds were found during the excavations at
Shiloh. The majority of these sherds, which represent at the most 55-60 imported Cypriot vessels and 3
Mycenaean ones, come from Debris 407 in Area D. The remaining sherds were occasionally found
within Iron I and unstratified loci in Areas C and J. -
Cypriot Pottery from Area D

The Cypriot sherds from Debris 407 include two Monochrome bowls, at least 8-10 White Slip II bowls,
a variety of up to 21 Base Ring I vessels and one Red Lustrous wheel-made ware spindle bottle ('Syrian
Bottle').
Monochrome ware. The two bowls are of two distinct types due to their rim shapes: a simple, very
slightly incurved rim (Fig. 6.38:1; cf. Astrom 1972b: Fig. XLV:2),13 and an incurved rim with a band of
flattening (Fig. 6.38:2; cf. ibid.: Fig. XLV :8; Sjoqvist's Type 2a, 1940:31; Fig. 5). Both types of bowls are
well known in LB I contexts in Canaan, and while they still can be found in the LB IIA period, it is
established that Monochrome pottery was most characteristic of the former period (Gittlen 1977:
319-324).
White Slip II ware. This ware is attested by numerous rims and body sherds of 'milk-bowls'. Only one
incomplete upper half of a bowl and its wishbone handle could be restored. It seems that all these bowls
can be assigned to Popham's 'normal stage' (1972:447; Fig. 54). Most of them are decorated with plain
ladder patterns, some have dots painted on the rim, and one has an horizontal hooked-chain pattern
between two ladders (Fig. 6.38:3-7; 6.39: 10). According to Gittlen's analysis, the chronological sequence
of all these bowl types is quite similar; they appear in modest numbers in Palestine during the last phase
of LB I and peak in the LB IIA period (Gittlen 1977:419-423).
13. Our bowl however is missing its base.
133
Base Ring I ware. The Base Ring pottery is very fragmentary so that it is difficult to estimate the number
of vessels represented, or to assign some of the sherds to either Base Ring I or II wares. The following
numbers present, therefore, a minimum count.
Two BR I bowls of the same type are evident, one by a rim fragment only (Fig. 6.39:1) the other
almost complete (Fig. 6.38:8; cf. Astrom 1972b: Fig. XLVI:7, 9). Three more body sherds, including a
piece of a curved fork-handle, may attest to at least one more similar bowl. This type of bowl seems to
appear in Canaan in LB IB and was popular mainly during LB IIA. It was no longer imported in LB IIB
(Gittlen 1977:117).
Six body sherds and two broken handles represent at least five big BR I jugs (cf. Astrom 1972b: Fig.
XLIX:9-10). One of the sherds is decorated with a spiral relief, while another exemplifies a neck-base
ridge. Both handles have deep knife incisions (Fig. 6.39:9). Some of the body sherds and another
unincised handle could belong to other kinds of big BR I jugs or tankards. Four small BR I jugs (bilbils)
are represented by additional fragments of handles and necks (Fig. 6.39:2, 6; cf. ibid.: Fig. XLIX:6-7).
Two rim sherds and a thumb-grip seem to denote three tankards (Fig. 6.39:3-5; cf. ibid.: Fig. L:8).
Tankards and BR I jugs, large as well as bilbils, appear in Canaan already during the LB IA period.
Their popularity peaks during LB IB-LB IIA, and it seems that their manufacture and trade ceased
before the beginning of LB IIB (Gittlen 1977:123-124; for a survey of important Canaan assemblages
including BR I ware see Gezer V:78).
Red Lustrous wheel-made ware. One sherd from a neck of a spindle bottle made of Red Lustrous ware
('Syrian Bottle') has been identified (Fig. 6.39:8; cf. Astrom 1972b: Fig. LIV:5, 7). This unique vessel has
been found in other LB I-LB II assemblages in Canaan (see e.g. Gezer V:80, and references there).14 It is
noteworthy that Debris 407 yielded another neck fragment of a large spindle bottle, also red burnished,
but this turned out to be a locally-made imitation of the original ware.
Cypriot Materia/from Other Loci

About 25 sherds of imported Cypriot vessels were retrieved from mixed loci around Debris 407 and
from other loci at the site. As these sherds were associated with Late Bronze Age activity at the site, their
analysis is relevant to our discussion.
The composition of this group of sherds is similar to that examined above: fragments of two
Monochrome bowls; six WS II milk bowls; seven sherds of big BR I jugs with plastic decoration and
incised handles (at least four vessels) and two sherds of bilbils (Fig. 6.40). One of theWS II bowls (Fig.
6.40:5) is remarkable since its carefully executed decoration relates it to Popham's WS II 'early stage'
(1972:447; Fig. 53).

The Cypriot material also included three BR II pieces: a bowl of Sjoqvist's Type 2b (1940:40; Fig. 8;
Astrom 1972b: Fig. LII:2-4, 6); a fragment of a small bilbil decorated with typical white lines; a leg (or
horn?) of a bull-shaped vase (Fig. 6.40:13; cf. ibid.: Fig. LIII:l2, 15). Also found was a sherd of a White
Shaved juglet. As shown by Gittlen, all of the above BR II vessels and the White Shaved juglet first
appeared in Canaan in LB IB and proliferated during the LB IIA (1977:130-131, 135, 137, 348-354). 15
Sherds of imported Late Bronze Age vessels found in other areas (C and J) include three pieces of BR
I bowls, a handle of a large BR I jug and two sherds of WS II bowls.
14. For further discussion of its use and distribution see Merrillees 1963; Astrom 1969.
15. For the bull-shaped vase, which is an almost uniquely LB IIA phenomenon, see also Gezer V:78.
134
Mycenaean Pottery
Of the four Mycenaean sherds found at Shiloh, two belonging to the same vessel come from Debris 407,
while the others come from a mixed locus near Debris 407 and from an Iron I context in Area C.
The body sherds from Debris 407 (for one see Fig. 6.39:7) seem to represent a small piriform jar or
possibly a piriform stirrup-jar. The sherd from Area Cis also from a closed vessel, most probably of the
same type (Fig. 6.40:14). (For similar vessels see Hankey 1977: 45-46, FS 45.) The small body sherd
from Debris 407 confines may have belonged to a small pyxis (Fig. 6.40:15; cf. ibid.:46, FS 94). All these
vessels are dated to Myc. IIIA2, namely, to the main part of the LB IIA period in Canaan (ibid.:47).
CONCLUSIONS
The typological analysis of the pottery from Debris 407 makes it clear that the local Late Bronze Age
wares of Shiloh generally correspond to LB I/ LB IIA pottery assemblages from adjacent sites in the
central hill country (Dominus Flevit, Nahlat Ahim, Gibeon, Tell Jedur, Tell el-Farcah) as well as in
neighbouring regions (the Shephelah - Gezer, Lachish, Tell Beit Mirsim; lower Jordan valley -
Jericho, Beth-shan). However, the Shiloh deposit seems to cover at least part of the LB IA, which is not
represented in most of these other assemblages, and to span only the early part of the LB IIA.
The local fossile directeurs of the LB I (i.e., Bichrome Ware; Black Lustrous juglets) are not
represented, except for one sherd of 'Chocolate-on-White'. This may be a result of pottery distribution
patterns, although Black Lustrous juglets have been found in the central hill country, for example at
Dominus Flevit (Saller 1964: 106-107), or of cultural preferences (only dipper juglets were retrieved from
Debris 407). It may, however, hint at a gap in activity at Shiloh following its destruction at the end of the
Middle Bronze Age. If such a gap did exist, orily a short time must have elapsed before cult practices
were resumed at the site. This is evident from the MB II-III shallow bowls with inverted rims deposited
in Debris 407 as well as from the strong Middle Bronze Age traditions reflected in other types of vessels
(e.g. shallow plain-rim bowls, pedestal bowls, kraters, cooking-pots and lamps). We would therefore
date the revival of Shiloh as a cult site to the later phase of the LB IA, namely, to the end of the 16th or
beginning of the 15th century B.C.E. at the latest.
The majority of vessels found in Debris 407 belong to the LB I period. This conclusion is supported by
the fact that certain LB IIA pottery types are missing from the Shiloh assemblage (cf. especially the
assemblages ofNahlat Ahim and Tell Jedur Amiran 1960; Ben-Arieh 1981) while other types appear
only modestly (e.g. shallow bowls with bevelled rim, upright-rim kraters, cooking-pots with triangular
rim, biconical jugs, etc.). The local LB pottery from Debris 407 testifies therefore to the termination of
cult activity at the site during the early part of LB IIA, i.e., in the first half of the 14th century B.C.E.
The above conclusions seem to be confirmed by the chronological range of the imported pottery
found in or around Debris 407. In spite of the fragmentary condition of the Cypriot pottery, it can be
determined that most of it belongs to the LB IB-early LB IIA period; notably, only a few sherds could be
definitly identified as BR II. The Cypriot pottery assemblage of Shiloh is one of the largest LB IB
collections of such pottery in the country, and its disturbed and fragmentary condition is lamentable.
The Mycenaean pottery is of a similar horizon although it may have arrived at the site later than the
Cypriot pottery, during the first phase of the LB IIA.16
16. For a few well-dated LB II objects found at the site see Chapter 9.
135
To sum up, both the local and the imported pottery of Stratum VI indicate that for about a century
and a half, from the end ofthe 16th century to mid-14th century B.C.E., the site was visited by pilgrims
who left behind their offerings (see Chapter 19). Shiloh was deserted for the remainder of the Late
Bronze Age until the revival of activity at the site in Iron Age I.
FIGURE 6.30: STRATUM VI (LB) POTTERY FROM DEBRIS 407

Bowl 14384/1 1431 Brown
2 Bowl 14310/1 1439 Reddish
3 Bowl 14128/1 1~31 Brown
4 Bowl 4247 1415 Buff
5 Bowl 7290/1 1431 Brown
6 Bowl 14354/1 1439 Brown
7 Bowl 14166 1431 Brown
8 Bowl 14265 1439 Brown
10 Bowl 14358/1 1439 Reddish-brown
11 Bowl 14027(1 1431 Brown
12 Bowl 14128(2 1431 Brown
13 Bowl 14351/1 1439 Brown

14 Bowl 7191 1431 Brown
16 Bowl 14387/1 1439 Reddish
17 Bowl 14351/2 1439 Reddish
18 Bowl 14371/1 !439 Whitish
19 Bowl 14358/2 1439 Reddish
20 Bowl 14027/2 1431 Brown
22 Bowl 14359(1 1439 Brown
23 Bowl 7183 1431 Brown
24 Bowl 14539 1461 Brown
25 Bowl 14346/1 1439 Brown
26 Bowl 14346/2 1439 Reddish
136
Fig. 6.30:
~~
a~7
17
Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407.
137
FIGURE 6.31: STRATUM VI (LB) POTTERY FROM DEBRIS 407 (cont.)

Bowl 14358/3 1439 Brown
2 Bowl 14131/1 1415 Brown
3 Bowl 14367/1 1439 Brown
6 Bowl 7251 1431 Brown
7 Bowl 7283/1 1431 Buff
8 Bowl 14317/1 1439 Brown
9 Bowl 14320/1 1439 Buff
10 Bowl 14367/2 1439 Brown
ll Bowl 14350/1 1439 Buff
13 Bowl 14310/2 1439 Brown
14 Bowl 14123 1415 Buff
15 Bowl 14287/1 1439 Reddish
16 Bowl 14287/2 1439 Reddish
17 Bowl 7059 1440 Brown
18 Bowl 7141 1440 Buff
19 Bowl 14384/2 1431 Brown
22 Bowl 14226 1431 White slip
23 Bowl 14337 1415 Brown
24 Bowl 14311/l 1440 Reddish-brown
26 Bowl 14358/5 1439 Buff

2 Bowl 14343/1 1439 Brown
3 Bowl 143ll/2 1440 Reddish-brown
6 Bowl 14393 1439 Brown, burnished inside
7 Bowl 14343/2 1439 Light brown; remains of bones
found inside

10 Bowl 7239/2 1431 Buff
ll Bowl 7239/3 1431 Pinkish
12 Bowl 14035/1 1439 Brown
17 Bowl 14384/4 1431 Brown
18 Bowl 14035/2 1439 Brown
21 Bowl 14147/1 1431 Reddish
138
Fig. 6.31:
"~
.~
,~\7
,~ 1_7
, ~ I .7
v "
~
~
Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407 (cont.).

\J_ 7
'[JY
~
L7
"
~I 7
1;7 .- --
~[7
~~-.--[7--.
139
13
w
18
.20
140
~
Fig. 6.32:
~
II
~
, \( I .J
. C, I .J
_..../
~J·~
5
14
.~
!..\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'1\\\\\\\\l
'"""'"""''""'"'"

I
""----
7 ,
~::; .~l7 ,C
. \ t7 . ~
. ~ 17
1.:5
7
7
--:J
'~ ~-/

Bowl 14317/2 1439 Reddish
3 Bowl 14350/2 1439 Brown; remains of burnish 6.41:6
4 Bowl 14310/4 1439 Reddish; red slip on both sides
6 Bowl 14354/3 1439 Brown
7 Bowl 14220 1439 Brown; burnish inside
8 Bowl 14384/5 1431 Brown; burnish inside
9 Bowl 7290/2 1431 Brown
10 Bowl 14050 1431 Buff
11 Bowl 7283/2 1431 Buff 6.41:5
13 Bowl 7ll8 1440 Light brown
14 Bowl 14336 1439 Light brown; white slip inside
near the rim
15 Bowl 14021 407 Brown
18 Bowl 14019/1 1431 Brown
19 Bowl 14351/3 1439 Brown; red slip 6.41:4

3 Krater 7262 1415 Light brown; white slip near the rim
4 Krater 4101 407 Light brown
5 Krater 14524 1461 Buff
6 Krater 4265/l 1415 White slip outside
7 Krater 14273 1439 Reddish
9 Krater 14365 1415 Reddish
10 Krater 14530/3 1461 Greyish

1 Goblet 14120 1431 White slipped and burnished 6.41:11
2 Goblet 14343/3 1439 Reddish; burnished outside

3 Goblet 14317/3 1439 Reddish 6.41:7
4 Goblet 14387/2 1439 Buff 6.41:8
5 Goblet 14019/2 1431 Light brown
6 Goblet 14358/6 1439 Brown; burnished
7 Goblet 14198 1415 White slipped; found with remains
of bones 6.41:9
10 Cooking-pot 14348/2 1439 Dark brown
12 Cooking-pot 14109 1431 Greyish
141
10
13
16
142
Fig. 6.33:
5
17
14
',

6
12
18
0
-=-=-----'==--
10cm
7
~7
6
3
Fig. 6.34:
8
10
~ I
. mJD

7
~- ~II
0
---
""'-==-
10cm
--
~-
143
8
4
10
(
144
Fig. 6.35:
?
12
14
13
I
I
5
2
I
&.~~~~"*'~~"*'~~~
~\"\\\\\\\\\"\\"\\\\\"\"\\\\"\\\\"\"\"\~
l
~

9
6
11
(
(
\
7
0
'-"=--~
10cm

Cooking-pot 14320/2 1439 Dark brown
8 Juglet 14367/3 1439 Brown
9 Juglet 14350/3 1439 Light brown
lO Juglet 14154 1431 Brown
II Juglet 14019/3 143I Reddish
12 Juglet I4317/5 1439 Light brown
13 Juglet 14019/4 1431 Light brown
14 Jug 7264 1431 Reddish; burnished
I5 Jug I4384f7 143I Dark brown; burnished
16 Jug I4350/4 1439 Brown; burnished
17 Jar I4350/5 1439 Light brown
18 Jug I4383 1415 Light brown
FIGURE 637: STRATUM VI (LB) POTTERY FROM DEBRIS 407 (cont.)

1 Storage jar 14103 1415 Reddish
6 St. jar/jug 14536 l46I Light brown
7 St. jar/jug 14131/3 1415 Buff
8 Jug 14280 1440 Light brown
9 Lamp 7239/4 1415 Brown
10 Lamp 7297/2 14I5 Light brown
II Lamp I4172 I4I5 Buff
12 Lamp 14264 1431 Reddish-brown
13 Baking tray 7016 705 Greyish-brown
14 Cult stand 14294 1439 Buff 6.41:10
FIGURE 6.38: STRATUM VI (LB) POTTERY FROM DEBRIS 407- IMPORTED WARES
No. Type Reg. No. Locus

1 Monochrome bowl 14244 1439
2 Monochrome bowl 14348/4 1439
3 WS II bowl 14235 1439
4 WS II bowl 14371/3 1439
5 WS II bowl 14014 1415
6 WS II bowl 14358/8 1439
7 WS II bowl 14358/9 1439
8 BR I bowl 7239/5 1415
145
17
(
146
I
Fig. 6.36:
?
;=
''
\
10
\
~
"

3
'--=~~~10cm.
r
7
12
16
16
(
\
~
J
7
4
9
1
(
Fig. 6.37:
I
)=rf
IT1
r
5
2
w
y=--[

Y:-11
r
8I
m
M-=f
.n1
147
148
0
(
Fig. 6.38:
"""""--=--=
(~I
---::=JiiiiiiiiOII
IDem.
I
Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407

J
2
8.
imported wares.
c
( ~I
0
I
)
J
FIGURE 6.39: STRATUM VI (LB) POTTERY FROM DEBRIS 407: IMPORTED WARES (cont.)

BR I bowl 14242 1431
2 BR I bilbil 14399 1415
3 BR I tankard 14520/1 1461
4 BR I tankard 14347 1439
5 BR I tankard 14196 1439
6 BR I bilbil 14528 1461
7 Piriform jar 14530/4 1461
8 Red lustrous bottle 14529 1461
9 BR I jug 14522 1461
10 WS II bowl 14520/2 1461
FIGURE 6.40: IMPORTED LATE BRONZE SHERDS FROM OTHER LOCI

3 WS II bowl 4248 425
4 BR I bowl 3203 327
5 WS II bowl 14396 1449
6 BR I bowl 6187 617
7 BR I jug 14361 1442
8 BR I jug 14373 1449
9 BR I bilbil 7136 716
10 BR II bowl 7114 7ll
ll BR I bilbil 7249 716
12 BR II bilbil 7111 716
13 BR II bull-shaped
vessel 4019 405
14 Piriform jar 3232 330
15 Pyxis 14195 1436
FIGURE 6.41: STRATUM VI (LB) VESSELS FROM DEBRIS 407


Bowl
2 Bowl
3 Bowl
4 Bowl 14351/3 1439 6.33:19
5 Bowl 7283/2 1431 6.33:11
6 Bowl 14350/2 1439 6.33:3
7 Goblet 14317/3 1439 6.35:3
8 Goblet 14387/2 1439 6.35:4
9 Goblet 14198 1415 6.35:7
10 Cult stand 14294 1439 6.37:14
11 Goblet 14120 1431 6.35:1
149
9
6
150
Fig. 6.39:
II
0
0
10
Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407

3cm.
~-=-=~=--~--====---
imported wares (cont.).

10cm.
8
5
3
)
D---
11
~
Fig. 6.40:
\
)
3\eI
I
1--~~
]
Imported LB sherds from other loci.

12
~-·----
b
--==-
5
7
2.
IDem
\ ]
151
8
7
152
Fig. 6.41:
9
2
Stratum VI (LB) pottery from Debris 407.

0
10cm.
10cm.
6
3
10
THE IRON AGE I POTTERY
The Iron I assemblage from Shiloh is the richest found in any hill country site. Iron I pottery was found
in each area excavated, in clean loci and in almost every mixed locus unearthed at the site.
The most important finds were uncovered in Area C. This area revealed a rich collection of dozens of
vessels and thousands of sherds. The complete vessels and a large quantity of sherds were found in
Buildings 312 and 335 (Chapter 2). An abundance of Iron I sherds (but no complete vessels) were
retrieved from Debris 623 which overlay Building 335. Undisturbed Iron I material was also retrieved
from silos found around the site, especially in Area D and also from an installation in Area E. Our
discussion concentrates on this material (Tables 6.1-6. 7). Since Iron I assemblages have recently been
treated in detail by one of the authors (Finkelstein 1986; 1988:270-291; 1990), we will deal here only with
the most important types and issues, with the emphasis on comparison with other Iron I sites from
which detailed quantitative data are available.
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
Table 6.12 and Fig. 6.42 present the complete and nearly complete vessels found in Area C by the Bar
Ilan expedition and by the Danish excavators (Shiloh 1969):
TABLE 6.12: COMPLETE AND NEARLY COMPLETE IRON I VESSELS
Type No. ofvessels

Area C Other areas Danish exp. Total %
Bowls 3 3 5
Kraters 4 1 5 8
Cooking-pots 6 6 10
Jugs 10 10 17
Juglet 1 1 2
Storage jars 7 9 15
Collared-rim pithoi 13 4 7 24 40
Other vessels 2 2 3
Total 46 6 9 60
The preservation of such an impressive quantity of vessels is due to the fact that the site was destroyed
by fire and the fleeing population had to leave their belongings behind. Suffice to say that cizbet Sartah,
Giloh, Mount Ebal and Kh. ed-Dawwara together, all abandoned rather than destroyed, yielded about
35 complete or nearly complete vessels compared with 60 vessels at Shiloh. Over half the vessels found in
Area C (54%) are storage jars and pithoi, a fact which supports the assumption that the pillared
buildings served as store-houses.
Table 6.13 summarizes the quantitative analysis of sherds from all undisturbed Iron I loci: in the
pillared buildings of Area C, in Debris 623 of Area C and in the silos of Area D:
153
TABLE 6.13: IRON I SHERDS FROM SHILOH
Type Area C AreaD Total

Pillared Debris Silos
Buildings 623
A. Bowls and Kraters
Rounded bowls 13 9 1 23
'Manassite bowls' 3 7 10
Other bowls 29 40 4 73
Kraters 24 20 3 47
B. Cooking- Pots
Cooking-pots with everted rim 41 14 3 58
Cooking-pots with erect rim 222 394 26 642
Cooking-pots with ridged rim 1 2 3
Other cooking-pots 22 8 2 32
C. Jars and Jugs

Jugs 181 193 19 393
Storage jars 12 1 13
Collared-rim pithoi, thickened rim 39 23 2 64
Collared-rim pithoi, thin rim 55 159 8 222
Pithoi with slanted shoulder 4 4
Neckless pithoi 3 3
D. Other Vessels
Juglets 7 6 14
Lamps 12 5 17
Stands 13 13
Other vessels 24 33* 2 59
E. Bases
Flattened bases 33 32 3 68
Disc bases 26 16 43
Thickened bases 1 1 2
Ring bases 130 158 10 298
Rounded and pointed bases 21 9 2 32
F. Decorated Sherds
Painted sherds 13** 7 21
Sherds with red slip 3 3
Handles with incisions and holes*** 10 5 15
Total 920 1164 88 2172
*One painted and burnished;** One Philistine sherd; ***For a complete list, including handles from mixed loci, see Table 6.19.
154
Quantitative data on Iron I assemblages have been provided from four hill country sites: Giloh- an
early 12th century site south of Jerusalem (Mazar 1981); cizbet Sartah- a 12th-11th century three-
stratum site on the western margin of the Samaria foothills (Finkelstein 1986); Kh. ed-Dawwara a
late-11th-10th century site northeast of Jerusalem (Finkelstein 1990); Mt. Ebal- a 12th-early 11th
century two-stratum site near Shechem (Zertal1986-87). Tables 6.14-18 and Figs. 6.43-45 compare the
results of the quantitative analysis of the Shiloh material with the results of these four sites:
TABLE 6.14: MAIN VESSEL TYPES IN FIVE IRON I SITES(% OF ALL SHERDS)
Site: Kh. ed- clzbet Giloh Mt. Ebal Shiloh*

Dawwara Sartah 1 2 3
Stratum: Ill II I // I
Bowls & kraters 10 28 16 19 9 20 25 7 7 7

Cooking pots 27 14 20 24 27 4 6 31 36 34
Jugs 17 8 19 15 12 19 17 20 17 18
Storage jars 13 18 14 14 49 40 36 12 16 14
* 1 Pillared Buildings; 2- Debris 623; 3- Total of Area C

It is worth mentioning that the 12th-11th century types of the coastal plain, such as Type 1 of clzbet
Sartah and the S-profile carinated bowls (Finkelstein 1986:47-52) are missing at Shiloh.
'Manassite bowls' (e.g. Fig. 6.57: 1). This is a typical vessel of Iron I sites in the northeastern part of the
central hill country. Manassite bowls were found in large quantities in the Manasseh survey (Zertal
1988:295), while in the Land of Ephraim survey they are known almost only from the area immediately
to the south and east of Shechem. In Shiloh they constitute ca. 7% of the bowl sherds. Manassite bowls
were found in both strata at Mt. Ebal (Zertal1986-87:125-126). In Stratum II they make up 82% of the
bowls. Zertal has surveyed all the comparisons and has convincingly shown that this type is more
frequent in the early Iron Age I than in the later phases of that period.
Bowls with incised decoration on their rims (Figs. 6.52:5; 6.60:3). A krater with somewhat similar
decoration was found at Tel Harashim in the Upper Galilee (Aharoni 1957:22). Another was unearthed
at Beth-shan (James 1966 Fig. 20:4).
Multi-handled kraters. Two kraters of this type were found at Shiloh (Figs. 6.46:7; 6.60:4). Multi-handled
kraters were widespread throughout the country during the Iron Age I, especially in the hill country. A
krater from Dothan has 16 handles (Free 1954: 17-18) and the Raddana krater apparently had the same
number. A fragment with 8 handles was unearthed at Tell en-Nasbeh (Wampler 1947: Pl. 65:1480).
Multi-handled kraters of a somewhat similar type and of other types were found at lowland sites as. well
(Finkelstein 1988: 288, n. 28).
155
Kraters of the type shown in Fig. 6.46:3 were also found in Stratum II at Mt. Ebal (Zertal1986-87
Fig. 13:2) and in Stratum VI at Beth-shan (Yadin and Geva 1986 Fig. 2;3:1).
B. COOKING-POTS
Cooking-pots with everted rim. The share of this Late Bronze-tradition type at Shiloh (8%) is smaller
than at early Iron I sites such as Giloh (56%), clzbet Sartah III (14%) and Mt. Ebal (41% and 19% in
Strata II and I respectively), but larger than its share in later Iron I strata like Kh. ed-Dawwara (2%) and
clzbet Sartah II-I (4% and 2% respectively- Table 6.15; Fig. 6.43). It is worth noting that their share in
Buildings 312 and 335 is much higher than in Debris 623.
Cooking-pots with erect rim. The share of this type at Shiloh is the largest in all Iron I sites, relatively
close to that of Stratum I at Mt. Ebal.
JUGS AND JUGLETS COOKING POTS

11 6
BOWLS AND KRATER
7
STORAGE JARS
8 OTHER VESSELS
3
PITHOI
20
Fig. 6.42: Complete Iron I vessels from Area C (including finds from the Danish excavations).
56
0/WV+AA 1.8. Ill 1.8. II 1.8. I GILOH EBAL II EBAI.. I 8H.BLOO 8H.62S
Fig. 6.43: Ratio of cooking-pots with everted rims to total number of cooking-pots at five Iron I sites (%).
156
Cooking-pots with thickened ridge near the rim. This cooking-pot, typical of the early Iron II, is almost
absent at Shiloh. Only three sherds of this type were found - one il). the pillared buildings and two in
Debris 623 (0.5% of total number of cooking-pots)- compared to 40% in Kh. ed-Dawwara (see figures
there).
Cooking-pots with plain rim. These cooking-pots are best known from the Negev sites of the late
11th-early lOth centuries B.C.E. (Finkelstein 1986:66-69).
TABLE 6.15: MAIN TYPES OF COOKING POTS IN FIVE IRON I SITES(%)**
Site: Dawwara cIzbet Sartah Giloh Mt. Ebal Shiloh*

Stratum: III II I II I 1 2 3
Everted rims 2 14 4 2 56 41 19 14 3 8
Erect rims 17 22 23 13 44 59
81 )
Slanted 85 96 87
rims 23 31 24 36
Plain and
ridged rims 40 27 28 35 0.5 0.5 0.5
* Pillared Buildings; 2- Debris 623; 3- Total of Area C

** Type classifications at the various sites was not identical; 'other cooking-pots' are not included
C. JUGS AND JARS

Jugs. Most of the Shiloh jugs are of the trefoil rim type. The share of jugs in various hill country Iron I
sites is almost the same, regardless of date, geographic location or function (Table 6.16).
A jug with three 'handles' used as a base (Fig. 6.50:11) was also found at Giloh (Mazar 1981 Fig. 5:10).
96
54
27
0/W'MR
[][]L]
1.8. Ill 1.8. II 1.8. I GILOH EBAL II EBAL I SH.BLD. SH.628
D Series A
Fig. 6.44: Ratio of collared-rim pithoi to total number of jars at five Iron I sites(%).
157
Storage jars with three handles. Two jars of this type were found at Shiloh. They have trefoil rims and a
handle which connects the shoulder of the vessel with the rim (Fig. 6.53:10). Vessels of this type were
found at two other Iron I sites: one at Tel Qasile Stratum X (Mazar 1985 Fig 49:1) and six in the two
strata of Mt. Ebal (Zertal 1986-87:132, Figs 14:1, 17:1). The fact that they appear in 11th century
contexts at Tel Qasile and Shiloh is one of the reasons for suggesting a lower date for the Mt. Ebal site
than that given by the excavator.
Collared-rim pithoi. This type has been treated at length elsewhere (Finkelstein 1986:77-84;
1988:275-285). Additional data which support the time framework suggested there now come from Tel
Nami, where collared-rim pithoi were found in a 'Late Bronze liB' cemetery (Artzi 1990:76), and from
Tel Qiri, where these pithoi continued to be in use in the lOth century B.C.E. (Hunt 1987:200).
The share of the collared-rim pithoi in the Shiloh assemblage is smaller than their share in those from
Giloh and Mt. Ebal and larger than their portion in cizbet Sartah and Kh. ed-Dawwara (Table 6.14; Fig.
6.44). Two trends are traceable: sites in the heart of the hill country produced more collared-rim pithoi
than sites near the coastal plain; collared-rim pithoi were more popular in the later phases of the Iron I
than in the very early stages of the period, with their number decreasing again in the early 1Oth century
B.C.E. The share of the collared-rim pithoi in the total number of storage,jars at Shiloh is the highest in
all Iron I sites. The reason might be the function of the Area C buildings as storerooms.
TABLE 6.16: COLLARED-RIM PITHOI IN FIVE IRON I SITES(%)
Site: Dawwara cIzbet Sartah Giloh Mt. Ebal Shiloh*

% of all sherds 7 5 3 2 33 28 30 10 14 12
% of all storage
jars 54 27 19 17 68 71 84 88 96 93
* Pillared Buildings; 2 Debris 623; 3 Total of Area C

90
81
73
69 70
61
DN</WARA I.S. Ill I.S.II I.S.I SH.BLD. SH.623
~M:m FL., TH. AND DISC B RING BASES
Fig. 6.45: Flattened, thickened and disc bases vs. ring bases at three Iron I sites (%).
158
The collared-rim pithoi have numerous variants and subtypes, such as thick and thin rims, long and
short necks, etc. At Shiloh the rims of the collared-rim pithoi were classified only according to their
thickness. The ratio between thick and thin rims was found to be 41:59 and 13:87 in the pillared
buildings and Debris 623 respectively. In cizbet Sartah the ratio was found to be 62.5:37.5, and 20:80 in
Strata III and I respectively (Finkelstein 1986:77-78).1 7 Possibly this is another clue that the pithoi with
thickened rims are relatively earlier than those with thin rims.
Some rims of collared-rim pithoi found at Shiloh are decorated. Seven rims, including sherds from
mixed loci, have reed impressions (Fig. 6.67:3).18 An almost complete rim found in Area J (Fig 6.60:6,
6.67:4) has three impressions of rosettes, or stars, of the type found at Sahab in Transjordan (Ibrahim
1978:117, 120-121; 1983:48-50). Some ofthe handles ofthe intact collared-rim pithoi are decorated with
designs of small punctures (see below). The outer surface of a thickened rim which was found in L. 407
in Area D was white slipped.
Other storage jars. The storage jar with thickened base (Fig. 6.51:3) is in the tradition of the Late Bronze
'Canaanite jar' (Amiran 1969:140-142) and is therefore one ofthe earliest vessel types found in the Iron I
assemblage of Shiloh.
The storage jar in Fig 6.49:2 was found in the row of collared-rim pithoi in L. 335. Its two handles are
stamped with a 'Hyksos' scarab with geometric design (Chapter 8) and its neck is decorated with rope
decoration. There are no parallels for this jar in Iron I assemblages nor is there any exact parallel from
earlier periods. Yet the above features resemble Middle Bronze vessels. Stamped handles of this type
were found in several Middle Bronze hill country sites: Tell el-Farcah (Mallet 1988 Pl. LXXXIV:3, 10),
Dothan (Free 1953:20) and Bethel (Kelso 1968 Pl. 119), as well as Razor (Y adin et al. 1961 Pl.
CCXLV:3). It is not unlikely therefore, that the people of Iron I Shiloh had found an intact Middle
Bronze jar and reused it.
Later types of pithoi. These appear in Shiloh in small quantities and only in Debris 623. Only four
sherds of pithoi with slanted shoulder and I"l:eck (Finkelstein 1988: Fig. 53:8) and three sherds of neckless
pithoi appeared. The latter constitutes 14% of the storage jars in lOth century Kh. ed-Dawwara. These
types do not appear at all in early Iron I strata, such as Giloh, Mt. Ebal and Stratum III at cizbet Sartah.
D. OTHER VESSELS
Pyxides (Fig. 6.50:8) were found in several Iron I sites, both in the hill country and in the lowlands:
Tacanach Stratum liB (Rast 1978 Fig. 92:7); Tell el-Farcah VIID-VIIA (Chambon 1984 Pl. 60:12); Mt.
Ebal (Zertall986:_87 Fig. 19:3); Megiddo VIIB-VI (Loud 1948 Pl. 64:6, 84:9), etc.
Strainers of the type found at Shiloh (Fig. 6.47:6) were uncovered in Strata VIIA-VI at Megiddo (Loud
1948 Pis. 70:4, 85:8, 9).
E. BASES
The ratio of flattened and disc bases at Shiloh is smaller than at cizbet Sartah III of the 12th century but
larger than at Kh. ed-Dawwara and cizbet Sartah II-I, both of the late 11th-lOth century B.C.E. (Table
17. Note that the number of rims checked in cizbet Sartah was limited.
18. For this phenomenon see Finkelstein 1988:278-280. For an additional rim from Tel Qiri see Ben-Tor et al. 1987:91.
159
6.17; Fig. 6.45). The ring bases take the same chronological place: their number in Shiloh is larger than
in the earlier strata (e.g. cizbet Sartah III) and smaller than in the later strata (Kh. ed-Dawwara and
cizbet Sartah II-I). The fact that the number of thickened bases in the later strata of clzbet Sartah is
larger than at Shiloh is probably due to the proximity of the former site to the coastal plain.
TABLE 6.17: BASES IN THREE IRON I SITES(%)
Site: Dawwara cIzbet Sartah Shiloh*

Stratum: III II I 1 2 3
Flattened bases 11 22 11 16 15 15
Thickened bases 1 27 13 6 1 1
Disc bases 2 20 6 4 12 7 10
Ring bases 81 31 70 90 61 73 67
Round & pointed
bases 10 4 7
* I -Pillared Buildings; 2- Debris 623; 3- Total of Area C
F. DECORA TED SHERDS

Painted sherds. At cizbet Sartah the number of decorated sherds decreased with time, from 4% of the
total number in Stratum III to 1% in Stratum I. In the heart of the hill country the number of painted
sherds increased from 1% at early 11th century Shiloh to 2% at Kh. ed-Dawwara of the lOth century
B.C.E.
Two Philistine sherds were found at Shiloh, one in L. 332 of Area C and the other in a mixed locus in
Area H (Fig. 6.68:2). Philistine sherds have been published from three hill c<?untry sites: a few were
found at Bethel and Beth-Zur and at least 47 were retrieved at Tell)m-Nasbeh (Dothan 1982:44,48, 54).
Philistine sherds were not found at Kh. ed-Dawwara and apparently no sherds of this type were
encountered at et-Tell (c Ai) and Kh. Raddana either. It seems therefore that Philistine pottery reached
the heart of the hill country only·in the second half of the 11th century B.C.E., and even at that time
occurs only at the most important sites.
TABLE 6.18: DECORATED SHERDS IN FIVE IRON I SITES(%)

Site: Dawwara cIzbetSartah Giloh Mt. Ebal Shiloh*

Painted sherds 1.7 3.6 2.2 1.4 n.d. n.d. n.d. 1.4 0.6 1.0
Slipped and
burnished
sherds 1.7 2.9 9.1 16.6 0.2 0.1
Punctured
handles 0.4 0.6 3.2 7.3 1.1 0.4 0.7
* 1 - Pillared Buildings; 2- Debris 623; 3 -Total of Area C
160
TABLE 6.19: PUNCTURED AND INCISED HANDLES
No. Reg. Locus Area Date Type of vessel

1 3221 335 c Iron I storage jar or collared-rim pithos
2 3255 611 c Iron I collared-rim pithos
3 3274 326 c Mixed jug
4 3277 611 c Iron I storage jar
5 3305 300 c Mixed storage jar
8 3334 306 c Iron I storage jar*
10 3381 335 c Iron I collared-rim pithos*
12 3412 335 c Iron I collared-rim pithos*
14 4192 425 D Iron I silo storage jar
15 4231 403 D Iron I storage jar or collared-rim pithos
16 4232 424 D Iron I silo jug
17 4232 424 D Iron I silo jug
18 6011 607 c Iron I jug
19 6145 618 c Iron I jug
21 6236 623 c Iron I krater
22 6264 623 c Iron I jug
23 6353 623 c Iron I storage jar or collared-rim pithos
24 6373 336 c Iron I jug
26 6402 1311 c Iron I jug
30 7050 706 D Mixed jug or storage jar
31 7041 712 D Mixed storage jar
33 8009 802 F Mixed storage jar
34 11060 1102 J Mixed collared-rim pithos (?)
35 11069 1108 J Mixed storage jar
36 11089 1112 J Mixed storage jar or collared-rim pithos
37 12069 1210 K Mixed jug or storage jar
39 13046 1310 c Mixed storage jar or collared-rim pithos

40 13139 1310 c Mixed collared-rim pithos
42 14029 1400 D Mixed collared-rim pithos
43 14051 1408 D Mixed jug
46 14395 1449 D Mixed jug
47 20016 2005 M Mixed collared-rim pithos
48 surface jug
49 surface collared-rim pithos
* Complete vessel
161
Slipped and burnished sherds. In this case too the situation in the western foothills differs from that in
the heart of the hill country. At cizbet Sartah there is a relatively significant number of slipped and
burnished sherds, increasing with time. In the heart of the hill country slipped and burnished material is
non-existent in the early sites, and at Shiloh it appears in limited numbers, and only in Debris 623. The
number of slipped and burnished sherds is still limited at lOth century Kh. ed-Dawwara.
Handles with incisions and punctures. This topic has been thoroughly treated elsewhere (Finkelstein
1988:285-287). Handles with incisions and punctures arefound in the hill country from the Jezreel valley
in the north to the Judean hills in the south, with the main concentration in Samaria. Chronologically
they range from the 12th to the lOth centuries B.C.E., although none were found at Kh. ed..:Dawwara.
New material has recently been published from Mt. Ebal (Zertal1986-87:136-137 and figures). The rich
Shiloh collection (Table 6.19 and Fig. 6.61) shows that incisions and punctures were done on different
types of vessels small Qugs), medium (storage jars) and large (collared-rim pithoi). The Shiloh finds,
which are dated to the 11th century B.C.E., contradict Zertal's assumption (1986-87:136-137) that these
handles can be used as a tool for dating early Iron I sites in the hill country. Three complete vessels with
punctures on their handles were found at Shiloh. It seems that the handles were punctured for decoration;
if there was a functional purpose, it has not been traced yet.
Figures in relief. Sherds of a cooking pot, a krater and a cult stand decorated with figures in relief (Figs.
6.54-55) have been discussed elsewhere (Finkelstein 1988:287-291). 19
CONCLUSIONS
Chronologically the Shiloh assemblage falls between the early Iron I strata of cizbet Sartah III, Giloh
and Mt. Ebal and the late 11th-lOth century strata of cizbet Sartah II-I and Kh. ed-Dawwara. It still has
some of the features of the 12th century sites, such as cooking-pots with everted rims and the 'Canaanite
jar', but the proportion of the early types in the assemblage is relatively small compared to the early Iron
I sites. In dating the Shiloh assemblage one should consider both the existence of late Iron I vessels and
the absence (or limited number) of typical late 11th-lOth century types, such as cooking-pots with
thickened ridge, Philistine sherds, slipped and burnished material, baseless round cooking jugs (of the
type shown in Finkelstein 1986 Fig. 19:8), etc.
Within the Iron I material in Shiloh, Debris 623 seems to be slightly later than the assemblage found
in the pillared buildings. Stratigraphically this is clear, although one could claim that the material which
was dumped on the slope came from an earlier source, such as afavissa of offerings which were brought
to a temple. However, the somewhat later date for Debris 623 seems to be confirmed by the quantitative
analysis of the Shiloh material. Especially important is the proportion of cooking-pots with everted rim,
and the fact that the two types of later pithoi and slipped sherds were found only in this debris (see also
Chapter 11). Nevertheless, the time difference between the two assemblages seems to be very limited and
neither has the types typical of the lOth century B.C.E.
To sum up, the ceramic date for the Shiloh assemblage, late 12th century and first half of the 11th
century B.C.E., seems to correspond with the 'historical' date suggested by Albright (1929:4) and Kjaer
(1930: 105) for the destruction of Shiloh.
19. For cult stands see Beck 1990.
162
FIGURE 6.46: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA C BUILDING 335

I Bowl 13202 1301 Buff 6.62:1
2 Baking tray? 3392/1 335 Buff
3 Krater 3387 335 Reddish-brown 6.62:3
4 Krater 3412/1 335 Brown 6.62:2
5 Krater 13201 1301 Reddish-brown
7 Krater 3390 335 Grey 6.62:4
8 Cooking-pot 13087 13ll Pinkish
9 Cooking-pot 13028/1 1301
11 Cooking-pot ' 3392/2 335
FIGURE 6.47: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA C- BUILDING 335 (cont.)

I Cooking-pot 13031 1301
3 Cooking-pot 13053/1 1301
4 Cooking-pot 13053/2 1301
5 Cooking-pot 13053/3 1301
6 Strainer 13041 13ll Brown; found with No.8
7 Jug 3350 335 Greyish-brown
8 Jug 1305 11311 Brown
9 Jug 13062 1301 Light brown 6.62:6
10 Jug 6402 1311
II Handle 3221 335
12 Handle 13046 1311
13 Jug 3392/3 335 Brown
14 Jug 3338 335 Brown

Pithos 3409 335 Greyish-brown 6.65:3
2 Pithos 3364 335 Brown 6.64:3

4 Pithos 3414 335 Brown 6.63:5
5 Storage jar 3392/4 335 Reddish-brown 6.63:1

Pithos 3381 335 Greyish
2 Storage jar 3398 335 Reddish-brown; sealed on both handles
(Ch. 8) 6.65:1
3 Pithos 3412/2 335 Brown 6.63:3
4 Pithos 3402 335 Brown 6.65:4
163
10 '
164
Fig. 6.46:
fl
I
,,
~--
9
3
11
Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- Building 335.

10
13
Fig. 6.47:
8
l
Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C

J
4
2
11
Building 335 (cont.).

12
14
I
---~--=(
~~~~~~---~
165
166
c
Fig. 6.48:
3
J1
Fig. 6.49:
0
__,._::·~
10cm

4
167
FIGURE 6.50: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA C- BUILDING 312 AND HALL 306

Cooking-pot 6180 306
2 Cooking-pot 3263/1 336
4 Cooking-pot 3262 336 Grey 6.62:5
5 Cooking-pot 6l79 306 Reddish-brown
8 Pyxis 3155 312 Light 6.62:7
9 Jug 6137 306 Buff
10 Jug 3091 312 Greyish-brown
ll Jug 6195 312 Light brown 6.62:8
FIGURE 6.51: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA C- BUILDING 312 AND HALL 306 (cont.)

I Pithos 6240 306 Reddish-brown 6.64:5
2 Pithos 6273 336 Li~ht brown
4 Pithos 3179 306 Brown 6.64:4
5 Storage jar 3334 336 Light brown 6.65:2
6 Pithos 3283 306 Brown 6.63:4
FIGURE 6.52: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA C DEBRIS 623

1 Bowl 6127/3 618 Light

2 Bowl 6276 623 Light
4 Bowl 6266/1 623 Brown
5 Bowl 6310 623 Brown, large white grits
6 Krater 6236 623 Brown
7 Ktater 6330 623 Light brown
8 Krater 6190 623 Light
9 Cooking-pot 6341 f1 623
ll Cooking-pot 3253 623 Reddish
l3 Cooking-pot 3249 623
168
8
3
.9
(
.L
Fig. 6.50:
.7
10
I
I
0

--.._=:::.o~~-=._......
10cm.
Building 312 and Hall 306.

2
6
4
11
---- :-::-_
.....
~
169
170
Fig. 6.51:
6
2
3
jo
I -\
Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- building 312 and Hal!306 (cont.).
4
7
Fig. 6.52:
3
,
\
\
~
~
8
Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- Debris 623.

5
10
.q
-=,~---=·
7
7
I
J
171
• Fl
2 3
4
)~ Q)l
I 15
t
~
J=
I
6
I
)
'
8
J r-\
9
5 10
0
--- 10cm 0
~
10crn
Fig. 6.53: Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area C- Debris 623 (cont.).
FIGURE 6.53: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA C- DEBRIS 623 (cont.)

I Pilgrim flask 6398 623
2 Jug 6264 623 Light
3 Handle 3324 623 Brown
4 Pithos 6339 623 Pinkish 6.67:3
5 Pithos 6362 623 Light
7 Pithos 6215 623 Light
8 Pithos 6306 623 Pinkish-brown
10 Storage jar 6127/2 618 Light brown 6.64:2
172
I
J ... -, .....
J ~~ I~ -., '\
2
I I
\ ~\ 1 ''
I I\ I
\11.1 ll
,, N
3cm.
5 --~=-_. 6
Fig. 6.54: Fragments of cult stand (1-4) and sherds decorated with animal heads from Debris 623.
FIGURE 6.54: FRAGMENTS OF CULT STAND (1-4) AND SHERDS DECORATED WITH ANIMAL HEADS FROM
DEBRIS 623

Fragment of
cult stand 6354 623 Reddish to light brown
2 Fragment of
cult stand 6282 623 Reddish
3 Fragment of
cult stand 6152 618 Reddish to light brown
4 Fragment of
cult stand 6266/3 623 Reddish to light brown
~5 Cooking-pot 6158 618 Dark brown; head of a lioness (?)
6 Krater 6228 623 Brown; head of ram
173
174
Fig. 6.55:
0
Fragments of cult stand ( l-2) and sherds decorated with animal heads from Debris 623.
FIGURE 6.55: FRAGMENTS OF CULT STAND AND SHERDS DECORATED WITH ANIMAL HEADS FROM
DEBRIS 623

Fragment of cult stand 6354 623
2 Fragment of cult stand 6282 623
4 Krater 6228 623
~.I./ 0
~-
10cm
2 3
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
\
I
\
\
0 10cm.
4 """""""~--===-- 5
Fig. 6.56: Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area E- Installation 519.
175
5
3
9
7
11
[
176
5
r
Fig. 6.57:
~-''
F
\~
13
I
I
(9
Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area D
0
f
t
L. 403-404.
lOcm
4
8
2
10
12
)
<
I
r
~-
',
II
l
t
~--
FIGURE 6.56: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA E- INSTALLATION 519

Bowl 5063 509 Brown
2 Jug 5139 520 Buff, remains of reddish-brown slip
3 Pithos 5127 520 Reddish brown
c
~t
I
2
/
3
)
\\
't 2
4
)
J
l
) I ~ }
5
p l
6
h~
'l
7 8
j I
~
9
I 10
Fig. 6.58: Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from Area D- L. 403-404 (cont.).
177
FIGURE 6.57: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA D L. 403-404

Bowl 7160 716 Light brown
2 Krater 7214 403 Light brown
3 Krater 7234 731 Reddish-brown
ll Cooking-pot 4076 404
I3 Cooking-pot 7207/1 731
FIGURE 6.58: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM AREA D L. 403-404 (cont.)

Pithos 72ll 403 Light brown
2 Pithos 7171 727 Dark grey
3 Pithos 7213 403 Greyish-brown
4 Pithos 4121/1 404 Pinkish
lO Pithos 7258 731 Brown
FIGURE 6.59: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY FROM SILOS IN AREAS C, D AND H

l Bowl 3097 3ll Brown
2 Krater 10055 1003 Light
4 Jug 14390/1 1453 Brown
5 Jug 4232 424 Grey
6 Jug 4218/1 424 Reddish
7 Jug 7140 72! Greyish-brown
8 Pithos 4218/2 424 Pinkish-brown
9 Pithos 14390/2 1453 Brown
178
9
6
2
Fig. 6.59:
\ ;==
'
•
8
~--
0..___
II
Stratum V (Iron I) pottery from silos in Areas C, D and H.

10c.m
,.,
\ '
5
10
~~
J
-·
l
179
C'§gJ I _,
10cm
5
Fig. 6.60: Stratum V (Iron I) pottery - miscellaneous.

FIGURE 6.60: STRATUM V (IRON I) POTTERY MISCELLANEOUS

I Bowl 3277 611 Light
2 Bowl 3238 307 Grey
4 Krater 4174 422 Grey
5 Pithos 3327 611
6 Pithos 11065 1102 Pinkish, 3 rosette impressions 6.67:4
180
)o o ( )ooo(
)T( ) 00 0( ) {\ (
) 0 (
1 2 3 4 5 6
)0 0(
1 8
) o 0(
0
H\
9 10
)"'0oo ( oOO
0 oo Jo ( )oooo(
1
0 00
)
00
0
oo(
oo o
t:J 0
) 0 ( ) 0 ( ) 0 ( ) o( ~o 0o•(
13 14 15 16 11 18
)o ( )"0 0Oo (
19
) g(
20
) 0 (
21 22
oooooo
23
) n\ 24
r(
)0( )o( J o o( ) D ( ) @ ( Jo o(
25 26 27 28 29 30
31
0 0 (
32
)oo ( 1 Oo ( Jo ~ o( 35
) 0 0 \
36 ) 'o (
Jo~Oo0(
37
)O'\
38
)oo(
39 J 0 (
0
0 0
J~l
0
) 0 0 ( )o oo( 0 0 0 0
°
) 0 ( 0
0 0 0 0 0
42 43 44
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0 0
) 0 ( ) 0 oo( j"o•( ) 0 ~ 0 (
0
0 0
45 46 48 49 47
Fig. 6.61: Schematic drawings of punctured and incised handles (see Table 6.19).
181
182
1
Fig. 6.62:
1
Stratum V (Iron I) vessels from Area C.

0
10cm
4
8
2
Fig. 6.63:
Stratum V (Iron I) vessels from Area C (cont.).
183
Fig. 6.64: Stratum V (Iron I) vessels from Area C (cont.).
184
Fig. 6.65:
o
Stratum V (Iron I) vessels from Area C (cont.).

""""'== -
.......
20cm.
185
FIGURE 6.62: STRATUM V (IRON I) VESSELS FROM AREA C

Bowl 13202 1301 6.46:1
2 Krater 3412/1 335 6.46:4
3 Krater 3387 335 6.46:3
4 Krater 3390 335 6.46:7
5 Cooking-pot 3262 336 6.50:4
6 Jug 13062 1301 6.47:9
7 Pyxis 3155 312 6.50:8
8 Jug 6195 312 6.50:11
FIGURE 6.63: STRATUM V (IRON I) VESSELS FROM AREA C (cont.)

Storage jar 3392/4 335 6.48:5
2 Storage jar 6372 306 6.51:3
3 Pithos 3412/2 335 6.49:3
4 Pithos 3283 306 6.51:6
5 Pithos 3414 335 6.48:4

1 Storage jar 6141 306 6.51:7
2 Storage jar 6127/2 618 6.53:10
3 Pithos 3364 335 6.48:2
4 Pithos 3179 306 6.51:4
5 Pithos 6240 306 6.51:1

1 Storage jar 3398 335 6.49:2
2 Storage jar 3334 336 6.51:5
3 Pithos 3409 335 6.48:1
4 Pithos 3402 335 6.49:4
POTTERY OF THE LATER PERIODS
Pottery from the Iron Age II, Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine occupations and two Persian sherds are
presented in Figs. 6.68-70. While these sparse finds allow us to date the strata, a thorough discussion of
the pottery assemblages will not be undertaken here. The Iron II assemblage is dated to the late Iron II
on the basis of some of the cooking-pots, bowls and storage jars (Fig. 6.68). Of special interest is a rim of
a holemouth pithos with two Hebrew letters an cayin and a yod incised on it before firing (Figs.
6.66:14; 6.67:4).
186
FIGURE 6.66: STRATUM IV (IRON II) POTTERY FROM AREAS E (l-15) AND C (16-19)

Bowl 5050 5ll Burnished
2 Bowl Burnished
3 Bowl 5071 511 Reddish; burnished
4 Bowl 5021 511 Burnished
5 Bowl 5155 505 Buff; 'Samaritan' bowl?
7 Bowl 5134 511 Burnished
8 Bowl 5080 5ll Grey
10 Krater 5007/l 504 Pinkish; burnished rim and inside
11 Krater 5065 507 Greyish
13 Holemouth
pithos 5012 511 Reddish
14 Holemouth
pithos 5067 511 Greyish; inscribed with two letters 6.67:2
15 Holemouth
pithos 5007/2 504 Light brown
16 Bowl 3057/1 313
17 Bowl 3095/1 313
19 Holemouth
pithos 3057/2 313
FIGURE 6.67: MISCELLANEOUS MB II (1), IRON I (3-4) AND IRON II (2)
No. Type Reg. No. Locus See Fig. Note

Cult stand 14158 1428 6.7:24
2 Holemouth
pithos 5067 51~ 6.66:14
3 Pithoi 6273 627
6339 62S
6012 604 6.68:4
6293 601
4 Pithos 11065 1102 6.60:6 one of two
sherds of this rim
187
n
4.
18
10
188
Fig. 6.66:
~-,
8
\
2
0
I
}
.~10cm.
I
15
12
J
13
17
19
~
Stratum IV (Iron II) pottery from Areas E (l-15) and C (16-19).

/
-
I
_.r-
~
6
3~
I
~--
L_
•z
·-
\
~-
7
l
~Fl=======................
J3)
Fig. 6.67:
0
Miscellaneous ~ MB II (1), Iron I (3-4) and Iron II (2).

4cm.
03cm.
189
r
4 + 5
'
Fig. 6.68: Miscellaneous- MB (1), Iron I (2-4) and Persian (5-7).
FIGURE 6.68: MISCELLANEOUS- MB (I), IRON I (2-4) AND PERSIAN (5-6)

Cooking-pot lll31 1113
2 Philistine
krater 10061 1018 Reddish
3 Pithos 16054 1603
4 Pithos 6012 604 Reddish 6.67:3
5 Bowl 7123 714 Buff
6 Holemouth
jar 12007 1201 Dark grey
190
7
4
12
16
14
10
~
Fig. 6.69:
flJ
~
J
I
I
l
?
~--
1
5
2
r
(
I
I
)
\
,~l
f
l
F
9
3
11
15
~
q-
I'
~:1
. !
I
_q-l
'JTO·
Stratum II pottery and stone vessels from Buildings 804 and 810 in Area F (1-ll); L. 1I 12 in Area J (12-23).
-@
191
r
13
15
~
192
Fig. 6.70:
I
17
m
~
2
10
--}19
--
~
~
Ml
\i7l
7
n
~--
3
4
)=fl
~-·
12
p--(
Ml R\ JT( )=r\
Stratum II pottery from various loci in Area E (l-12). Stratum I pottery from the upper terrace of Area C (13-21).
REFERENCES
Aharoni, Y. 1957. The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Upper Galilee. Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Albright, W.F. 1929. New Israelite and Pre-Israelite Sites: the Spring Trip of 1929. BASOR 35:1-14.
Amiran, R. 1960. A Late Bronze Age II Pottery Group from a Tomb in Jerusalem. Eretz-Israe/6:23-37.
(Hebrew)
Amiran, R. 1969. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. Jerusalem.
Artzi, M. 1990. Notes and News: Nami Land and Sea Project, 1985-1988. IEJ40:73-76.
Astrom, P. 1966. Excavations at Kalopsidha and Ayios Iakovos in Cyprus. SIMA 2.
Astrom, P. 1969. A Red Lustrous Wheel-made Spindle Bottle and Its Contents. Medelhavsmuseet
Bulletin 12:16-21.
Astrom, P. 1972a. The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age. SCEIV:lB.
Astrom, P. 1972b. The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. SCEIV:lC,D.
Beck, P. 1990. The Taanach Cult Stands: Iconographic Traditions in the Iron I Cult Vessels. In:
Na'aman, N. and Finkelstein, I., eds. From Nomadism to Monarchy: Archaeological and Historical
Aspects of Early Israel. Jerusalem. pp. 417-446. (Hebrew)
Ben-Arieh, S. 1981. A Late Bronze Age Tomb from Tell Jedur. Bretz Israel15:115-128. (Hebrew)
Ben-Dor, I. 1950. Middle Bronze Age Temple at Nahariya. QDAP 14:1-41.
Ben-Tor, A. eta!. 1987. Tell Qiri: A Village in the Jezreel Valley. Qedem 24. Jerusalem.
Bienkowski, P. 1986. Jericho in the Late Bronze Age. Warminster.
Bunimovitz, S. 1990. Cultural Processes and Socio-Political Change in the Central Hill Country in the
Late Bronze-Iron I Transition. In: Na'aman, N. and Finkelstein, I., eds. From Nomadism to
Monarchy. Archaeological and Historical Aspects of Early Israel. Jerusalem. pp. 257-283.
(Hebrew)
Chambon, A. 1984. Tell el-Farcah 1: L'age du Fer. Editions recherche sur les civilisations 31. Paris.
Cole, D.F. 1984. Shechem I: The Middle Bronze Pottery. Winona Lake.
Dajani, A.K. 1960. Middle Bronze Age Pottery. ADAJ 4-5:99-113.
Dever, W.G. 1974. The M:e IIC Stratification in the Northwest Gate Area at Shechem. BASOR
216:31-52.
Dothan, T. 1982. The Philistines and their Material Culture. Jerusalem.
Eisenberg, E. 1977. The Temples at Tell Kittan. BA 40:77-81.
Finkelstein, I. 1986. cIzbet Sartah: An Early Iron Age Site Near Rosh Hacayin, Israel. BAR S299.
Oxford.
Finkelstein, I. 1988. The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement. Jerusalem
Finkelstein, I. 1990. Excavations at Kh. ed-Dawwara- An Iron Age Site Northeast of Jerusalem. Tel
Aviv 17:163-208.
Free, J.P. 1953. The First Season of Excavation at Dothan. BASOR 131:16-20.
Free, J.P. 1954. The Second Season at Dothan. BASOR 135:14-20.
Funk, R.W. 1968. The Bronze Age-Iron Age Pottery. In: Sellers, O.R. et al. The 1957 Excavation at
Beth-Zur. AASOR 38:35-53.
Gezer II. Dever, W.G. et al. 1974. Gezer II: Report of the 1967-1970 Seasons in Fields I and II. Annual
NGSBAJ II.
Gezer V. Seger, J.D. and Lance, H.D., eds. Gezer V: The Field I Caves. Annual NGSBAJ V.
193
Gittlen, B.M. 1977. Studies in the Late Cypriote Pottery Found in Palestine (Microfilmed Ph.D. thesis).
Ann Arbor.
Guz-Zilberstein, B. 1984. The Pottery of the Late Bronze Age. L The Local Pottery. In: Stern, E.
Excavations at Tell Mevorakh. Part Two: The Bronze Age. Qedem 18. Jerusalem. pp. 10-16.
Hankey, V. 1977. The Aegean Pottery. In: Ben-Arieh, S. and Edelstein, G. Akko. Tombs Near the
Persian Garden. cAtiqot 12 (English Series):45-51.
Hazor I. Yadin, Y. et al. 1958. Hazor I: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955.
Jerusalem.
Hazor II. Yadin, Y. et al. 1960. Hazor II: An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956.
Jerusalem.
Hazor III-IV. Yadin, Y. et al. 1989. Hazor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of
Excavations, 1957-1958 (Text). Jerusalem.
Hennessy, J.B. 1985. Chocolate-on-White Ware at Pella. In: Tubb, J., ed. Palestine in the Bronze and
Iron Ages: Papers in Honour of Olga Tufnell. London. pp. 100-113.
Hunt, M. 1987. The Pottery. In: Ben-Tor, A. et al. Tell Qiri: A Village in the Jezreel Valley. Qedem 24.
Jerusalem. pp. 139-223.
Ibrahim, M. 1978. The Collared-rim Jar of the Early Iron Age. In: Moorey, R. and Parr, P., eds.
Archaeology in the Levant. Warminster. pp. 116-126.
Ibrahim, M. 1983. Siegel und Siegelabdrlicke aus Sahab. ZDPV99:43-53.
James, F. 1966. The Iron Age at Beth-Shan. Philadelphia.
Jericho I. Kenyon, K.M. 1960. Excavations at Jericho I: The Tombs Excavated in 1952-4. London.
Jericho IV. Kenyon, K.M. and Holland, T.A. 1982. Excavations at Jericho IV: The Pottery Type Series
and Other Finds. London.
Jericho V. Kenyon, K.M. and Holland, T.A. 1983. Excavations at Jericho V: The Pottery Phases of the
Tell and Other Finds. London.
Johnson, P. 1982. The Middle Cypriote Pottery Found in Palestine. Opuscula Atheniensia 14:49-72.
Kelso, J.L. 1968. The Excavation of Bethel (1934-1960). AASOR 39.
Kempinski, A. 1983. Syrien und Paliistina (Kanaan) in der letzten Phase der Mittelbronze liB-Zeit
(1650-1550 v. Chr). Wiesbaden.
Kenyon, K.M. 1973. Palestine in the Time of the Eighteenth Dynasty. CAH II/ 1:526-556.
Knapp, A.B. 1987. Pots, PIXE, and Data Processing at Pella in Jordan. BASOR 266:1-30.
Knapp, A.B. 1989. Complexity and Collapse in the North Jordan Valley: Archaeometry and Society in
the Middle-Late Bronze Ages. IEJ 39:129-148.

Knapp, A.B. et al. 1988. Ceramic Production and Social Change: Archaeometric Analysis of Bronze
Age Pottery from Jordan. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 1/2:57-113.
Lachish II. Tufnell, 0., Inge, C.H. and Harding, L. 1940. Lachish II (Tell ed-Duweir): The Fosse
Temple. London.
Lachish IV. Tufnell, 0. 1958. Lachish IV (Tell ed-Duweir): The Bronze Age. London.
Leonard, A. 1986. Kattarat as-Samra, 1985. Archive fur Orientforschung 33:166-167.
Maguire, L. 1987. Imported Cypriot Pottery from the Middle Bronze Age Levels at Kabri. In:
Kempinski, A., ed. Excavations at Kabri: Preliminary Report of 1986 Season. Tel Aviv. pp.
44-51.
Mallet, J. 1988. Tell el-Farcah //, 2. I.e Bronze moyen. Editions recherche sur les civilisations 66. Paris.
194
Mazar, A. 1980. Excavations at Tell Qasile. Part One: The Philistine Sanctuary: Architecture and Cult
Objects. Qedem 12. Jerusalem.

Mazar, A. 1981. Giloh: An Early Israelite Settlement Site Near Jerusalem. IEJ 31:1-36.
Mazar, A. 1985. Excavations at Tell Qasile. Part Two: The Philistine Sanctuary: Various Finds, The
Pottery, Conclusions, Appendixes. Qedem 20. Jerusalem.
Megiddo II. Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo II. Chicago.
McClellan, T. 1975. Quantitative Studies in the Iron Age Pottery of Palestine. (Microfilmed Ph.D.
thesis). Ann Arbor.
Merrilees, R.S. 1963. Bronze Age Spindle Bottels from the Levant. Opuscula Atheniensia 4:187-196.
Negbi, 0. 1989. Bronze Age Pottery (Strata XVII-XV). In: Herzog, Z., Rapp, G.Jr. and Negbi, 0., eds.
Excavations at Tel Michal, Israel. Minneapolis. pp. 43-63.
Oren, E.D. 1973. The Northern Cemetery of Beth-Shan. Leiden.
Pella 1. McNicoll, A., Smith, R.H. and Hennessy, B. 1982. Pella in Jordan 1. Canberra.
Petrie, F. 1931. Ancient Gaza I. Tell el-Ajjul. London.
Popham, M. 1972. White Slip Ware. In: Astrom, P. The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. SCE IV:1C:431-471.
Pritchard, J.B. 1963. The Bronze Age Cemetery at Gibeon. Philadelphia.
Rast, W.E. 1978. Taanach I: Studies in the Iron Age Pottery. Cambridge.
Saller, S.J. 1964. The Excavations at Dominus Flevit (Mount Olivet, Jerusalem), Part lL' The Jebusite
Burial Place. Jerusalem.
Saltz, D. 1977. The Chronology of the Middle Cypriote Period. RDAC:51-70.
Saltz, D. 1984. Imported Cypriot Pottery. In: Stern, E. Excavations at Tell Mevorakh. Part Two: The
Bronze Age. Qedem 18. Jerusalem. pp. 58-59.
Seger, J.D. 1974. The Middle Bronze Age IIC Date of the East Gate at Shechem. Levant 6:117-130.
Sellers, O.R. 1933. The Citadel of Beth-Zur. Philadelphia.
Shiloh 1969. Buhl, M.L. and Holm-Nielsen, S. 1969. Shiloh: The Danish Excavations at Tall Sailun,
Singer, I. 1983. The Middle Bronze Age Fortified Enclosure. In: Fritz, V. and Kempinski, A. Ergebnisse
der Ausgrabungen auf der Hirbet el-Msas (Tel Masos) 1972-1975. Wiesbaden. pp. 186-197.
Sjoqvist, E. 1940. Problems of the Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Stockholm.
TBM I. Albright, W.F. 1932. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim in Palestine I: The Pottery of the First
Three Campaigns. AASOR 12.
TBM !A. Albright, W.F. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim IA: The Bronze Age Pottery ofthe Fourth
Campaign. AASOR 13:55-127.
de Vaux, R. and Steve, A.M. 1947. La premiere campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Naplouse.
RB 54:573-589.
de Vaux, R. and Steve, A.M. 1949. La deuxieme campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Naplouse.
Rapport preliminaire. RB 56: 102-138.
Wampler, J.C. 1947. Tell en-Nasbeh II· The Pottery. Berkeley.
Weinstein, J. 1981. The Egyptian Empire in Palestine: A Reassessment. BASOR 241:1-28.
Wright, G.E. 1961. The Archaeology of Palestine. In: Wright, G.E., ed. The Bible and the Near East.
Essays in Honor of William Foxwell Albright. Garden City. pp. 73-112.
Yadin, Y. 1975. Razor. The Rediscovery of A Great Citadel of the Bible. Tel Aviv.
Yadin, Y. and Geva, S. 1986. Investigations at Beth Shean: The Early Iron Age Strata. Qedem 23.
Jerusalem.
195
196
Aviv 13-14:105-165.
Zertal, A. 1988. The Israelite Settlement in the Hill Country of Manasseh. Haifa. (Hebrew)
Zertal, A. 1986-87. An Early Iron Age Cultic Site on Mount Ebal: Excavation Seasons 1982-1987. Tel
CHAPTER 7
FLINT TOOLS
Erich Friedmann*
The 46 tools studied are made of flint of various shades of brown and grey. The source of the flint is
uncertain but flint pebbles have been collected in the proximity of the site.
Three groups of tools can be defined. The major group consists of 30 sickle blades!; the second group
consists of 2 'Canaanean' blades; the third group is made up of flakes and miscellaneous tools.2
STRATUM VIII: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II

Stratum VIII yielded 13 sickle blades and 3 blades:
Reg. No. 7256 I 2 (L. 723). Wide, rectangular sickle blade with fine denticulation and sheen on working
edge, and abrupt retouch on back and narrow ends (Fig. 7.2:2).
Reg. No. 7067 I 3 (L. 707); Reg. No. 8123 (L. 809); Reg. No. 14165 (L. 1426); Reg. No. 7259 (L. 723);
Reg. No. 8063 (L. 805). Narrow, rectangular sickle blades with fine denticulation and sheen on working
edges. The backs and narrow ends are shaped by abrupt retouch (Fig. 7.2:3).
Reg. No. 7276 (L. 723); Reg. No. 8041 I 1 (L. 805); Reg. No. 8041 I 2 (L. 805). Narrow, rectangular sickle
blades with fine denticulation and sheen on working edges. The backs are flat and unretouched, the
truncations are shaped by abrupt retouch.
Reg. No. 7128, (L. 714). Narrow, rectangular sickle blade with fine denticulation and sheen on working
edge. The back is broken, the truncations shaped by flat retouch.
Reg. No. 8029 (L. 805); Reg. No. 1416112 (L. 1417). Narrow, triangular sickle blades with fine
denticulation and sheen on working edges. The backs and truncations are shaped by abrupt retouch
(Fig. 7.2:4).

!. Sickle blades which are wider than 3 em. are here termed wide sickle blades.
2. Some of the tools come from mixed loci. They were assigned to specific periods according to their typology.
197
198
Fig. 7.1:
Flint tools.
1
5
4
2
Reg. No. 14095 (L. 1418). Narrow, triangular sickle blade with fine denticulation and sheen on working
edge. The back is flat and unretouched, the truncations are shaped by abrupt retouch.
Reg. No. 15052/2 (L. 805). 'Canaanean' blade with fine denticualtion, without sheen. One end is
truncated by abrupt retouch, the other end still carries the bulb.
Reg. No. 14067I 2 (L. 723). 'Canaanean' blade with denticulation on working edge, without sheen. Both
ends are broken (Fig. 7.2:5).
Reg. No. 14258 (L. 1427). Blade with cortex, and notch shaped by retouch (Fig. 7.2:6).
STRATUM VII: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE III

Stratum VII yielded 3 sickle blades and 1 blade:
Reg. No. 10083 (L. 1019); Reg. No. 1700811 (L. 1704). Narrow, rectangular sickle blades. with fine
denticulation and sheen on working edges, backs and truncations formed by abrupt retouch (Fig. 7.1 :6;
Fig. 7.2:1).
Reg. No. 17008 I 2 (L. 1704). Wide, rectangular sickle blade with fine denticulation and sheen on
working edge. The unretouched striking platform and the bulb can be seen on the back. The narrow
ends are flat, with fine flat retouch.
Reg. No. 15110 (L. 1527). Blade with fine denticulation and sheen on working edge. The bulb can be
seen on one end, the other end is broken.
STRATUM VI: LATE BRONZE AGE

Three sickle blades, one blade and one flake were found in this stratum:
Reg. No. 14254 (L. 1440). Wide, rectangular sickle blade (over 3 em. wide) with fine denticulation and
sheen on working edge, semi-abrupt retouch on back and two truncations shaped by abrupt retouch
(Fig. 7.1:4).
Reg. No. 14144 (L. 1415). Narrow, rectangular sii;kle blade with very fine denticulation and semi-abrupt
retouch on back. One narrow end is truncated by abrupt retouch, the other end is the unretouched base
of the blade with the bulb still in place (Fig. 7.1 :5).
Reg. No. 7298 (L. 1415). Narrow, rectangular sickle blade with fine denticulation on working edge, the
other edge is unretouched. One narrow end is broken, the other is truncated by abrupt retouch.
Reg. No. 14251 (L. 1415). Blade with one truncation shaped by abrupt retouch, the other end is broken
on the side of the working edge. There are four notches shaped by retouch.
Reg. No. 4113 (L. 407). Flake with signs of retouch (appears to belong to an earlier period).
199
200
Fig. 7.2:
Flint tools (cont.)
1
5
6
2
4

Stratum V yielded 11 sickle blades, 7 blades and 3 flakes:
Reg. No. 3093 (L. 312). Wide, rectangular sickle blade with fine denticulation and sheen on working
edge, semi-abrupt retouch on back and two truncations shaped by abrupt retouch (Fig. 7.1:1).
Reg. No. 13028/2 (L. 1301). Wide, rectangular sickle blade with fine denticulation and sheen on
working edge, a flat unretouched back and two truncations shaped by abrupt retouch.
Reg. No. 6255 (L. 627). Wide, rectangular sickle blade (broken) with fine denticulation and sheen on
working edge and semi-abrupt retouch on the back. The existing truncation is shaped by abrupt
retouch.
Reg. No. 7246 (L. 1415); Reg. No. 13067 (L. 1309); Reg. No. 6287 (L. 623); Reg. No. 7195 (L. 731); Reg.
No. 7207/2 (L. 731). Narrow sickle blades with fine denticulation and sheen on working edges, three
with abrupt retouch on backs, two with semi-abrupt retouch on backs. All truncations shaped by abrupt
retouch (Fig. 7.1:2).
Reg. No. 14194 (L. 1430); Reg. No. 6358 (L. 623); Reg. No. 3372 (L. 335). Narrow, triangular sickle
blades with fine denticulation and sheen on working edges. The backs and truncations shaped by abrupt
retouch (Fig. 7.1:3).
Reg. No. 6181 (L. 623); Reg. No. 6250 (L. 623); Reg. No. 13088 (L. 1301); Reg. No. 6380 (L. 623).
Narrow, rectangular blades (broken) with fine denticulation and sheen on working edges, two with
abrupt retouch on backs and two with flat unretouched backs.
Reg. No. 12063 (L. 1207); Reg. No. 6256 (L. 306); Reg. No. 6272 (L. 312). Broken blades with fine
denticulation and sheen on working edges.
Reg. No. 13007 (L. 1301). Retouched flake with two notches shaped by retouch.
Reg. No. 13073 (L. 1301); Reg. No. 6336 (L. 623). Flakes with signs of retouch and sheen.
DISCUSSION
Rectangular and triangular sickle blades can be assigned to the period from the Middle Bronze to the
Iron Age I (Rosen 1983). It should be noted that sickle blades resembling those from Shiloh were found
at other sites, such as Gezer, Lachish and Tel Harasim (Rosen 1986; Mozel1985; Friedmann 1991). In
this assemblage the fine denticulation on the cutting edge was always worked from the ventral to the
dorsal side. On 38 of the 46 tools sickle sheen was clearly discerned, attesting to extensive activity,
probably agricultural.
The sickle blades were inserted into a haft of bone or wood, or into the jawbone of an animal. A
triangular blade was inserted at the upper end of the sickle haft, furthest from the hand.
201
The widespread use of flint sickle blades even into the Iron Age was probably due to their relative
efficiency and low cost compared to sickle blades made of metaL
REFERENCES
Friedmann, E. 1991. The Flint Tools of Area E/3. In: Givon,S., ed. The First Season of Excavation at
'Tel Harasim' 1990: Preliminary Report 1. Tel Aviv. pp. 34-37. (Hebrew)
Mozel, I. 1983. A Reconstructed Sickle from Lachish. Tel Aviv 10:182-185.
Rosen, S.A. 1983. The Canaanean Blade and the Early Bronze Age./EJ 33:15-29.
Rosen, S.A. 1986. Note on the Gezer Flint Caches. In: Dever, W.G. eta/., eds. Gezer IV. Jerusalem. pp.
259-263.
202
CHAPTER 8
SCARABS AND OTHER GLYPTIC FINDS

Baruch Brandl*
The seventeen new glyptic finds described in this chapter join those previously found by the Danish
Expedition (Shiloh 1969: Nos. 58, 118, 194-196, 202). They are presented here in chronological order. In
conformity with editorial policy regarding chronological divisions the following terminology is used:
Middle Bronze I, Middle Bronze II and Middle Bronze III (MB I, MB II and MB III- Albright's MB
IIA, MB IIB and MB IIC respecti\rely).
Identifying data of each object include the field number, locus number, Area, Israel Antiquities
Authority registration number (IAA). Technical details include dimensions (L. length; W. width;
H.- height; D. -diameter; T.- thickness), material, general description, state of preservation and
quality of workmanship.
Typological details of the backs and sides of the scarabs are only given in unusmtl cases. Reference to
Tufnell's Design Classification (Brandll986:247, n. 4) is limited to the base. An attempt has been made
to list all excavated parallels from sites in the Levant as a basis for future studies. Parallels from
collections have been used when this has been the only comparative material available.
STRATUM VIII
1. Sea/impression (Fig. 8.1)
Reg. No. 14285; Locus 723; Area D; L~A No. Kl2800.
L. 17 mm., W. 11 mm.
Scarab impression in high relief made before firing on the upper part of handle of storage jar. Complete.
Mediocre workmanship.
Description. Two motifs are enclosed in a vertical oval frame. The lower is the Sm3 t3wi symbol which is
composed of lotus and papyrus plants tied around the hieroglyph Sm3 = 'to unite' (Gardiner
1973:465[F36]). This composite symbol means "Union of Upper and Lower Egypt".! The upper motif is
a horizontal oval, possibly the determinative for 'round' (Gardiner 1973:538[Z8]), containing an unclear
element. The element in the oval can perhaps be compared with that on a scarab from Qau in Egypt
* Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. The photographs were taken by Ilan Sztulman, Nahum Slapak and Yoram
Weinberg. The drawings were made by Carmen Hersch under the author's guidance. Refer to text for measurements where
no scale is given in the figures. The raw materials of the two seals found in Iron I loci of Stratum V were identified by
J'laomi Porat and Liora Kolska Horwitz (See Chapter 9: Appendices 1, 2).
1. For comprehensive bibliography see Brandll985:182.
203
Fig. 8.1: Seal impression 14285.
(Brunton 1930: Pl. 19:61) which has two vertical lines near the edges and two horizontal curved lines in
the central zone.
Typology. The scarab from which this impression was made belongs to Tufnell's Design Class 3Al
(Ward 1978:72-74, Fig 16; Tufnell 1984:117, Pl. 7).
Date. The scarab can be dated to the MB III on the basis of design and excavated parallels.
The Sm3 t3wi symbol has a long duration in Egypt, from the First Intermediate Period to the 18th
Dynasty (Ward 1978:72-74; Tufnell1984:117).
The Shiloh impression has a shorter duration. It post-dates the First Intermediate Period since it has
an additional element- the oval (Ward 1978:72-74).
Ovals appear on Egyptian scarabs from the end of the 12th Dynasty and during the Second
Intermediate Period (Ward 1978:72-73, Fig. 16:9-10). They enclose various motifs: a spiral from Kahun
(Petrie 1890:Pl. 10:37 = Ward 1978:73), Uronarti (Reisner and Wheeler 1930:Fig. 8:15[X-45] and
Dendera (Petrie 1900:Pl. 20); an inner 'H' from Uronarti (Reisner 1955:Fig. 11:271[53]; the hieroglyph
njrfrom the Cairo Museum (Newberry 1907:101, Pl. 11:36402).
Levantine parallels seem to exist only in the MB III. Ovals enclosing four semicircles were found at
Tell el cAjjul (Petrie 1934: Pl. 5:93) and Byblos (Dunand 1950, 1954 and 1958:175, Pl. 200[No. 8166]).
The hieroglyph Cn~ in the oval comes from Tomb 4021 at Hazor (Hazar III-IV: Pls. 236:13, 318:4 =
Hazar III-IV text: 128).
Therefore it seems to me that the Shiloh seal impression was made from a contemporary MB III
scarab.
Context. The handle was found in a clear Stratum VIII context.
204
STRATUM VII
2. Scarab (Fig. 8.2)
Reg. No. 7257; Locus 723; Area D; IAA No. Kll279.
L. 26 mm.; W. 17 mm.; H. 10 mm.
Steatite. Carved, drilled, glazed and mounted on a bronze ring. Complete but only a fragment of the
ring remains. Good workmanship.
Description. The decoration on the base can be divided into three components:
1. Rope border.
2. Symmetrical design composed of two twisted ropes connected at four points by short bars and
baseless triangles.
3. A central X design flanked by a stroke in each of the other two areas created by the rope intersections.
Typology. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's Design Classes 6B2a and 8A (1984:126, Pl. 24 and ibid.:13l,
Pl. 34 respectively) and reflects the Hyksos style. It seems to me that the Shiloh scarab does not fall
precisely within the former design class since it has two X crosses instead of one. These create, together
with the two vertical bars, an hexagon in the centre which is a very dominant feature. I suggest
classifying this pattern as a third sub-group of Design Class 6B2. The duration of this new class would
be limited to the beginning of the MB II-HI (Tufnell 1984: 125-126).
Fig. 8.2: Scarab 7257.
_ _ _ _...;1cm.
205
Date. The Shiloh scarab can be dated to the MB II-III, or the beginning of the MB III both by design
and excavated parallels.
The design belongs to the early period of Hyksos scarabs.
Egyptian parallels are of little value since all are unprovenanced. They are in collections in London
(Petrie 1925:PL 8:145-146), Basel (Hornung and Staehelin 1976:358, Pl. 95[No. 855]) and Moscow
(Hodjache 1979:301, 304, Pls. 17-18[No. 22]).
Ten excavated parallels are known from Canaan; they differ in some small details. Three were found
at Gezer (Macalister 1905:188-189, Pl. 1:1; Gezer l/:316 [No. 100], 328 [No. 368]). One comes from
Shechem (Sellin 1927:208, Pl. 20a), one from Tell el-Farcah (S) (Petrie 1930: Pl. 22:214 [T. 580]), two
from Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1931: Pl. 13:62; Petrie 1934:Pl. 9:296), two from Jericho Tomb 9 (Garstang
1932: Pl. 37:48) and Tomb B47 (Kirkbride 1965:653-654, Fig. 303:6) and one from Tel Michal (Giveon
1988:98-99, Pl. 8:117).
Most of these scarabs were found in MB II-III contexts and the others attributed to that period. The
Shiloh scarab should be dated early in the MB III on the basis of the complexity of its design. This fits
well with the excavator's observations.
Context. The Shiloh scarab was found in the white layer (Layer 4) of the glacis.2

Reg. No. 15126; Locus 1527; Area F; IAA No. K12334.
L. 19 mm.; W. 13 mm.; H. 8.5 mm.
Steatite. Greenish glaze. Perforated, drilled from both ends. Complete. Chipped on left side. Good
workmanship.
Description. In a vertical oval that serves as a frame are eleven hieroglyphs: nbw, ~pr, two rjd columns,
two t columns, two Cn~ colums, two rifr columns and b/. It seems to me that the hieroglyphs are
arranged in both vertical and horizontal symmetry; note the balance of the nbw and f!/. Evidently, the
hieroglyphs are used only as components of a design that is characterized by symmetry and harmony.
The back of the scarab is decorated with a lotus flower, the double suture (Ward 1978: frontispiece)
serving as stalk.
______ ......1cm.
Fig. 8.3: Scarab 15126.
2. (Editor's note) A large quantity of pottery and bones found in the tower layer of the glacis was identified as refuse of the
pre-walled settlement at the site (Chapter 13). No other finds, not even sherds, were retrieved from the upper four layers of
the glacis except for Scarab 7257. Hence it is reasonable to assume that it belonged to one of the people who laid the glacis
rather than to the inhabitants of the earlier settlement.
206
Typology. The scarab belongs to Tufnell's Design Class 3A3. At the same time it joins a relatively small
group of scarabs with decorated backs (Tufnell 1970: esp. 97, Fig. 1: 17).
Date. The closest parallels with lotus flowers on the back come from Tell el-cAjjul Tomb 1410 of the
'Courtyard Cemetery' (Petrie 1932: Pl. 7:106), Lachish Cave 4004 (Lachish IV:120, Pl. 36:215) and Tell
Nagila Tomb DT 2 (Amiran and Eitan 1965:120, Pl. 15:6).
Parallels with hieroglyphs as part of a symmetric design are numerous, the most recently published is
from Tel Halif (Seger et al. 1990:26, Fig. 19).
Such designs and type of back are unquestionably in the Hyksos style.
Context. The scarab was found in a clear MB III context.

Reg. No. 17317; Locus 1713 (=1527); Area F; IAA No. Kl2348.
L. 14.75 mm.; W. 10.25 mm.; H. 6.75 mm.
Steatite. Yellowish glaze. Perforated, drilled from both ends. Complete. Chipping on both sides of the
perforation suggests that the scarab had a ring. Mediocre workmanship.
Description, In a vertical oval that serves as a border are, from top to bottom, dsrt "Red Crown of
Lower Egypt" (Gardiner 1973:504[S3]) set on its side with what seems to be an uraeus in front, nbw
(Gardiner 1973:505[S12]), and ~3st (Gardiner 1973:488[N25]).
Typology. This combination of hieroglyphic signs does not form intelligible words. Therefore it should
be regarded as a design scarab and classified in Tufnell's Design Class 3A3 (1984:118, Pl. 8).
Fig. 8.4: Scarab 17317.

------- 1cm.
Date. According to Tufnell, the side and back indicate a MB II-III date.
No exact parallels are known but two scarabs which contain the same hieroglyphs with additions
point to a MB III date. One was found in Tomb 3070 of Stratum X at Megiddo (Megiddo II: Pl.
151:121) and the other was uncovered in Tomb J14 at Jericho (Kirkbride 1965:610-611, Fig. 288:7).
Context. The scarab was found in a clear MB III context.
5. Seal impression (Fig. 8.5)

Reg. No. 15367; Locus 1527; Area F; IAA No. Kll273.
L. 18.5 mm.; W. 14 mm
Very deep scarab impression in high relief made before firing on upper part of handle of storage jar.
Inverted. Complete. Good workmanship.
207
I
I
I
I
I
,,,);
y Fig. 8.5: Seal impression 15367.
Description. A vertical oval encircles a scene depicting a kneeling woman with a knee-length full skirt
and long hair. Her left hand is free while from her right hand an uraeus emerges, below which is another.
The two uraei create a vertical symmetry with the woman (cf. Lachish IV:Pl. 39:325). At the bottom is
the hieroglyph nb that serves as an exergue. The woman's dress and the nb sign are hatched, while the
uraei are cross-hatched.

Typology. The scarab from which this impression was made belongs to Tufnell's Design Class 10Clc
(1984: Pl. 46:2816).
Date. Tufnell (1973:78) dated Design Class 10 to the 13th-15th Dynasties, more specifically to the end of
this time-span (Tufnell 1984: 193).
The hatching and cross-hatching are typical of Hyksos scarabs (cf. Brandl 1984:60, Fig. 19:2, Pl.
46:2).
The closest parallel was found in Tomb Hl3 at Jericho, which belongs to Kenyon's Group V (Kirkbride
1965:648-649, Fig. 301:9).
Context. The impression was found in a clear MB III context in the same room as Objects 3 and 4
above.
208
6. Sealing (Fig. 8.6)

Reg. No. 15125/5; Locus 1526; Area F; IAA No. K12349.
Sealing L. 20 mm.; W. 17 mm.; H. 12 mm.; Impression L. 17 mm.; W. 14 mm.
Brown clay. Inverted scarab impression on sealing attaching one of the button handles and the tying
cords of a wooden box. The diameter of the string is 3.5-4.5 mm. Partial. Attempted repair evident.
Good workmanship.
Description. A composition of hieroglyphs and symbols in a horizontal oval divided into three panels.
The central panel contains six hieroglyphs (r, n, c, ~c used phonetically with two duplicated). 3 On both
sides of the central column is a floral motif that is perpendicular to the hieroglyphs. It consists of two
palm branches flanked by clumps of papyrus with drooping buds that could be interpreted as t3 m}Jw,
____
...__ 1cm
Fig. 8.6: Sealing 15125.
3. These signs give the impression of an inscription but it is clear from the many parallels that their use was purely decorative.
209
'Lower Egypt' or the Delta (Gardiner 1973:48l[M15,Ml6]; Leibovitch 1955:14, Fig. 6:6; Kirkbride
1965:618,620, Fig. 291:5). This combination is common and appears on scarabs from Jericho (Kirkbride
1965:Fig. 291:5), Ruweise (Tufnell 1984: Pl. 7;1299), Tell el-cAjjul (Tufnell 1984:Pl. 7: 1307, 1309,
1312-1313) and Nazareth (Bagatti 1969:260, 315, Figs. 209:1, 211:14).
Typology. The sealing was impressed by a scarab of Tufnell's Design Classes IE3, 3C and 3El (Tufnell
1984:116, Pl. 3; 121, Pl. 16; 122, Pl. 19 respectively). It belongs to the type that was used to seal doors or
boxes. 4 Unlike Aegean (Wieneke 1976: Fig. 1) or Iranian sealings (Marcus 1989:Fig. 6a-c), it did not
cover the whole peg or button but was only attached to one of its sides like that in the tomb of Meket-Re
at Thebes (Winlock 1955: Fig. 69:c) and other tombs (Freed 1982:201 [No. 233]). It seems that this
tradition of sealing doors or boxes was still practised in Iron Age II Judah (Avigad 1990:265-266, Pl.
28:C-E).
Date. The central column of hieroglyphs belongs to the large group of scarabs containing the an ra
formula, typical of the Hyksos period (Murray 1949:95-97, Pl. 12; Tufnell 1984: 121). The additions to
the t3 ml}w motif are also typical of Hyksos scarabs.
The orthography of then in the shape of a comb is characteristic of the Hyksos an ra formula (TufneH
1984:121).
All the parallels mentioned above were from well-dated MB III contexts.
Context. The sealing was found in Room 1526, adjoining that in which Objects 3, 4 and 5 were found.
7. Seal impression (Fig. 8. 7)

L. 11 mm.; W. 7.5 mm.
Scarab impression made before firing set diagonally on upper part of handle of storage jar. Complete.
Mediocre workmanship.
Fig. 8. 7: Seal impression 17053.
4. The reconstruction of the box was based on contemporary material from Jericho (Ricketts !960) and the reconstruction of
the method of sealing is based on the material from the tomb of Meket-Re at Thebes (Winlock 1955: Fig. 69:C).
210
Description. The scarab which was used to make this impression had no inner border line (cf. Tufnell
1984:Pl. 27:2197). A vertical twisted rope pattern in the centre is flanked on each side by two semicircles.
Typology. The scarab from which this seal impression was made belongs to Tufnell's Design Class 6C3
(1984:127, Pl. 27).
Date. This seal impression could be dated on the basis of design only. Two close parallels are known,
one from Tell el-Yehudiyeh and the other from Gezer (Brandll986:247, No. 1). Both are related to the
Hyksos period, although they do not come from well-dated contexts.
Context. The impression was found in a clear MB III context, which confirms the dating of the above
parallels.
8. Two seal impressions5 (Fig. 8.8)

Reg. No. 3398; Locus 335; Area C; IAA No. K11318.
L. 14 mm.; W. 9 mm.
Impressions of the same scarab, mounted in metal, made before firing on upper part of both handles of a
storage jar. Complete, but part of the design covered by the setting. Mediocre workmanship.
Description. The centre contains a scroll design. The surround, apparently covered by the setting (cf.
Tufnell1984:130, Pl. 33), would be wide enough to accommodate a rope border.
Typology. The combination of scrolls within a rope border is typical of Jericho (Tufnell1984: 130).
Date. Since the design is not sufficiently clear, the impression should be dated by the vessel which is
typical of the MB III.
Context. The storage jar was found in Iron I Building 335, standing in a row with collared-rim pithoi
(see Figs. 2.9-10, 12; 6.49:2, 6.65:1).6

Reg. No. 10053; Locus 1012; Area H; IAA No. Kl1278.
L. 23.5 mm.; W. 16 mm.; T. 10 mm.
Steatite. Perforated, drilled from both ends. Complete except for damaged base. Good workmanship.
Description. A horizontal oval with a scene depicting a large figure of a lion standing on a fallen figure
of a female wearing a long dress. A palm branch appears between the lion's hind legs. Both the body of
the lion and the female's dress are hatched.
On the back of the scarab there is a stripe of greenish glaze. It is not clear whether this was done
intentionally or is a result of weathering. However, such stripes can be seen on Hyksos scarabs (e.g.
Ben-Tor 1989:69 [No. 32]) including one from Tell el-c Ajjul (Petrie l934:Pl. 11:402).
Typology. This scarab belongs to Tufnell 's Design Classes 9E and 1OA 1 (1984: 133-134, Pl. 40 and 135,
Pl. 43 respectively).
Date. The design is typical of the later part of the Hyksos period (Tufnell 1984: 133).
The hatching and cross-hatching on the lion's body and the hatching on the female's dress are in
typical Hyksos style.
Parallels were found at Tell el-Farcah (S) (Petrie 1930: Pl. 7:54), Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1933: Pl. 35),
Jericho Tombs 21 and 30 (Rowe 1936:82, Pl. 8:317; 20, Pl. 2:69 respectively) and Tomb B47 (Kirkbride
1965:653,655, Fig. 303:16) and Lachish Cave 4004 (Lachish IV:l20, Pl. 36:215; see discussion Object 3).
5. Only a photograph and a drawing of this impression were seen by the author.
6. (Editor's note) Such storage jars are not known in the Iron I but its shape and the rope decoration on the shoulder resemble
Middle Bronze vessels. It seems therefore that a Middle Bronze storage jar was found intact and reused in the Iron I.
211
Context. This scarab was found in a section outside the wall. It should however be related to the MB III
stratum.
Fig. 8.9: Scarab 10053.

____
....... 1cm.
Fig. 8.8: Fig. 8.10:

One of the seal Seal impression 17328.
impressions of storage
____
jar 3398.
......_ lcm
2
10. Seal impression? (Fig. 8.10)

Reg. No. 17328; Surface near Area F.
L. 15 mm.; W. 11 mm.
Impression of a scarab, probably mounted in a ring, on body sherd of storage jar. Complete. Setting
covered right edge. Good workmanship.
7. Seen. 5 above.
212
Description. The impression depicts a naked female with palm branches on each side, assuming the
setting covered the right side of the scarab.

Typology. The scarab from which the impression was made belongs to Tufnell's Design Class lODl
(1984:138:Pl. 48; cf. Schroer 1989:96-111 [Nos. 3-34]).
Date. Human figures on scarabs appeared late in the Middle Bronze Age. The design of the naked
goddess is dated to the MB III (Tufnell1984:140).
In the MB III there was a fashion of impressing scarabs on other parts of the vessels besides the
handles, such as the lower part of the walls (Dothan 1973:8-9, Fig. 3:13, Pl. 3:D) or on the plastic rope
decoration (Dothan 197 6: 17-19, Fig. 17: 1).
Context. Most of the excavated parallels (Schroer 1989) were found in good MB III contexts. The
Shiloh impression should therefore be dated to that period.

Reg. No. 16050; Locus 1607; Area E; IAA No. Kll275.
L. 15 mm.; W. 10 mm.
Scarab impression made before firing on handle of storage jar. Effaced. Mediocre workmanship.
Description. Illegible.
Typology. Cannot be determined.
Date. Based on the type of jar handle, this could have originated in either the Middle or Late Bronze
Age.
Context. The handle was found in a mixed context.
STRATUM VI
Reg. No. 14001; Locus 1440; Area D; IAA No. K11276.
L. 34 mm.; H. 20 mm.
Cylinder-seal impression on the upper part of a handle of krater (cf. Mallet 1988:301, Pl. 84:10). The
seal, possibly made of faience (Collon 1987:61), was rolled from left to right. There is duplication of a
short section due to aborted start. Lower part of the scene missing. Mediocre workmanship.
Description. Between two horizontal lines a ritual scene (Teissier 1984:92) depicts a standing worshipper
with a long robe (for the robe cf. Hazor III-IV: Pl. 319:3-4; Schaeffer-Forrer et al. 1983:99, 113 [R.S.
8.349 and 14.115]), a sacred tree, recumbent antelope and a floral panel.
Typology. The style of the elements and their combination as well as the ample use of the drill (Collon
1987:65) are characteristic of the Mitannian 'Popular Style' (Frankfort 1939:279-280).8
8. Also known as Porada's 'Common Style'(l947:ll-13) or Kantor's 'Depleted Style'(see Beck 1967:2; Mazar 1978:10).
213
214
I
\
\
/
Fig. 8.12:
Cylinder-seal impression 14001.
Date. The Shiloh impression can be dated to the LB II and specifically to the 13th century B.C. E. on the
basis of style and excavated parallels.
Mitannian-style seals of this type were still being produced in the west even after the fall of Mitanni
(Mazar 1978:11; cf. Beck 1967:72, 116).
Parallels are known only from Canaan and the Syrian coast (Mazar 1971; Beck 1967: Fig. 168) from
13th century B.C.E. contexts. The closest parallel to the Shiloh impression comes from Ugarit
(Schaeffer-Forrer et al. 1983:145[R.S. 2.167]).
Context. The clear Stratum VI context corroborates the above dating.

Reg. No. 10127; Surface near Area H; IAA No. K11280.
L. 16.25 mm.; W. 12 mm.; H. 7 mm.
Steatite. Yellowish glaze. Perforated, drilled from both ends. Complete. Small chip in left side of base.
Good workmanship.
Description. In a vertical oval frame are five signs. From top to bottom these are: winged sun disc, Cpy
(Faulkner 1962:41), mn and two antithetic iCrt (uraei) pendant from a rjd column.
Typology. This can be grouped with other Design scarabs.
Date. This scarab can be dated to the 19th Dynasty on the basis of two parallels. One from Deir el-Balah
shows a winged sun disc (Petrie 1934 Pl. 11:438). The other, from Tomb 981 at Tell el-Farcah (S)
(Starkey and Harding 1932: Pl. 57:338), has the combination of the rjd column and two uraei.
Context. Although found on the surface, this scarab should be assigned to Stratum VI.
___
...._ 1cm.
Fig. 8.13: Scarab 10127.

STRATUMV
L. 15.5 mm.; W. 11.5 mm.
Impression of a scarab, probably mounted in metal, made before firing on the lower part of handle of
storage jar. Partial. Mediocre workmanship.
Description. Within a horizontal oval is a marching lion or sphinx with its tail curled over its back. The
head is indistinct.
Typology. This is a common motif in New Kingdom scarabs.
215
Date. The motif itself has a long life (for the Iron II see, for instance, Hazor II: Pls. 89:5, 102:23, 142:5).
This impression can be dated to the Iron I since the handle is that of a collared-rim pithos.
Context. The handle was found in a mixed context.
15. Seal (Fig. 8.15)

D. 40 mm.; H. 11 mm.
Basalt (see Appendix 2, Chapter 9). Perforated, drilled from both ends. Complete. Good workmanship.
Description. The shape of this round seal with a gabled back is very unusual.
Two quadrupeds, most probably ibex, form a central cross. The rest of the space is occupied by two
recumbent horned quadrupeds, a head and neck of an ibex and another of a young gazelle, and a
triangle.
Typology. This seal resembles two smaller conical seals from Tell el-Farcah (N) (de Vaux 1955:581-582,
Fig, 18:F3086; de Vaux 1955:581-582, Fig. 18:F2939).9
Date. de Vaux dated the above seals to the Iron Age I.
Context. The Shiloh seal was found in a clear Iron I context. It thus strengthens the original dating of
the Tell el-Farcah (N) parallels.
9. For details on this class of seals see Keel (1985:33-38).
216
Fig. 8.15: Seal4083.
16. Seal (Fig. 8.16)

W. 32 mm.; estimated H. 21 mm.; T. 21 mm.
A truncated pyramid made by two diagonal cuttings of a bone (see Appendix 1, Chapter 9). Broken.
Good workmanship.
217
Description. On the base is a chariot scene. It seems that the engraver prepared a panel with two
horizontal lines, but because of bad planning the figure's head and the horse's ears protrude above the
upper border. The sides are pierced and decorated with two pairs of lines. It seems that after being
broken, the break was polished and a semicircle drilled to stabilize the string to which the seal was
attached.
Typology. The Shiloh seal joins a small group of bone seals from Beth-shemesh (Grant 1932:82-83, Pl.
48:1108; 1934:43, 51, Fig. 3:19).
Date. The Beth-shemesh seals were dated to the Iron Age I.
Context. The seal was found in a clear Iron I context. It therefore corroborates the date of the
Beth-shemesh seals.
Fig. 8.16: Seal6189.
218
17. Potter's mark (Fig. 8.17)

Reg. No. 6084/ 1; Locus 617; Area C; IAA No. Kl2802.
W. 41 mm.; H. 28 mm.
Incised on the lower part of a handle of storage jar before firing. Complete. Good workmanship.
Description. The rectangular mark is divided into six almost equal squares.
Typology. The Shiloh potter's mark joins a large group of similar designs found in many periods.
Date. Since such marks appear from the Early Bronze to the Iron II (Hazor l/:Pls. 89:5, 102:23), this
find should be dated by the vessel. The handle seems to be from a collared-rim pithos.
Context. The handle was found in a clear Iron I context.
Fig. 8.17: Potter's mark

6084.
CONCLUSIONS
The number of glyptic finds from Shiloh has increased four-fold. Additional Middle and Late Bronze
Age items augment the variety from those periods and new finds from the Iron Age I can now be added
to the corpus. In all cases they represent a local industry.
In many instances the Shiloh objects are accura1ely dated by their context and thus reinforce the
dating of their parallels.
REFERENCES
Amiran, R. and Eitan, A. 1965. A Canaanite-Hyksos City at Tell Nagila. Archaeology 18:113-123.
Avigad, N. 1990. Two Hebrew 'Fiscal' Bullae. IEJ 40:262-266.
Bagatti, B. 1969. Excavations in Nazareth. Jerusalem.
219
Beck, P. 1967. Problems in the Glyptic Art of Palestine (Ph.D. thesis). Ann Arbor.
Ben-Tor, D. 1989. The Scarab: A Reflection of Ancient Egypt. Israel Museum Catalogue 303. Jerusalem.
Brandl, B. 1984. A Scarab, Two Seal Impressions and a Cowroid. In: Stern, E. Excavations at Tel
Mevorakh (1973-1976). Part Two: The Bronze Age. Qedem 18. Jerusalem. pp. 60-61.
Brandl, B. 1985. Appendix E: An Egyptian Clay Sealing from En Shadud. In Braun, E. et al. En Shadud
Salvage Excavations at a Farming Community in the Jezreel Valley, Israel. BAR S249. Oxford.
pp. 182-186.
Brandl, B. 1986. Appendix B: The Scarabs from Field VI at Gezer. In: Dever, W.G., ed. Gezer IV: The
1969-1971 Seasons in Field VI, The "Acropolis'~ Jerusalem. pp. 247-257.
Brunton, G. 1930. Qau and Badari Ill. London.
Chambon, A. 1984. Tell el-Farcah I: L'age du Fer. Editions recherche sur les civilizations 31. Paris.
Collon, D. 1987. First Impressions. Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East British Museum
Publications. London.
Dothan, M. 1973. The Foundation of Tel Morand Tel Ashdod. A Chapter in the Relationship between
a,Metropolis and its Harbour. IEJ23:1-17.
Dothan, M. 1976. Akko: Interim Excavation Report First Season, 1973/4. BASOR 224:1-48.
Dunand, M. 1950, 1954 and 1958. Fouilles de Byblos, Tome II. 1933-1938. Paris.
Faulkner, R.O. 1962. A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian. Oxford.
Frankfort, H. 1939. Cylinder Seals. London.
Freed, R.E. 1992. Trinket Box. In: Brovarski, E., Doll, S.K. and Freed, R.E., eds. Egypt's Golden Age:
The Art of Living in the New Kingdom 1558-1085 B.C. Museum of Fine Arts Catalogue. Boston.
pp. 201 (No. 233).
Gardiner, A. 1973. Egyptian Grammar. London.
Garstang, J. 1932. Jericho: City and Necropolis. Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 19:3-22,
35-54.
Gezer I-III. Macalister, R.A.S. 1912. The Excavations of Gezer, 1902-1905 and 1907-1909. Vols. I-III.
London.
Giveon, R. 1985. Egyptian Scarabsfrom Western Asiafrom the Collections of the British Museum.
OB03.
Giveon, R. 1988. Scarabs from Recent Excavations in Israel. OBO 83.
Grant, E. 1932. Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine) 1928-1929-1930-1931. Part II. Haverford.
Grant, E. 1934. Rumeileh being Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Part Ill. Haverford.
Hazor II. Yadin, Y. et al. 1960. Hazor II. An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956.
Jerusalem.
Excavations, 1957-1958 (Plates). Jerusalem.
Hazor III-IV text. Yadin et al. 1989. Hazor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of
Hodjache, S.I. 1979. Principes fondamentaux dans l'etude des scarabees egyptiens ornementes. In:
Reinecke, W.F. ed. Acts, First International Congress of Egyptology, Cairo, October 2-10, 1976.
Berlin. pp. 279-305.
Hornung, E. and Staehelin, E. 1976. Skarabiien und andere Siegelamulette aus Basler Sammlungen.
Mainz.
Keel, 0. 1985. Bildtrager aus Palastina/ Israel und die besondere Bedeutung der Miniaturkunst. In:
220
Keel, 0. and Schroer, S. Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln aus Paliistinaj Israel Band I. OBO 67. pp.
7-47.
Kirkbride, D. 1965. Appendix E: Scarabs. In: Kenyon, K.M. et al. Excavations at Jericho. Vol. II' The
Tombs Excavated in 1955-8. London. pp. 580-655.
Lachish IV. Tufnell, 0. et al. 1958. Lachish IV, (Tell ed-Duweir): The Bronze Age. London.
Leibovitch, J. 1955. Description of the Scarabs Found in a Cemetery near Tel Aviv. Atiqot 1:13-18
(English Series).
Macalister, R.A.S. 1905. Twelfth Quarterly Report on the Excavation of Gezer. PEFQSt 37:183-199.
Mallet, J. 1988. Tell el-Farcah, 2: Le Bronze moyen. Editions recherche sur les civilisations 66. Paris.
Marcus, M.I. 1989. Emblems of Authority, The Seals and Sealings from Hasanlu IV B. Expedition
31:53-63.
Mazar, A. 1971. Cylinder Seals from Bretz-Israel in the Second Millennium BC (unpublished M.A.
thesis). The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Mazar, A. 1978. Cylinder-Seals ofthe Middle and Late Bronze Ages in Bretz-Israel. Qadmoniot 9:6-14.
(Hebrew)
Megiddo /!.Loud. G. 1948. Megiddo IL Seasons of 1935-39. Chicago.
Murray, M.A. 1949. Some Canaanite Scarabs. PEQ 81:92-99.
Newberry, P.E. 1907. Scarab-shaped Seals. Catalogue general des antiquites egyptiennes du Musee du
Caire Nos. 36001-37521. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1890. Kahun, Garob and Hawara. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1900. Dendereh, 1898. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1925. Buttons and Design Scarabs. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1930. Beth Pelet /(Tell Para). London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1931. Ancient Gaza /. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1932. Ancient Gaza II. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1933. Ancient Gaza Ill. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1934. Ancient Gaza IV. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Porada, E. 1947. Seal Impressions ofNuzi. AASOR 24. New Haven.
Reisner, G.A. 1955. Clay Sealings of Dynasty XIII from Uronarti Fort. Kush 3:26-69.
Reisner, G.A. and Wheeler, N.F. 1930. The Art of Seal Carving in Egypt in the Middle Kingdom.
Bulletin of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts 28:47-55.
Ricketts, M. 1960. Appendix B: Furniture from the Middle Bronze Age Tombs. In: Kenyon, K.M. et al.
Excavations at Jericho I: The Tombs Excavated in 1952-4. London. pp. 527-534.
Rowe, A. 1936. A Catalogue of Egyptian Scarabs, Scaraboids, Seals and Amulets in the Palestine
Archaeological Museum. Cairo.
Schaeffer-Forrer, C.F.-A. et al. 1983. Corpus des cylindres-Sceaux de Ras Shamra- Ugarit et d'Enkomi-
Alasia. Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations 13. Paris.
Schroer, S. 1989. Die Gottin auf den Stempelsiege1n aus Palastina/Israel. In: Keel, 0., Keel-Leu, H. and
Schroer, S. 1989. Studien zu den Stempelsiegeln Aus Paliistinaj Israel Band II. OBO 88. pp. 1-38.
Seger, J.D. et al. 1990. The Bronze Age Settlements at Tell Halif: Phase II Excavations, 1983-1987.
BASOR Supplement 26:1-32.
Sellin, E. 1927. Die Ausgrabung von Sichem. Kurze vorlaufige Mitteilung tiber die Arbeit im Frlihjahr
1927. ZDPV 50:205-211, 265-274.
221
Starkey, J.L. and Harding, G.L. 1932. Beth Pelet Cemetery. In: Macdonald, E., Starkey, J.L. and
Harding, G.L. Beth Pelet II. London.
Teissier, B. 1984. Ancient Near Eastern Cylinder Seals from the Marcopoli Collection. Berkeley.
Tufnell, 0. 1970. Archaeological Notes A: Some Scarabs with Decorated Backs. Levant 2:95-99.
Tufnell, 0. 1973. The Middle Bronze Age Scarab-Seals from Burials on the Mound at Megiddo. Levant
5:69-82.
Tufnell, 0. 1984. Studies on Scarab Seals. Vol. II: Scarab Seals and Their Contribution to History in
the Early Second Millennium B. C. Warminster.
de Vaux, R. 1955. Les fouilles de Tell el-Farca pres Naplouse. Cinquieme campagne. Raport preliminaire.
RB 62:541-589.
Ward, W.A. 1978. Studies on Scarab Seals. Vol. I: Pre-12th Dynasty Scarab Amulets. Warminster.
Wieneke, M.H. 1976. Clay Sealings from Shechem, the Sudan, and the Aegean. JNES 35:127-130.
Winlock, H.E. 1955. Models of Daily Life in Ancient Egypt: From the Tomb of Meket-Re at Thebes.
Cambridge, Mass.
222
CHAPTER9
CLAY, BONE, METAL AND STONE OBJECTS

Baruch Brandl*
This chapter treats 53 objects. They are grouped by raw materials and within these by strata. The reader
is referred to the appendices to this chapter which deal with the identification of the bones and stones.
In conformity with editorial policy regarding chronological divisions for this report the following
terminology is used: Middle Bronze I, Middle Bronze II and Middle Bronze III (MB I, MB II and MB
III= Albright's MB IIA, MB liB and MB IIC respectively).
Identifying data of each object include the field number, locus number, Area, Israel Antiquities
Authority registration number (IAA). Technical details include dimensions (L. -length; W. width;
H.- height; D.- diameter; T.- thickness), description of the material, manufacturing technique and
state of preservation.
CLAY OBJECTS
STRATUM VIII
1./bex-shapedjug spout (Figs. 9.1; 9.7:1-2)
Reg. No. 14186/2; Locus 1428; Area D; IAA No. K11292.
L. 8.8 em.
Hand-made; incised and shaved. Well-fired clay with a reddish-pink surface. No traces of slip.
Fragmentary.
Description. The fragment was found in four sections and joined together. It represents the head and
neck of an ibex. The mouth and nose are missing and the eyes, ears and horns are broken. All are
applied. One of the bulges of each horn has survived, allowing the animal to be identified. The ears are
tense and the eyes are open; the eyebrows are stretched around the eyeballs. The pupil is elongated and
thus the angle of the neck could be determined.
Typology. On the basis of the angle of the neck and the long horns the hollow fragment can be identified
as part of a decorated spout of a jug rather than as part of a zoomorphic vessel.
Very few vessels of this type are known from Middle Bronze Age Canaan. One was found at Megiddo
(Megiddo II: Pls. 51:11, 133:23) and the other was apparently unearthed in Garstang's excavations at
* Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem. Most of the photographs of the Shiloh objects were taken by Han Sztulman. The
drawings were made by Carmen Hersch under the author's guidance. Yuval Goren prepared the thin sections for microscopic
analysis. I am indebted to Orit Shamir for valuable discussions on the subject of textile technology.
223
2 4
Fig. 9.1: Ibex-shaped jug spout 14186: 1-4)- different views; 5) reconstruction.
Jericho (Vincent 1935:592, Pl. 26:4). A similar vessel from a private collection has recently been exhibited
in Tel Aviv (Ziffer 1990:88*, Fig. 44*).
Date. The jug fragment from Megiddo was an isolated find in Tomb 2107, which is ascribed to Stratum
IX (Megiddo Il:164). The tomb is located on the edge of the excavation of Area BB [Sq. Nl4] (Megiddo
/I: Fig. 401), hence its stratigraphic setting is not clear (cf. Megiddo II: Figs. 390-405). Therefore the
date of the jug may be pushed back to Stratum X or even earlier. The Jericho jug was found in one of the
storerooms and can be dated to the MB III on typological grounds, as can the third vessel mentioned
above.
Context: Found in the MB III glacis.
STRATUM VII
2. Bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel (Figs. 9.2, 9.3, 9.7:3-7)
Reg. No. 15177; Locus 1522; Area F; IAA No. Kl2331.
L. ca. 21 em.; W. 7.4 em.; H. 19.5 em.
Combination wheel made and hand-made. Slipped, burnished and painted. Plastic additions. Broken.
Description. Cylindrical wheel-made body. The chest was hand-made. The legs are solid and hand-made;
the hooves were not preserved. After the legs were attached to the body, they were shaved. Of the
224
I
I
I
I
l
I
i
I
//
Fig. 9.2:
____________________________
Bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel 15177.

\
I
\
\
~------)
I
I
/
I
3cm.
\
---------------------------~
"--~-/
\
,I
I
I.J
II
\
I
d
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
/
l__j
I I I
,,
\
\
I
\
lI __ _jI
\
225
animal's sexual organs only the scrotum survived (cf. Dunand 1950 and 1958:805, Pl. 173[15848]). The
tail was not preserved. The neck was made of two laye~s; the inner one is a wheel-made cylinder, while
the outer is hand-made. In contrast to the schematic body, the neck is naturalistic, expressing the power
of the animal. The head is hand-made and hollow. The mouth is open and serves as the end of the spout.
The nostrils are indicated by two punctures. The eyes are plastic, each made of two buttons, the smaller
representing the eyeballs and the larger depicting the eyebrows. The horns are solid; their pointed ends
have been broken off. The ridge-shaped dewlap is hand-made as are the upright ears. The vessel has a
heavy yellowish-white slip that was well burnished. The entire vessel is painted in brownish-red stripes.
The symmetrical pattern resembles basketwork (cf. Dunand 1937 and 1939:276, Pl. 164[3932], wrongly
identified as a horse with a rider).
Typology. The object had one opening in the mouth and probably another in the back (see
reconstruction) and hence can be classified as a zoomorphic vessel.
Several bull-shaped vessels are known from Middle Bronze Canaan. A fragmentary vessel of an
unidentified animal with a 'vertical spout' on its back was found at Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM /:31, Pl. 8:3).
It is white slipped with remnants of red line painting. Albright suggested that the lines were part of a
harness, and that the animal may be identified as a horse and the 'vertical spout' as its rider. A head
fragment was found in Stratum XI at Megiddo (Megiddo II: Pl. 247:2); its dewlap can be recognized; the
eyes are plastic. A small bull-shaped vessel was found in a tomb at Amman (Harding 1953:18, Fig. 9:10,
Pl. 2: 105). That object too has a cream slip and traces of red painted decoration. Its dewlap was pierced
and the hole used for suspension. An almost complete zoomorphic vessel was found in a burial cave on
the Mount of Olives (Lemaire 1955:283-285, Figs. 9:5, 13:14; Saller 1964:158-159, Fig. 58:2, Pl. 34:6a-b).
The body is cylindrical with a funnel-shaped mouth close to the neck. It is white slipped. Both Lemaire
and Saller dated it to the Late Bronze Age, but its shape (see below) and decoration point to a Middle
~--·---·---- ----,,
I
, _________ - ,.-J
I
I
I
I
I
I
\_ ---------,
.,
I
Fig. 9.3: Reconstruction of bull-shaped

0 3cm
zoomorphic vessell5177. --=..--:::---='--"
226
Bronze Age date. Three fragments of zoomorphic vessels were found at Hazor (Hazar I:84, Pl. 93: 11,24;
Hazar II: Pl. 260:25; Hazar III-IV:223). All three belong to bull-shaped vessels, since their dewlaps are
prominent. An almost complete bull-shaped vessel was found at Tell Nagila (Amiran and Eitan 1964:198,
Pl. 18:4; 1965:121, Fig. 9). Its technical treatment seems to be the same as that of the Shiloh object. It
has an opening on the back, close to the tail, and its legs end in split hooves. It is red slipped and
burnished with black and white painting. A fragment of a zoomorphic vessel was found at Shechem
(Kerkhof 1969:80-81, Fig. 24:15). It should be identified as the head of a bull since the dewlap is
prominent. Like the Shiloh vessel, its neck was made of two layers and its eyes are plastic. Two
additional bull-shaped vessels may be added to the list. In both only the legs survived, the hooves
making it possible to identify the animal. The first leg was found at Hazor (Hazar III-IV: Pl. 244:8). It
was unearthed in surface soil and therefore dated to the MB II/ LB I Period. The second was found at
Tell el-Farcah (N) (Mallet 1988: Fig. 23:8, Pl. 81:8).
Discussion. It seems that there is a technical-typological difference between the Middle Bronze and later
zoomorphic vessels. Unlike the earlier ones, the later vessels always have a handle.
Bull-shaped vessels should be regarded as cult vessels. The two openings indicate that liquids were
poured into one and out of the other. Their shape suggests a connection with a Canaanite deity, most
probably a weather god. The limited number of animal types represented on such vessels negates
Macalister's suggestion that they served as lamps or feeding bottles ( Gezer II:239, Fig. 391 ).
The well-burnished white slip with brownish-red painting that appears on several of the above-
mentioned vessels intimates that perhaps they may be ascribed to the 'Chocolate-on-White' ware. It
should be noted that another Middle Bronze Age family - that of Tell el-Yehudiyeh - also has
zoomorphic vessels in its repertoire, although not bulls.
The modelling and shaving, the lack of handles, the red-burnishing on the Tell Nagila vessel and the
painting on others point to a possible northern origin, very probably in the Hittite lands. This was
already suggested by the publishers of the Tell Nagila vessel. Several lion and bull-shaped vessels with
two openings and no handle were found at two sites of the Karum Kanesh II period - Kiiltepe itself
(Akurgal and Hirmer 1962:39, Pl. 34) and Btiyiikkale (Hattusha) (Bittel1970:46, Pl.9).
Date. All the above items were found in well-dated MB II-III contexts.
3. Lid (Figs. 9.4:1, 9.8:1)

L. 11.65 em.; W. 7.35 em.; H. 4.65 em.
Brown surface. Hand-made. Incised and shaved. Complete.
Description. Oval with an incised border. A perforated handle is attached longitudinally to its upper
suface and a mark (x) is incised the base.
Typology. Clay lids are known as early as the Early Bronze Age. In many cases they are identical to
hemispherical bowls, but provided with a handle on the 'base' (Guy 1938: Pl. 60:25; Megiddo I: 170, Pis.
35:1-4, 64:2-4; Megiddo II: Pl. 255:6,8-9). Flat lids seem to appear later.
Parallels are known from Gezer (Gezer II:146; Gezer III: Pl. 144:6), Megiddo (Megiddo II: Pls.
255:7,10-11, 288:3), Shechem (Kerkhof 1969: Fig. 29:17) and Shiloh (Shiloh 1969:50, 81 Pl. 28:227).
Since no appropriate vessels to be covered by such lids were found at Shiloh, I it is possible that this type
of lid was used to cover the asymmetric mouth of gourds serving as vessels (cf. Schaeffer 1949: Fig.
I. For a similar situation see Gezer ll:l46; Gezer lll:Pl. 144:6.
227
76:1). It is feasible that the lid covered the vessel with the handle inside (cf. Gezer II: 140, Fig. 310) so that
the incised border was attached to the vessel's mouth, making the mark on its base visible.
Date. The above parallels cover a long period of time, from the Middle Bronze to the Iron Age. Two of
the Megiddo finds come from Middle Bronze Strata XII and XI (Megiddo II: Pls. 255:7, 288:3). The
Shiloh lids (see also No. 4 below) were found in the same MB III context and are well-dated both
typologically and archaeologically. It therefore seems that the date of a similar lid from the Danish
excavations (Shiloh 1969: 50, 81, Pl. 28:227) should be corrected.
3cm.
Fig. 9.4: Clay objects: 1) --Lid 15104; 2)- Lid 15136.
4. Lid (Figs. 9.4:2, 9.8:1)

L. 13 em.; W. 6.8 em.; H. 4.65 em.
See Object 3.
228
5. Kiln stopper (Figs. 9.5:1, 9.8:2)

Present L. 8 em.; estimated full L. ca. 12.7 em.; D. from 4.7x3.4 em. on the pointed edge, to ca. 11.3 em.
on its base.
Organic temper. Hand-made. Broken.
Description. Only the point of this conical object has survived. It seems that material for making
//.................
------------ .................................
/
/ ' ',
// '\
;' '\
(I
I
,
I
\
'
I
II
\ I 2
'\ I I
\ I
\
~'' /
/
-
.......... ........... ~----------"""'/
/
-----------------. , '
r/ \
I I
I I
I I
I I
\ I
\ j
\ I
\ I
\ I
\ I
\ \
\ .
.
3cm.
Fig. 9.5: Clay objects: 1) Kiln stopper 15107; 2) Relief plaque 7214; 3)- Votive ear 3030.
229
mud bricks was shaped into a cone. It is not a loom weight since it lacks the typical perforation near the
apex ( Gezer I/:74).

Typology. It seems thatthis object belongs to a group of clay stoppers that regulated the air flow
through the flues of kilns.
Such stoppers are known from Afula, Aphek (Kochavi and Beck 1985:25; 1986:6; Kochavi 1989:52-53;
Ayalon 1988:13 n. 17), Tell Qasile (Ayalon 1988:12-22, Ills. 18:3-4, 19), Nahariya (Singer-Avitz and Levi
1992:10*, n. 6)and possibly Gezer (op cit.).
Date. The stoppers from Tell Qasile and Nahariya are dated to the late MB I, while those from Aphek
and Afula (Dothan 1970:465; 1975:34-35) are dated to the MB II. The object from Shiloh is the first such
find from a good MB III context and thus represents the continued use of this technology. This stopper
hints at the possibility that there was a pottery kiln near the site during Stratum VII period.
STRATUM VI
Two objects should be attributed to this stratum on the basis of their typology despite the fact that they
were not found in Late Bronze loci.
6. Relief figurine (Figs. 9.5:2, 9.8:3)

L. 5.1 em.; W. 3.55 em.; T. 1.55 em.
Yellowish surface. Mould-made. Broken.
Description. Legs and pubic triangle of a female.
Typology. This object belongs to the group of mould-made and pared plaques of naked females typical
of the Late Bronze Age. They are called 'Hathor-Ashtoreth' plaques by Macalister ( Gezer III: PI. 221)
and 'Astarte figurines' or 'Astarte plaques' (Albright 1939; Pritchard 1943; Riis 1949; Conrad 1985).
Tadmor ( 1981; 1982a; 1982b) suggested classifying them into 'standing' and 'lying-on-bed' figurines. The
standing figurines, whose feet are either turned to one side or splayed,- are frequently associated with
divine attributes and therefore should be considered as representing deities. The second group, supine
with feet extended, seems to depict mortal women.
The figurine from Shiloh apparently belongs to the human group judging from the position of the legs
and the fact that the back of the object looks like a bed. Since no traces of hands are observable on either
side of the pubic zone (cf. Hazor I: Pl. 89: 15 = 160:22), it seems that the lady was holding her breasts.
The object was broken in two typical areas of weakness.
Similar fragments were found inter alia at Tell Beit Mirsim ( TBM II: Pl. 26:9), Shechem (Kerkhof
1969:80-81, Fig. 24:10) and Hazor (Hazar II: PI. 195:7; Hazar III-IV: Pl. 242:4).
Date. This type of figurine is well dated to the Late Bronze Age. Although the Shiloh specimen was
found in a mixed context, it should undoubtedly be ascribed to Stratum VI, or more specifically, to the
LB II Period.
7. Votive ear (Figs. 9.5:3, 9.8:6)

Reg. No. 3030; Locus 307; Area C; IAA No. Kll281.
L. 8.1 em.; estimated full W. 5.5 em.; maximum T. 2.5 em.
Brownish-yellow surface. Hand modelled. Broken in two places.
Description. Shaped like a human right ear. The lobe is missing.
Typology. The object belongs to a well-known group of amulets in the form of the ideogram or
230
determinative of ear msrjr (Gardiner 1973:452[D18]). These have been found in Egypt and in the
territories that were under direct Egyptian influence.
Most of the Egyptian parallels are known from collections in London (Petrie 1914: 10, Pl. 1:5a-b),
Cairo (Reisner 1958: Pl. 25:12822), Geneva (Chappaz 1983:110-111, 122 [No. 082]) and Freibourg
(Herrmann 1985:65 [252BIF 171]).
Parallels have been excavated at Deir el Medineh (Nagel1929:68, Fig. 20:9) and Paras (Karkowski
1981:110-111 [No.ll]) and a right ear made of glazed pottery, broken in the same way as the Shiloh
item, at Serabit el-Khadem in Sinai (Petrie 1906:150, Fig. 155:15). Two votive right ears made of clay
were found at Byblos (Dunand 1954:83, Fig. 66 [7262]; 212, Fig. 225 (8684]). One was unearthed in
Palestine but never identified as such. It was found in Cave 28 II at Gezer ( Gezer I: 124; Gezer Ill: Pl.
36: 19) and might have been made of faience which lost its glaze.
Date. All the above ears are dated to the period of the New Kingdom in Egypt. Even Cave 28 II at
Gezer, dated mainly to the MB II-III, yielded some Late Bronze finds including a Mycenaean sherd
( Gezer Ill:43:2), a wall bracket ( Gezer I: Fig. 17) and a scarab with the prenomen of Ramesses II written
in rebus form, typical of the 19th Dynasty (cf. Brandl 1982:372-375). Therefore, although the Shiloh
object was found in an Iron I context, it seems safe to suggest that originally it came from Stratum VI.
STRATUMV
8. Polisher (Figs. 9.6:1, 9.8:4)
L. 6.3 em., estimated full L. 10.7 em.; W. 2.9 em., estimated full W. 6.1 em.; T. 0.9 em.
Brown surface. Wheel-made, slipped and burnished. Secondary chiselling, perforated and polished.
Broken.
Description. Originally a sherd of a closed vessel, probably a jug, the exposed core along the outline
shows that it was reshaped after the vessel broke.
Typology. The oval shape with the perforation in the centre relates it to a well-known group of pottery
polishers named 'feluccas' (boat-shaped) by the Egyptian workers at Megiddo (Guy 1938:7). These are
also found without perforation in the centre.
Parallels for unperforated polishers come from Megiddo (Guy 1938: Pl. 158:4; Megiddo II: Pl.
257:10), Lachish (Lachish IV: Pl. 49:15), Tell Keisan (Briend, Humbert et al. 1980: Pl. 82:7-10) and Tell
el-Farcah (N) (Mallet 1988: Fig. 23:4). In the neigbouring countries they were found at Tell Tabara
el-Akrad (Hood 1951:145-146, Figs. 12:18, 19) and El Amarna (Kemp et al. 1989:88-89, Fig. 4.5.).
Parallels for perforated polishers come from Gezer (Gezer III: Pl. 191:5), Megiddo (Guy 1938: Pl.
158:1, 18, 20), Lachish (Lachish III: Pis. 41:12, 14; 58:2) and Me~ad I;lashavyahu (Naveh 1962: Fig.
4:20). In the neighbouring countries they were found at Ugarit (Schaeffer 1949: Fig. 98:1-12), Sarepta
(Pritchard eta/. 1975: Fig. 62:9-10; Pritchard 1978: Fig. 49) and Tell Abu al-Kharaz in JordaJ:l (Fischer
1991:82-83, Fig.7:17).
Date. The perforated type was in use at least from the Late Bronze Age until the end of the Iron age.
This polisher as well as Nos. 9 11, all from Stratum V, seem to confirm the presence of a local ceramic
industry during the Iron I period.
9. Polisher (Figs. 9.6:2, 9.8:4)

Reg. No. 13001; Locus 1301; Area C; IAA No. Kll284.
Dimensions: L. 4.3 em., estimated full L. 10.3 em.; W. 7.3 em.; T. 0.75 em.
231
Pinkish surface. Wheel-made, slipped and burnished. Secondary chiselling, perforated and polished.
Broken.
For discussion see Object 8.
10. Polisher (Figs. 9.6:3, 9.8:4)

L. 4.5 em., estimated full L. 10.5 em.; W. 5.1 em., estimated full W. 5.9 em.; T. 0.7 em.
Yellowish on convex surface, red-brown on concave surface. Wheel-made, slipped and burnished.
Broken.
For discussion see Object 8. The red slip on the inner side indicates that this specimen was made from a
bowl fragment.
11. Polisher (Figs. 9.6:4, 9.8:4)

Dimensions: L. 6.7 em., estimated full L. 10.8 em.; W. 4.5 em., estimated full W. 5 em.; T. 0.8 em.
For discussion see Object 8.
I
/
---- , \ \\
// ......
\
I
I \\ '
\ I I
I \
I
II '\
\ I\
I
I
I '
\
\
lI
I LJ
2
I
r\
\ \
\\
I \
\ i
\ \
I I
~
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
L~
I 4 5
Fig. 9.6: Clay objects: 1)- Polisher 6220; 2) Polisher 13001; 3)- Polisher 3102; 4) Polisher 13075; 5)- Loom weight
9073.
232
Fig. 9.7:
different scale].
2
6
0
4cm.
1-2): Ibex-shaped jug spout 14186; 3-7): Bull-shaped zoomorphic vessell5!77 [scale of 3) and 5) = 1:2.5; 7) is on a
233
234
Clay objects: I) Fig. 9.8:
13001, 3102 and 13075; 5)
5
Loom weight 9073; 6)

4cm.
Lids 15104 and 15136; 2)- Kiln stopper 15107; 3)

Votive ear 3030.
2
3
0
Relief plaque 7214; 4)

Polishers 6220,
3cm.
STRATUM III
12. Loom weight (Figs. 9.6:5, 9.8:5)

Reg. No. 9073; Locus 913; Area G; IAA No. K11301.
W. 6x5.7 em. at the base, 2.3x2.2 em. at the top; H. 6.4 em.
Light brown. Hand modelled. Perforated, drilled from both ends. Complete.
Description. A truncated pyramid with slightly concave top. A perforation at about two-thirds of its
height.
Typology. Such objects were used as loom weights.
Date. Truncated pyramidal loom weights were most common during the Hellenistic and Roman Periods
(Gezer II: 74-75, Fig. 268e; Crowfoot et al. 1957:399-401, Fig. 92a:26). The loom weight from Shiloh was
found in a mixed context which included Iron II and Hellenistic material. Therefore it is suggested that
it be assigned to Stratum III. A similar loom weight was found by the Danish excavators and attributed
to the Iron Age II (Shiloh 1969:19, 71, Pls. 7:74, IX:74).
WORKED BONE OBJECTS
STRATUM VIII
1. Carved object (Fig. 9.9:1-3)
L. 16.3 em.; W. of proximal epiphysis 5.2x4.9 em.
Sawn and incised. Complete.
Description: A bovine leg bone cut at one end and decorated with an incised zigzag design.
Typology. Several explanations could be suggested for this object. It might have been the haft of an
implement (cf. Levy et al. 1987:360,689 Pl. 14.5.7, 716-717 Fig. 15.18.1), 2 a needle-case (cf. Gezer II: 87,
Fig. 276a; Hazor III-IV: Pl. 343:10) or a flute (cf. Ariel et al. 1990:142-144, Fig. 24). Similar objects
found in other excavations (cf. Dunand 1939:429, Pl. 146:6605; Megiddo II: Pl. 287:1) were not even
tentatively identified.
Date. This was found in the fill of the glacis and can thus be dated to the MB III.
STRATUM VII
2. Needle shuttle (Fig. 9.9:4)
Reg. No. 15173/2; Locus 1526; Area F; IAA No. K12799.

L. 6.65 em.; W. 1.5 em.; T. 0.2-0.25 em.
Sawn and polished. Broken.
Description. A polished shaft with a rounded edge.
Typology. Such objects are usually identified as spatulae (cf. Lachish Ill: Pl. 63:22; Amiran et al.
1978:56-57, Pl. 72:2-8; Kertesz 1989:362 Fig. 32.1.11-12, 364) although it seems to differ from common
spatulae (see Object 6 below) in its narrowness and the shape of its pointed edge (compare Lachish Ill:
Pl. 63:22 with Pl. 63:23-27). This object was apparently used as a needle shuttle in the process of weaving
2. This is rejected by Horwitz below (Appendix 1).
235
(Megiddo II: Pl. 165:1; Mallon 1934:77, Fig. 31:6-7, 12-15; Hennessy 1969:21, Fig. 11:13; Bar-Adon
1971:185; 1980:177).
Date. Comparable objects were found in assemblages of various dates, from the Chalcolithic period to
the Iron Age and later. The Shiloh specimen was found in a MB III context. A parallel that seems to
come from the same period was found in the City of David, Jerusalem (Ariel et al. 1990:124 Fig. lO:BI
26).
3. Inlay (Fig. 9.9:5)

L. 2.1 em.; W. 1.35 em.; T. 0.2 em.
Sawn. Complete.
Description. Small piece in the shape of a rosette petal (cf. Jericho I: 329, 367, Fig. 145:1; 467-468, Fig.
203:6; Pritchard 1963:30, Fig. 25 [2nd row left]).
Typology. This is an example of the well-known Canaanite art of inlaying wooden boxes with bone and
sometimes ivory (Liebowitz 1972; 1977).
~
·~
2 4
J
Fig. 9.9:
5
0~ .
.
--~~
6
3cm.
......
- '
.
Bone objects: 1-2)- Carved Object 7273; 3)- Reconstruction of carved object 7273; 4)- Shuttle 15173; 5)-
Inlay 15253; 6)- Spindle whorls 15165/ l-2; 7)- Spatula 10099.
236
In addition to parallels from Jericho and Gibeon, comparable petals were found at Gezer ( Gezer I:98,
122; Gezer II:248; Gezer III: Pl. 26:11, Pl. 34:26), Megiddo Tomb 3175 (Megiddo II: Pl. 193:10), in
another tomb at Gibeon (Pritchard 1963:35, Fig. 26:15) and Jericho (Jericho I:294, 302, Figs. 11:7b,c,
478, Figs. 217:5,7).
Date. All these parallels come from MB II-III contexts. Six more petals which were found in Pit 176 at
Lachish (associated with Structure Ill ofthe Fosse Temple- Lachish II:62, 89-90, Pl. 21:43) may have
originated in the Middle Bronze Age as well.
4-5. Two spindle whorls (Fig. 9.9:6)

Reg. No. 15165/1 and 15165/2; Locus 1526; Area F; IAA No. K12337.
15165/1- D. 2.5 em.; H. 0.6 em.; 15165/2 D. 1.9 em.; H. 0.5 em.
Sawn, curved, drilled, polished and strengthened by fire. Complete.
Description. Flat plano-convex buttons perforated through the centre. Signs of a saw are visible on the
flat side (cf. Hazor II: Pl. 126:22). Concentric circles on the convex side signify the carving (cf. Briend,
Humbert et al. 1980: Pl. 96:10, where they appear on the flat side). The cylindrical drilling was done
from one side.
Typology. Such objects are generally considered to be spindle whorls. Even Petrie, who originally
identified such objects as buttons because of their light weight, joined this consensus (Petrie et al.
1952:16, Pl. 18:11-12). Since the Shiloh whorls were found in one place, there is a possibility that they
were used together (cf. Guy 1938:171, Fig. 175:6, Pl. 84:1; TBM II:55, n. 64; Megiddo I: Pl. 95:38). It
seems that such light whorls were used for spinning flax and sometimes for wool, while the heavier ones
made of stone were used only for wool (cf. Crowfoot et al. 1957:399).3 Two possible techniques for their
use have been suggested; the whorls were at the top of the stick (Guy 1938:171, Fig. 175:6; Crowfoot et
a/. 1957:399) or the stick and whorls were inverted and rotated inside a bowl (Irvin 1977:313, Fig. 81).
Parallels for these objects were gathered by Ariel (1990:121-124, Bl20). Additional items which may
be added to his list were found at Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1931:8, Pl. 23:134; 1933:11, Pl. 28:40; 1934:11, Pl.
36:33-34 and Petrie et al. 1952:16, Pl. 18:11-12), Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM l/:55-56, Pl. 38:31) and Hazor
(Hazor I: Pis. 89:17, 142:19; 1960: Pl. 137:27; 1961: Pl. 299:5).
Date. The majority of similar whorls was found in MB II-III contexts. The Hazor specimens (Hazor I:
Pis. 89:17, 142:19; 1960:Pl. 137:27) are dated to the Late Bronze Age.
STRATUM IV
6. Spatula (Fig. 9.9:7)
Reg. No. 10099; Locus 1023; Area H; IAA No. K11287.

L. 11.5 em.; maximal W. 2.5 em.; T. 0.25-0.3 em.
Sawn and polished.
Description. A worked rib with one end rounded, the other pointed.
Typology. This specimen belongs to the most frequent type of spatula (Ariel et al. 1990:128, Figs. 14-15,
BI 59-114). Suggestions for the function of this type of object were listed by Ariel (ibid.:129). The most
recent hypothesis (VanBeek and VanBeek 1990) identifies the spatulae as ophthalmic instruments.
3. Orit Shamir (personal communication) is of the opinion that the heavy whorls were used only for linen.
4. Only the top and third examples are made of bone. Petrie also published four bone spacers in the same plate (No.6)
overlooking their relationship to the spindle.
237
Date. Spatulae of this shape are common in the Iron Age II and later. The archaeological context of
Object 6 contained Middle Bronze and Iron II pottery. The spatula can therefore safely be assigned to
Stratum IV.
METAL OBJECTS FROM STRATUM VII
A group of bronze and silver objects was found in the Stratum VII (MB III) rooms in Area F. The bulk
of the bronze objects seems to be weapons 5 and the silver objects can be classified as jewellery. Most of
these metal objects were found together in L. 1713, on the floor in the northwestern corner of Room
1527.
The jewellery was a part of a silver scrap hoard that was wrapped in textile (some of the objects had
remains of cloth adhering to them) in order to be reworked. Only three of the silver objects are described
here (for other objects see Fig. 9.12:5).
The objects from Room 1527 have been published elsewhere (Finkelstein and Brandl 1985). The
following descriptions are based on that article, with some amendments based on later information. The
metallurgy of the bronze objects is discussed in Chapter 12.
BRONZE WEAPONS
1. Shaft-hole axe with lugs (Figs. 9.10:1, 9.11:1)
L. 19.2 em.; W. on cutting edge 6.4 em.; T. 1.0 em.
Cast in a bivalve mould, hammered. Complete.
Description. Four horizontal ribs surround the shaft-hole and terminate in lug-shapes. A rectangular
tongue-support butt stems from the lower part of the area joining the shaft-hole and the blade. Both
upper and lower edges of the blade are thickened.
Typology. This axe is of a very rare type. Exact parallels were found in excavations at Nimrud (Handcock
1912: Pl. 28) and at Chagar Bazar (Mallowan 1947:81, 85, 187-88, 218, Pis. 41:1, 55:15), while the
provenance of a third example is unknown (Kashan:15, No. 23; Curtis 1983:79). The limited number of
specimens and the difficulty in dating them has prevented their proper typological and chronological
attribution. Maxwell-Hyslop (1949: 107-8 Pl. 39:3), following Mallowan (1947:187) despite his
reservations, included axes from Ugarit and Alalakh under her 'Type 18', while Mallowan himself
(1956:20-21; 1966:346-47, n. 36), followed by Erkanal (1977:16), related our type to the axes from
Ktiltepe and Acemhiiytik. Curtis (1983:73-74) quite rightly rejected Mallowan's attempts to relate the
axes from Nimrud and Chagar Bazar to the axe from Ktiltepe as it lacks the supporting tongue
stemming from the base of the blade. He emphasized that the Ktiltepe axe belongs to a specific
Anatolian group, but at the same time, like Maxwell-Hyslop, related the axes from Nimrud and Chagar
Bazar to those found at Ugarit, Alalakh, Bogazkoy and Beth-shan.
This approach seems questionable since all the last-mentioned axes, as noted by Mallowan (1947:187),
differ from the Chagar Bazar type in several details: the blade is straight; there is no thickening at the
edges of the blade; the tongue is shorter; these axes have a lug above the point of the upper joint of the
5. (Editor's note) For bronze toggle pins see Chapter lO. An additional needle was found in L. 1522 and another two, which
are not discussed here, were found in L. 1718 (Stratum VIII) and 1537 (mixed material).
238
Fig. 9.10:
5)
Metal objects: 1)
\
Flat axe 15111;6)- Dagger 15091.

3
6
-®
-o
Shaft-hole axe 17320;2)- Flat axe 17322;3)- Flat axe 17318;4)- Spear or lance butt 15181;
239
240
3
Fig. 9.11:
5)
5
Flat axe 17318; 6)- Dagger 15091.

0
4cm.
Metal objects: 1)- Shaft-hole axe 17320; 2)- Flat axe 17322; 3)
0
Flat axe 15111; 4)- Spear or lance butt 15181;

3cm.
blade and the shaft-hole as a continuation of the lower tongue; the angle between the blade and the
shaft-hole is quite open (Schaeffer 1932:21, Fig. 14; Curtis 1983:80, Fig. 3). In conclusion, the two
groups of axes should be regarded separately, as already pointed out by Deshayes (1960: Vol I:187-91,
Vol II:78, Pls. 22:12, 24:1,4,6 [Types F 1 a-c]).
Date. The Chagar Bazar axe was found in Tomb J.200, dug into a brick platform built over the ruins of
the palace which contained inscribed tablets from the days of Shamshi-Adad I and Hammurabi.
Accordingly, Mallowan dated the tomb to the period between 1750 and 1600 B.C. E. (the end of activity
on the site), fixing its date, and thus that of the axe, in the first fifty years of that period (Mallowan
1947:187-188). This dating was later supported by what Mallowan regarded as a parallel from Kiiltepe
(Mallowan 1956:20-21; 1966:346-47, n. 36). Mallowan dated the Nimrud axe to the same period. The
date proposed was accepted by Maxwell-Hyslop, Deshayes, Erkanal, Yadin (1963:77-78) and others.
According to Curtis, the two types were not contemporaneous, but the parallels which he regarded as
the best (Ugarit, Alalakh and Bogazkoy) are later than our type by some two hundred years. Thus, he ·
re-examined the assemblages from Nimrud and Chagar Bazar. At Nimrud he fixed the date of the
assemblage to 1550 B.C. E. and onward, on the basis of a dagger and nine spacer-beads of glass, while in
his opinion at Chagar Bazar activity continued until about 1500 B.C.E. since pottery of Nuzi type was
found there. In any event, Curtis did not find a clear solution for Tomb G.200, which contained a toggle
pin whose period of use could not have extended as late as the 17th century B.C.E. (Curtis 1983:74-78).
Hence the obvious importance of the axe from Shiloh, found in a well-dated MB III context. These
axes thus appear from c. 1750 to 1500 B.C.E., and our axe is an intermediate link between the Nimrud
axe and that from Chagar Bazar. Another possibility would be to date the other two to the more limited
period of the Shiloh example.
Although Miron accepted the different dates of these three axes (Finkelstein and Brandll985:22), he
rejects without qualification the suggestion that the Shiloh axe is a chronological link (Miron 1985: 134).
2. Flat axe (Figs. 9.10:2, 9.11:2)

Reg. No. 17322; Locus 1713 (=1527); Area F; IAA No. K12320.
L. 20.2 em.; W. 6.1 em. on cutting edge, 3.8 em. on tang; maximum T. 1.7 em.
Cast in a single mould, hammered. Complete.
Description. Flat axe, thinning towards the convex cutting edge. Upper and lower edges and the back
are straight.
Typology. This axe is also quite rare in Canaan. Generally it can be attributed to Miron's Type lib
(1985:45-46), but all the members of that type are either smaller and/ or have different proportions
between their cutting edge and their back. Till now no real parallel for this axe has been found in
excavations. The closest parallels, including dimensions, are from Ugarit (Schaeffer 1956:261; Figs.
234:1-3, 236, 278, Fig. 240, Pl. 10).
Date. The axe from Ugarit is dated to the LB II. The axe from Shiloh indicates thatthis type already
appeared in the MB III.
3. Flat axe (Figs. 9.10:3, 9.11:5)

L. 6.5 em. (present); W. on cutting edge 4.2 em.; T. 0.9 em. present.
Cast in a single mould, hammered. Broken.
241
Description. Flat axe broadening towards the flattened convex cutting edge. One edge is straight, the
other is slightly concave towards the cutting edge.

Typology. Since it is incomplete, this axe might be attributable to either Miron's Type II or V (1985:45-
46). However as far as I can judge it should be considered as a new, independent type.
Parallels are known from Gezer (Gezer II:243; Gezer III: PI. 192:5 =Miron 1985:33, No. 125 [Type
V]), Tell el-Farcah South (Starkey and Harding 1932: Pl. 74:89), Jericho (Garstang 1934: Pl. 26:18 =
Miron 1985:27, No. 89, Pl. 22:1 [Type V]), Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM II:53, Pl. 40:3 =Miron 1985:27, No.
92 [Type II]), Shechem (Miron 1985:28, No. 95, Pl. 4:8[Type II]) and cAin Samiya (Miron 1985:38, No.
154, Pl. 6:10 [Type IIf]).
Date. The axesfrom Jericho, Tell Beit Mirsim and Shechem come from MB III contexts. It seems likely
that those from Gezer and cAin Samiya '" could belong to that period as well.
4. Spear or lance butt (Figs. 9.10:4, 9.11:4)

L. 9.1 em.; D. 0.85-2.1 em.
Cast, hammered. Complete.
Description. Socketted. Circular in section along entire length.
Typology. This is the simplest shape of what is considered a spear or lance butt. Similar objects were
found at Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1931:8, Pl. 16:16), Tell el-Farcah (S) (Petrie 1930:8, Pl. 21:92), Hazar
(Hazor III-IV: Pls. 205:6-7, 221:15), Gezer (Gezer II:375; Gezer III: Pl. 218:1-5), and Megiddo (Megiddo
II: PI. 177:2-5).
Date. Butts in this simple form are already known in the third millennium B.C.E. (Woolley 1934:306,
Pls. 224, 226 [U.9963]). In the Levant this type continued into the first millennium B.C.E. The specimen
from Tell el-c Ajjul is contemporary with the find from Shiloh, both being dated by their archaelogical
context.
5. Flat axe (Figs. 9.10:5, 9.11:3)

Reg. No. 15111; Locus 1526; Area F; IAA No. K12312 and K12313.
L. 19.9 em.; W. 6 em. on cutting edge, 3.9 em. on tang; maximal T. 1.3 em.
Cast in a single mould, hammered. Complete, found in two pieces.
Description. Flat axe broadening towards a flattened convex cutting edge with additional thickening
near the cutting edge. The back is straight.
Typology. The axe belongs to Miron's Type II-1b (1985:45-46). Parallels come from Shechem (Kerkhof
1969:94-95, Fig 28.13) and cAin Samiya (Miron 1985:38, No. 150, Pl. 3:3).
Date. Precise contexts of the parallels are not given, but it seems that they can be dated to the MB III.
6. Dagger (Figs. 9.10:6, 9.11:6)

L. 15.5 em.; W. 3.9 em.; T. 0.325-0.30 (blade), 0.2-0.325 (tang).
Cast in a single mould, hammered. Only the blade survived without the wooden handle and stone
pommel in which it was usually set.
Description. Flat blade with concave sides, pronounced shoulders and slightly rounded point. The tang
is rectangular in section and does not have perforations for rivets.
242
Typology. This dagger belongs to Type 27a in Maxwell-Hyslop's classification (1946:27-28). According
to Shalev (1986:16-18) more than 90 such daggers date to the Middle Bronze Age as against 70 which
date to the Late Bronze Age. Shalev assigns the flat daggers from both periods to one class (Type 2)
despite the differences in their size and proportions, and considers the later ones to be the development
of the earlier daggers. In my opinion these are different types. Moreover, even the classification of
Maxwell-Hyslop is too general, and combines what seem to be different types (cf. Lachish IV: Pl.
22:11-20 where at least 6 different types are classed in Maxwell-Hyslop's 'Type 27a').
This type of dagger was found in Tomb I at Gezer ( Gezer III: Pl. 60:3,5), Cemetery 500 at Tell
el-Farcah (S) (Petrie 1930: Pls. 6:14,9:47, 11:67,75) and T. 1021 at that site (Starkey and Harding 1932:
Pl. 43:1), Tomb 9 at Jericho (Garstang 1932: Pl. 37:1), Tell Beit Mirsim Stratum D (TBM II: Pl. 41:11),
el-Jisr (Ory 1945:37, Pl. 13:1- No 49), Tomb 6 at the Tel Aviv harbour (Kaplan 1955:5, 12 Fig. 5:1, Pl.
2:1, and Table of Finds), Lachish (Lachish IV: Pls. 22:11, 13-14, 18 = 50:25-26, 51:19), Barqai (Gophna
and Sussman 1966:1*, 10-11, Fig. 9:6, Pl. 2.2:1) and Tomb 2/3 at Ginossar (Epstein 1974:21-22,31 Fig.
12:4, Pl. 9:11, 5*).
Date. All the parallels date to the MB II-III.
SILVER JEWELLERY
7. Pendant (Fig. 9.12:1-2)
Reg. No. 17321 (incl. part of 17316); Locus 1713 (=1527); Area F; IAA No. K12339.
D. 11.8 em.; T. 0.07 em. (the tube: L. 2.8 em.; D. 1.4 em.)
Pressed into a die like that from Megiddo (Megiddo I: Pl.105:6). Folded, tubular loop detached.
Description. Disc with tubular loop at the top. Judging by its condition it is clear that it had been
discarded for reworking (cf. Guy 1938: Pl. 166:8).
Typology. The pendant bears the motif commonly denoted 'marque royale hittite' (de Genouillac
1926:33-34, Pls. 24, 24 bis, 25), 'Blitzsymbol' (Bittel 1932: Abb. 11), 'Thunderbolt symbol' (Guy
1938:162-163, Fig. 169, Pl. 166:8) or 'Cappadocian symbol' (Schmidt 1932:146-147, Fig. 184). This
motif, which appears in several variations, has been much discussed (Wainwright 1956; 1958:287;
Bossert 1957:97). Our form is of the fullest type: a cruciform made up of four straight horns with a disc
at the centre and between them four wavy horns. Between each wavy and straight horn there is a small
circle.
Date. The source of this motif is in Anatolia and it appears from the 19-18th century B.C.E. (the Karum
Period). It has been discovered at every site of that period - Kiiltepe, Alishar Hoyiik, Alaca Hoyiik and
others. It is found on seals (Schmidt 1931:89, Fig. 136; von der Osten 1937:228-229, Fig. 257) or as an
applique on pottery vessels (von der Osten 1937:228-229, Fig. 257; Ozgii~ 1959:51, Fig. 59, Pl. 32:1). It
was very widespread under the Hittite empire (Ko~ay 1951: Pl. 77:1a-b; Ozgii~ 1982:153, Fig. 164a-b, Pl.
87:2-3), and hence reached Syria, Canaan and even Egypt. In Syria it is known at Ugarit on a bronze
standard (Schaeffer 1931:2, Pl. 13:4) and as an ornament on the head of the goddess Anat in the 'Bed
Ivory' (Schaeffer 1954:488, Fig. 6), as well as on an ivory disc from Alalakh (Barnett 1957:230, Fig. 91
[No. X.6]). In Canaan it is known in a die from Megiddo (Megiddo 1: Pl. 105:6). At Tel el-Amarna, a
pottery mould for making this symbol in faience was found (Petrie 1894: Pl. 18- Nos. 439-440). After
the period of the Hittite empire this motif disappeared in Anatolia (Guy 1938:163, n. 146) but continued
to appear in Canaan and Syria. In Canaan it is known on a pendant from Megiddo, dated to the Iron
Age I (Guy 1938:162-163, Fig. 169, Pl. 166:8), while in Syria it is known in a slightly different form on
the 'Angels Relief' from Aleppo, dated to the lOth century B.C.E. (Dussaud 1931:95-96).
243
Fig. 9.12:
n~····
.
' .
-0
.
.,
.•
5
Silver jewellery: l-2)- Pendant 1732; 3)- Pin 17316; 4)- Pendant 17319; 5)- Part of the silver scrap hoard.
Our medallion is the largest of its type, and it undoubtedly originated in Anatolia. It constitutes a link
between the symbols of the Karum period and those of the period of the empire.
8. Pendant (Figs. 9.12:4)

L. 0.95 em. (tube); D. 0.55 em. (tube); Circumference 9.2 em. (crescent)
Cast. Complete but folded.
Description. Crescent shaped with a tubular loop in the centre.
Typology. Such pendants are quite common and are known from several places in Canaan: Gezer
(Gezer l/:102-103, Figs. 287,288:11, 450; Gezer Ill: Pls. 136:2, 8; 226:6-10), Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1932:8,
244
Pl. 3:29; 1933:8, Pl. 14:29-33; 1934:6, Pls. 12, 13, 14:11-12; 8, Pls. 19, 20:128-129) and Megiddo (Megiddo
II: Pls. 209:25, 213:80, 214:81-82, 251:105).

Date. The range of the appearance of these pendants is from the MB I down to the end of the Late
Bronze Age. Therefore the Shiloh object can be dated only according to its archaeological context.
9. Pin (Figs. 9.12:3)

L. 9.4 em.; D. 1 em. (head); H. 0.9 em. (head)
Cast. Complete but folded several times.
Description. This unperforated pin or toggle pin has a flat head and a round thickening below.
Typology. This is a very rare type in Canaan. The only parallels known to me are from Byblos (Dunand
1937 and 1939:136, Pl. 105 [1992]; 153, Pl. 69 [2219]; 211, Pl. 104 [3150]; 412, Pl. 105 [6451]). It seems
that this type of pin originated in Anatolia and mainland Greece. Among the Anatolian parallels are
those from Yortan (Kamil1982: Fig. 88:332-333), Mersin (Garstang 1953: Fig. 158:6-7, Pl. 31 b), Tarsus
(Goldman 1956: Pl. 430:164-178, 435:1), Yanarlar (Emre 1978: Figs. 110-117, Pl. 40:4a-d) and Alishar
Hoytik (von der Osten 1937:150, 158 [e680], 193-198, Fig. 196). For parallels from Greece see Tripathi
1988: Pl. 55:300-303.
Date. This pin was found in one of the Stratum VII rooms and is dated by its archaeological context.
STONE OBJECTS
The excavations at Shiloh yielded 26 stone objects made of seven different types of stone: basalt 13
objects; chalk- 3; limestone- 3; hematite- 2; serpentine 1; speleothem with calcite crystals -1;
onyx-banded calcite (alabaster)- 3 objects.
The description of the stone objects referred to in this report as 'pestles' must be prefaced with a
comment on their function. Eight such artefacts were found in the Stratum VII (MB III) rooms in Area
F, six in Room 1527, one in Room 1526 and one in Room 1522. Two additional pestles were found in
Area D. These objects have been described in the past as pounders (Garstang 1932: Pl. 30:16b),
hammers (Megiddo /:Pl. 106:4-11) or hammer-rubbers (Guy 1938: Pl. 158:22-23). Pestles were found
together with tripod basalt mortars at Jericho (Garstang 1932: Pl. 30:16a-b; Jericho /:325-326, Fig.
125:1-2, Pl. 15:2; Jericho //:428, Fig. 123:7-8), Tell el-Farcah (N) (de Vaux 1951:400-401, Fig. 4:7-8, Pl.
14:1 = Mallet 1988:28-9, Fig. 8:9-10, Pl. 28:9-10), Lachish (Lachish IV: Pl. 26:19, 21-23), Matza
(Sussman 1966:41-42, Fig. 2:20-21) and Barqai (Gophna and Sussman 1969:10, Pl. 3:7). The fact that
the Shiloh pestles were found without mortars,6 their concentration in the Area F rooms and their
diversity in size and shape raises the possibility that they were used as weights.? This suggestion is
supported by the observation that three pestles found in Room 1527 have a small drilling on their lower
part, that might have served as marks. s
6. One basalt tripod was found in the Danish excavations and dated to the Iron II (Shiloh 1969:74; Pis. 12, XVI[No. 125]).
7. For metrological discussion see Eran forthcoming.
8. Avraham Eran was the first to notice these on two pestles and suggested that they might have served as a mark. A third
specimen from the same location was later noticed by this author. Dr. Naomi Porat confirmed that all three drillings were
man-made. Parallels for such perforated basalt pestles were found at Tell Abu Hawwam (Hamilton 1935:17, Pl. 31:34),
Megiddo (Guy l938:Pl. 158:23), Lachish (Lachish II: PI. 29: 17-19) and Hazor (Hazar III-IV: Pl. 334: 10). The last-mentioned
comes from the LB I stratum in the temple of Area H (Hazar IJJ-/Vtext:223-25).
245
STRATUM VII
1. Pestle/Weight (Figs. 9.13:1, 9.17:1)

H. 8.25 em.; D. 3-5.5 em.
Basalt. Complete.
Description. A cone with convex sides and base and truncated flat apex. The base is polished from use.
There is a small drilling, possibly a mark, 2.5 em. above the base.
Typology. Pestles of this shape are known from Jericho (Garstang 1932: Pl. 30: 16b; Jericho II:285, Fig.
123:5), Lachish (Lachish IV: Pl. 26:22) and Hazor (Hazor lll-IV: Pls. 270:16, 334:8).
Date. The parallels mentioned above seem to date to the MB II-III.

H. 7.7 em.; D. 1.5-5 em.
Basalt. Complete.
Description. A cone with convex sides, base and top. The base is polished. There is a small drilling,
possibly a mark, 1.8 em. above the base.
Typology. Parallels for this object were found at Megiddo (Guy 1938: Pl. 112: 14; Megiddo I: Pl. 106:7)
and Hazor (Hazor I: Pls. 142:24, 160:13).
Date. This type of object originated in the MB II-III and had a long range into the Iron Age. Since the
Shiloh object was found in Stratum VII it is clearly an early example of this group.

H. 4.35 em.; D. 3.7-5.5 em.
Basalt. Complete.
Description. A squat cone with a small drilling, possibly a mark, 2.2 em. above the base.
Typology. Parallels for this object were found at Tell Beit Mirsim ( TBM II: Pl. 44: 14), Lachish (Lachish
IV: Pl. 26:45) and Hazor (Hazor III-IV: Pls. 206:16, 294:8, 299:2; 334:17).
Date. This type originated not earlier than the MB II-III and has a long range. Like the preceding pestle,
this also belongs to the early group.
4. Pestle/Weight (Fig. 9.13:5)

H. 3.8 em.; D. 3-4.3 em.

Basalt. Complete.
Description. Hemispherical with a slightly flattened top and convex base which shows signs of polishing.
For Typology and Date see Object 3.

H. 8.5 em.; D. 2.5-5.4 em.
Basalt. Complete.
Description. See Object 1.
246
Fig. 9.13:
2
Pestle 15315; 7)- Pestle 4010; 8)- Pestle 15153.

---~~--
3cm
.3
Stone objects: I)- Pestle 15193; 2)- Pestle 15194; 3)- Pestle 15100; 4)- Pestle 15323; 5)- Pestle 15424; 6)-
247
0 3cm.
-----~
6 7 8
0. ,.
.
.
0
.
f)
.
.
.
9 11 12
Fig. 9.14: Stone objects: I)- Pestle 15271; 2)- Dagger pommel 13042; 3)- Spindle whorll3171; 4)- Rubber/Weight
14368; 5) Weight 3144; 6)- Perforated object 15325; 7) Weight(?) 17323; 8) Weight(?) 14147; 9)- Stopper
14027; 10)- Pestle 14044; II) Weight 17011; 12)- Stopper/Weight 5068.
248
Fig. 9.15:
base Fragment 15233.
---------
____ )
I
..........,\
I
II
i
I
I
II
\
Stone objects: I)- Mortar 14141; 2)

5
._~=-__;Jcm.
2
Axe 15145; 3)- Adze 12032; 4)- Alabaster vase 1I I 16; 5)- Alabaster
249
Typology. This is a typical example of the MBII form of pestle. For parallels see Jericho (Garstang
1932: Pl. 30:16b; Jericho I:325-326, Fig. 125:2, Pl. 15:2 [centre]; Jericho II: 285, Fig. 123:5) and Lachish
(Lachish IV: PI. 26:22).
Date. All the above parallels come from well-dated MBII-III contexts.

H. 4.275 em.; D. 1.8-4.65 em.
Basalt. Complete. Chipped near the top.
Description. Cone with convex base, sides and top.
Typology. Comparable objects were unearthed at Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM II: Pl. 44:12), Tell el-Farcah
(N) (de Vaux 1951:399-400, Fig. 4:8 = Mallet 1988:28-29, Fig. 8:10) and Hazor (Hazar III-IV: Pls.
206:16, 294:9). There is a possibility that the object from Shiloh was used as a weight (cf. Dunand 1937
and 1939:101, Pl. 109:1529).
Date. Most of the above-mentioned parallels date to the MB II-III.

H. 3.5 em.; D. 2.6-4.6 em.
Basalt. Complete.
Description. Hemispherical with convex base and truncated top.
Typology. Parallels were found at Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM II: Pl. 44:14) and Hazor (Hazar III-IV: Pls.
294:2; 334: 17).
'Date. The Shiloh object was found in a mixed locus, but typologically the above parallels d,ate it to the
MB II-III. It should apparently be attributed to Stratum VII.
3cm. 10cm
Fig. 9.16: Alabaster pilgrim flask 14540.
250
1 0 3cm.
10
0 4cm.
11 12
Fig. 9.17: Stone objects: 1)- Pestle 15193; 2) Pestle 15194; 3)- Pestle 15323; 4) Pestle 15100; 5)- Pestle 15315; 6)-
Pestle 15153; 7)- Pestle 15271; 8) Perforated object 15325; 9) Dagger pomme113042; 10)- Weight 17011;
11) Axe 15145; 12)- Adze 12032.
251

L. 14.7 em.; maximal D. 6.1 em.
Reddish limestone. Complete.
Description. Cylinder with convex sides, base and top.
Typology. A comparable cylindrical pestle was found at Tell el-Farcah (N) (Mallet 1988:70-71, Fig
29:11, Pl. 83:7).
Date. The Tell el-Farcah (N) example was found in an MBII context. The Shiloh object (MB III)
extends the duration of use of this type.

H. 10.6 em.; W. 3.7-5.6 em.; T. 2.5-4.8 em.
Silicious limestone. Complete. Some chipping.
Description. A cone with convex sides and base. Flattened top. Oval transverse section. The base is
polished.
Typology. Such objects are classed as pestles (Guy 1938:Pl. 158, 22).
Date. Found in an MB III context.
0 4cm.
1 4
Fig. 9.18: Stone objects: 1)- Mortar 14141; 2) Alabaster vase llll6; 3) Fragment of alabaster pilgrim flask 14540; 4)
Alabaster base Fragment 15233.
252
10. Dagger pommel (Figs. 9.14:2, 9.17:9)

Reg. No. 13042; Locus 1311; Area C; IAA No. Kl1283.
H. 2.75 em.; maximal D. 4.45 em. (2.5 em. at the base).
Chalk. Complete.
Description. A biconical object with a bevelled top, hollowed out at the base in order to receive the
dagger's handle and two holes for fastening rivets (cf. Petrie 1933: Pl. 18:7).
Typology. This is one of the two common types of Middle Bronze Age pommels (cf. Petrie 1934: Pl.
41:110-119; Hazor III-IV: Pl. 335:9-10). Similar pommels were found at Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1931: Pl.
52:20; 1933: Pls. 18:7, 27:66; 1934: Pls. 22:245,41:112, 114, 116-117, 119; Petrie et al. 1952: Pl. 20:52, 54),
Beth-shemesh (Grant 1934:69, Fig 6:[4-78]), Tell Beit Mirsim Stratum E (TBM II: 57, Pl. 44:5-6),
Megiddo (Megiddo II: Pl. 180:40), Hazar (Hazor III-IV:Pl. 335:9), Tomb 18 at Gibeon (Pritchard
1963:35-36, Fig. 26:17) and Tomb 4 at Bethany (Loffreda 1984:Fig 9:4).
Date. Most of the above parallels date to the MB II. Therefore it seems that the pommel from Shiloh,
although found in Iron I context, originated in Stratum VII.
11. Axe (Figs. 9.15:2, 9.17:11)

L. 8.5 em.; maximal W. 5.4 em.; 4.3 em. at the working edge; T. 3.95 em.
Basalt. Complete. Some chipping.
Description. The upper and lower edges, back and cutting edge are convex. In horizontal cross section
the sides and back are convex and the cutting edge is pointed. The entire surface was polished.
Typology. In this type of stone axe the maximum width is not on the working edge. An axe made from
porphyritic diabase was found at the Chalcolithic site of Kissonegra-Myloutkia, north of Lemba in
Cyprus (Elliott 1983:12-13, Fig. 2:3). Other comparable axes were found at Byblos (Dunand 1939:40,
Fig. 24; 45-46, Fig. 36), Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM II: 56, Pl. 44:3) and Tell Farcah (N) (Mallet 1988:68-69,
Fig. 28:3).
Date. The parallels from Canaan date to the MB II.
12. Adze (Figs. 9.15:3, 9.17:12)

Reg. No. 12032; Locus 1202; Area K; IAA No. K12791.
L. 10 em.; estimated full W. on cutting edge 5.3 em.; T. 4 em.
Basalt. Broken
Description. Only the central part survived. In side view one edge is straight, the other convex and both
curve towards the pointed cutting edge. A ridge divides the object asymmetrically. In horizontal cross
section the straight sides flare towards the cutting edge.
Typology. This artefact may be regarded as an adze because of its asymmetric transverse section. A
similar artefact is known from Jericho (Garstang 1932: Pl. 19:c [left]).
Date. The object was found in a mixed locus, but on the basis of the parallel from Jericho, which was
dated to the MB II-III, it would seem reasonable to attribute it to Stratum VII.
13. Perforated object/Polisher (Figs. 9.14:6, 9.17:8)

Reg. No. 15325; Locus 1527; Area F; IAA No. Kll294.
H. 5.2 em.; W. 5.5-5.6 em.
Basalt. Complete.
253
Description. A cube with rounded corners, perforated by drilling from both directions. the perforation
is highly polished.
Typology. Although resembling a mace head and of sufficient weight (266.6 gr.), the small diameter of
the perforation (0.9 em.) makes this unlikely. 9 It could conceivably have been used as a polisher. Other
unidentified objects which were perforated in the same way are known from Tell el-c Ajjul (Petrie 1933:
Pl. 27:41), Megiddo (Megiddo II: Pl. 290:3) and Hazor (Hazor II: Pl. 152:16; Hazor III-IV:Pl. 278:3).
Date. This object is dated by its context to the MB III.
14. Weight(?) (Fig. 9.14:7)

Reg. No. 17323; Locus 1713 (= 1527); Area F; IAA No. Kl1295.
H. 5.65 em.; D. 3.3-4.85 em.
Speleothem with large calcite crystals. Unworked. Broken.
Description. Part of a stalagmite or stalactite.
Typology. This is either a natural stone intended to be crushed and used by a potter as temper, or a
weight. The present weight of the object is 174.2 gr.
Date. This object is dated by its context to the MB III.
STRATUM VI
15. Pebble/Weight(?) (Fig. 9.14:8)
H. 3.95 em.; maximal D. 4.75-5 em.
Limestone. Complete.
Description. Polished(?) pebble.
Typology. Possibly used as a weight.
Date. This object is dated by its context to the LB II.
16. Stopper/Weight (Fig. 9.14:9)

Reg. No. 14027 /3; Locus 1461; Area D; IAA No. K11300.
H. 4 em.; maximal D. 3.75 em.
Chalk. Complete.
Description. This conical object has a groove 1.6-2.1 em. from the flat edge and a drilling in the centre of
the flat side.
Typology. Stopper (cf. Megiddo II: Pl. 256:14) or weight (Eran forthcoming).
Date. This object is dated by its context to the LB II.
17. Mortar (Figs. 9.15:1, 9.18:1)

H. 4.2 em.; maximal D. 11.4 em.
Basalt. Complete with three old breaks in the rim.
Description. Shaped like a simple round bowl. There are traces of reddish ochre inside the bowl, on the
rim and in an external strip ca. 2 em. below the rim.
9. I would like to thank Michael Sebbane for this comment.
254
Typology. Comparable bowls with red paint or ground hematite were identified as mortars. They were
found at Megiddo (Megiddo II: Pls. 262:14, 263:17), Tell el Farcah (S) (Petrie et al. 1952:18, Pl. 21:108)
and Deir el-Balah (unpublished).
Date. The parallels come from LB II contexts.
18. Pilgrim flask (Figs. 9.16, 9.18:3)

Reg. No. 14540; Locus 1461; Area D; IAA No. Kll296.
L. 11 em.; W. 5.7 em.; T. 0.6 em.
Onyx-banded calcite (alabaster). Broken.
Description. Body fragment.
Typology. The two rows of incised triangles identify it as belonging to a pilgrim flask. This decoration is
especially typical of faience flasks (cf. Lachish II: Pl. 22:56). Alabaster pilgrim flasks are known from
Gezer (Gezer III: Pl. 212:14), Tell Jemmeh (Petrie 1928:20, Pl. 45:4), Tomb 11 at Beth-shemesh (Grant
1929:137; Grant and Wright 1939:44, n. 18, 160), Megiddo (Megiddo //: Pls. 259:19 = 261:19), Ugarit
(Schaeffer 1949: Fig. 59:30), Lachish (Lachish IV: Pis. 26:47 = 55:15) and Tomb 90 at Beth-shan (Oren
1973:228-229, Fig. 45:25).
Date. All the above examples date to the LB II.
19. Vase (Fig. 9.15:4, 9.18:2)

aeg. No. 11116; Locus 1109; Area J; IAA No. K11291.
H. 7.3 em.; D. 2.2-2.35 em.
Onyx-banded calcite (alabaster). Broken
Description. The lower part of a vessel with a boss separating the trumpet base from the body.
Typology. Vessels with a boss were found in Middle Bronze Age contexts at Gezer ( Gezer Ill: Pl. 42:2),
Tell el-cAjjul (Petrie 1933:10, Pls. 15, 26:21-22; 1934:10, Pls. 24, 39:61, 63-64) and Megiddo (Megiddo
I/: Pls. 258:6, 260:35 = 261 :35). In all these vessels the diameter of the base is smaller than that of the
boss. The object from Shiloh belongs to another group in which the base is larger than the boss. This
group is known mainly from Egypt and contains several type of vessels: Cairo Museum (von Bissing
1907:70, 72, Pls. 3:18380, 18387, 4:18379), Metropolitan Museum New York (from western Thebes-
Hayes 1959:276-277, Fig. 169 [centre]) and the Rijksmuseum Leiden (Bourriau 1982:127-128 [No.
116]).
Outside Egypt such vessels are known from Ugarit (Bossert 1951:51, 224 [Nos. 760-761]), Byblos
(Dunand 1937 and 1939:352, Fig. 277 [5222]) and Assur (von Bissing 1940 [Nos. 7, 12-18, 20-27a, 34];
Haller 1954:63, Fig. 79a, 139-140, Fig. 164a-e, Pls. 31-32; Klengel-Brandt 1992:153; Wartke
1992:120-121, Ill. 4-5).10
A similar vessel made of serpentine was found at the Amman temple (Hankey 1974:162-171, Pl. 32:D
[S. 7]).
Date. All the above-mentioned parallels were found in LB II contexts. Therefore the Shiloh object,
which was found in a Stratum II context, should be attributed to Stratum VI.
10. Crystal beads of the same shape were also found (Haller 1954:145-146, Pl. 36:g-gl; Wartke 1992:118, Ill. 13).
255
20. Base fragment (Figs. 9.15:5, 9.18:4)

H. 2 em.; D. 14.5 em. (estimated), 4.7 em. (central hole).
Onyx-banded calcite (alabaster). Broken.
Description. Part of a base in the shape of a ring.
Typology. This fragment is a component of a composite vessel. The majority of such vessels were
constructed in two parts. Examples of this kind were found at Gezer Tomb 7 (Gezer Ill: Pl. 64:19), Tell
el-c Ajjul (Petrie 1932:10, Pl. 20:33), Lachish (Lachish IV: Pis. 26:35, 52:45), Beth-shan (Oren 1973:214-
215, Fig. 40:5-6) and Deir el-Balah (Dothan 1979:13, 16-17, Ills. 25, 30). Vessels made of three or more
segments were found at Deir el-Balah (Dothan 1979:64-65, Ills. 145-147; Clamer 1986:27-28, Pl. 4:1).
Date. All these vessels date to the LB II. Therefore the Shiloh fragment, which was found in a mixed
context, should be attributed to Stratum VI.
STRATUM Vor IV
21. Spindle whorl (Fig. 9.14:3)
Basalt. Complete.
Description. Domed trapezoid with a groove on the upper part and a convex base.
Typology. For parallels see Tell Beit Mirsim (TBM II:56, Pl. 38:21; 1943:84, Pl. 63:3) and Samaria
(Crowfoot et al. 1957:398-399, 401, Fig. 92a:5).
Date. The above parallels come from Iron Age contexts. The object was found in a mixed context, but it
seems reasonable to attribute it to either Stratum V or Stratum IV.
STRATUM IV
22. Weight (Fig. 9.14:5)
L. 2.5 em.; W. 1.85 em.; T. 1.15 em.
Hematite. CompletP-.
Description. A flattish oval highly polished pebble.
Typology. Apparently a weight (cf. Megiddo I: Pl. 104:6-8, 11-12, 15, 17-21,25, 28, 34, 38-41, 51).
Date. Found in a pit containing Iron II material, and thus can confidently be attributed to this period.
23. Weight (Figs. 9.14:11, 9.17:10)

H. 3.2 em.; maximal D. 4.35 em., 2.85 em. at base.
Serpentine. Complete.
Description. Biconical. There is a small perforation at the base and another off-centre at the top. The
polishing seems to be unfinished.
Typology. The shape of the object is typical of a weight (cf. Megiddo I: Pl. 104:3, 32).
Date. A serpentine weight was found at Megiddo in Stratum III (Megiddo I: Pl. 104:24). The Shiloh
object, which was found in a mixed locus containing MB, Iron I, Iron II and Roman material may be
confidently attributed to Stratum IV.
256
NOT DATED

Reg. No. 14044; Locus 1404; Area D; IAA No. Kl2789.
H. 4.55 em.; D. 2-4.8 em.
Basalt. Complete.
Description and typology. See Object 6.
Date. The object was found on the surface in a mixed locus. Since this type of pestle has a long
chronological range, it cannot be dated.
25. Stopper/Weight (Fig. 9.14:12)

Reg. No. 5068; Locus 507; Area E; IAA No. K12793.
Chalk. Broken.
Description. Conical object with the apex broken off.
Typology. See Object 16 (cf. Mallet 1988:70-71, Fig. 29:8).
Date. The object was found in a mixed locus and cannot be accurately dated.
26. Rubber/Weight (Fig. 9.14:4)

L. 2.45 em.; W. 1.65 em.; T. 0.5 em.
Hematite. Complete.
Description. A flat polished pebble
Typology. Such pebbles could have been used either as potter's rubbers (cf. Lachish IV: Pl. 49:15), or
weights (see Object 22).
Date. The Shiloh object was found in a mixed context and cannot be accurately dated.
CONCLUSIONS
The clay, bone, metal and stone artefacts discovered at Shiloh provide considerable insight into the
foreign contacts of the inhabitants of the site and on the various industries in which they engaged.
Several metal and clay objects found in Stratum VII (MB III) indicate strong connections with the
north, especially with Anatolia. Some of the stone and clay objects of Stratum VI (Late Bronze Age)
point to connections with Egypt.

Recycling of metal was traced in Stratum VII (MB III). Pottery production is evident in Strata VII
(MB III), VI (LB) and V (Iron I). Spinning and weaving activities were observed in Strata VII (MB III),
V (Iron I), IV (Iron II) and III (Hellenistic).
257
REFERENCES
Akurgal, E. and Hirmer, M. 1962. The Art of the Hittites. London.

Albright, W.F. 1939. Astarte Plaques and Figurines from Tell Beit Mirsim. Melanges syriens offerts a
Monsieur Rene Dussaud. Paris. pp. 109-117.
Amiran, R. and Eitan, A. 1964. Two Seasons of Excavations at Tell Nagila (1962-1963). BIES 28:193-
203. (Hebrew)
Amiran, R. and Eitan, A. 1965. A Canaanite-Hyksos City at Tell Nagila. Archaeology 18:113-123.
Amiran, R. et al. 1978. Early Arad, The Chalcolithic Settlement and Early Bronze City I: First-Fifth
Seasons of Excavations, 1962-1966. Jerusalem.
Ariel, D.A. et al. 1990. Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985, Directed by Yigal Shiloh, II:
Imported Stamped Amphora Handles, Coins, Worked Bone and Ivory, and Glass. Qedem 30.
Jerusalem.
Ayalon, E. 1988. A Byzantine Road and Other Discoveries in the Vicinity of Tell Qasile. Israel-
People and Land 4:9-27. (Hebrew)
Bar-Adon, P. 1980. The Cave of the Treasure, The Finds from the Cave in Na}jal Mishmar. Jerusalem.
Barnett, R.D. 1957. The Nimrud Ivories. London.
von Bissing, F.W. 1907. Steingefiisse. Catalogue general des antiquites egyptiennes du Musee du Caire,
Nos. 18065-18793. Vienna.
von Bissing, F.W. 1940. Agyptische und agyptisierende Alabastergefasse aus den Deutschen
Ausgrabungen in Assur. ZA 12[46]:149-182.
Bittel, K. 1932. Die James Simon-Grabung in Bogazkoy September 1931. Mitteilungen der Deutschen
Orient-Gesellschaft 70:1-23.
Bittel, K. 1970. Hattusha, The Capital of the Hittites. New York.
Bossert, H.T. 1951. Altsyrien. Ttibingen.
Bossert, H.T. 1957. Meine Sonne. Orientalia 26:97-126.
Brandl, B. 1982. The Tel Masos Scarab: A Suggestion for A New Method for the Interpretation of
Royal Scarabs. Scripta Hierosolymitana 28:371-405.
Briend, J., Humbert, J.-B. et al. 1980. Tell Keisan (1971-1976) une' cite phenicienne en Galilee. Paris.
Chappaz, J.-L. 1983. Fichier permanent des antiquites egyptiennes (et egyptisantes) des collections
privees romandes III. Bulletin Societe d'Egyptologie Geneve. 8:109-125.
Clamer, C. 1986. The Dayan Collection: The Stone Vessels. Israel Museum Journa/5:19-36.
Conrad, D. 1985. A Note on An Astarte Plaque from Tel Akko. Michmanim 2:19-24.
Crowfoot, J.W. eta!. 1957. Samaria-Sebaste, Ill: The Objects from Samaria. London.
Curtis, J.E. 1983. Some Axe-heads from Chagar Bazar and Nimrud. Iraq 45:73-81.
Deshayes, J. 1960. Les outils de bronze de l'lndus au Danube, I-ll Paris.
Dothan, M. 1970. cAfula. EAEHL l/:464-466. (Hebrew)
Dothan, M. 1975. cAfula. EAEHL I:32-36. (English)
Dothan, T. 1979. Excavations at the Cemetery of Deir el-Bala}j. Qedem 10. Jerusalem.
Dunand, M. 1937 and 1939. Fouilles de Byblos, Tome/. 1926-1932. Paris.
Dunand, M. 1950, 1954 and 1958. Fouilles de Byblos, Tome II. 1933-1938. Paris.
Dussaud, R. 1931. Fouilles de M. Ploix de rotrou dans la citadelle d'Alep. Syria 12:95-96.
Elliot, C. 1983. Kissonerga Mylouthkia: An Outline of the Ground Stone Industry. Levant 15:11-37.
Emre, K. 1978. Yanarlar. A Hittite Cemetery near Afyon. Ankara.
258
Epstein, C. 1974. Middle Bronze Age Tombs at Kefar Szold and Ginosar. Atiqot 7:13-39. (Hebrew)
Bran, A. Forthcoming. The Weights from the Shiloh Excavations, 1981-1984.

Erkanal, H. 1977. Die Axte und Beile des 2. Jahrtausends in Zentralanatolien. Mtinchen.
Finkelstein, I. and Brandl, B. 1985. A Group of Metal Objects from Shiloh. Israel Museum Journal
4:17-26.
Fischer, P.M. 1991. Tell Abu al-Kharaz, The Swedish Jordan Expedition 1989, First Season Preliminary
Report from Trial Soundings. ADAJ 35:67-104.
Gardiner, A. 1973. Egyptian Grammar. 3rd. edition. London.
Garstang, J. 1932. Jericho: City and Necropolis. Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 19:3-22,
35-54.
Garstang, J. 1934. Jericho: City and Necropolis, Fourth Report. Annals of Archaeology and
Anthropology 21:99-136.
Garstang, J. 1953. Prehistoric Mersin. Yumuk Tepe in Southern Turkey. Oxford.
de Genouillac, H. 1926. Ceramique cappadocienne. Paris.
Gezer I-III. Macalister, R.A.S. 1912. The Excavations of Gezer, 1902-1905 and 1907-1909. Vols. I-III.
London.
Gophna, R. and Sussman, V. 1969. A Middle Bronze Age Tomb at Barqai. Atiqot 5:1-13. (Hebrew)
Goldman, H. 1956. Excavations at GozlU Kule, Tarsus, Vol. II. From the Neolithic through the Bronze
Age. Princeton.
Grant, E. 1929. Beth Shemesh. Haverford.
Grant, E. 1934. Rumeileh Being Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine), Part IlL Haverford.
Grant, E. and Wright, G.E. 1939. Rumeileh being Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Part V [Text].
Haverford.
Guy, P.L.O. 1938. Megiddo Tombs. Chicago.
HaUer, A. 1954. Die Graber und Gruft von Assur. Berlin.
Hamilton, R.W. 1935. Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam. QDAP 4:1-69.
Handcock, P.S.P. 1912. Mesopotamian Archaeology. London.
Hankey, V. 1974. A Late Bronze Age Temple at Amman: I. The Aegean Pottery, II. Vases and Objects
Made of Stone. Levant 6:131-178.
Harding, G.L. 1953. Four Tomb Groups from Jordan. PEFA 6.
Hayes, W.C. 1959. The Scepter of Egypt, Part II: The Hyksos Period and the New Kingdom (1675-1080
B.C.). New York.
Hazor /. Yadin, Y. et al. 1958. Hazor 1: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955.
Jerusalem.
Hazor II. Yadin, Y. eta!. 1960. Hazor II: An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956.
Jerusalem.
Excavations, 1957-1958 (Plates). Jerusalem.
Hazor /II-IV text. Yadin, Y. et al. 1989. Hazor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of
Hennessy, J.B. 1969. Preliminary Report on a First Season of Excavations at Teleilat Ghassul. Levant
1:1-24.
Herrmann, C. 1985. Formenfur iigyptische Fayencen. OBO 60. Freiburg.
Hood, S. 1951. Excavations at Tabara el Akrad, 1948-49. AS 1:113-147.
259
Irvin, D. 1977. Spinnen. In: Galling, K. ed. Biblisches Reallexikon (2nd. edition). Tiibingen. pp. 311-313.
Jericho I. Kenyon, K.M. eta/. 1960. Excavations at Jericho I: The Tombs Excavated in 1952-4. London.
Jericho II. Kenyon, K.M. et a/. Excavations at Jericho. Vol. II: The Tombs Excavated in 1955-8.
London.
Kamil, T. 1982. Yortan Cemetery in the Early Bronze Age of Western Anatolia. BAR S145. Oxford.
Kaplan, J. 1955. A Cemetery of the Bronze Age Discovered Near Tel Aviv Harbour. Atiqot 1:1-12.
(Hebrew)
Karkowski, J. 1981. Paras V: The Pharaonic Inscriptions from Paras. Warsaw.
Kashan. 1975. Sotheby's Catalogue of Antiquities and Islamic Art. London.
Kemp, B.J. eta/. 1989. Amarna Reports V. London.
Kerkhof, V.I. 1969. Catalogue ofthe Shechem Collection in the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in Leiden.
Oudheidkundige Mededelingen, Rijksmuseum van Oudheden 50:28-109.
Kertesz, T. 1989. Terracottas and Worked Bone Artifacts. In: Herzog, Z. eta/. , eds. Excavations at Tel
Michal, Israel. Minneapolis. pp. 361-364.
Klengel-Brandt, E. 1992. Deckelgefass mit Ritzzeichnung. In: Jakob-Rost, L. eta/. Staatliche Museen
zu Berlin. Das Vorderasiatische Museum. Mainz am Rhein. p. 153.
Kochavi, M. 1989. Aphek- Antipatris: Five Thousand Years of History. Tel Aviv. (Hebrew)
Kochavi, M. and Beck, P. 1985. Aphek-Antipatris - 1985. Had. Arch. 87:25. (Hebrew)
Kochavi, M. and Beck, P. 1986. Aphek-Antipatris - 1985. ESI 4:5-6.
Ko§ay, H.Z. 1951. Lesfouilles d'Alaca Hoyii.k. Ankara.
Lachish II. Tufnell, 0. eta/. 1940. Lachish II (Tell ed-Duweir): The Fosse Temple. London.
Lachish Ill. Tufnell, 0. eta/. 1953. Lachish III (Tell ed-Duweir): The Iron Age. London.
Lachish IV. Tufnell, 0 . eta/. 1958. Lachish IV (Tell ed-Duweir): The Bronze Age. London.
Lemaire, P . 1955. Une tombe du bronze recent au mont des oliviers (rapport preliminaire). LA 5:261-299.
Levy, T.E. eta/. 1987. Shiqmim I: Studies Concerning Chalcolithic Societies in the Northern Negev
Desert, Israel (1982-1984). BAR S356. Oxford.
Liebowitz, H.A. 1972. Regionalism in the Art of Syria and Palestine in the Middle Bronze Age
(unpublished Ph.D. thesis). University of Pennsylvania.
Liebowitz, H. A. 1977. Bone and Ivory Inlay from Syria and Palestine. IEJ 27:89-97.
Loffreda, S. 1984. La Tomba No.4 del Bronzo Media liB a Betania. LA 34:357-370.
Mallet, J. 1988. Tell el-Farcah /L2: I.e Bronze moyen. Editions recherche sur les civilisations 66. Paris.
Mallon, A. 1934. "Outillage enos". In: Mallon, A. , Koeppel, R. and Neuville, R. Teleilat Ghassul I:
compte rendu desfouilles de 1'/nstitut Biblique Pontifica/1929-1932. Rome. pp. 77- 79.
Mallowan, M.E.L. 1947. Excavations at Brak and Chagar Bazar. Iraq 9.
Mallowan, M.E.L. 1956. Twenty-Five Years of Mesopotamian Discovery. London.
Mallowan, M.E.L. 1966. Nimrud and its Remains. London.
Maxwell-Hyslop, R . 1946. Daggers and Swords in Western Asia: A Study from Prehistoric Times To
600 B.C. Iraq 8:1-65.
Maxwell-Hyslop, R. 1949. Western Asiatic Shaft-Hole Axes. Iraq 11:90-130.
Megiddo I. Lamon, R.S. and Shipton, G.M. 1939. Megiddo I, Seasons of 1925-34. Strata I-V. Chicago.
Megiddo //. Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo II, Seasons of 1935-39. Chicago.
Miron, E. 1985. A xes and Adzes in Israel and its Surroundings From the Beginning of the Metallurgical
Era till the Appearance of Iron Technology (unpublished M.A. thesis). Tel Aviv University.
(Hebrew)
260
Account: s4309548
Nagel, M.G. 1929. Rapport sur lesfouilles de Deir el Medineh (Nord)[1928] Cairo.
Naveh, J. 1962. The Excavations at Me~ad Hashavyahu, Preliminary Report. IEJ 12:89-113.
Oren, E.D. 1973. The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shan. Leiden.
Ory, J . 1945. A Middle Bronze Age Tomb at El-Jisr. QDAP 13:31-42.
Osten, von der H.H. 1937. The Alishar Hii.yii.k Seasons of 1930-32, Parts I and II. Chicago.
6zgti~, T. 1959. Kii.ltepe-Kani~. Ankara.
6zgti~, T. 1982. Ma(fat Hoyii.k II. Ankara .
. Petrie, W.M.F. 1894. Tell el-Amarna. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1906. Researches in Sinai. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1914. Amulets. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1928. Gerar. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1930. Beth Pelet I (Tell Para). London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1931. Ancient Gaza I. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1932. Ancient Gaza II. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1933. Ancient Gaza Ill. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. 1934. Ancient Gaza IV. Tell el Ajjul. London.
Petrie, W.M.F. et al. 1952. City of Shepherd Kings and Ancient Gaza V. London.
Price-Williams, D. 1977. The Tombs of the Middle Bronze Age II Period from the 500 Cemetery at Tell
Para (South). LIA Occasional Publications 1. London.
Pritchard, J.B. 1943. Palestinian Figurines in Relation to Certain Goddesses Known Through Literature.
New Haven.
Pritchard, J .B. 1963. The Bronze Age Cemetery at Gibeon. Philadelphia.
Pritchard, J.B. 1978. Recovering Sarepta, A Phoenician City. Princeton.
Pritchard, J.B. et al. 1975. Sarepta, A Preliminary Report on the Iron Age. Philadelphia.
Reisner, M.G.A. 1958. Amulets II. Catalogue gem!ral des antiquites egyptiennes du Musee du Caire,
Nos. 12528-13595. Cairo.
Riis, J .P. 1949. The Syrian Astarte Plaques and Their Western Connections. Berytus 9:69-90.
Saller, S.J. 1964. The Excavations at Dominus Flevit (Mount Olivet, Jerusalem), Part II: The Jebusite
Burial Place. Jerusalem.
Schaeffer, C.P.-A. 1931. Les fouilles de Minet-el-Beida et de Ras Shamra, deuxieme campagne
(printemps 1930). Syria 12:1-14.
Schaeffer, C.P.-A. 1932. Les fouilles de Minet-el-Beida et de Ras Shamra: troisieme campagne
(printemps 1931). Syria 13:1-27.
Schaeffer, C.P.-A. 1949. Ugaritica II. Paris.
Schaeffer, C.P.-A. 1954. The Largest Single-Piece Ivory Carving to be Found in the Near East: Richly-
Carved Panels from the Bed of the King of Ugarit, 3300 Years Ago. The Illustrated London News.
3391 (Vol. 224):488-490.
Schaeffer, C.P.-A. 1956. Ugaritica Ill. Paris.
Schmidt, E.F. 1931. Anatolia Through the Ages, Discoveries at the Alishar Mound 1927-1929. Chicago.
Schmidt, E.F. 1932. The Alishar Hii.yii.k Seasons of 1928 and 1929. Part I. Chicago.
Shalev, S. 1986. The Development of Swords and Daggers in Late Bronze Age Canaan (unpublished
M.A. thesis). Tel Aviv University. (Hebrew)
Palestine, in 1926, 1929, 1932 and 1963. The Pre-Hellenistic Remains. Copenhagen.
261
Account: s4309548
Singer-Avitz, L. and Levi, Y. 1992. An MB IIA Kiln at the Nal)al Soreq Site. Atiqot 21:9*-14*.
(Hebrew)
Starkey, J.L. and Harding, G.L. 1932. Beth-Pelet Cemetery. In: Macdonald, E., Starkey, J.L. and
Harding, G.L. Beth-Pelet II London.
Sussman, V. 1966. Middle Bronze Age Burials at Moza. Atiqot 3:40-43. (Hebrew)
Tadmor, M. 1981. Female Relief Figurines of Late Bronze Age Canaan. E/15:79-84. (Hebrew)
Tadmor, M. 1982a. Female Figurines in Canaan in the Late Bronze Age. Qadmoniot 25:2-10. (Hebrew)
Tadmor, M. 1982b. Female Cult Figurines in Late Bronze Canaan and Early Israel: Archaeological
Evidence. In: Ishida, T., ed. Studies in the Period of David and Solomon and Other Essays.
Tokyo. pp. 139-173.
TBM I. Albright, W.F. 1932. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim in Palestine I: The Pottery ofthe First
Three Campaigns. AASOR 12.
TBM II. Albright, W.F. 1938. The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim II: The Bronze Age. AASOR 17.
Tripathi, D.N. 1988. Bronzework of Mainland Greece from c. 2600 B.C to c. 1450 B.C. Goteborg.
VanBeek, G. and VanBeek, 0. 1990. The Function of the Bone Spatula. BA 53:205-209.
de Vaux, R. 1951. La troisieme campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Naplouse. RB 58:393-430,
566-590.
Vincent, L.H. 1935. Chronique: A travers les fouilles palestiniennes. II Jericho et sa chronologie. RB
44:583-605.
Wainwright, G.A. 1956. The Cappadocian Symbol. AS 6:137-143.
Wainwright, G.A. 1958. The 'Sign Royal' or Cappadocian Symbol. Orientalia 27:287.
Wartke, R.B. 1992. Die Backsteingruft 45 in Assur: Entdekung, Fundzusammensetzung und
Prasentation in Berliner Vorderasiatischen Museum. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-
Gesellschaft 124:97-130.
Woolley, L. 1934. Ur Excavations, Vol. II. Oxford.
Yadin, Y. 1963. The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands. Jerusalem.
Ziffer, I. 1990. At that time the Canaanites were in the land: Daily Life in Canaan in the Middle Bronze
Age 2, 2000-1550 B.C.E. Eretz Israel Museum exhibition catalogue. Tel Aviv
262
APPENDIX 1
IDENTIFICATION OF BONE RAW MATERIAL

USED IN ARTEFACT MANUFACTURE
Liora Kolska Horwitz*
Seven worked bone artefacts from Shiloh (six described above and one described in Chapter 8) were
examined in order to determine the raw material used in their manufacture. All pieces appear to be
made on mammalian bone. No species identifications were possible, but some of the bones could be
assigned to size classes; either large mammals, i.e., cattle/ donkey, or medium-sized mammals, i.e.,
sheep I goat.
Reg. No. 7273: This item is a right metatarsal of Bas taurus with the proximal epiphysis still present and
unworked, while the distal epiphysis has been removed by sawing horizontally relative to the bone shaft.
Deep incisions are visible on the volar surface of the bone, while a short but quite deep incision is visible
at midshaft, on the plantar surface. This incision does not penetrate the medullary cavity. This inner
(medullar cavity) surface of the long bone is unworked. Similarly, the distal, sawn edge of the bone is
not worked. These two features suggest that the piece is unfinished and was either in the process of being
worked or else had been discarded.
Brandl (this chapter) has suggested that this piece may have served as a handle for a hafted implement
much in the same way as the sheep I goat metapodials served as handles for copper awls in the Chalcolithic
period (Ilan and Sebbane 1989). However, my examination of these Chalcolithic bone handles indicates
that they have rounded and worked distal ends whereas the piece from Shiloh is unworked, with the
original saw marks still visible. In addition, the Chalcolithic pieces lack the short, deep groove present
on the plantar surface of the Shiloh bone. The Chalcolithic artefacts and the metatarsal from Shiloh
therefore differ in the degree and pattern of modification.
Reg. No. 15173/2: A shuttle manufactured on a fragment of a halved mammalian long bone shaft. The
edges and both inner (medullary cavity) and outer surfaces of the bone are smoothed.
Reg. No. 15253: A small inlay manufactured on a piece of mammalian bone.
Reg. Nos. 15165 I 1 and 15165 I 2: One large and one smaller spindle whorl, both manufactured on
mammalian bone. Both have been blackened by fire.
Reg. No. 10099: A spatula manufactured on a rib of a large mammal. Mammalian ribs appear to be
favoured for the manufacture of spatulas due to their shape, size and thickness (Horwitz 1990).
263
Reg. No. 6189 (L. 623) (see Chapter 8). A seal made on a shaft fragment of mammalian bone, probably a
tibia shaft of a medium-sized mammal. The object has been fashioned on a section of lQ!lg bon~ shaft
that has had both epiphyses and excess shaft removed by cutting them horizontally relative to the shaft
of the bone. Both ends of the shaft and its inner and outer surfaces exhibit smoothing and polish and a
perforation.
REFERENCES
Horwitz, L.K. 1990. Archaeozoological Analysis of Raw Materials Used in the Manufacture of Bone
Artifacts. In: Ariel, D.T. Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985 Vol. II (Qedem 30).
Jerusalem: 144-145.
Ilan, 0. and Sebbane, M. 1989. Copper Metallurgy, Trade and the Urbanization of Southern Canaan in
the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. In: de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). L'urbanisation de Ia Palestine
a !'age du bronze ancien (BAR International Series 527). Oxford: 139-162.
264
APPENDIX2
MACROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION OF STONE OBJECTS

Naomi Porat*
Twenty seven objects were analyzed. Twenty six are described in Chapter 9, while the last object (Seal
4083) is dealt with in Chapter 8. Most samples were examined without any treatment under a stereoscopic
microscope (binocular). Thus the rock description is macroscopic. Thin sections were made from three
samples (Objects 9, 13, and 17 below), hence their description is more detailed. The sequential numbers
below correspond to Brandl's descriptions.
1. Reg. No. 15193 Basalt; abundant weathered olivine
2. Reg. No. 15194 Basalt; abundant weathered olivine
3. Reg. No. 15323 Basalt
5. Reg. No. 15100 Basalt, slightly vesicular
8. Reg. No. 15153 Limestone; reddish
9. Reg. No. 15271 Silicious limestone; micritic pellets/ intraclasts, rimmed and cemented
with quartz
10. Reg. No. 13042 Chalk
11. Reg. No. 15145 Basalt; massive, very finely crystalline
12. Reg. No. 12032 Basalt; massive, coarsely crystalline, with phenocrysts
13. Reg. No. 15325 Basalt; porphyritic (olivine), trachytic texture, with pyroxene xenoliths
14. Reg. No. 17323 Speleothem; a stalagmite or stalactite with huge calcite crystals
15. Reg. No. 14147/2 Limestone; very fine grained (lithographic)
16. Reg. No. 14027/3 Chalk
17. Reg. No. 14141/2 Basalt; porphyritic (olivine), coarsely crystalline, with ophitic texture,
abundant calcite
18. Reg. No. 14540 Onyx-banded calcite

21. Reg. No. 13171 Basalt; massive, fine grained, with phenocrysts
22. Reg. No. 3144 Hematite
23. Reg. No. 17011 Serpentine; green-black veins and green-grey domains
24. Reg. No. 14044 Basalt; vesicular
25. Reg. No. 5068 Chalk
26. Reg. No. 14368 Hematite
27. Reg. No. 4083 It is difficult to determine the rock type. Probably basalt, highly polished,
very dense, medium crystalline
* The Geological Survey, Jerusalem
265
CHAPTER 10
PERSONAL ACCESSORIES AND ORNAMENTS

Benjamin Sass*
THE FINDS
Toggle pins (Fig. 10.1:1)
The two toggle pins are of an MB-early LB type (Henschel-Simon 1938, Type II.6), and indeed one of
them, a fragment now 4.5 em. long (Reg. No. 17291), was found in L. 1522, a storeroom of MB III
Stratum VII. The other, 8.5 em. long (Reg. No. 18008) is unstratified.
Hair or garment ornament (Fig. 10.1:2)

Found in L. 1415 of Stratum VI (Debris 407), this thin sheet-gold ornament (0.54 gr, Reg. No. 14239),
pierced at the apex, is in the shape of a three-petalled flower. The decoration of border lines and dots
could have been executed in repousse or by burnishing into a mould. As is customary in MB and LB
sheet-gold ornaments, the edges are folded over.
Somewhat similar to a fly amulet, it cannot be classified as such for lack of a head. Although its use as
a pendant cannot be ruled out, a hair (or wig) or garment decoration seems more appropriate. The
shape, a segment of a rosette, is rather uncommon; compare the cloisonne pendant from the LB
'Treasury' at Kamid el-Loz (Fig. 10.1:3; Hachmann 1983, frontispiece and no. 85; Kamid el-Loz 10: 45).
Otherwise the closest parallels are contemporary thin sheet-gold rosettes, of similar function, well-known
in the Near East and the Aegean (there are, of course, also earlier and later examples). Among the
Canaanite material the finds from Beth-shan (Rowe 1940:11, Pis. 30:58, 34:4) and Dan (Biran 1974: Fig.
8) may be mentioned.
Beads and pendants

a.) Of the two barrel-shaped, or rounded biconical, carnelian beads (Fig. 10.1:4), one (Reg. No. 15305)
comes from L. 1526, one of the MB III storerooms in Area F, and the other (Reg. No. 13054, a
fragmentary piece) was found in L. 1301 in the Iron I buildings of Area C. This type of bead is universal.
b.) Rather crude pendant (or weight?) made of limestone (Reg. No. 17011, Fig. 10.1 :5). It comes from L.
1703 which contained a mixture of pottery, mostly MB, but also from the Iron I, Iron II and the Roman
periods.
* Department of Archaeology, University of Haifa.
266
0 1cm.
3 4 5
0 3cm.
Fig. 10.1: Personal accessories and ornamems: IJ - nronze toggle pins; 2) - Gold ornament 14239; 3) Late Bronze
pendant from Kamid el-Loz; 4) - Carnelian beads; 5) - Limestone pendant or weight; 6) Shells; 7) -
Mother-of-pearl ring; 8) Shell lips (from left to right, Reg. Nos. 3171, 14023 and 14338).
267
c.) The MB III storerooms (Stratum VII, L. 1522, 1526 and 1527) yielded a quantity of shells (Fig.
10.1:6).1 These include an unpierced freshwater mollusc, Melanopsis praemorsa buccinoidea, probably
from a nearby spring; a pierced Mediterranean rustic dove-shell, Columbella rustica; and 26 pierced
Mediterranean cone shells, Conus mediterraneus, as well as an unpierced one. A pierced Red Sea
bloody nerite, Nerita sanguinolenta, comes from L. 1447 of Iron Age I.
d.) Mother of pearl ring (Reg. No. 14066, Fig. 10.1:7), perhaps a hair or garment ornament. It was found
in a mixed locus (L. 1404) that contained MB, Iron I, Iron II and later pottery.
Shell lips (Fig. 10.1:8)

Three worked lips of the Mediterranean bonnet, Phalium granulatum undulatum (family Cassidae,
hence the oft-used name 'cassid lips'), come from L. 1431 (Reg. No. 14023), L. 307 (Reg. No. 3171) and
L. 1446 (Reg. No. 14338) that contained LB, Iron I and mostly Iron I material respectively. Reese (1989;
see also Tubb 1990:87, 97) demonstrated the ubiquity of Phalium lips from the Upper Paleolithic to the
Roman period in domestic, cultic and funerary contexts. The function of the shell lips is not self-evident.
They might have been selected for the symbolic value of their crescentic shape. As many are unpierced,
they may have been sewn onto garments, the natural ribs facilitating this task. A utilitarian purpose is
not to be ruled out, however, in addition to the amuletic/ ornamental role. An ethnographic study,
which would be beyond the scope of this excavation report, is certain to produce an insight into the use
and symbolic role of these shell lips.
DISCUSSION
The only coherent assemblage of personal ornaments and accessories found at Shiloh forms part of the
stock-in-trade of a Middle Bronze Age merchant or metalsmith (see Chapter 9). As to the shell
ornaments, the chief point of interest is the ratio of 28:1 of Mediterranean to Red Sea shells. The single
freshwater mollusc, possibly coming from the vicinity of Shiloh, is unpierced and may not have served
as an ornament at all. Otherwise, not much can be said about this small mixed lot.
REFERENCES
Biran, A. 1974. Tel Dan. BA 37:26-51.

Hachmann, R. 1983. Fruhe Phoniker im Libanon: 20 Jahre deutsche Ausgrabungen in Kamid el-Loz.
Mainz.
Henschel-Simon, E. 1938. The 'Toggle Pins' in the Palestine Archaeological Museum. QDAP6:169-209.
Kamid el-Loz 10. Miron, R. 1990. Das 'Schatzhaus' im Palastbereich. Die Funde. Bonn.
Kamid el~Loz 12. Bokonyi, S. 1990. Tierhaltung und Jagd. Tierknochenfunde der Ausgrabungen 1964
bis 1981. Bonn.
Reese, D.S. 1989. On Cassid Lips and Helmet Shells. BASOR 275:33-39.
Rowe, A. 1940. The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth Shan. Philadelphia.
Tubb, J.N. 1990. Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Cemetery of Tiwal esh-Sharqi. London.
1. The shells were identified by Henk K. Mienis, Curator of the Mollusc Collection, Zoological Museum, Hebrew University,
Jerusalem.
268
PART THREE
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSES
CHAPTER 11
PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSES OF MIDDLE BRONZE AGE III,

LATEBRONZEAGEANDIRONAGEI
POTTERY ASSEMBLAGES
Jonathan Glass, Yuval Goren, Shlomo Bunimovitz, Israel Finkelstein*
The results of a comprehensive petrographic study of selected wares from Shiloh are presented in this
chapter. Three assemblages were sampled: MB III (Stratum VII), Late Bronze Age (Stratum VI) and
Iron Age I (Stratum V).
The study was oriented towards the following targets:
1. To locate the provenance of the pottery discovered in the MB III storerooms, LB Debris 407 and the
Iron I pillared buildings. A special effort has been made to trace the provenance and technological
affinities of collared-rim pithoi, the most ubiquitous vessels in Iron I sites of the central hill country
(Finkelstein 1988: 275-285; see Chapter 6). 1
2. To trace the nature and standard of ceramic technology in each of the assemblages in terms of
correlation between the raw materials and the possible function of each vessel type.
3. To study the development of pottery technology during the time span represented by the three
assemblages.
The chief raw material used to manufacture pottery is clay, which occurs in nature as a weathering
product of aluminous rocks. To this is generally added a non-plastic component, commonly called
temper (Shepard 1965:6-54), which may be either natural (e.g. wadi sand) or artificial (i.e., grog).
Many techniques are employed for analyzing the composition of pottery, the simplest of which is the
use of a magnifying glass or stereoscopic microscope. Such analyses aim at a general determination of
clay and temper categories and of the overall texture of the sherd (Bishop et al. 1982:277-281; Stienstra
1986). Petrography is a most effective tool when large assemblages are investigated, especially when
coarsely tempered, low-fired pottery is examined (Goren and Porat 1989). The simplicity and low cost
facilitate investigation of a large number of samples thus providing valuable information relatively
quickly. For these reasons it was the preferred analytical method for the study ofthe Shiloh assemblages.
During petrographic analysis the samples were classified into petrographic groups. A 'petrographic
group' encompasses vessels which share similar petrographic affinities in both clay and temper. This
* Research Division, Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem and Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.
1. For the dispute over their function, chronology and origin see also Ibrahim 1978; Zertal l988a; Biran 1989; Yellin and
Gunneweg 1989.
271
classification is defined solely by the nature of the raw materials regardless of variables such as typology,
chronology and geographic location of the site. Therefore, it may serve as an independent technical
criterion for a comparative assortment of ceramic assemblages.
However, classifying archaeological material by petrographic group presents several problems. Pottery
vessels represent a varied selection of materials and shapes, which are dictated by the personal taste of
the potter. As a result there are considerable difficulties in defining the control group to which the data
of the studied group may be compared. The question is what degree of similarity is sufficient for
including two different cases in one group. A second problem results from the fact that ceramic raw
materials are sediments which vary in their provenance, nature and mineralogy. Hence, it is difficult to
stipulate the petrological criteria for defining petrographic groups.
METHOD
The study was carried out in three stages. First the entire assemblage was examined with the aid of a
magnifying glass and divided into general groups according to the characteristics of both clay and
temper. This is common procedure prior to mineralogical and chemical analysis (Bishop et al.
1982:278-281; Rothenberg and Glass 1983:102-105; Stienstra 1986). The samples for petrographic
examination were then chosen both by typology and raw materials of the vessels. In the second stage,
thin-sections were prepared and examined under a petrographic (polarizing) microscope at
magnifications ranging between x40 and x400. An inventory of the thin-sections is presented in Tables
11.1-2. Finally, the Shiloh samples were compared with a control range of clays, soils and common
tempering materials (Goren 1991: Appendix 1).2
RESULTS
The Shiloh material includes a limited number of petrographic groups. Their provenance was determined
according to the typical lithological 'fingerprint' of each individual group on the basis of comparison
with a data-bank of about 2,500 thin-sections of vessels from different periods and regions
The following petrographic groups were observed in the three assemblages from Shiloh:
The 'Moza-Aminadav' Group

This group is characterized by a mixture of fine iron-rich carbonate clay and coarse dolomitic sand. It is
well recorded from several assemblages of different periods, all retrieved from sites in the central hill
country and its vicinity. It is a dominant component in the ceramic assemblages of the Judaean Desert
Chalcolithic sites, as well as of sites in the Judaean hills (Goren 1987, 1991). In the EB I it is recorded
from sites in central Israel, from the Beer-sheba Valley in the south to Aphek in the north. It has
however not been discerned at any EB II-III site (Porat 1989a; 1989b; Gilead and Goren 1989; Meir et
al. 1992). In the Intermediate Bronze and Middle Bronze Ages it again becomes one of the common raw
materials of the ceramic assemblages in the Judaean hills and the northern Negev and is also known
from the Iron I assemblages of Tell en-Nasbeh, Raddana and Giloh (all unpublished). Coarse dolomitic
2. Clay samples were moistened and formed into small briquettes, and then fired at temperatures of 6oooc and 800°C.
Thin-sections were prepared from these briquettes following the method of Courty et al. (1989).
272
Fig. ll.l: Collared-rim pithos of Group A. Quartz grains (rounded, light) and shale fragments in a silty
clay-rich ground mass (magnification x 25, crossed nicols).
Fig. 11.2 Collared-rim pithos of Group A. Large silty shale fragments with peripheral shrinkage cavities;
quartz grains (rounded, light) embedded in a silty clay-rich ground mass (magnification x 25,
crossed nicols).
273
Fig. 11.3: Collared-rim pithos of Group A. A well-rounded quartz grain derived from a Lower Cretaceous
sand formation, embedded in an isotropic silty clay-rich ground mass (magnification x 25,
crossed nicols ).
Fig. 11.4: Collared-rim pithos of Group A. Oolitic structures in fine limestone fragments (magnification x
100, plane-polarized light).
274
Fig. 11.5: Collared-rim pithos of Group A. A large oolitic limestone fragment with spheroidal iron oxide-
rich matrix, most probably formed by replacement of calcitic oolites; also some isolated iron
oxide-rich spheroids exhibiting peripheral cavities (magnification x 25, crossed nicols).
Fig. 11.6: Collared-rim pithos of Group A. Ferruginous sandstone fragment embedded in an isotropic,
silty clay-rich ground mass (magnification x 25, crossed nicols).
275
sand is a common tempering material in the Iron Age II assemblage from the City of David in Jerusalem
(Franken 1990:79-85).
Recently an ancient quarry of dolomitic sand was discovered near the Intermediate Bronze-Middle
Bronze Age site of Emeq Refaim (E. Eizenberg, personal communication). The quarry is located in an
outcrop that forms the lowermost stratum of the Aminadav formation, directly overlying the uppermost
layer of the Moza clay. Indeed, both macroscopic and microscopic examinations confirmed that the
pottery of the above-mentioned site was made from a mixture of Moza clay and dolomitic sand.
The addition of calcite to the paste strengthens the thermal-shock resistance of a vessel (Arnold 1985:
24). Under firing conditions dolomite alters to calcite (Graf and Goldsmith 1955) and it is very probable
that the more accessible and friable dolomite sand was frequently used instead of calcite. At sites
located near outcrops of dolomitic sand, this temper was commonly utilized in the production of
thin-walled or other fine wares, whereas cooking-pots and basins incorporated crushed calcite. The
method was probably dictated by the availability of the raw material, namely, proximity to the
Cenomanian formations of the central highlands.
To sum up, the origin of vessels belonging to this petrographic group is those places in the central hill
country where the Moza-Aminadav formations are exposed.
The 'Lower Cretaceous' Group (Figs. 11.1-6)

This group is characterized by the use of argillaceous, iron-rich shales and clay mud balls, with a higher
silt content than the former group and typical ferruginous oolites. Some oolites have developed around
quartz grains, others have no internal structure. Sandy quartz appears in most of the thin-sections as
subangular grains. They include coarse rounded quartz grains (which originated from sand or weathered
sandstone), sandstone grains (aggregates of rounded quartz grains embedded in carbonate and/ or iron
oxide matrix), silt rich in quartz, oolitic limestone, spheroids of iron oxide (frequently with an internal
concentric structure) and aggregates of such spheroids. Also present are grains of fine-grained limestone.
Other 'fingerprints' of this group are diversified shale fragments, some of which are ferruginous while
others tend to be more clayey .. Pellets, tuff fragments and typical rhombohedral limonitic pseudomorphs
after dolomite also occur in some of the samples.
A large bank of comparative data shows that the lower formations of the Lower Cretaceous
lithological section were the source of both clay and temper. These formations outcrop extensively in
Transjordan between the southern part of the Dead Sea and Wadi Zarqa, and also in the Upper Galilee
and southern Lebanon. Smaller outcrops appear in eastern Samaria, in Wadi Malih and Wadi Farcah.
The most relevant localities in the case of Shiloh are those of eastern Samaria and Transjordan. A
detailed petrological description of the Lower Cretaceous formations in Wadi Farcah and Wadi Malih
was presented by Mimran (1969) and Shaliv (1972) and a profile of the Jordanian outcrops was given by
Bender (1974). A distinctive characteristic of the Lower Cretaceous shales (Hatira formation), and even
more so of the upper formations (Faria and Tammun), are the limonitic oolites, which are not known
from any other part of the lithostratigraphic column of the southern Levant. Both ferruginous shales
and quartzitic sandstones are very rare in other parts of that column.
On the basis of these affinities it is possible to trace the origin of the ceramic raw materials of each
vessel. The presence of tuff as one of the main tempering components points to the Tayasir formation
shales, whereas the presence of diversified shales, siltstones, quartzitic sands and ferruginous oolites
points to the Hatira shales. The utilization of the Faria-Tammun marls can be determined from the
276
presence of marly clays with vast limonitic rhombs, which represent pseudomorphs after dolomite,
pellets and fossil shell fragments together with abundant ferruginous oolites.
The use of Lower Cretaceous shales and highly ferruginous marls for the production of pottery has
been recorded in several other cases. The utilization of this superior quality raw material enabled the
potter to achieve a high degree of sintering of the clay at relatively low firing temperatures, due to the
fluxing activity of the iron. Therefore, Lower Cretaceous ferruginous shales and marls were used in
several instances in order to produce vessels of greater strength, especially pithoi, jugs and storage jars
intended to hold liquids. At the Chalco lithic site of Tuleilat el-Ghassul most of the locally-made pottery
was formed of this iron-rich clay (Goren 1987:48-53), the typical pithoi having been sintered to
surprisingly high quality (Edwards and Segnit 1982). The same raw materials were used during the EB II
for the production of the high quality 'Metallic Ware', as well as other fine vessels (Porat 1989a). Recent
examinations of Iron I collared-rim pithoi from several sites in the Galilee (unpublished) have revealed
the use of this clay. Its adoption for the manufacture of pithoi demanded careful selection of a layer of
shales rich in clay minerals and poor in carbonates; the latter may cause mechanical damage to the
highly-fired pottery due to the process of decalcination which occurs at 7000C and above. Nonetheless,
this clay was used for producing most of the ceramic repertoire at sites located near outcrops of these
formations (Goren 1990; 1991).
The 'Terra Rossa + Calcite' Group

This group is easily defined even when examined by the naked eye since it contains large, nearly pure,
angular calcite crystals as the sole tempering component. The calcite crystals are clear, exhibit typical
twinning and zoning features, and are split along their cleavage planes, indicating that they were crushed
by the potter prior to admixture in the paste. The use of crushed calcite required the potter to mine this
mineral from naturally-occurring veins in limestones, carefully crush it and mix it in the body of the clay
(Glass 1978a; 1978b; 1978c). This laborious and time-consuming procedure extended the manufacturing
process and therefore was probably dictated by specific market demands. As noted above, the use of
calcite as temper increases the thermal-shock resistance of the vessel and reduces its porosity. Crushed
calcite is therefore very common as the main tempering material of cooking vessels from the EB I
through the end of the Iron Age, when it was replaced by other ingredients.
At Shiloh the calcite-tempered pottery is characterized by a silty, non-carbonate, rather ferruginous
clay, identified as terra rossa. This soil type is widely exposed in the central hill country as well as in
many other regions in the Mediterranean climatic zones of Israel. Therefore, the provenance of vessels
belonging to this petrographic group cannot be determined on the basis of their lithology alone.
The 'Moza +Calcite' Group

This group is composed of Moza clay and crushed calcite. The characteristics of these two raw materials
have been dealt with above.
The 'Calcareous Sand' Group

In this group a variegated calcareous sand dominates the coarse nonplastic assemblage. This sand
originates in deposits of river beds which drain areas of micritic, chalky and detrital limestone. Gypsum
cleavage fragments appear as secondary elements in the nonplastic assemblage. Their majority, especially
close to the surface of the sherds, were dissolved and thus left cavities. Some of the samples contain
chert, usually of fine grain size. Other typical elements in this group are crushed pottery fragments,
277
different in composition from the body of the sherd. The former are dark, poor in carbonate and rich in
silty quartz. They have a rounded outline, and there is no doubt that they were reshaped by the firing.
Some of the samples contain fragments of fossils. Also frequent are plant particles, which in most cases
produced a characteristic grey core.
Under low-grade oxidizing firing conditions the clay matrix burnt to very light colours. The matrix is
a marl and contains numerous microscopic rhombohedral calcite crystals as well as minute crystals of
ore minerals.
The absence of coarsely crystalline carbonates derived from dolomite indicates that this group does
not come from the vicinity of Shiloh. Its lithic assemblage points to a geological environment which is
dominated by marl, chalk, chalky limestone, cryptocrystalline limestone, flint and gypsum. Such an
assemblage matches that of the Eocene limestone formations and the Taqia marls and shales which are
exposed in vast areas on the margins of the Shechem syncline, a minimum distance of ca. 10 km. to the
northwest of Shiloh.
It is important to note that although the geological environments of the 'Lower Cretaceous' and
'Calcareous Sand' groups are completely different, they can be found in close proximity in the upper
course of Wadi Farcah.
The 'Marl' Group

This group is characterized by a lighter, calcareous clay rich in foraminifera. On the basis of the
microfauna! assemblage within the matrix, it seems that in most cases Senonian (Taqia) marl was the
common raw material which constitutes the plastic component of this group. The temper consists of
several types of sand-size rock fragments, including limestone, basalt and chert (No. 20), or only
limestone (No. 49). In the third sample (No. 50) no temper was added. The grains are spherical, fairly
well sorted and seem to originate in wadi sands which were sieved by the potter.
These vessels may represent the use of similar clays with the addition of different types of temper
derived from various depositional environments. Since in the two former cases (Nos. 20 and 49) the
temper is identified as wadi sand, it may be assumed that this specific clay was used locally by potters
who used sieved sand from wadis located near their workshops.
The limestone, basalt and chert temper of Sample No. 20 represe!}ts sediment from a wadi which
drains an area where both limestone and basalt occur. The holocrystalline alkaline basalts in which
olivine phenocrysts are altered to iddingsite are particularly diagnostic. The matrix contains plagioclase
and clinopyroxene. This composition is typical of the Neogene-Pleistocene outcrops of the Galilee
(Oppenheim 1959), Transjordan (Bender 1974) and the Golan Heights (Mor 1973). The Tayasir basalts
of the Lower Cretaceous, on the other hand, although closer in their distribution to Shiloh than the
Neogene-Pleistocene basalts, are characterized by trachytic textures ~:md alteration of the olivine to
chlorite (Mimran 1972). Therefore, the provenance of this vessel (LB trumpet-base carinated bowl) is
possibly in the Galilee.
The provenance of the other two vessels of this group, one of which is a sealed collared-rim pithos
(No. 49), cannot be resolved on the basis of their petrography alone.
DISCUSSION
The Development of Pottery Technology
Comparison of the technology and typology of the three ceramic assemblages discussed here
demonstrates that no significant changes occurred during the time sp<).n which they represent. Almost
278
the same raw materials were utilized for similar pottery types, reflecting a well-established ceramic
tradition. The use of crushed calcite for example, with the addition of either Moza clay or terra rossa,
for the production of cooking-pots is traceable in all three periods. The same holds true for the
utilization of Lower Cretaceous clays. Nevertheless some minor changes can be discerned. For instance,
the use of Lower Cretaceous raw materials becomes more common during the Iron Age. These minor
changes might point to some development in ceramic technology, but they could also reflect the
influence of specific workshops. Another possibility is that the different functions of the three features
(javissae in the Late Bronze Age; storerooms in the MB III and the Iron I) generated a certain bias.
Hence the data from Shiloh is insufficient for drafting a broader socio-economic model.
Analysis of Collared-rim Pithoi

Examination of 48 rims of collared-rim pithoi revealed that they could be assigned to two distinct
petrographic groups, differentiated also by typology and technology.
1. Group A, belonging to the 'Lower Cretaceous' petrographic group (Figs. 11.1-6; Fig. 11.7: 1-6). These
pithoi are symmetrically rounded, display clear signs of the wheel, have a thickened, folded rim and a
distinct border, usually in the shape of a ridge, between the neck and the shoulder.
2. GroupB, belonging to the 'Calcareous Sand' petrographic group (Fig. 11.7:7-16). These pithoi have a
simple, in some cases irregular, shape. Signs of the wheel are weak or non-existent, usually the rim is
neither thickened nor folded and there is a gradual transition from the rim to the neck.
It is possible that the two groups also vary in the technique of attaching the neck to the body of the
vessel near the collar. However the limited number of rims in the sample which were preserved down to
the lower neck made it impossible to reach a definite conclusion.
The sample of collared-rim pithoi from Shiloh represents two manufacturing centres which differ
both in the clay used for production and in technology. The Group A rims were shaped on a fast wheel
while those of Group B were shaped on a slow wheel or hand made. Neither was situated in the
immediate vicinity of Shiloh. That which produced Group A was more advanced from a technological
point of view and should be located in a Lower Cretaceous environment, preferably that of Wadi
Farcah. The other (Group B) should be located where Eocene limestone and Taqia marls are exposed,
perhaps on the margins of the Shechem syncline. Both areas were densely populated in Iron Age I. A
group of Iron I sites was surveyed in Wadi Farcah (Zertal 1988b), and dozens have been recorded on the
western, eastern and southern margins of the Shechem syncline (ibid.; Finkelstein 1988).
The fact that all the vessels analyzed came from only two production centres and that other Iron I
vessels from the site were made in its vicinity (Table 11.1) suggests that collared-rim pithoi were
produced in central workshops, rather than by local or travelling potters. The case of Dan is somewhat
different: 30% of the pithoi analyzed were locally made while the rest were imported from seven different
geographic regions none of which was in the vicinity of Shiloh (Yellin and Gunneweg 1989). It is also
interesting to note that one of the workshops which produced some of the Shiloh collared-rim jars (the
'Calcareous Sand' group) is not represented in the MB III and Late Bronze assemblages.
The distribution of the two groups in Area C reveals a possible chronological and qualitative difference
between them (Figs. 11.8-10). Most of the rims of Group A were found in the Iron I pillared buildings
while most rims of Group B were retrieved from Debris 623, an Iron I deposit containing much pottery
and animal bones, which was laid over pillared Building 335 (Chapter 2). 27 rims of Group A were
retrieved from the pillared buildings compared to 3 from Debris 623 (90% vs. 10%; 87% of the rims from
279
9
7
11
13
15
j
)
280
j
j
cl
Fig. 11.7:
l
)
I
I
I
,
\
)
2
'
\
(5
)
\
\.
0
I
Collared-rim pithoi of Type A (1-6) and Type B (7-16).

- _,__JDcm.
B
12
10
16
14
./
)
)
5
3
j
t)
( s ,;---
l
~I
I
I
l
,
\
\
l.
~
37
F F
BYZANTINE; Locus 623

.. ( £:401 :E:R!Mcre:R ........................
A.AAAAAA
•••
m /RON AGEl
EJ ROMAN -BVZAN TINE

•••••••
B a 3m B
~~~--~--~--~--~--~----~~
Fig. 11.8: Distribution of Group A and Group B collared-rim pithoi in the Area C pillared buildings and in Debris 623.
the pillared buildings belong to Group A). 14 rims of Group B were uncovered in Debris 623 compared
to 4 in the pillared buildings (77% vs. 23%; 82% of the rims in Debris 623 belong to Group B).
It is worth noting that the three intact vessels in the sample, all found in the pillared buildings, belong
to Group A. Typologically, of the 17 restored collared-rim jars which were found in Area C by the
Danish expedition (Shiloh 1969) and by present excavations, 10 have thick rims, 4 have thin rims and 3
are difficult to classify.
The quantitative analysis of the Area C pottery (Chapter 6) hints that the Debris 623 assemblage is
slightly later than the assemblage of the pillared buildings. It seems that the material of Debris 623 was
cleared from an Iron I deposit on the summit of the mound a short while after the destruction of the
pillared buildings and dumped on the western slope.3
The group of vessels which dominates the pillared buildings' assemblage represents the floruit of
Shiloh. They were made by a sophisticated manufacturing centre and placed in an important section of
the site. The pillared buildings of Area C were apparently storerooms and formed part of the auxiliary
installations of the temple compound of Iron I Shiloh. It is reasonable to assume that they were
managed by the temple administration and connected with redistribution of commodities.
Debris 623 represents a brief continuation of activity at Shiloh within the Iron I after the destruction
of the pillared buildings. Most of the vessels were made in a less sophisticated workshop, possibly
because they were not intended to be associated with the site's administration.
3. There is no intermediate level between the destruction layer of Building 335 and Debris 623 and there are no post-Iron I
sherds in Debris 623.
281
Summing up, Group A apparently predates Group B with a certain overlap of the two. The pillared
buildings contained better quality ware, whereas Debris 623 originated in a place which accommodated
jars of lesser quality.
Additional information regarding chronology, manufacturing technology and trade of the collared-rim
jars from the central hill country will hopefully be forthcoming from examination of sherds collected
from scores of Iron I sites surveyed in the region. 4
Fig. 11.9: Proportion of the two groups of pithoi in the pillared buildings and in Debris 623 (%).
GR:)IJP A (H)UP B
- Pll!.ARED BUILDINGS ~ DEBRIS 623
Fig. 11.10: Distribution of the Group A and Group B pithoi in Area C (pillared buildings vs. Debris 623; %).
4. The present study is the first stage in a broader project to examine collared-rim pithoi collected from Iron I sites in the
course of the Land of Ephraim survey.
282
TABLE 11.1: INVENTORY OF THIN-SECTIONS (EXCLUDING COLLARED-RIM PITHOI)
Sample Period Type Petrographic

No. group
I MBII! Bowl Moza-Aminadav

2 MBill Carinated bowl Moza-Aminadav
3 MBill Shallow bowl Lower Cretaceous
4 MBIII Jug Moza-Aminadav
5 MBIII Cooking-pot Terra rossa +calcite
6 MBIII Pithos Moza-Aminadav
7 MBIIl Pithos Lower Cretaceous
8 LB Shallow bowl Moza-Aminadav
9 LB Shallow bowl Lower Cretaceous
II LB Shallow bowl Moza-Aminadav
14 LB Shallow bowl Lower Cretaceous
17 LB Carinated bowl Moza-Aminadav
18 LB Carinated bowl Moza-Aminadav
19 LB Trumpet bowl Moza-Aminadav
22 LB Trumpet bowl Marl + basalt+ limestone
24 LB Lamp Moza-Aminadav
27 LB Cooking-pot Moza. calcite
28 LB Cooking-pot Terra rossa + calcite
29 LB Cooking-pot Moza + calcite
32 LB Juglet Moza-Aminadav
33 LB Juglet Moza-Aminadav
35 LB Goblet Moza-Aminadav
36 LB Goblet Moza-Aminadav
37 !AI Bowl Moza-Aminadav
38 IAI Bowl Lower Cretaceous
39 !AI Bowl Marl
40 IAI Lamp Moza-Aminadav
41 !AI Lamp Terra rossa + calcite
42 IAI Cooking-pot Terra rossa + calcite
43 !AI Cooking-pot Terra rossa + calcite
46 !AI Large bowl Lower Cretaceous
47 IAI Large bowl Lower Cretaceous

48 !AI Jug Lower Cretaceous
49 IAI Jug Moza-Aminadav
50 IAI Jug Lower Cretaceous
51 IAI Jug Lower Cretaceous
55 !AI(?) Jug Moza-Aminadav
58 IAI Pyxis Lower Cretaceous
59 !AI(?) Storage jar Moza-Aminadav
60 !AI Storage jar Moza + wadi sand
61 !AI Pithos with rosette
impressions Marl + wadi sand
283
TABLE 11.2: INVENTORY OF THIN SECTIONS OF COLLARED-RIM PITHOI
Sample Reg. Locus Petrographic Comments

No. No. group
3088 306 Lower Cretaceous
2 3142 336 Lower Cretaceous
4 3172 306 Lower Cretaceous Restored vessel
8 3285 306 Lower Cretaceous?
10 3342 306 Calcareous sand
l3 3406 335 Lower Cretaceous
16 6127/1 618 Calcareous sand
21 6162/3 618 Lower Cretaceous
37 6331/l 623 Calcareous sand

284
REFERENCES
Arnold, D.E. 1985. Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge.

Bender, F. 1974. The Geology of Jordan. Stuttgart.
Biran, A. 1989. The Collared-rim Jars and the Settlement of the Tribe of Dan. In: Gitin, S. and Dever,
W.G., eds. Recent Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology. AASOR 49: 71-96.
Bishop, R.L., Rands, R.L. and Holley, G.R. 1982. Ceramic Compositional Analysis in Archaeological
Perspective. In: Schiffer, M.B., ed. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 5:275-330.
Courty, M.A., Goldberg, P. and Macphail, R. 1989. Soils and Micromorphology in Archaeology.
Cambridge.
Edwards, W.I. and Segnit, E.R. 1984. Pottery Technology at the Chalcolithic Site of Teleilat Ghassul
(Jordan). Archaeometry 26:69-77.
Franken, H.J. 1990. The Wares and Manufacture of Pottery. In: Franken, H.J. and Steiner, M.L., eds.
Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1967, Vol. II. Oxford. pp. 77-98.
Gilead, I. and Goren, Y. 1989. Petrographic Analyses of Fourth Millennium B.C. Pottery and Stone
Vessels from the Northern Negev, Israel. BASOR 275:5-14.
Glass, J. 1978a. Petrographical and Technological Analyses. In: Amiran, R. Early Arad: The Chalcolithic
Settlement and Early Bronze City I. Jerusalem. pp. 8-9.
Glass, J. 1978b. Petrographical and Technological Analyses of Pottery of Stratum IV. In: Amiran, R.
Early Arad: The Chalcolithic Settlement and Early Bronze City I. Jerusalem. pp. 43-44.
Glass, J. 1978c. Petrographical and Technological Analyses of Pottery of Strata III-I. In: Amiran, R.
Early Arad: The Chalcolithic Settlement and Early Bronze City I. Jerusalem. p. 50.
Goren, Y. 1987. The Petrography of Pottery Assemblages of the Chalcolithic Period from Southern
Israel (unpublished M.A. thesis). The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Goren, Y. 1990. Pottery from Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age I Cemeteries in Israel: Some New
Aspects of the Development of Ceramic Technology. Eretz Israel21:119-126. (Hebrew)
Goren, Y. 1991. The Beginnings of Pottery Production in Israel: Technology and Typology of Proto-
Historic Ceramic Assemblages in Eretz-Israel (6th-4th Millenia B.C.E.J(unpublished Ph.D. thesis).
The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew).
Goren, Y. and Gilead, I. 1987. Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from Shiqmim: A Preliminary Report.
In: Levy, T.E., ed. Shiqmim I. BAR S356. Oxford. pp. 411-418.
Graf, D.L. and Goldsmith, J.R. 1955. Dolomite-magnesian Calcite Reactions at Elevated Temperatures
and C0 2 Pressures. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 7:109-128.

Ibrahim, M. 1978. The Collared-rim Jar of the Early Iron Age. In: Moorey, R. and Parr, P., eds.
Archaeology in the Levant. Warminster. pp. 116-126.
Meir, A.M. Yellin, J. and Goren, Y. 1992. Reevaluation of the Red and Black Bowl from Parker's
Excavation in Jerusalem. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 11:39-53.
Mimran, Y. 1969. The Geology of the Wadi Malikh Area (unpublished MSc. thesis). The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Mimran, Y. 1972. The Tayasir Volcanics: A Lower Cretaceous Formation in the Shomron, Central
Israel. Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin 52: 1-9.
Mor, D. 1973. The Volcanism of the Central Golan Heights (unpublished M.Sc. thesis). The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
285
Oppenheim, M. 1959. The Vulcanological Phenomena of South-Eastern Lower Galilee (unpublished
Ph.D. thesis). The Hebrew University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)

Porat, N. 1989a. Petrography of Pottery from Southern Israel and Sinai. In: de Miroschedji, P., ed.
L'urbanisation de Ia Palestine a/age du bronze ancien. BAR S527. Oxford. pp. 169-188.
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. thesis). The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem.
Rothenberg, B. and Glass, J. 1983. The Midianite Pottery. In: Sawyer, J.F.A. and Clines, D.J.A., eds.
Midian, Moab and Edam. Sheffield. pp. 65-124.
Shaliv, G. 1972. The Geology of the Wadi Farcah Area (unpublished M.Sc. thesis). The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem. (Hebrew).
Shepard, A.O. 1965. Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Washington D.C.
Stienstra, P. 1986. Systematic Macroscopic Description of the Texture and Composition of Ancient
Pottery - Some Basic Methods. Newsletter of the Department of Pottery Technology of Leiden
IV:29-48.
Yellin, J. and Gunneweg, J. 1989. Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis and the Origin of Iron Age
I Collared-rim Jars and Pithoi from Tel Dan. In: Gitin, S. and Dever, W.G., eds. Recent
Excavations in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology. AASOR 49: 133-141.
Zertal, A. 1988a. The Water Factor during the Israelite Settlement Process in Canaan. In: Heltzer, M.
and Lipinski, E., eds. Society and Economy in the Eastern Mediterranean (c. 1500-1000 B.C.).
Leuven. pp. 341-352.
Zertal, A. 1988b. The Israelite Settlement in the Hill Country of Manasseh. Haifa. (Hebrew)
286
CHAPTER 12
MIDDLE BRONZE III METAL OBJECTS

Sariel Shalev and Peter N orthover*
A group of copper-alloy objects was discovered on the floor of Room 1527 in Area F. They were dated,
with other finds from the storerooms of Area F, to the Middle Bronze Age III. Some of the items were
published preliminarily (Finkelstein and Brandl 1985; Chapter 9). The aim of this chapter is to add
metallurgical data to the typological analyses already carried out (op. cit.), as well as to those presented
here for the first time, and to discuss their impact on the archaeological interpretation.
METHOD
In order to collect metallurgical and metallographical data on the technical properties of the copper-alloy
objects from Shiloh, 12 samples were taken from 11 items, Axe 17320 being sampled twice. The samples
were taken by using either a fine piercing saw or a 1 mm. drill. Seven of the items were mounted in a
copper-filled acrylic resin, ground and polished to lJ.!. They were etched for metallographic examination
with ammonical hydrogen peroxide, or ferric chloride/hydrochloric acid/water/ethanol. The samples
were then repolished for electron probe microanalysis.
Analyses were made using the CAMEBAX electron probe microanalyser in the Department of
Materials, Oxford University. The analyses were made over three 50!1 squares on each sample; the
accelerating voltage was 25kV, the beam current lOOnA and the counting time per element 10 sec. The
elements analyzed, lines used and limits of detection are presented in Table 12.1.
Five drilled samples were weighed and dissolved in aqua regia (3 parts concentrated HCl to 1 part
concentrated HN0 3), and diluted to volume. They were then analyzed by N. Halperin using an IL-157
atomic absorption spectrometer in the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. All determinations
were made using the technical conditions specified in Table 12.1.
* Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University and Department of Materials, Oxford University respectively.
287
TABLE 12.1: ANALYZING TECHNIQUES
CAMEBAX EPMA IL-157 AAS

Element Energy- Sensitivity Lamp- Wavelength Sensitivity
Line % Current nm mg/ml
Fe Ka 0.01 5mA 271.9 0.13
Co Ka 0.01 8mA 240.7 0.05
Ni Ka 0.01 5mA 232.0 0.06
Cu Ka 0.01 5mA 222.6 1.5
Zn Ka 0.02 5mA 213.9 0.008
As La 0.02 7mA 193.8 0.4
Ag La 0.02 5mA 328.1 0.03
Sn La 0.01 6mA 235.5 1.2
Sb La 0.02 lOrnA 217.6 0.2
Au Ma 0.04 5mA 242.8 0.1
Pb Ma 0.03 5mA 283.3 0.2
Bi Ma 0.01 6mA 223.1 0.2
Table 12.2 specifies the items which were sampled for metallurgical and metallographical analyses:
TABLE 12.2: LIST OF OBJECTS
No. Object Reg. No. Leng. Wid. Thick. Reference Sample Area
1. Shaft-hole Finkelstein &

axe Brandl
2. 17320 19.2 6.4 1.0 1985: No.1 tang near
socket's interior
(drilling)
3. Tanged dagger 15091 15.6 3.9 0.5 first pub. cutting edge
4. Socketed point 15181 9.1 2.1 2.1 1985: No.4 edge of socket
5. Flat axe 17318 +6.5 4.2 0.9 1985: No.3 middle fracture
6. Flat axe 17322 20.2 6.1 1.7 1985: No.2 (drilling)
7. Flat axe 15111 19.9 6.0 first pub. (drilling)
8. Toggle-pin 17291 +3.9 1.1 0.7 first pub. (drilling)
9. Broken pin 17283 +5.0 0.4 0.3 first pub. (drilling)
10. Broken pin 17075/2 +4.9 0.4 0.3 first pub. (drilling)
11. Broken pin 15321 +5.9 0.2 0.2 first pub. (drilling)
12. Folded plaque 17139 2x2.5 3.0 0.1 first pub. (drilling)
288
METALLURGY
The chemical composition results are shown in Table 12.3. They represent the average of three analyses
for EPMA and more than 10 mgs. for AAS. Hence it is possible for results to be obtained which are less
than the detection limits given above for individual analyses.
TABLE 12.3: METALLURGICAL ANALYSES
No. Method Sn% As% Sb% Pb% Co% Ni% Fe% Ag% Au% Zn% Bi% Cu%
1. EPMA 10.00 n.d. n.d. 0.16 0.01 0.01 0.15 0.01 tr. 0.03 0.03 89.56
2. EPMA 10.83 n.d. tr. 0.21 n.d. 0.01 0.15 0.03 tr. 0.04 tr. 88.70
3. EPMA 0.07 1.78 0.06 0.10 0.01 0.01 0.25 0.03 tr. tr. n.d. 97.65
4. EPMA 0.03 0.58 0.02 0.13 n.d. 0.04 0.15 0.04 tr. tr. 0.01 98.96
5. EPMA 0.63 2.96 0.08 0.16 0.01 0.03 1.01 0.03 tr. 0.08 0.02 95.08
6. EPMA 7.07 1.18 0.05 0.24 0.01 0.02 0.49 0.04 n.d. tr. 0.02 90.86
7. EPMA 5.26 0.56 0.03 0.39 0.01 0.03 0.21 0.03 n.d. 0.07 tr. 93.38
8. AAS 5.58 0.19 n.d. 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.17 0.05 n.d. 0.04 n.d. 70.2*
9. AAS 0.22 1.97 0.04 0.01 n.d. 0.01 0.46 0.06 0.01 0.05 n.d. 71.9*
10. AAS 0.13 1.48 0.05 0.17 tr. 0.01 2.48 0.45 n.d, 0.04 0.03 62.2*
11. AAS 3.44 0.25 n.d. 0.57 0.02 0.06 2.00 0.15 0.04 0.25 n.d. 74.6#
12. AAS 2.84 0.32 0.09 1.20 0.01 0.06 0.30 0.15 n.d. 0.08 n.d. 70.0*
* corrosion
# sample of less than 10 mg.
METALLOGRAPHY
1. Shaft-hole axe with lugs (Reg. No. 17320). Sample from junction of tang and socket. Pitted surface;
intergranular corrosion network with large grain size and branching along widely spaced slip traces;
towards core of sample intergranular corrosion appears to outline homogenized structure, few inclusions.
Etching confirms structure revealed by corrosion; recrystallized grain structure with annealing twins and
very large grain size(> lOOj.t); a few slip traces; towards core of sample irregular grain outlines typical of
an homogenized structure begin to appear. No coring or a+8 eutectoid.
Object in sample area has been worked and annealed; annealing temperatures have been sufficient for
homogenization. The large grain size probably results from the effect of heat due to further annealing of
other parts of the axe and from limited prior cold work in the sample area.
2. Shaft-hole axe with lugs (Reg. No. 17320). Second sample, drilling.
3. Tanged dagger (Reg. No. 15091). Sample from cutting-edge at about mid-length of blade. General
corrosion over pitted surface; corrosion penetration in parallel bands; parallel lines of widely spaced
inclusions. Heavily deformed recrystallized grain structure with annealing twins and numerous deformed
slip traces superimposed on deformed cored dendritic. structure; structure too deformed for determination
of grain size. Structure indicates 40-50% final cold reduction after limited number of working/ annealing
cycles; annealing temperature was sufficient for recrystallization but not for homogenization.
289
4. Socketed point (Reg. No. 15181). Sample from edge of folded socket. General corrosion over pitted
surface with some islands of a-solid solution remaining in corrosion product; parallel lines of elongated
inclusions; fully recrystallized equiaxed grain structure with annealing twins superimposed on deformed
cored structure; grain size = 20-30!-L; no slip traces etched and structure is not deformed. Fully
recrystallized structure with little if any final cold work; substantial reduction during previous
working/ annealing cycles; annealing temperature was sufficient for recrystallization but not for
homogenization.
5. Fracture of flat axe (Reg. No. 17318). Sample from fracture edge. Pitted surface; patches of
intergranular corrosion; numerous irregular oxide inclusions; possible small area of Cu3As. Fully
recrystallized equiaxed grain structure with annealing twins; grain size = 20-30!-L; some slip traces etched;
homogeneous. Limited cold work after final anneal. Annealing temperature was sufficient for
homogenization.
6. Flat axe (Reg. No. 17322): Drilling.

7. Flat axe (Reg. No. 15111): Drilling.
8. Toggle-pin (Reg. No. 17291): Drilling.
9. Broken pin (Reg. No. 17283): Drilling.
12. Folded plaque (Reg. No. 17139): Drilling.
DISCUSSION
The shaft-hole axe with lugs has already been described in detail (Finkelstein and Bra:tidll985:21-22). It
seems that its main shape-characteristic is the imitation of a human fist with a thumb projecting
downward (op. cit.) or upward (Chavane 1987:360-364). This item was found in an accurately-dated
MB III archaeological context. Its date fits nicely with the typological parallels from Chagar Bazar and
Nimrud and differs from the Late Bronze Age types mainly in the socket-blade angle and the number of
ribs (Chavane 1987:363; see Figs. 9, 10, 12 and compare Figs. 13-18).
The specimen from Shiloh is the only axe of this type analyzed to date. Its chemical composition
shows a product of a controlled tin-bronze alloying process. The tin content (over 10%) is higher than all
the other items analyzed here, while the rest of the metal composition is distinguishably cleaner with a
low level of impurities such as iron and no presence of arsenic.

According to the metallographic analysis, this object was cast in a closed complex mould, probably
like the one reconstructed for the item in the Munich Museum (Buchholz and Drescher 1987: Fig. 4C).
Although the shape of the cast was probably near to its final appearance, it was still submitted to limited
cycles of cold work and annealing in order to achieve its ultimate form and hardness.
The tanged dagger, unlike the axe mentioned above, is typologically a member of a long and well-
known local tradition. The dagger from Shiloh belongs to a popular style of daggers. Around 90 items
from the Middle Bronze Age II-III as well as 70 objects from the Late Bronze Age are known. More
than 30 of these daggers have been sampled for metallurgical and metallographic analysis. The results
show that they were all cast into an open mould and then shaped into their final forms and bh:tde-
hardness by cycles of hammering and annealing. The metal composition of the Middle Bronze Age
290
group consists mainly of low arsenic alloy (less than 3%) and the minute presence of tin as one of the
impurities. During the Late Bronze Age tin becomes the major alloy (Shalev 1988:307) while arsenic
decreases to less than 0. 7%. The chemical composition represents a manufacturing technique based
mainly on the remelting of scrap. It is probably the change in the scrap composition that enabled the
local metalsmiths to slightly change the shape of their end-product between the MB II-III and the Late
Bronze Age.
The medium size of the dagger from Shiloh as well as its concave blade with wide shoulders and
rounded tip fits nicely with a well-defined sub-type. Daggers with the same typological characteristic
features were found in MB II-III contexts, mainly in southern Israel. Of the 40 objects known to date, 20
were unearthed at Tell el-c Ajjul and only one was found in a tomb at Megiddo; 5 daggers were found at
Tell el-Farcah South, 5 at Lachish and one at Barkai. Single finds (1-2 objects) are known also from Tell
Beit Mirsim, Jericho, Gibeon, Gezer and the Tel Aviv harbour.
The metal composition of the dagger from Shiloh conforms well with the above technological
interpretation, namely low arsenic alloying (less than 2%) and tin only as an impurity among others such
as antimony and iron. The metallographic analysis of this item presents a 'history' similar to many
others in this class, with perhaps rather more cold work. The estimated hardness according to the
metallographic structure is around 175Hv2.5.
The socketed point has already been described as a spear or lance butt by Finkelstein and Brandl
(1985:23) in the category of weapons. This item might also be interpreted as a working tool and be
described as a point of a digging stick or a hand pick (Lechtman 1981:96-7; Todd and Charles 1977:206,
Fig.3; Conrad and Rothenberg 1980:84, Fig.73). This type of object is probably a product of a local
workshop and has a long history, reaching the Iron Age as a copper-based alloy and continuing into the
Hellenistic and Roman periods as an iron product.
The metal composition of the MB III socketed point from Shiloh represents, as in the case of the
aforementioned dagger, represents a simple scrap-based industry. It consists of a very low amount of
arsenic (0.6%) accompanied by other elements, including tin, at the impurity level only. The point was
cast into an open mould and then shaped into its final form through cycles of cold work and annealing.
The socket was flattened and folded according to the metallographic analysis and Buchholz and
Drescher's reconstruction (1987: Fig. 7A-C).
Two flat axes and a fracture of a third were found at Shiloh. The simple shape of two of the three
items has already been described in detail (Finkelstein and Brandl 1985:22-23). These objects are the
typological descendants of a long tradition of utilitarian items that already began to appear in the 4th
millennium B.C.E. and reached its peak during the 3rd millennium B.C.E. Approximately 30 objects
from these periods were analyzed by the authors. With the exception of one from the Chalcolithic period
and one from the Early Bronze Age, all were made of unalloyed copper with 0%-0.8% arsenic (and 2.3%
in the two exceptions). The amount of tin in all those sampled objects does not exceed 0.03% and is,
more or less, at the same level as most other elements.
Although the MB III flat axes from Shiloh resemble in shape various items from earlier periods, their
metallurgical analyses show a marked differentiation. Not only are the levels of most impurities higher
than the comparable values in earlier periods, there are significant quantities of arsenic (0.6-3%) and tin
(0.6-7%) which reach alloy level. There is an inverse correlation between arsenic and tin; when the tin is
low the arsenic is high and vice versa. The same metallurgical situation is reflected in the analyses of
some MB-LB flat axes from Tell el-cAjjul and Lachish.
Flat axes were traditionally made by being cast into an open mould (like those found in MB II-III
291
Shechem and Tell Beit Mirsim) and then shaped and hardened by cycles of hammering and annealing. It
appears that the fluctuation in the composition of the alloys as well as the significant amount of
impurities, combined with the manufacturing technique, evidence a simple local industry based on
secondary resources.
The same chemical composition phenomena as those discussed above for the flat axes could be
detected in all the copper-based small finds from MB III Shiloh. Here the fluctuation between arsenic
(0.2%-2%) and tin (0.1%-5.6%), although slightly lower, also veers from one element concentration to
the other. This, with the impurities level, also represents a simple technology based on the remelting of
scrap.
Differentiation between types could also be aided by their impurity patterns. The three broken thin
wire-shaped pieces (Items 9-11, called here 'broken pins') have a higher level of iron, like the group of
flat axes.
The folded plaque (Item 12) has a higher level of lead. This would facilitate hammering and thinning
the object by increasing flexibility and ductility. The chemical composition of this object, as well as its
shape, indicates that it could have served originally as an edge of a belt or harness. It was probably sawn
or riveted through the two parallel holes onto a strip of leather or some other perishable material.
Although it is only partially preserved, the typological affinities of the broken toggle-pin (Item 8) are
clear. This fragment belongs to the late MB group of thick and short toggle-pins (Shalev 1989 for details
and bibliography). Its metal composition (low traces of arsenic and a significant amount of tin) is
appropriate to its typological group, and probably reflects changes in the local scrap market rather than
a deliberate improvement in the manufacturing techniques of toggle-pins (op. cit.).
CONCLUSIONS
Two main copper-based industries could be distinguished in the finds from Shiloh:
With the exception of the silver jewellery (Finkelstein and Brandl 1985:23-25), the only identified
prestige item that could serve both as a weapon or a cult object was the shaft-hole axe. Its complex
shape and its metal composition reflect a well-controlled tin bronze industry. According to its
technological uniqueness as well as its typological parallels, this item was a product of a non-local
metal-working centre and was probably imported to the site.
All the other objects found at Shiloh (the tanged dagger, the socketed point, the flat axes, the pins and
the plaque) are less complex in both shape and manufacturing technology. Their metal composition
consists of variations between arsenic and low tin alloying, with a significant amount of impurities. They
are products of a simple metal-working industry based on the remelting of scrap. These items represent,
in shape as well as in metal content, a well-defined link in a long chain of a local tradition of tools,
simple weapons and other utilitarian objects.
The analytical data presented here, although based only on a fraction of the total of metal objects
known from this period, enriches our knowledge of the metal industry of Canaan. The end of the Middle
Bronze Age is the last phase before the general use of tin bronze during the Late Bronze Age. The
alloying systems during the Middle Bronze Age are known to be a mixture of arsenical copper and tin
bronze (Khalil 1980; Gerstenblith 1983: Ch. VI). The metal objects from Shiloh make a noteworthy
contribution towards understanding the reasons behind this mixture.
In this small group we could identify one 'clean' tin-bronze prestige item alongside various simple
objects made from alloys of arsenic and tin in differing amounts. This would occur when scrap was used
292
as the primary metal source. Therefore, it appears that the increasing import of tin bronze objects was a
contributing factor towards the presence of tin in the local scrap-based products, whereas the decrease in
the amount of arsenic might well be the result of repeated remelting cycles.
REFERENCES
Buchholz, H.G. and Drescher, H. 1987. Einige friihe Metallgera.te aus Anatolien. Acta Praehistorica et
Archaeologica 19: 37-70.
Chavane, M.J. 1987. Instruments de bronze. In: Yon, M., ed. Le centre de Ia ville. Ras Shamra-
Ougarit Ill. Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations 72. Paris. pp. 357-374.
Conrad, H.G. and Rothenberg, B. 1980. Antikes Kupfer im Timna-Tal. Der Anschnitt 1. Bochum.
Finkelstein, I. and Brandl, B. 1985. A Group of Metal Objects from Shiloh. The Israel Museum Journal
4:17-26.
Gerstenblith, P. 1983. The Levant at the Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. American Schools of
Oriental Research Dissertation Series, 5.
Khalil, L.A. H. 1980. The Composition and Technology of Copper Artifacts from Jericho and Some
Related Sites (unpublished Ph.D. thesis). London.
Lechtman, H. 1981. Copper-Arsenic Bronzes from the North Coast of Peru. Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences 376:77-122.
Shalev, S. 1988. Redating the 'Philistine Sword' at the British Museum: A Case Study in Typology and
Technology. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7(3):303-311.
Shalev, S. 1989. Middle Bronze Age Toggle-pins from Kabri. In: Kempinski, A., ed. Excavations at
Kabri: Preliminary Report of 1988 Season. T~l Aviv. pp. 42-45.
Todd, J.A. and Charles, J.A. 1977. The Analysis of Non-metallic Inclusions in Ancient Iron. PACT
1:204-220.
293
CHAPTER 13
MICROMORPHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE

MIDDLE BRONZE AGE GLACIS
Hanoch Lavee, Moshe Wieder, Israel Finkelstein*
Middle Bronze Age earthworks have been unearthed at numerous site~ in the southern Levant. Their
function and method of construction have been treated in several studies (e.g. Parr 1968; Kaplan 1975;
Pennells 1983; Finkelstein 1992) but never from the morphological and pedological points of view.
Soil micromorphology has recently been applied in various fields of archaeology, such as the study of
cave depositions (e.g. Goldberg 1979; Wattez et al. 1990), landscape history (Schuldrein and Goldberg
1981) and pottery provenance (Adan-Bayewitz and Wieder 1992). In this paper analyses of soil
micromorphology and particle size distribution are used in order to investigate the nature and
characteristics of a Middle Bronze Age glacis.
The MB III glacis at Shiloh was examined at five places around the site (Chapters 2, 3, 5). Its most
impressive portion was uncovered in a deep sectional trench which was cut down to bedrock at right-
angles to the outer face of the fortification wall in Area D (Chapter 3).
Fig. 13.1: Schematic section of the glacis, looking south. The numbers indicate the Layers mentioned in the article.
* Department of Geography, Bar-Ilan University and Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.
294
Fig. 13.2:
Fig. 13.3:
Detail of the southern section of the glacis. The numbers indicate the different layers.
Detail of the southern section of the glacis. The numbers indicate the different layers.
295
Fig. 13.4: Burnt organic remnants from Layer 2 (crossed Fig. 13.5: Dolomite grains in the microfabric of Layer 3
nicols). (crossed nicols).
Fig. 13.6: Mosaic-like mosepic fabric in Layer 3 (crossed Fig. 13.7: Skew planes (cracks) characteristic of the mi-
nicols). crofabric of Layer 3 (plane-polarized light).
Fig. 13.8: Dolomitic porous structure characteristic of Fig. 13.9: Cross section of a partly decomposed root from
Layer 4 (crossed nicols). Layer 5 (plane-polarized light).
296
The base of the glacis from the fortification wall to the foot of the slope can be reconstructed at ca.
25 m. and its maximum depth, next to the city wall, is 6.3 m. The gradient of the surface of the glacis is
28°.
In Area D the glacis is composed of five main elements. From bottom to top, these are (Figs. 13.1-3):
1. At the base a thick layer of yellowish-grey material containing a large quantity of MB II sherds and
animal bones. Between the bottom of this layer and the bedrock surface there was a mud-brown layer
about 80 em. thick (sub-Layer lA) in which no sherds were encountered;
2. A grey ash layer, about 0.2-0.3 m. thick;
3. A long 'lens', about 0.9 m. thick, made up of thin sub-layers each a few centimetres thick, formed
alternately of reddish-brown earth and a friable white material. They were laid at an angle opposite to
that of the slope. This element does not appear along the entire length of the glacis.
4. A crumbly white material containing numerous small stones. This appears along the entire length of
the glacis and seems to be its predominant element. It varies from 0.7-1.8 m. in depth.
5. A muddy-brown soil that makes up the surface of the glacis, with white 'fingers' of Layer 4 penetrating
into it.
Wall M291, about 0.9 m. thick and 3.2 m. high, was discovered buried in Layer 1 of the glacis. It was
built of medium-sized stones and founded on bedrock. Large boulders were found buried at the bottom
of Layer 1 in two places on the downslope part of the glacis.
There are several indications that the glacis was laid within a relatively short period of time:
1. The similarity of the debris on both sides of retaining Wall M291 shows that it was constructed
together with the deposition of the material;
2. There are no traces of plaster on retaining Wall M291 or on the outer face of the fortification wall, a
fact which indicates that neither at any time served as free-standing walls;
3. The pottery found in Layer 1 of the glacis is dated to the MB II/ early MB III (Chapter 6);
4. Excavation in other areas proved beyond any doubt that the fortification wall was constructed during
the Middle Bronze Age III, and that there was no settlement activity at the site in the Late Bronze Age I.
In other words, both construction of the glacis and destruction of the site took place during the former
period.
METHOD
Representative samples were taken from each characteristic layer of the glacis for thin-section and
mechanical composition analysis. The samples were impregnated with Araldite epoxy resin. The
micromorphological analysis follows the terminology of Brewer (1964), together with additional terms
used in descriptions of carbonates (Wieder and Yaalon 1974; 1982). Particle size distribution of the
earthy material (< 2 mm.) was determined by Wright's sedimentation method (1939).
MICROMORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Layer 1. The sample is a heterogeneous mixed material. About 30-40% of it consists of rock fragments
2-8 mm. in size. The remaining material displays a soil microfabric. Some pottery remains and burnt
woods are also discernible. The rock fabric is mainly micritic (4j.t or less in size), without fossil inclusions.
It represents the softer components of a dolomitic marl. The microfabric of the soil is as follows: the
297
skeleton grains (the large stable minerals) are quartz grains, about 50!1 in size. The plasma (carbonate
and non-carbonate clay) is yellowish-brown and consists of microcalcites which form a calciasepic
fabric. The plasma contains many organic inclusions. Numerous voids occur as vugs and short craze
planes. The microfabric is that of a rendzina-type soil.
The distribution of rock fragments and soil in sub-Layer IA is similar to that of Layer' I. However,
there are no pottery remains in this sub-layer and it is browner than the latter. The plasmic fabric is
mainly calciasepic, with a few local mosepic (mosaic-like) inclusions. A red mosaic fabric is characteristic
of terra rossa.
A sample was also taken from a pocket of reddish material in the rock surface below sub-Layer lA
(sub-Layer IB). Some large dolomite crystals are present as well as micritic rock fragments. The plasma
is reddish-brown and mosepic, typical of terra rossa.
Layer 2. The material resembles that of Layer 1, namely rock fragments and soil with similar distribution.
It differs from Layer 1 in that it is greyer, contains no pottery remains and includes many burnt organic
remnants (Fig. 13.4). The voids appear as many small to large vugs.
Layer 3. This soil displays a terra rossa microfabric. The skeleton is made up of many silt-size quartz
grains and large rhombohedral dolomite crystals (Fig. 13.5). The plasmic fabric is mosepic (Fig. 13.6).
Post-depositional argillans occur, indicating a relatively high stability of the material. The argillans are
the result of water leaching from the above layers rather than of pedogenic illuviation. Many skew
planes occur (Fig. 13. 7), an indication of shrinking and swelling processes. Such soils are highly
impermeable.
Layer 4. The microfabric is that of a dolomite with small to medium-sized crystals (Fig. 13.8). Some
small voids occur. There are no biogenic fossils present.
Layer 5. This is terra rossa. The microfabric is similar to that of Layer 3, but with fewer argillans. Fresh
roots can be recognized in this soil, a result of exposure to the surface (Fig. 13.9). The relative stability of
this layer can be explained by the mosepic fabric and the presence of planes which indicate shrinking
and swelling processes typical of soils in which smectite is the dominant clay mineral.
GRANULOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS
The grain size distribution of the earthy material of the different layers is presented in Fig. 13.10.
Layerl. The soil microfabric is a silt loam with 18.5% clay, 57% silt (43% fine silt) and 24.5% sand. Most
of the latter (11 %) is coarse sand (500-2000 1-t) and only 5.5% is fine sand (50-125Jl). This composition is
characteristic of rendzina. Sub-Layer 1A is similar to Layer 1, i.e., silt loam soil with 25% clay, 53.5%
silt (43% fine silt) and 21.5% sand. Sub-Layer 1B is composed, like typical terra rossa, mainly of clay
( 46.5%) and smaller quantities of silt (35%) and sand (18.5%). Most of the sandy fraction is fine sand
(H%) of aeolian origin.
Layer 2. This is a silt loam similar to that of Layer 1 but with slightly less clay ( 14%) and a little more silt
(60%; fine silt 42%) and sand (26%).
Layer 3. This is a typical compact clayey red terra rossa with 53% clay, 31% silt and 16% sand. Within
the sandy fraction most of the material (13%) is fine sand.
Layer 4. Very porous silt loam (almost sandy loam) with 5% clay, 53% silt (only 18% fine silt) and 42%
sand.
Layer 5. Similar to Layer 3, this is a typical compact and stable terra rossa. It is composed of 51% clay,
31% silt and only 18% sand. Most of the sandy fraction ( 11 %) is fine sand.
298
..... 80
s::
CD
CJ
I..
CD
Q, 60
•• 1a
-o- 1b
CD
> ... 2
..... 40 --a- 3
m 4
:J
~ 5
E 20
:J
CJ
o;-~~,7TI~~~~~m-_,~,~m-~~~~
1 10 100 1000 10000

grain size {micron)
Fig. 13.10: Grain size distribution of the earthy material of the different layers (see legend).
This analysis indicates that the main and most important parameter which differs between the layers
is the clay content, The amount of clay and silt together is fairly similJLr in all five layers (74-84%), except
for Layer 4, which contains less silt+ clay (58%), but a high proportion (42%) of sand composed mainly
of dolomitic grains. Drainage is good in Layers 1, 1A and 2 since the high percentage of fine silt (a result
of the large amount of micritic crystals) is compensated for by the high percentage (30-40%) of rock
fragments larger than 2 mm. which are an integral part of these layers.
The layers of the glacis can therefore be divided into two groups:
1. The silt-loamy layers (1, lA, 2 and 4) which are characterized by relatively porous material and better
drainage conditions;
2. The clayey layers (lB, 3 and 5) which are more compact, heavy and stable, and less permeable.
DISCUSSION
The country rock in the area is a dolomitic marl which varies in hardness. This, together with its
porosity, determines the type of soil which develops on it. Rendzina and calcrete (at different stages of
development) are formed on the soft porous rocks. On the hard less porous rocks with large cracks, terra
rossa develops. These two soil types are partially eroded into the gulleys surrounding the site forming
colluvial-alluvial deposits. All these materials, together with anthropogenic artefacts, are found i.n the
glacis. In other words;;all the material deposited in the glacis was brought from the proximity of the site.
A similali ,situation w~s observed at Tel Gezer, where the components of the glacis -chalk, quarry
material and occupational debris - where all taken from the immediate vicinity of the site (Bullard
1970:118).
299
Layer 1 is a mixture of soil, rock fragments and settlement debris of the first occupation of the site in
the Middle Bronze Age II (Stratum VIII). Sub-Layer lA is from the same provenance, without pottery
and bones. Layer 1 is not in situ. There are clear indications that in the initial phase of construction the
surface material in the area was removed down to bedrock. Moreover, there is no trace of foundation
trenches for the fortification wall and Wall M291 in Layer 1. Sub-Layer lA, which is very heterogeneous,
is also not in situ. Material lB, found in pockets in the bedrock, is a local soil formed in situ.
Layer 2 was made of soil with small burnt organic particles. Apparently this was also taken from the
debris of the previous settlement, but with no pottery sherds or bones.
Layer 3 is a mixture of terra rossa and chalky elements. Therefore, it seems that the material for it was
taken from the hilly slopes around the valley (see Figs. 1.3-4).
The material for Layer 4 was apparently taken from a quarry. A large quarry, which seems to have
been the source of the boulders used in the construction of the MB III fortification wall, is located on the
natural terrace immediately to the north of the mound (see Fig. 1.6). It is large enough to have supplied
the enormous number of stones needed for the wall. Many of the stones in the wall and the material
found in the glacis are the dolomitic marl which is found in the quarry. The Layer 4 material was
probably taken from the debris of a chalky layer in the quarry.
The material for Layer 5 was apparently brought from the gulley a few hundred metres to the east of
Area D (see Fig. 1.3).
The purpose of the glacis was to support the fortification wall, and to serve as a counterbalance to the
pressure of the stone fill that was laid on its inner side (Figs. 3.3, 3.8). The builders were faced with three
problems. They had to support the wall in the most effective way, prevent the glacis from sliding and
prevent water from being trapped in the body of the glacis. Water could penetrate into the glacis
horizontally from Stone Fill417 and from the fortification wall, and vertically from the surface of the
glacis. A glacis made of impermeable soil would stop vertical penetration of water but would be
destroyed by the pressure of the water which would be trapped within the fortification wall and in the
fills behind it.
In order to solve the first problem the builders needed weight. To fulfil the other two requirements
they needed a combination of porous and impermeable layers. Indeed, the materials laid in the glacis
can be divided into two categories: clayey, heavy layers (3 and 5) and porous, light layers (1, 2 and 4).
Each of these served a different purpose. The clayey layers were used for their weight, which provided
good support for the fortification wall and lent stability to the glacis, and in the case of Layer 5 the
clayey material served to seal the surface of the glacis. The porous layers were employed for their good
drainage properties. The two types of layers were deposited alternately.
Before laying the glacis the builders removed the surface soil down to bedrock. They then started
constructing the fortification wall and retaining Wall M291. The first element deposited was sub-Layer
lA a porous material composed of a mixture of soil and settlement debris. This was the 'make-up' of
the glacis. It replaced the natural terra rossa which when wet would become a muddy viscous stratum
that could cause the entire construction to slide downhill.
The next two layers (the main body of Layer 1 and Layer 2) are porous, light and cheap to prepare.
They allowed the water trapped in Stone Fill417 and in the fortification wall to be drained down the
slope of the mound. Because they are light, they had to be stabilized. This was done by constructing
retaining Wall M291 and depositing boulders at the lower, downslope part of the glacis. Both the
retaining wall and the boulders were found in Layer 1 only.
Layer 3 was laid on top of the two light layers in order to give them weight and thus extra stability. It
300
was further stabilized by the sophisticated method of deposition at an angle opposite to that of the slope.
The chalky elements balanced the clay of the terra rossa. However, burying such a clayey layer in the
glacis could be dangerous since it might trap water. To prevent this, Layer 3 was deposited as random
'lenses'; in other words, it was not continuous along the entire length of the glacis.
Layer 4 is the dominant feature of the glacis. Its main purpose was to drain water which penetrated
from the surface or from the wall as rapidly as possible without allowing it to percolate into the lower
layers.
Because of its porosity, Layer 4 could not serve as the cover of the glacis. It was therefore protected by
Layer 5, which formed the surface and sealed the glacis. Layer 5 gave the glacis extra weight and greater
stability. Since it is relatively impermeable, it also prevented vertical infiltration of water. 1 The material
was easy to find and thus the surface of the glacis could be simply repaired after erosion damage during
the winter. Proof of its strength and durability lies in the fact that it was found relatively well-preserved
after 3500 years. Moreover, the top of the fortification wall still only projects 1-1.5 m. above the surface
of the glacis, indicating that erosion of the latter was limited. Since the clayey material in Layer 5 might
have caused slippage, it was anchored into Layer 4 by interfingering. There is some indication that, like
the other clayey layer (3), Layer 5 was also deposited at an angle opposite to that of the slope.
The Shiloh glacis demonst1ates the great engineering skill of its builders. Middle Bronze earthworks
in other regions of the country should now be analyzed by the same methods in order to carry out an
overall evaluation of the public construction projects of the period.
REFERENCES
Adan-Bayewitz, D. and Wieder, M. 1992. Ceramics from Roman Galilee: A Comparison of Several
Techniques for Fabric Characterization. Journal of Field Archaeology 19(2):189-205.
Brewer, R. 1964. Fabric and Mineral Analysis of Soils. New York.
Bullard, R.G. 1970. Geological Studies in Field Archaeology. BA 33:98-132.
Finkelstein, I. 1992. The Middle Bronze 'Fortifications': Reflection of Social Organization and Political
Formations. Tel Aviv 19(2):201-220.
Goldberg, P. 1979. Micromorphology of Sediments from Hayonim Cave, Israel. Catena 6:167-181.
Kaplan, J. 1975. Further Aspects of the Middle Bronze Age II Fortifications in Palestine. ZDPV
91:1-17.
Parr, P. 1968. The Origin of the Rampart Fortification of Middle Bronze Age Palestine and Syria.
ZDPV84:18-45.
Pennells, E. 1983. Middle Bronze Age Earthworks: A Contemporary Engineering Evaluation. BA
46(1):57-61.
Schuldrein, J. and Goldberg, P. 1981. Late Quaternary Paleoenvironments and Prehistoric Site
Distribution in the Lower Jordan Valley: A Preliminary Report. Paleorient 7:57-71.
Wattez, J., Courty, M. and Macphail, R.I. 1990. Burnt Organo-mineral Deposits Related to Animal
and Human Activities in Prehistoric Caves. In: Douglas, L.A., ed. Soil Micromorphology: A
Basic and Applied Science. Amsterdam. pp. 431-439.
l. For a somewhat similar situation at Gezer see Bullard 1970:ll9.
301
Wieder, M. and Yaalon, D.H. 1974. Effect of Matrix on Carbonate Nodule Crystallization. Geoderma
11:95-121.
Wieder, M. and Yaalon, D.H. 1982. Micromorphological Fabrics and Developmental Stages of
Carbonate Nodular Forms Related to Soil Characteristics. Geoderma 28:203-220.
Wright, C.H. 1939. Soil Analysis (6th Edition). London.
302
CHAPTER 14
ELECTRON SPIN RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY OF

WHEAT GRAINS FROM AN IRON AGE I SILO
Ionel Rosenthal and Baruch Rosen
Electron Spin Resonance (ESR) spectroscopy is a sensitive, nondestructive analytical technique which
can provide otherwise unavailable information on the thermal history of cereal grains derived from
archaeological investigations (Hillman et al. 1983).
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the thermal history of carbonized wheat grains found in two
stone-lined silos (L. 1400 and 1462) in Area D (Chapter 3).
The carbonized grains (predominantly wheat) were brought to the laboratory where they were stored
in a closed container in a cool place. Whole seeds were manually selected for ESR analysis using
stainless steel tweezers. No additional treatment was given to the samples. They were not ground in
order to avoid possible interference from mechanically created lattice defects, which may occasionally
be expressed as ESR signals. Measurements were performed on a Varian E 12, X-band ESR
spectrometer, equipped with a TE 102 cavity. The ESR signal was normalized to the weight of the test
portion taken for analysis. The g-factors were measured relative to Fermi's salt (g=2.00550±0.00005).
Grain samples found at Shiloh were blackened in appearance but retained morphological
characteristics which identified them as wheat. Compositional analysis of several samples from a number
of locations in the silos gave the following results:
Moisture (loss of mass to constant weight at atmospheric pressure at 100 °C) -12-14%;
Protein (by the Kjeldhal method, %Nx5.7)- 14.6-20%; 1
Ash (material remaining after incineration at 5500C in an air rich environment)- 5.1-10%.
Fig. 14.1 shows a typical ESR signal of a Shiloh wheat sample. The signal is isotropic, has a value for
the g-factor of 2.0032 characteristic of a carbon radical, and in view of the circumstances, it was
associated with radicals created by heating. The signal was remarkably stable. We found that a 5 gm.
sample of grains extracted for several days with over 10 litres of water (7°C) and then redried at room
temperature retained the original ESR signal.
In addition to the carbon radical, the wheat contains paramagnetic elements of inorganic origin.
Thus, in the inorganic residue left after ashing, the presence of manganese ion (Mn2+) can be easily
detected. This ion has five unpaired electrons which produce a characteristic ESR spectrum with six
* Department of Food Sciences, Volcani Institute.

1. No evidence on the structure of the nitrogen-containing compounds present in the carbonized wheat is available, but a
boiling water extract of the sample was ninhydrine and Biuret test positive.
303
peaks (Meirovitch and Poupko 1978). Nevertheless this signal cannot be detected in integral grains.
Val'Ues.for manganese content in modern wheat are between 1.2 to 8.0, and mean of 4 mg. per 100 gm. of
wheat (Kent-Jones and Amos 1967).
Using contemporary hard wheat of local, Israeli origin (moisture 5-7%, protein 11.4-13.1%, ash
1.7-1.9%), we determined the dependence of the carbon signal's g-value on the maximum temperature
of past carbonization of wheat. Samples of whole grain were heated to a specific temperature and were
retained at this temperature for 4 hours. Heating to the desired temperature was at the rate of 1°C per
minute. For heating the wheat grains were placed in pre-ashed ceramic crucibles (2 em. in diameter and
4 em. deep). The crucibles were placed in a ceramic dish which contained a mixture of sea sand and local
fine limestone gravel. The crucibles and their contents were then covered with a layer of the same
mixture, 5 em. deep, before being placed in the oven. The heating conditions were designed to simulate
the airless conditions under which the archaeologically derived sample was carbonized. The 4 hr.
heating period was considered minimal for reproducible, stable effects. After heating, the oven was
switched off and the wheat was allowed to cool overnight to room temperature. The cold carbonized
wheat sample, which visually resembled the ancient samples, was placed in a closed glass vial.
The results (Fig. 14.2) confirm the findings of Hillman et al. (1983) that heating at higher temperatures
shifts the signal at lower g-values, approaching the g-value of free electrons. If a sample was exposed to
successive heating treatments at different temperatures, the final g-value was still determined by the
highest temperature applied, independent of the other thermal treatments.
The measured g-value of 2.0032 for the Shiloh grains indicates a maximum temperature of past
heating of 250-300°C. This assessment was also supported by the observation that ESR signals generated
by heating of contemporary wheat were more isotropic for temperatures higher than 20ooc, like the
isotropic signal recorded for the Shiloh wheaL
Fig. 14.1: A typical ESR

signal of a Shiloh
wheat sample.
304
It is expected that the number of unpaired electrons, that is the radical concentration, increases with
heating temperature. Indeed, the signal intensities of once heated contemporary wheat samples increased
after additional heating treatments at temperatures higher than the original ones (Fig 14.3).
In accord with the presumed heating at a temperature of approximately 250-300°C, the radical
concentration of the Shiloh grains began to change significantly only after additional heating at
temperatures higher than 3oooc.
The study provides additional evidence that the wheat found in Shiloh was incinerated. This may
indicate the fate of other parts of the site at that period. We believe that a chemical examination of the
Iron I carbonized wheat from Shiloh may yield novel inside information on farming practices during
that period. However, it is clear that before any such chemical investigation can be undertaken, a
well-defined thermal history of the sample must be available in order to account for the changes brought
about by the heat. Now that such information is at hand, further chemical studies of this wheat are
possible.
2.004
100 200 300 400 500 600 100 200 300 400 500 600
Heating temperature (OC) Heating temperature (OC)
Fig. !4.2: The relationship between the g-value and Fig. 14.3: The relative spin concentration as a function
heating temperature of wheat grains. of temperature of a second heating treatment.
Wheat samples were initially heated for four
hours at: l)- JOOOC; 2)- 2000C; 3)- 3000C;
and 4) 400°C. The Shiloh sample behaved
like curve 3.
REFERENCES
Hillman, G.C., Robins, G.V., Oduwole, D., Sales, K.D. and McNeil, D.A.C. 1983. Determination of
Thermal Histories of Archaeological Cereal Grains with Electron Spin Resonance Spectroscopy.
Science 222:1235-1236.
Ikeya, M. and Miki, T. 1979. Electron Spin Resonance Dating of Animal and Human Bones. Science
207:977-979.
Kent-Jones, D.W. and Amos, A.J. 1967. Modern Cereal Chemistry. London. p. 35.
Meirovitch, E. and Poupko, R. 1978. Line Shape Studies of the Electron Spin Resonance Spectra of
Manganese Protein Complexes. Journal of Physical Chemistry 82:1920-1925.
305
Account: s4309548
PART FOUR
ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY
Account: s4309548
CHAPTER 15
FAUNAL REMAINS
Shlomo Hellwing, Moshe Sade and Vered Kishon*
The faunal material includes 6137 identified bone fragments, derived from 644 baskets and 179loci, with
a total weight of 55 kg. (Table 15.1). It spans over two millennia, from the Middle Bronze Age II to the
Roman period (Strata VIII-II). The bulk of the material came from Late Bronze and Iron I loci (48.4%
and 22% respectively), followed by the MB III and MB II (10.4% and 10.6% respectively) (Table 15.2).
METHOD
Bones were identified according to the osteological collections in the Institute of Archaeology and the
Zoological Museum of the Tel Aviv University and according to pertinent literature (Cornwall 1968;
Schmidt 1972; Hesse and Wapnish 1985; Davis 1987).
Relative frequencies of animal species were calculated according to Watson (1979). Sheep and goats
were generally treated as a single group Ovis/ Capra, or caprovines. Whenever possible, an attempt
was made to distinguish between them (according to Boessneck 1969; Prummel and Frisch 1986).
Standard measurements, as well as right and left differentiations, were carried out according to Von den
TABLE 15.1: GENERAL INFORMATION
Stratum Period No. of No. of Bone weight

loci baskets (in kgs.)
VIII MBII 13 19 5.923

VII MB III 17 93 5.461

VI LB 31 101 22.215
v Iron Age I 76 293 14.788
IV Iron Age II 25 70 2.682
III Hellenistic 11 50 2.686
II Roman 7 18 1.255
Total 179 644 55.013
309
Driesch (1976). Ages were estimated according to the criteria of Silver (1969) and Habermehl (1975). In
the body-part breakdown we followed Horwitz and Tchernov (1987). The metapodia and phalanges of
Cervidae were identified according to the Besold's criteria (1966).
GENERAL RESULTS
The bone fragments belong to eight domesticated mammalian species and to four species of wild
mammals. A few bones of domestic birds and fish remains, as well as several mollusc shells, were also
present (Table 15.3). Most of the bone fragments (98.2% of the total number of bones analyzed)
belonged to domestic animals (Table 15.4).
The following animal species were identified:
Domestic Mammals (Mammalia): sheep ( Ovis aries); goat (Capra hircus); cattle (Bos taurus); pig (Sus
scrofa); dog (Canis familiaris); donkey (Equus asinus); horse (Equus caballus); camel ( Camelus
dromedarius).
Wild Mammals: mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella); fallow deer (Dama dama mesopotamica); red deer
( Cervus elaphus); mole-rat (Spa/ax ehrenbergz).
Birds (Aves): domestic chicken (Gallus domesticus); goose species (Anser sp.); pigeon (Columba Iivia).
Fish (Pisces): Unidentified.
Molluscs (Mollusca): Unidentified
Table 15.3 shows the distribution of identified bone fragments according to species and stratum. The
most abundant mammals at the site were caprovines (82.9% of the total of bone fragments identified).
Cattle were the second most common mammals (13.7%). All other mammals and birds, domestic and
wild, were poorly represented. Mollusc shells were also very rare.
The Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) is given in Table 15.5. The total MNI for all periods
concerned was 273 animals representing at least 184 caprovines and 39 cattle. Pigs were represented by
only 6 individuals and dogs by 9 individuals.
TABLE 15.2: NUMBER OF IDENTIFIED BONES ACCORDING TO PERIODS
Stratum Period No. of bones Percentage

identified
VIII MBII 651 10.60

VII MBIU 644 10.49
VI LB 2973 48.44
v Iron Age I 1350 21.99
IV Iron Age II 147 2.39
j:
III Hellenistic 100 f.62
II Roman 153 2.49
Mixed 119 1.93
Total 6137 100.00
310
TABLE 15.3: DISTRIBUTION OF IDENTIFIED FRAGMENTS ACCORDING TO PERIODS

AND SPECIES
Strata: MBII MBIII LB IA I !A II Hell. Rom. Mix. Total

Species:
Ovis/Capra No. 549 549 2623 1014 99 62 113 84 5093
% 84.3 85.2 88.2 75.1 67.3 62 74 83
Bos taurus No. 75 76 253 306 41 32 31 29 843
% 11.5 11.8 8.5 22.7 27.9 32 20 14
Sus scrofa No. 23 5 3 4 37
% 3.5 0.17 0.1 2.0 3 0.6
Canis familiaris No. 3 10 10 2 21
% 0.5 0.15 0.35 0.7 0.7 0.4
Equus asinus No. 1 3 2 7
% 0.15 0.1 0.15 0.1
Equus caballus No. 3 3
% 0.1 0.05
Came/us
dromedarius No.
% 0.03 0.02
Cervus elaphus No. 2 16 4 3 4 2 3 34
% 0.3 0.5 0.3 2.0 4 1.4 0.55
Damadama
mesopotamica No. 2 49 3 54
% 0.3 1.6 0.2 0.9
Gazella gazella No. 1 3
% 0.15 O.Q3 0.1 0.05
Spa/ax
ehrenbergi No. 9 9
% 1.4 0.15
Gallus gallus
domestica No. 7 5 2 15
% 0.15 0.25 0.4 1.4 0.2
Anser sp. No. 1
% 0.1 0.02
Columba Iivia No. l
% 0.1 0.02
Avessp. No. 2
% 0.7 0.03
Pisces No. 2 2 5
% 0.3 O.Q3 0.15 0.1
Mollusca No. 1 ~
% 0.15 0.03 0.03
Total No. 651 644 2973 1350 147 100 153 119 6137
% 10.6 10.5 48.5 22 2.4 1.6 2.5 1.9
Total no. species
in assemblage 5 10 13 12 5 5 6 5
311
TABLE 15.4: THE RATIO OF DOMESTIC/WILD ANIMALS ACCORDING TO PERIOD
Period: MBII MBIII LB /A I /A II Hell. Rom. Total

Domestic No. 650 628 2905 1338 144 96 151 5912
% 99.8 97.5 98 99 98 96 99 98
Wild No. 16 68 12 3 4 2 106
% 0.2 2.5 2 2 4 1 2
Total No. 651 644 2973 1350 147 100 153 6018
This chapter deals in detail with the four dominant strata from both the archaeological and faunal
points of view: the MB II, MB III, Late Bronze and Iron I. The assemblages of the three later periods -
Iron II, Hellenistic and Roman were too small to allow firm conclusions. They are therefore discussed
briefly, with the numerical data incorporated in Tables 15.1-5 above and in Tables 15.37, 39, 40 and 41
below (the intrasite discussion).
STRATUM VIII: MIDDLE BRONZE II (Tables 15.3, 5,6-12)

Most of the material of this stratum came from the lower part of the glacis in Area D. It totalled 651
identified bones, with an MNI of 20. Only one bone belonged to a wild animal. Small ruminants
represented 84.3% and cattle 11.5% of all animal remains. The frequency of pig remains was relatively
high (3.5%). A remarkable feature of this stratum is the absence of deer and equid bones.
Sheep and Goats ( Ovis/ Capra)

Caprovines were represented by 549 bones, with an MNI of 13 (Table 15.5). The most common bones
identified as sheep/goat were metapodia (127), followed by costae (102) and vertebrae (73). It is
important to note the absence of phalanx III. There is an equal distribution of right and left bones
(Table 15.7). The mortality profile of sheep/ goat reveals a high percentage (31.8%) of young animals
aged less than 42 months.
As for the dressing procedures, there is a predominance of proximal fragments (58.3%). The body-part
breakdown revealed the predominance of bones from the trunk (41.4%), while the least represented part
of the body was the foot (phalanges- 2.1 %). Fore and hindlimbs were equally represented (15.1% and
15.4% respectively). There was, however, an over-representation of humeri (21) and radii (17) in
comparison to other bones of the forelimbs. There were also more femora and metatarsi with hindlimbs
(Table 15.11). The data suggest a selection by the people for meat-rich bones; it might have also been the
result of an active transport into or out of the site (Schlepp effect).
Cattle (Bas taurus)

Cattle were represented by 75 identified bones, with an MNI of 3 (Tables 15.3, 5). Most of the cattle
bones belonged to adult animals with fused bones. Most frequent cattle bones were costae and metapodia
(Table 15.6). Phalanx III was entirely absent. Only one fragment of a horn core was present. There were
10 left cattle long bones vs. 6 right ones (Table15.7). The ratio of proximal to distal bone parts was 8:4
(Table 15.10). The body-part breakdown (Table 15.11) shows, similarly to Ovis/ Capra, a numerical
312
dominance of trunk bones (35.9%) and cranial elements (32.8%), with very few foot bones (3.1 %). There
were 13 hindlimb bones, as opposed to 5 forelimb bones. Only 4 bones out of 75 were unfused.
Pig (Sus scrofa)

Swine are represented by 23 identified bones, with an MNI of 2. Most of the bones were cranial elements
and teeth, possibly reflecting selection. The same distribution of pig bones can be seen in the body-part
breakdown- 63.1% of the bone remains belong to the cranial part. Foot bones were entirely absent.
STRATUM VII: MIDDLE BRONZE III (Tables 15.3, 5, 14-19)

The faunal assemblage comes from the storerooms of Area H and comprises 644 identified bones, with
an MNI of 35 (Table 15.5). Domestic animals make up 97.5% of the assemblage. Sheep and goats are
represented by about 85.2%, followed by cattle with 11.8% of the total. Pig bones were entirely absent.
All other animals were poorly represented (Table 15.3).
Sheep and Goats (Ovis/ Capra)

Caprovines were the most frequent species in Stratum VII, with an MNI of 18 (Table 15.5). The
relatively large percentage (26%) of young animals slaughtered is striking and resembles the situation in
the MB II. Most of the young caprovines were killed when 30 to 36 months old (Tables 15.13, 14).
As in the Middle Bronze Age II, the most common bones were metapodia (134), vertebrae (87) and
costae (78). The numerical decrease from phalanx I (25 bones) to phalanx II (3 bones) is noteworthy.
Phalanx III was entirely absent. Only one maxillary fragment was found. Sheep I goat forelimbs were
represented by 20 scapulae, but only 11 humeri. In the hindlimbs, however, the typical bones showed a
rather equal distribution. Only 5 horn cores were identified.
The distribution of right and left skeletal parts of sheep I goat revealed a clear-cut preponderance of
bones of the right side (65.8%- Table 15.16). There were obviously more proximal parts (66.6%) than
distal ones (33.3%). This ratio suggests consistency in the dressing procedures (Table 15.17).
The trunk was the major body-part exploited in this period (40.2%- Table 15.18)) with the group of
cranial bones second in importance. There was no great difference between forelimbs and hindlimbs
(14.3% and 17.1% respectively). There were more sheep than goats in the herds (7:2).
Cattle (Bas taurus)

Seventy six cattle bones were identified, with an MNI of 9 (Tables 15.3, 5). All were fused and belonged
to adult or old individuals. The most frequent Bos bones recovered were phalanges (15), followed by
tibiae (10) and vertebrae (10). Horn cores were entirely absent and so were skull fragments, suggesting
that the skulls were not brought to the site, or that they were smashed into small, unidentifiable pieces.
As for sheep 1goat, there was an over-representation of right-sided bones (65.2%). There were also more
proximal (53.0%) than distal bones (Tables 15.16, 17).
The body-part breakdown (Table 15.19) shows a rather unusual distribution pattern: a normal one for
the cranial, hindlimb and trunk parts, a striking under-representation of the forelimbs (only 2.9% of the
total) and an over-representation of foot bones (18.8%).
Comparison between Middle Bronze II and Middle Bronze Ill

Unchanged features: high percentage of young caprovines killed (31% and 26% respectively); numerical
313
predominance of right skeletal elements; continuity in dressing procedures based on the presence of
more proximal than distal bones.
Changed features: species composition increases from 6 to 11; absence of pig in the subsistence system of
the MB III; in cattle, left bone predominance in the MB II, shifting to right bone dominance in the MB
III.
STRATUM VI: LATE BRONZE AGE (Tables 15.3, 5, 20-26)

The Late Bronze Age bone assemblage, the richest in Shiloh, comes from Debris 407 excavated in Area
D. There were 2973 identified bone fragments, which weighed 22.2 kg.; the MNI was 106. Domestic
animals were represented by 2905 bones (97.7%), including 8 mammalian and one avian species. Game
animals (fallow deer and red deer) comprised only 2.2% of the assemblage. Scarce remnants of fish and
sea shells completed the faunal collection of the· Late Bronze Age.
Sheep and Goats ( Ovis /Capra)

Caprovines comprised 88.2% of the total collection: 2623 identified bones, with an MNI of 83. The
relatively high percentage of young animals (about 20%) is an outstanding feature. The age distribution
shows that most young caprovines were killed at the age of 10-24 months and another group at the age
of 36-42 months (Tables 15.20, 21). The ratio between sheep and goats shows numerical dominance of
the former- 92.1 % (37 sheep and 4 goats).
The most common bones excavated were rib fragments (695) and vertebrae (341), followed by molars,
cranial and mandibular fragments, remnants of pelvic bones and metapodials. Striking is the meagre
number of maxillae (4) and horn cores (19). It is possible that the skulls were smashed into small pieces
in order to take out the brain. Of interest is the high number of phalanx I (97) and the small numbers of
phalanx II (21) and phalanx HI (9). The number of astragali and calcanei was quite similar (34 and 32
respectively). The distribution of right and left bones revealed a slight dominance of the former -
52.74% (Table 15.23).
Evidence of butchering and dressing procedures in caprovines was obtained by comparing the number
of proximal or distal bone parts. It was found that 65.8% of the bones were proximals (Table 15.24).
As for the body-part breakdown, the trunk had the highest representation (42.3%), followed by the
cranial part (27.1%- Table 15.25). Foot bones (phalanges) were present in low frequencies (5.1%),
suggesting that they were discarded elsewhere by the inhabitants.
The measurements on 13 diagnostic bones belonging to sheep/ goat (Table 15.26) apparently indicate
that some of the individuals were relatively bigger compared to previous and later periods. Alternatively,
as the sample is mixed comprising both sheep and goats as well as animals of both sexes, it is possible
that the size change reflects a shift in the composition of the sample rather than increasing size per se.
Cattle (Bos taurus)

The Late Bronze Age stratum yielded 253 cattle bone (8.5% of the total), with an MNI of 6. Like
sheep f goat, the largest number of bones recovered from the skeleton were vertebrae and ribs. The
lowest representation was in the metacarpals: only one metacarpus could be identified. The quantity of
astragali and calcanei was quite similar. There was a higher frequency of phalanx I than that of
phalanges II and III. Maxillary elements were absent (Table 15.22). As in the small ruminants, there
314
were more bones of the right side of the body (53.2%- Table 15.23). Five bones out of thirteen were
unfused (38.4%- Tables 15.20, 21). There were more proximal parts than distal ones (Table 15.24).
The body-part distribution showed that the trunk had the highest representation (37.0%), followed by
the cranial part. There were many more hindlimbs (17.0%) than forelimbs (8.5%- Table 15.25).
Other Animals
There were 49 bone fragments of fallow deer in the Late Bronze Age assemblage (1.6% ofthe total), with
an MNI of 2. Other cervids, probably red dear ( Cervus elaphus) were represented by 16 fragments with
an MNI of 2. Horse and donkey were represented by 3 bones each. Only 1 camel phalanx and 1 gazelle
phalanx were found. Seven bones of domestic fowl apparently belonged to the same specimen. A single
fish vertebra and one mollusca shell concluded the sample.
STRATUM V: IRON AGE I (Tables 15.3, 5, 27-33)

The total Iron Age I bone assemblage consisted of 1,350 identified bones, with a total weight of 14.8 kg.
Domestic mammals were represented by 1,338 bones (99 .1% of the assemblage), belonging to 6 species,
while only 12 bones belonged to wild mammals of three different species. Birds were poorly represented
only 7 bones, belonging to 3 genera: Gallus (fowl), Anser (goose), and Columba (pigeon). There were
also 2 fish bones in the sample.
Sheep and Goats (Ovis/Capra)

Caprovines were represented by 1014 bones (75.1% of the total), with an MNI of 51. The most frequently
represented bones of the skeleton were costae (161), metapodia (112) and vertebrae (75). The relatively
large number of phalanx III (18 bones) is worth noting (Table 15.27). There is a slight dominance of
bones of the left side (51.7%- Table 15.28). Most animals had been butchered as adults (88.2%), the
minority (12.0%) were young animals with unfused epiphyses. Most young individuals were 10 months
old when slaughtered (Tables 15.29, 30). The ratio between proximal and distal bone fragments was 1:1.
This may indicate a rather random, nonspecific butchering method (Table 15.31). The body-part
breakdown shows higher frequencies for the cranial and trunk parts (27.8% and 26.1% respectively).
There were more hindlimbs (21 %) than forelimbs (18.3%). The over-representation of foot bones (6.5%)
is striking (Table 15.32). The metapodial index calculated on 9 specimens shows 77% sheep.
About 190 measurements were made on 9 diagnostic sheep/ goat bones (Table 15.33). It appears that
there was a certain decrease in the size of some bones, compared with the figures obtained for the
previous periods. The results of the Shiloh measurements are similar to those of Iron I Mount Ebal
(Horwitz 1986-87).
Cattle (Bos Taurus)

Large ruminants were represented by 306 bones, with an MNI of 12 cattle. The most frequent cattle
bones were metapodia (42), vertebrae (32), molars (46) and mandibulae (22 Table 15.27). The number
of phalanx I was relatively high- 21 bones (15 phalanx II and 7 phalanx III). There was only one horn
core in the sample. The dominance of left bones from the skeleton (62.3%) is striking. This pattern is
quite different from that of the sheep/ goat (Table 15.28). Most of the cattle (72%) were butchered as
adults, but a rather high percentage (28%) were killed as heifers and oxen at the ages of 2 to 3 years
(Tables 15.29, 30). More distal bone fragments (43) have been unearthed than proximal fragments (24)
315
specific pattern in the manner in which cattle were butchered (Table 15.31). As for the body-part
distribution: cranial parts had the highest representation (28.8%) followed by hindlimbs (25.4%) and
trunk elements (18.6%). Foot bones were present in very high frequencies (16.3%) compared to
caprovines (6.5% Table 15.32). Judging from the measurements (Table 15.33), it seems that the Iron I
cattle were smaller than those of the Late Bronze Age.
Other Animals
Ten dog bones were retrieved (4 tibiae, 2 phalanx III, 2 mandibular fragments, 1 humerus and 1 femur).
They represent an MNI of 4 dogs. Cervidae (red deer and fallow deer) were represented by 7 fragments
(astragali, metapodials and phalanges), with an MNI of 2. The pig was represented by a single mandible
and the donkey by two metapodia.
Only four bones of birds- domestic chicken, a goose and a pigeon- were identified. From this it
can be concluded that domestic birds did not play a major role in the economy of the Iron I inhabitants.
A single fish bone was found in the sample.
STRATUM IV: IRON AGE II (Tables 15.3, 5)
Sheep and Goats ( Ovis I Capra)

Caprovines were represented by 99 identified bones, with an MNI of 8. The most common bones were
metapodia, costae, vertebrae, mandibulae, scapulae and tibiae. Maxillar fragments, phalanx II and III
were entirely absent. There were only two horn cores in the sample. There was a slight numerical
preponderance of right bones (24 right vs. 21left bones). The number of proximal bone fragments was
higher than the number of distal fragments (19 vs. 11), suggesting a specialization in dressing carcasses.
The percentage of adult animals was rather high - 82.2% vs. 17.8% that were killed as young animals.
The body-part distribution showed the highest frequency for the hindlimbs (28.4%), followed by the
cranial part (26.1 %). Remarkable is the under-representation of foot bones only a single phalanx I
bone was recovered.
The 3 metapodial indices calculated showed that all three specimens were sheep.
Cattle (Bos taurus)

The most common bones excavated were metapodials, molars and mandibular fragments. Phalanx III
and horn cores were entirely absent and all the other skeletal parts were under-represented. All the cattle
bones belonged to adult individuals. There were 7 right and 3 left bones. All the bone fragments were
from the proximal side. As for the body-part breakdown, the cranial part had the highest representation
(48.3%), while fore and hindlimbs had the lowest frequencies (6.4% and 9.6% respectively). Trunk and
foot parts showed relatively high frequencies (22.5% and 12.9% respectively).
Other Animals
Three pig bones were represented: two mandibulae and one metapodial, representing an MNI of 2.
Cervidae were represented by one metapodial, one phalanx I and one phalanx II.
The tibiotarsus of an unidentified bird was also found in the faunal assemblage.
316
STRATUM III: HELLENISTIC PERIOD (Tables 15.3, 5)
Sheep and Goats ( Ovis /Capra)

There was a numerical dominance of costae, radii, metapodials and astragali. Horn cores, phalanx II
and phalanx III were entirely absent. The body-part breakdown for sheep/ goat showed high frequencies
of trunk elements (33.9%) relative to other body parts. There was also a predominance of forelimbs as
compared to hindlimbs (26.7% vs. 19.6% respectively). There were more right than left bones (12:6). The
only measurable metapodial had an index of a sheep. There were 7 proximal and 5 distal bones. The
percentage of adult caprovines killed was rather high- 84%, vs. 16% ofthe young animals with unfused
bones slaughtered.
Cattle (Bos taurus)

The most frequent bones were metapodials, radii and phalanges I and II. Right and left bones were
found in almost equal numbers. All bones belonged to adult and old individuals with fused bones. The
body-part breakdown revealed a preference for cranial parts (30. 7%). The forelimbs, trunk and foot
parts had an identical distribution (19.2%) but hindlimbs were poorly represented (11.5%). Four proximal
elements and only one distal element were represented.
Other Animals
Donkey was represented by a single metapodial, pig by a mandibular fragment and cervids by four
bones: a radius, a calcaneum, a metapodial and a phalanx I.
STRATUM II: ROMAN PERIOD (Tables 15.3, 5)
Sheep and Goats ( Ovis/ Capra)

The most common bones were metapodials, costae, vertebrae, pelvic and mandibular fragments. Horn
cores and phalanx III were absent. There were more bones from the right side (55.8%) than from the left
body side, and more proximal than distal parts. The body-part breakdown shows a high distribution of
trunk parts (32.3%). There were more hindlimbs than forelimbs (19.1% vs. 17.1%). Foot bones
(phalanges) had the lowest distribution (3.0%). The two metapodials measured indicated the presence of
two sheep. All the animals killed were adults.
Cattle (Bos taurus)

The most frequent elements identified as cattle bones were radii, femura, metapodials and molars. There
were more left bones and more proximal parts in the sample. The body-part breakdown shows high
frequencies for hindlimbs and foot bones, unlike the case for sheepjgoat. All the bones belonged to
adult cattle (fused bones).
Other Animals
Pigs were represented by one mandible and three molars; dogs by one metapodial; cervids by two
metapodials and domestic fowl by a femur and a tarso-metatarsus.
317
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY PRACTICES
INTRA SITE COMPAR/SON (Tables 15.36-43)
Mortality Profiles
The Shiloh assemblage points to interesting differences in cull patterns. A higher frequency of young
sheep, goats and cattle were killed during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages than in later periods, while
there was increased exploitation of adult animals during the Iron Age and after (Table 15.36).
Specifically, for cattle the change in mortality profile occurs in the Iron II period. A higher frequency of
adult animals is present from this period onwards until in the Roman period all of the cattle remains are
those of adults. For caprovines there is a trend towards decreasing frequencies of immature animals
from the MB II to the Iron I period. Thereafter there are no striking changes until the Roman period,
when all sheep I goat remains represent adult animals. It can be concluded that in the earlier periods
small and large-sized ruminants were kept mainly for their meat, whereas the importance of the secondary
products milk, wool, hides or the reproductive potential - increased from the Iron Age onward.
Differential Anatomical Frequencies

Distribution of skeletal elements. The distribution of several skeletal elements of Ovis /Capra reveals
that their frequencies were not similar throughout the ages. However, some consistency could be noted
(Table 15.37). The number of mandibular fragments was always greater than the number of maxillary
fragments (except in the Hellenistic period). There was an abundance of skull fragments. Possibly, skulls
were smashed into small pieces in order to extract the brain. The absence of Phalanx III in the Middle
Bronze Age and its presence du.ring the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age I is striking. The low number of
horn cores is difficult to explain; we suggest that horn cores were removed from the site, possibly for
trade.
Dressing procedures. 50 - 66% of the bones retrieved from Shiloh were proximal fragments (Table
15.38). No major change in dressing procedures can be observed over time. In both the small and large
ruminants there is a higher frequency of proximal ends in all periods, with the exception of the Iron I
and II periods for cattle. Here distal ends are slightly more numerous. It is possible that butchering and
consumption patterns are responsible for this pattern rather than preservation differences.
Left and right separation. There was a general dominance of bones from the right side (Table 15.39),
with the exception of the Iron Age I.
Body-part breakdown (Table 15.40). Caprovine body-part distribution was different between the Middle
Bronze and Late Bronze Age on one hand and the Iron Age on the other. In the former periods the
trunk of the animal was mainly represented (about 40%) although it has a low meat value. In the latter,
the representation of the fore and hindlimbs, which have a very high meat value, increased. For
sheep/ goat, there is a trend towards increased numbers of hindlimbs relative to forelimbs in the Iron
Age, especially in the Iron II period, relative to the preceeding periods. In the Hellenistic period this
pattern is reversed, with a much higher frequency of forelimbs. Cranial parts (mostly well preserved
teeth) showed no marked fluctuations. Foot bones in sheep/ goat had the poorest representation
( 1.1 %-6.8%), but showed interesting quantitative fluctuations: the highest distribution of foot bones was
318
found in the MB III, Late Bronze and Iron I, while the lowest was found in the Iron Age II. The
relatively high representation of foot bones in cattle (compared to sheep/ goat) is remarkable. Cattle foot
bones are notably scarce in the MB II period, but increase over time. Trunk elements reflect a general
decrease in frequency from the MB II onwards, while cranial elements are on the whole well represented,
with an especially high frequency in the Iron II. Cattle hindlimbs dominate all periods, with the
exception of the Hellenistic period, where the situation is reversed. In the Iron II period fore and
hindlimbs are almost equal in representation, thereby differing from sheep/ goat.
Changes in Animal Husbandry

The subsistence economy of all periods discussed in this report was based mainly on sheep I goat herding,
followed by cattle raising. Pigs, equids and dogs were kept to a lesser extent. Scanty remains of game
animals supplemented the meat sources.
The ratio between small and large ruminants changed over the ages. The highest percentage of sheep
and goats (91.2%) and the lowest of cattle (8.8%) was found in the Late Bronze Age (Table 15.41).
Starting with the Iron I, there was a reduction in the frequency of caprovines accompanied by an
increase in the frequency of cattle (see also Rosen 1986). This trend reach a peak of 34% cattle in the
Hellenistic period.
Only 37 pig bones have been recovered at Shiloh the fifth species in the mammalian assemblage.
The highest percentage of pigs (3.5%) was found in the MB II and the lowest (0.07%) in the Iron Age I.
A taboo on pig consumption may be suggested. The frequency of animal species used for transport
(equids) was very low. The main remains of wild fauna were the bones of the fallow deer. Dogs had a
very poor representation and were entirely absent in the Iron II and Hellenistic strata.
120%r------------------------------------------,
MBII MB Ill LB IRON I
- SHEEP/GOAT - QA.TTLE
Fig. 15.1: Ratio of sheep/goat and cattle in the four main strata(%).
319
Body Size changes

The comparison of the measurable bones reveals a decrease in the size of sheep I goat and cattle in the
transition from the Late Bronze to the Iron Age (Table 15.42). Interpretation of the sheep/ goat
measurements is problematic as the data presented here deals with a mixed sample of both sheep and
goat, as well as rams, ewes and possibly castrated animals. A change in the numerical representation of
either species or sex would result in a shift in the size range of the sample. These results should therefore
be interpreted with caution.
/NTERSITE COMPARISON(Tables 15.44-52)
Middle Bronze Age

The faunal assemblages of four sites, representing three different regions, are compared here - Shiloh
in the hill country (late-MB), Lachish in the Shephelah (late-MB - Drori 1979), and Tel Michal
(late-MB) and Tel Aphek (mainly early-MB) in the coastal plain (Hellwing and Feig 1989; Hellwing,
forthcoming). Sheep and goats dominate the faunal assemblages in all four sites, representing a maximum
of 86.8% at Tel Lachish and 85.2% at Shiloh of the MB III, and a minimum of 49.4% and 44.5% at Tel
Aphek and Tel Michal respectively. Skeletal remains of cattle varied from 6.5% at Tel Lachish Stratum
XI to 41.0% at Tel Michal. The highest frequency of pigs (7.7%) was found at Tel Aphek and Tel
Michal. The lowest percentage of pig remains was at Tel Lachish, but here we found the highest
frequency of dogs (5.6%). The absence of dogs at Tel Michal is striking (see Table 15.44).
Ovis/ Capra cranial parts were represented in relatively high frequencies at Lachish XI, Tel Michal
and Tel Aphek, although the cranial part has a lower meat value than other body parts. The fore and
SHILOH VIII SHILOH Vii LACHISH (CA.) TEL MICHAL TEL APHEK
- SHEEP/GOAT M Qb.TTLE
Fig. 15.2: Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in four Middle Bronze sites(%).
320
hindlimbs, with the highest meat value, were present in high frequencies at Tel Aphek and Tel Michal
(37.0% and 29.5%). Trunk elements were absent in Tel Lachish (Seasons I-VI).
Representation of fore and hindlimbs of cattle ranged from a minimum of 2.9% at MB III Shiloh to a
maximum of 26.8% at Tel Aphek. Cattle trunk elements were absent at Tel Lachish and Tel Michal.
Foot bones were present in low frequencies for both cattle and sheep/ goat, but exceptionally high for
cattle at Tel Michal (56.5% Table 15.45).
More adult animals were kept at the Middle Bronze sites (68-98%) relative to juveniles and subadults
(Table 15.46). Only at Shiloh (both MB II and III) was the mortality rate of young animals very high:
26.0% and 31.8% for small ruminants and 40% for cattle.
The presence of large numbers of adult animals is a good indication that they were exploited not only
for their meat but also for milk, wool, plough and reproduction. Only at Shiloh did the inhabitants
favour the tender meat of young caprovines and cattle.
Late Bronze Age

Three Late Bronze Age sites are analyzed here- Shiloh, Lachish (Drori 1979) and Tel Michal (Hellwing
and Feig 1989). In all three animal husbandry was primarily based on caprovines. Their highest
percentage (88.2%) was found at Shiloh and the lowest (45%) at Tel Michal. Cattle, on the other hand,
showed a low frequency at Shiloh (8.5%) and a higher frequency in Tel Lachish and Tel Michal (21.8%
and 40.2% respectively). It is possible that environmental factors were responsible for these differences,
but economic and cultural factors too may have played a role in favouring cattle raising. Pigs form less
than 2% of the total assemblage at Tel Lachish and a smaller percentage at Tel Michal and Shiloh.
Game animals were found in relatively small frequencies at all three sites. Their highest percentage
(6.2%) was noted at Tel Michal, followed by Lachish (Table 15.47).
SHILOH LAO-I ISH TEL MICHAL
- SHEEP/GOAT B QA..TTLE
Fig. 15.3: Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in three Late Bronze sites(%).
321
Trunk elements were absent for sheep/ goat and cattle at both Tel Michal and Tel Lachish. Cranial
remains were rather high (over 25%), the only exception being the frequency of cattle cranials at Lachish
(10.7%). Fore and hindlimb representation was variable but relatively high at Tel Michal for both cattle
and caprovines. In the Late Bronze, as in the previous period, a very high proportion of foot bones
(phalanges) were found at Lachish (24.2% in sheep/ goat and 46.4% in cattle). In general foot bones are
present in lower frequencies.
There is a difference in the killing patterns between Tel Michal and Shiloh. In the former, 95% of
caprovines and cattle remains were those of adult animals (with fused bones). At Shiloh more sheep/ goat
and cattle were slaughtered when still immature (29.4% and 38.4% respectively). This indicates that
many young animals were slaughtered at Shiloh for their meat. Examination of the sheep/ goat cull
profiles from the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Age strata at Shiloh indicates a similar pattern, with a
relatively high juvenile cull. However the mortality profile for the Bronze Age strata at the site as a
whole differ markedly from that found at other contemporary sites. This may be related to the possible
cultic nature of the Bronze Age deposits at Shiloh.
Iron Agel
The faunal assemblages of 8 Iron Age I sites are discussed here: Shiloh and Mt. Ebal in the hill country
(Horwitz 1986-87), clzbet Sartah in the foothills overlooking the coastal plain (Hellwing and Adjeman
1986), Beer-sheba (Hellwing 1984), Tel Masos (Tchernov and Drori 1983) and Arad (Sade 1988) in the
Beer-sheba-Arad Valley, Tel Miqne in the Shephelah (Hesse 1986) and Hesban on the Transjordanian
plateau (Weiler 1981). Caprovines dominate these faunal assemblages, with a maximum of 81.4% at
Arad and a minimum of 45.0% at Tel Miqne. This animal economy was supplemented mainly by cattle.
The highest representation of cattle is found at Tel Miqne (37.0%) and clzbet Sartah (34.3%), and the
lowest in Arad and Beer-sheba- both located in the arid zone of the northern Negev. Pigs form less
SHILOH IZBET BART BEER-SHEB TEL MASOS ARAD XII MT. EBAL
- SHEEP/GOAT M CATTLE
Fig. 15.4: Ratio of sheep/ goat and cattle in six Iron I sites(%).
322
than 1% of the total assemblage at Shiloh, clzbet Sartah, Beer-sheba and Tel Masos. They were entirely
absent at Arad and Mt. Ebal, but were found in high frequencies at Tel Miqne and Hesban (18.0% and
4.8% respectively). Camels were found only at clzbet Sartah (8.4%), where they may have been intrusive,
and at Hesban (Weiler 1981). The paucity of dogs, equids and gazelles is remarkable. Cervids (red deer,
fallow deer) form less than 3% of the total in four of the 8 sites analyzed, but at Mt. Ebal fallow deer
constituted 10% of the assemblage. The highest concentration of domestic chicken was at Tel Masos
(6.5%). Mollusc shells were unearthed at only two sites - 0.1% at Tel Masos and 4.8% at Beer-sheba.
Caprovine body part representation shows a marked selectivity for cranial parts and fore and
hindlimbs. The highest representation of fore and hindlimbs was noted at Tel Miqne (41.0% and 47.0%).
Trunk elements of both cattle and caprovines were absent at Tel Masos and Tel Miqne. However trunk
elements were exceptionally high (both cattle and sheep/goat) in the main structure of Mt. Ebal. The
lowest proportion of trunk elements was found at Tel Masos. Foot bones were present at all 8 sites
(from 1% at Hesban to 35% for cattle at Tel Miqne).
The people of the Iron I sites raised cattle and caprovines to adulthood. Only at Arad and Shiloh was
the percentage of young sheep/ goat relatively high (14.0% and 12.0% respectively). The highest
percentage of unfused cattle bones was noted at Tel Masos and Shiloh (27.9% and 38.4% respectively).
DISCUSSION
Substantial changes in animal exploitation strategies took place during Shiloh's time-span of occupation.
The number of animal species in the faunal assemblages increased from 5 species during the MB II to
13 species in the Late Bronze Age. Although Weiler (1981) identified as many as 11 domestic and at least
31 different wild mammals at Hesban, the economic systems of both sites were broadly based on the
same domestic mammals. Differences in the technique of fa)lnal recovery (i.e., hand picked versus sieved
material) at the two sites may account for the reduced variety of species found at Shiloh.
The ratio between domestic and wild animals throughout the ages indicates a decrease in the frequency
of hunting activity. However during the Late Bronze and Iron Age I deer were still hunted, and served as
a meat supplement.
When the data from Shiloh are compared to the information derived from other sites in Israel and
Jordan (Hellwing and Feig 1989; Hellwing, forthcoming; Drori 1979; Tchernov and Drori 1983; Hellwing
1984; Horwitz 1986-1987; 1989; Horwitz and Tchernov 1987; Weiler 1981; Sade 1988), it can be seen
that in all periods sheep and goats were the dominant species in the economy. Cattle played an
important but secondary role in the subsistence systems. This confirms the theory proposed by Zeder
(1988) that the selection of animals in the Levant focused on a limited number of species, sheep and
goats being the primary herd animals with cattle being the third most important domesticate in the Near
East. Cattle breeding is a demanding task which requires an abundant water supply and adequate
pasture, but cattle contribute a large quantity of meat (Horwitz and Tchernov 1987).
At Shiloh the ratio between caprovines and cattle was in constant change: the highest percentage of
sheep I goat and lowest percentage of cattle was found in the Late Bronze stratum. During the Iron Age
the importance of cattle herding increased significantly. Horwitz (1989) described a similar phenomenon
in the Refaim Valley sites near Jerusalem; there was a significantly higher representation of cattle (and
equids) in the MB II compared to the EB IV, which may indicate a more widespread or intensive use of
the plough in agriculture (for the correlation between high bovine frequencies and ploughing see Rosen
1986).
323
There was a gradual decrease in the representation of pigs from the MB II to the Iron I at Shiloh
(from 23 bones to a single pig bone). This decrease may reflect religious taboos. Indeed, in Iron I Tel
Miqne there was a significant number of pig remnants. The number of pig bones increased again during
the Roman period.
When animals were utilized for purposes other than their meat, they became too valuable to be killed
when still immature. At Late and Middle Bronze Tel Michal and Iron I Beer-sheba only a minority of
the ruminants were young (3% and 4.3-6.3% respectively- Hellwing and Feig 1989; Hellwing 1984). In
Shiloh of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, however, the percentage of young animals was strikingly
high (20-31%). At this site in the Iron Age I adult animals were valued again (only 12% slaughtered
young).
A good example of diachronic fluctuating bone representation element at the site was the phalanx III
of Ovis/ Capra. This small foot bone was entirely absent during the MB II, Iron II, Hellenistic and
Roman periods at Shiloh, but during the Late Bronze and Iron Age I, phalanx III had a rather good
representation (9 and 21 specimens, respectively). This may indicate changes in butchering techniques
and offal disposal or else may be related to the nature of the deposits examined for each period i.e.,
dumps versus floors. Foot bones are often removed together with the skin, so that a change in tanning
techniques may be responsible.
About 727 measurements have been carried out on some diagnostic bones of caprovines and bovines.
The most significant result was that the Late Bronze Age animals seem to be larger than in the other
periods. It is possible that new animal species were introduced into the site, changing the local fauna by
interbreeding. Another possibility is that environmental factors were responsible for this change.
CONCLUSIONS
Three main features of the Shiloh economy have persisted unchanged throughout the ages:
1. The percentage of domestic animals was high from the beginning of the settlement (MB II) until the
Roman period.
2. The subsistence economy was based mainly on the raising of sheep and goats. Cattle breeding took
second place.
3. Sheep appear to have been more common than goats. This suggests that wool was an important
by-product of domestication.
Other features suggest economic and behavioural innovations:
1. A relatively high percentage of young caprovines were slaughtered during the Middle and Late
Bronze Ages. However, during Iron Age I the inhabitants of Shiloh favoured adult and old animals.
This means that animals were now exploited for their wool, milk or traction power.
2. A preferential shift towards bones of the left side can be observed in the Iron Age I.
3. During the transition from the Late Bronze to the Iron Age I, basic changes in carcass dressing took
place: in the Iron Age, more bones were cut at the distal part.
4. There was a clear trend of favouring the trunk parts during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. In the
Iron Age I, the fore and hind limbs of ruminants, with their meat-rich bones, were more highly valued.
5. The high percentage of sheep/ goat and the low percentage of cattle in the Late Bronze Age may
reflect a certain deterioration in the state of the economy. The Iron Age I can, on the other hand, be
regarded as a period of economic stability with greater interest in raising cattle.
324
It can be concluded that the faunal remains from Shiloh represent several different economic systems.
Most important is the shift in animal husbandry during the Late Bronze-Iron I transition which
apparently reflects the expansion of cattle raising for meat, milk, traction and transport.
TABLE 15.5: MINIMUM NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS (MNI) ACCORDING TO PERIOD AND

SPECIES
Species MBII MBIII LB IA I IA II Hell. Roman Total
OvisfCapra MNI l3 18 83 51 8 4 7 184

%MNI 65 51.3 78.3 66.2 47 44 50
Bostaurus MNI 3 9 6 12 4 2 3 39
%MNI 15 25.6 5.7 15.6 25 22 22
Sus scrofa MNI 2 1 l l l 6
%MNI lO 0.9 1.3 11 7
Canis familiaris MNI 2 4 1 9
%MNI 5 2.9 1.9 5.2 7
Equus asinus MNI 1 1 l 2 1 6
%MNI 2.9 0.9 1.3 12.5 11
Equus caballus MNI 3 3
%MNI 2.8
Came/us dromedarius MNI l
%MNI 0.9
Cervus elaphus MNI 2 1 7
%MNI 2.9 1.9 1.3 6.25 11 7
Dama dama mesop. MNI 1 2 l 4
%MNI 2.9 1.9 1.3
Gazella gazella MNI 1 l 3
%MNI 5 0.9 1.3
Spalax ehrenbergi MNI 1
%MNI 2.9
Gallus domesticus MNI 2 2 1 6
%MNI 2.9 1.9 2.6 7
Anser sp. MNI 1

%MNI 1.3
Columba Iivia MNI 1
%MNI 1.3
Aves (unidentified) MNI 1
%MNI 6.25
Pisces sp. MNI 3
%MNI 2.9 0.9 1.3
Mollusca sp. MNI 1 2
%MNI 2.9 0.9
TOTAL MNI 20 35 106 77 16 9 14 277

% 7.2 12.6 38.3 27.8 5.8 3.2 5.1
325
TABLE 15.6: DISTRIBUTION OF SKELETAL ELEMENTS IN FOUR SPECIES (STRATUM VIII,

MBH)
Species: Ovis aries/ Bos taurus Susscrofa

Capra hircus
No. % No. % No. %
Mandible 17 3.1 1.3 4 17.4
Maxilla 3 0.6 1 4.3
Cranium frag. 41 7.5 8 10.7
Orbit 1.3
Horn core 4 0.7 1.3
Premolars 10 1.8 2 8.7
Molars 34 6.2 8 10.7 9 39.1
Scapula 21 3.8
Humerus 11 2.0 4.3
Ulna 8 1.5 4 5.3
Radius 17 3.1 1.3 4.3
Metacarpus 7 1.3
Pelvis 25 4.6 2 2.7 4.3
Femur 11 2.0 1.3
Tibia 7 1.3 1.3
Calcaneum 4 0.7 1.3
Astragalus 5 0.9 3 4.0
Metatarsus lO 1.8 5 6.7
Phalanx I 8 1.5 1.3
Phalanx II 0.2 l.3
Os centrale 1 l.3
Metapodials 127 23.1 12 16.0
Costae 102 18.6 16 21.4
Vertebrae 73 13.3 7 9.3 4 17.4
Patella 3 0.6
Total 549 84.1 75 11.5 23 3.6

326
TABLE 15.7: RATIO OF RIGHT AND LEFT BONES IN FOUR DOMESTIC SPECIES
(STRA:TUM VIII, MB II)
Species: Ovis aries JCapra hircus Bos taurus Susscrofa

Right Left Right Left Right Left
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Mandible 6 40.0 9 60.0 33.3 2 66.7
Maxilla 2 66.7 33.3 100.0
Scapula 11 61.1 7 38.9
Humerus 8 72.7 3 27.3 100.0
Ulna 2 33.3 4 66.7 25.0 3 75.0
Radius 5 35.7 9 64.9 100.0 100.0
Metacarpus 2 40.0 3 60.0
Pelvis 10 43.5 13 56.5 100.0
Femur 7 63.6 4 36.4 100.0
Tibia 2 28.6 5 71.4 100.0
Calcaneum 3 75.0 1 25.0 1 100.0
Astragalus 2 40.0 3 60.0 2 66.7 1 33.3
Metatarsus 6 66.7 3 33.3 2 100.0
Orbit 100.0
Os centrale 100.0
Total 66 50.4 65 49.6 6 37.5 10 62.5 3 42.9 4 57.1
TABLE 15.8: RATIO OF FUSED AND UNFUSED BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT (BASED ON

DISTAL AND PROXIMAL BONES*) (STRATUM VIII, MB II)
Species: Ovis aries/ Capra hircus

Fused % Unfused %
Humerus P 50.0 50.0
Humerus D 7 77.8 2 22.2
Radius P 8 80.0 2 20.0
Radius D 3 60.0 2 40.0
Metatarsus P 6 66.7 3 33.3
Metatarsus D 100.0
Femur P 33.3 2 66.7
Femur D 5 62.5 3 37.5
Tibia P 50.0 50.0
Tibia D 4 80.0 1 20.0
Metacarpus P 4 66.7 2 33.3
Metacarpus D 100.0
UlnaP 4 80.0 20.0
Total 45 68.2 21 31.8
*P - proximal; D distal
327
TABLE 15.9: AGE GROUPS OF SHEEP/GOAT (STRATUM VIII, MB II)
Unfused bones Fused %

bones
Months Foetal 10 18-28 30 31-35 36 37-41 42+
Humerus P
Humerus D 2 7
Radius P 2 8
Radius D 2 3
Metatarsus P 3 6
Metatarsus D
Femur P 2 1
FemurD 3 5
TibiaP
TibiaD 4
Metacarpus P 2 4
Metacarpus D
UlnaP 4
Total fused 45 68.2
Total unfused 5 4 2 2 2 5 31.8
TABLE 15.10: PROXIMAL AND DISTAL BONE FRAGMENTS IN SHEEP/GOAT AND

CATTLE (STRATUM VIII, MB II)
Species: Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Bos taurus

Proximal Distal Proximal Distal
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Scapula 3 100.0
Humerus 2 18.2 9 81.8
Ulna 5 83.3 1 16.7 4 100.0
P.. aJ.ius 10 66.7 5 33.3 l 100.0
Metacarpus 6 85.7 14.3
Femur 3 27.3 8 72.7 100.0
Tibia 2 28.6 5 71.4 1 100.0
Metatarsus 9 90.0 1 10.0 2 40.0 3 60.0
Pelvis 12 85.7 2 14.3
Total 49 58.3 35 41.7 8 66.7 4 33.3
328
TABLE 15.11: BODY-PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (STRATUM

VIII, MB II)
Cranial Forelimbs Hindlimbs Trunk Feet

S/G c S/G c S/G c S/G c S/G c
Horn core 4 Scapula 21 Pelvis 25 2 Vertebrae 73 7 Phalanx I 8
Cranium 41 9 Humerus 11 Femur 11 Costae 102 16 Phalanx II
Maxilla 3 Radius 17 Tibia 7
Teeth 44 10 Ulna 8 4 Calcaneus 4
Mandible 17 Metacarpus 7 Astragalus 5 3
Metatarsus 10 5
Patella 3
Tot. S/G 109 64 65 175 9
% 25.8 15.2 15.4 41.5 2.1
Total C 21 5 l3 23 2
% 32.8 7.8 20.3 35.9 3.1
TABLE 15.12: MEASUREMENTS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE BONES* (IN MM.;

STRATUM VIII, MB II)

Msr.** No. Min. Max. Mean No. Min. Max. Mean
Calcaneum Gb 3 15.90 20.22 18.51
GL 3 52.10 59.30 55.90
Astragalus Bd 5 16.55 21.15 17.89 39.35
Bp 5 17.24 21.29 18.48 39.99
GLm 5 25.74 31.47 27.40 57.42
GLi 5 25.91 33.18 28.63 62.24
Phalanx I Bd 8 11.14 14.33 12.70
Bp 8 11.50 16.24 13.77
GL 8 35.05 43.70 38.17
Phalanx II Bd 10.13 2 21.50 26.70 24.10
Bp 12.48 2 26.04 33.70 29.87
GL 23.10 2 39.20 42.10 40.65
Metatarsus Bp 2 16.10 20.50 18.30
Metacarpus Bp 5 22.29 24.97 23.28
Metapodials Bd 1 25.79
Radius Bd 2 26.70 27.42 27.06
Bp 5 19.32 30.80 29.50

Humerus Bd 3 25.54 30.06 29.01
Ulna Dpa 53.13
Spo 47.13
LO 86.32
Patella GB 20.10
GL 26.50
Femur Bd 2 33.81 36.44 35.11
Tibia Bd 3 22.93 23.09 22.99
Scapula Bg 20.76
ALp 32.32
* According to von den Driesch (1976) ** Measurement
329
TABLE 15.13: RATIO OF FUSED AND UNFUSED BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT (STRATUM VII,
MB III)
Fused Unfused
No. % No. %
Humerus P 50.0 1 50.0
Humerus D 7 77.8 2 22.2
Metatarsus P 10 83.3 2 16.7
FemurP 2 28.6 5 71.4
Phalanx I P 22 88.0 3 12.0
Metacarpus P 2 100.0
Calcaneum D 6 75.0 2 25.0
Tibia P 3 75.0 25.0
Total 51 73.9 18 26.1
TABLE 15.14: AGE GROUPS OF SHEEP/GOAT (STRATU!"f VII, MB III)
Unfused bones Fused bones %

Months Foetal 10 30-36 37-42 42~
Humerus P
Humerus D 21 7
Metatarsus P 2 10
Femur P 5 2
Phalanx I P 3 22
Metacarpus P 2
Calcaneus D 2 6
TibiaP 3
Total fused 51 73.9
Total unfused 7 2 7 2 26.1
330
TABLE 15.15: DISTRIBUTION OF SKELETAL ELEMENTS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE

(STRATUM VII, MB III)
Species: Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Bas taurus

No. % No. %
Mandible 19 3.5 5 6.6
Maxilla 0.2 1.3
Cranium frag. 23 4.2
Orbit 1 0.2
Horn core 5 0.9
Canines 1 0.2
Premolars 7 l.3 5 6.6
Molars 34 6.2 10 13.2
Scapula 20 3.6
Humerus 11 2.0 2 2.6
Ulna 5 0.9
Radius 13 2.4
Metacarpus 10 1.8
Pelvis 28 5.1 2 2.6
Femur 9 1.6
Tibia 7 l.3 10 13.2
Fibula 1 0.2
Calcaneum 8 1.5 2 2.6
Astragalus 6 1.1 l.3
Metatarsus 12 2.2 3 3.9
Phalanx I 25 4.5 8 10.5
Phalanx II 3 0.5 3 3.9
Phalanx III 2 2.6
Os centrale I 0.2
Metapodials 134 24.4 6 7.9
Vertebrae 87 15.8 10 13.2
Costae 78 14.2 6 7.9
Total 549 87.8 76 12.2

331
TABLE 15.16: RATIO OF RIGHT (R) AND LEFT (L) BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE
(STRATUM VII, MB III)

Right Left Right Left
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Mandible 10 76.9 3 23.1 4 80.0 20.0
Maxilla 1 100.0
Orbit 100.0
Scapula 8 66.7 4 33.3
Humerus 5 45.4 6 54.6 50.0 50.0
Ulna 3 60.0 2 40.0
Radius 3 33.3 6 66.7
Pelvis 18 64.3 10 35.7 2 100.0
Femur 9 100.0
Tibia 2 28.6 5 71.4 9 90.0 10.0
Fibula 100.0
Calcaneum 6 75.0 2 25.0 50.0 50.0
Astragalus 4 80.0 20.0 100.0
Metatarsus 11 91.7 8.3 100.0
Total 83 65.9 43 34.1 15 65.2 8 34.8

CATTLE (STRATUM VII, MB III)
Species: Ovis aries JCapra hircus Bos taurus

No. % No. % No. % No. %
Humerus 2 18.2 9 8l.8 2 100.0
Scapula 1 100.0
Ulna 3 60.0 2 40.0
Radius 7 77.8 2 22.2
Pelvis 4 100.0
Femur 7 77.8 2 22.2
Tibia 4 57.1 3 42.9 5 50.0 5 50.0

Fibula 1 100.0
Metatarsus 12 100.0 33.3 2 66.7
Total 42 66.7 21 33.3 8 53.3 7 46.7
332
TABLE 15.18: BODY-PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (STRATUM VII,

MB III)

Horn core 5 Scapula 20 Pelvis 28 2 Vertebrae 87 10 Phalanx I 25 8
Cranium 23 Humerus 11 2 Femur 9 Costae 78 6 Phalanx II 3 3
Teeth 41 15 Radius 13 Tibia 7 10 Phalanx HI 2
Mandible 19 5 Ulna 5 Calcaneum 8 2
Metacarpus 10 Astragalus 6
Metatarsus 12 3
Tot. S/G 88 59 70 165 28

% 21.5 14.4 17.1 40.2 6.8
Total C 20 2 18 16 13
% 29.0 2.9 26.0 23.2 18.3
TABLE 15.19: MEASUREMENTS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE BONES (IN MM.;

STRATUM VII, MB III)
Msr.- No. Min. Max. Mean No. Min. Max. Mean

Astragalus Bd 6 16.20 20.90 18.34 39.60
GLi 6 26.79 32.00 29.49 64.96
GLm 6 25.18 30.50 27.84 57.45
Calcaneum Gb 8 14.50 23.56 14.80 1 46.87
GL 6 51.40 63.40 57.40 1 129.43
Phalanx I Bd 23 7.60 13.90 10.75 6 22.70 37.20 29.95
Bp 19 9.80 15.30 12.55 6 22.80 36.90 29.85
GL 19 15.40 39.91 31.99 6 41.10 57.60 49.35
Phalanx II Bd 3 8.30 8.89 8.60 4 22.20 27.90 25.05
Bp 2 9.60 11.78 10.69 4 27.40 35.00 31.20
GL 22.40 28.12 25.26 4 33.00 40.80 36.90
Phalanx III Ld 2 48.30 57.00 52.65
Radius Bp 30.30
Metatarsus Bp 2 20.11 2l.l0 20.60 55.03
Metacarpus Bp 2 23.57 25.93 24.75
Tibia Bdp 26.87

Scapula Bg 20.79
Glp 31.83
333
TABLE 15.20: RATIO OF FUSED AND UNFUSED BONES IN SHEEP/ GOAT AND CATTLE
(STRATUM VI, LB)
Species: Ovis aries/ Capra hireus Bas taurus

Fused Unfused Fused Unfused
No. % No. % No. % No. %
Humerus 51 78.5 14 21.5 50.0 50.0
Radius 38 80.8 9 19.2
Metatarsus 14 93.3 6.7 2 50.0 2 50.0
Femur 41 80.4 10 19.6
Tibia 43 69.3 19 30.7 5 74.4 2 28.6
Phalanx I 60 87.0 9 13.0
Phalanx II 15 71.4 6 28.6
Total 277 79.6 71 20.4 8 61.5 5 38.5
TABLE 15.21: AGE GROUPS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (STRATUM VI, LB)
Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Bas taurus

Unfused bones Fused % Unfused Fused %
bones bones bones
Months Foetal 10 18-24 30-35 36 37-41 42+ Foetal 12~]8 42-47 48+
Humerus P 3 19
Humerus D 11 32
Radius P 4 27
Radius D 5 ll
Metatarsus P 1 14 2 2
Metatarsus D 3 15
Femur P 8 22
FemurD 2 19
Tibia P lO 20 2 5
Tibia D 9 23
Phalanx I P 9 60
Phalanx II P 6 15
Total fused 277 79.6 8 61.5

Total unfused 19 15 9 8 5 15 20.4 2 2 38.5
334
TABLE 15.22: DISTRIBUTION OF SKELETAL ELEMENTS ACCORDING TO SPECIES

(STRATUM VI, LB)
Species: Ovis aries/ Bostaurus Sus scrofa Canis Cervus sp. Damadama
Capra hircus familiaris mesopotamica
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Mandible !39 5.3 10 3.9 10.0 2 12.5 2.0
Maxilla 4 0.1 2 40.0
Cranium frag. 161 6.1 19 7.5 20.0
Horn core 19 0.7 4 1.6
Antler 13 26.5
Molars 219 8.3 28 11.1 2 20.0 10 20.4
Incisors 7 0.3 5 10.2
'Premolars 67 2.5 l 0.4 6.2 3 6.1
Scapula 92 3.5 3 1.2 10.0 2 4.1
Humerus 70 2.7 4 1.6 10.0 2 12.5 2 4.1
Ulna 48 1.8 5 2.0 10.0 2 4.1
Radius 55 2.1 7 2.8 2 4.1
Pelvis 153 5.8 ' 6 2.4 2.0
Femur 51 1.9 6 2.4 6.2 1 2.0
Tibia 66 2.5 II 4.3 2 20.0 3 6.1
Fibula 3 0.1
Astragalus 34 1.3 6 2.4 6.2
Calcaneus 32 1.2 5 2.0 6.2
Metatarsus 33 1.2 4 1.6 10.0 3 18.8
Metapodials 173 6.7 18 7.1 6.2
Phalanx I 97 3.7 13 5.2 4 25.0
Phalanx II 21 0.8 10 3.9 2.0
Phalanx III 9 0.3 3 1.2 2.0
Os centrale 5 0.2 2 0.8 20.0
Vertebrae 341 3.0 41 16.2 2 2.0
Costae 695 26.5 46 18.2 20.0 10.0
Total 2623 88.2 253 8.5 5 0.2 10 0.3 16 0.5 49 1.6
335
TABLE 15.23: RATIO OF RIGHT AND LEFT BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE
(STRATUM VI, LB)

No. % No. % No. % No. %
Mandible 66 47.5 73 52.5 6 60.0 4 40.0
Maxilla 5 55.5 4 44.5
Scapula 50 55.5 40 44.4 2 66.7 33.3
Humerus 32 49.2 33 50.8 3 75.0 25.0
Ulna 28 63.6 16 36.4 2 40.0 3 60.0
Radius 23 48.9 24 Sl.l 16.7 5 83.3
Metacarpus 9 32.1 19 67.9 1 100.0
Pelvis 83 54.2 70 45.8 3 50.0 3 50.0
Femur 29 56.9 22 43.1 3 50.0 3 50.0
Tibia 29 47.5 32 52.5 6 54.5 5 45.5
Astragalus 22 66.7 11 33.3 5 83.3 16.7
Calcaneum 17 53.1 15 46.9
Metatarsus 21 63.6 12 36.4 2 50.0 2 50.0
Total 414 52.7 371 47.3 33 53.2 29 46.8
TABLE 15.24: PROXIMAL AND DISTAL BONE FRAGMENT IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE
(STRATUM VI, LB)

No. % No. % No. % No. %
Humerus 23 35.4 42 64.6 2 50.0 2 50.0
Ulna 41 93.2 3 6.8 5 100.0
Radius 33 70.2 14 29.8 6 100.0
Metacarpus 28 100.0 1 100.0
Femur 30 58.8 21 41.2 2 33.3 4 66.7
Tibia 29 47.5 32 52.5 7 70.0 3 30.0
Metatarsus 32 100.0 4 100.0
Total 216 65.8 112 34.2 27 75.0 9 25.0
336
TABLE 15.25: BODY-PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (STRATUM VI; LB)

Horn core 19 4 Scapula 92 3 Pelvis 153 6 Vertebrae 341 41 Phalanx I 97 13
Cranium Humerus 70 4 Femur 51 6 Costae 695 46 Phalanx II 21 10
frag. 161 19 Radius 55 7 Fibula 3 Phalanx III 9 3
Maxilla 4 Ulna 48 5 Tibia 66 11
Teeth 293 29 Metacarpus 27 Calcaneus 32 5
Mandible 139 10 Astragalus 34 6
Metatarsus 31 4
Tarsus 5 2
Pattela 1
Total S/G 616 292 376 1036 127
% 25.2 11.9 15.4 42.3 5.2
Total C 62 20 40 87 26
% 26.4 8.5 17.0 37.0 11.1
TABLE 15.26: MEASUREMENTS OF SPECIES (IN MM; STRATUM VI, LB)
Species: Msr. Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Bos taurus Cervus sp.
No. Min. Max. Mean No. Min. Max. Mean No. Min. Max. Mean
Calcaneum GB 16 1l.IO 21.30 17.00 3 41.00 42.70 41.85 22.80
GL 9 44.00 66.30 60.00 l 133.90 67.70
Astragalus Bd 26 10.50 28.40 19.25 3 25.10 45.40 44.00 20.30
Gli 26 22.10 41.30 33.55 4 43.40 71.40 69.00 34.37
Glm 26 20.40 41.30 29.50 2 4l.l0 65.10 53.0 1 33.51
Phalanx I Bd 73 08.40 14.40 12.50 12 23.20 32.10 28.50 3 10.59 23.65 23.00
Bp 69 08.40 15.20 12.50 13 24.50 32.70 29.00 3 17.94 23.94 23.00
GL 72 17.50 43.98 38.00 12 50.10 64.74 59.00 3 49.92 54.33 52.00
Phalanx II Bd 21 08.00 24.07 09.60 7 20.20 26.40 23.90
Bp 21 09.10 27.65 11.50 7 25.60 30.50 30.00
GL 21 10.50 39.94 22.15 7 29.50 41.10 39.25
Phalanx III Ld 6 22.00 28.30 25.15 4 48.40 51.60 51.00 34.78
Metatarsus Bd 15 16.90 27.90 26.00 2 46.80 61.30 54.50
Bp 14 17.20 27.40 25.00
GL 8 62.30 153.40 135.00
Metacarpus Bd 4 23.48 28.33 26.00 2 42.60 50.70 47.00
Bp 2 22.12 25.96 24.00
Os centrale Gb 3 14.60 25.40 23.40 55.10

Os carpale Gb 24.70
Patella Gb 16.20 34.55
Gl 23.00
Radius Bd 30.60 72.97
Bp 4 32.70 35.00 32.60
GL 1 170.00
Femur Bd 36.97 42.10
Tibia Bd 2 26.28 28.46 27.37 58.39 40.65
Bp 1 40.27 85.55
Humerus BD 29.22
BT 4 28.55 36.17 33.00
Bp 62.39
337
TABLE 15.27: DISTRIBUTION OF SKELETAL ELEMENTS ACCORDING TO SPECIES

(STRATUM V, IA I)
Species: Ovis aries/ Capra hircus Bas taurus Canis familiaris

No. % No. % No. %
Mandible 66 6.5 22 7.2 2 20.0
Maxilla 3 0.3 0.3
Cranium frag. 44 4.3 3 1.0
Horn core 7 1.0 0.3
Incisors 1 0.1
Molars 112 11.1 46 15.0
Premolars 18 1.8 3 1.0
Scapula 69 6.8 6 2.0
Humerus 38 3.7 7 2.3 10.0
Ulna 12 1.2 4 1.3
Radius 32 3.2 8 2.6
Pelvis 80 7.9 12 3.9
Femur 16 1.6 16 5.2 10.0
Tibia 23 2.3 7 2.3 4 40.0
Astragalus 14 1.4 14 4.6
Calcaneum 28 2.8 12 3.9
Metatarsus 26 2.5 4 1.3
Phalanx I 40 3.9 21 6.9
Phalanx II 1 0.1 15 4.9
Phalanx III 18 1.8 7 2.3 2 20.0
Os centrale 4 0.4 2 0.6
Metapodials 112 ll.l 42 l3.7
Vertebrae 75 7.4 32 10.5
Costae 161 15.9 17 5.6
Total 1014 76.1 306 23.0 10 0.8
338
TABLE 15.28: RATIO OF RIGHT AND LEFT BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE
(STRATUM V, IA I)

Bones No. % No. % No. % No. %
Mandible 24 38.1 39 61.9 10 45.1 12 54.5
Maxilla 3 lOO.O
Scapula 35 53.0 31 47.0 I 25.0 3 75.0
Humerus 22 57.9 16 42.1 2 33.3 4 66.7
Ulna 5 45.4 6 54.5 2 50.0 2 50.0
Radius 14 50.0 14 50.0 2 28.6 5 71.4
Metacarpus 12 85.7 2 14.3 4 100.0
Pelvis 27 34.6 51 65.4 3 27.3 8 72.7
Femur 7 46.7 8 53.3 4 26.7 11 73.7
Tibia 14 63.6 8 36.4 3 42.9 4 57.1
Astragalus 7 50.0 7 50.0 7 50.0 7 50.0
Calcaneum 15 53.6 13 46.4 6 54.5 5 45.5
Metatarsus 14 53.8 l2 46.1
Total 196 48.3 210 51.7 41 37.6 68 62.4
TABLE 15.29: RATIO OF FUSED AND UNFUSED BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE
(STRATUM V, IA I)

No. % No. % No. % No. %
Humerus 34 89.5 4 l0.5. 5 83.3 I 16.7
Radius 25 89.3 3 10.7 5 71.4 2 28.6
Metacarpus 11 82.3 3 17.7 4 100.0
Metatarsus 22 84.5 3 15.5 I 25.0 3 75.0
Femur 15 93.7 I 6.3 12 80.0 3 20.0
Tibia 17 85.0 3 15.0 4 57.1 3 42.9
Total 124 87.9 17 12.1 31 72.1 12 27.9
339
TABLE 15.30: AGE GROUPS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (STRATUM V, IA I)
Species: Ovis aries I Capra hi reus Bos taurus

Unfused bones Fused Unfused bones Fused
Months Foetal 10 18-24 20-28 36 37-42 42+ Foetal 12-18 24-30 27-36 42 42-48 48+
Humerus P* 2
Humerus D 3 32 3
Radius P 2 19
Radius D 6
Metacarpus P 3 11 3
Metatarsus P 3 22
Metatarsus D 3 l
Femur P 5 3
Femur D 10 9
Tibia P 7
Tibia D 2 10 3 2
Total fused 124 21
Total unfused 3 5 2 3 3 3 3 3 2

CATTLE (STRATUM V, IA I)
Species: Ovis aries I Capra hircus Bos taurus

No. % No. % No. % No. %
Humerus 3 7.9 35 92.1 14.3 6 85.7
Ulna 12 100.0 4 100.0
Radius 25 78.1 7 21.9 3 37.5 5 62.5
Metacarpus 14 100.0 4 100.0
Femur 6 37.5 10 62.5 6 37.5 10 62.5
Tibia 8 34.8 15 65.2 2 28.6 5 71.4
Metatarsus 25 52.1 23 47.9 4 19.0 17 81.0
Total 93 50.8 90 49.2 24 35.8 43 64.2
TABLE 15.32: BODY-PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (STRATUM V, IA I)


SIG c SIG c SIG c SIG c SIG
Horn core 7 I Scapula 69 6 Pelvis 80 12 Vertebrae 75 32 Phalanx I 40 2

Cranium 44 3 Humerus 38 7 Femur 16 16 Costae 161 17 Phalanx II 1 1
Maxilla 3 1 Radius 32 8 Tibia 23 7 Phalanx III 18
Mandible 66 22 Ulna 12 4 Astragalus 14 14
Teeth 131 49 Metacarpus 14 4 Calcaneum 28 12
Metatarsus 25 4
Tarsus 4 2
Tot.S/G 251 165 190 236 59

% 27.9 18.3 21.1 26.2 6.5
Total C 76 29 67 49 4
% 28.7 11.0 25.4 18.6
340
TABLE 15.33: MEASUREMENTS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE BONES (IN MM;

STRATUM V, IA I)

Msr. No. Min. Max. Mean No. Min. Max. Mean
Astragalus Bd 14 12.40 21.30 18.80 5 28.40 48.20 40.00
Gli 13 25.90 33.60 29.50 5 46.10 69.50 64.00
Glm 13 25.20 31.50 27.50 5 42.80 62.90 60.00
Calcaneum GB 13 10.50 23.40 17.00 42.70
GL 5 52.80 62.40 57.80
Phalanx I Bd 32 09.10 13.90 11.50 9 15.60 27.30 26.50
Bp 32 10.70 16.20 12.50 10 17.30 48.80 28.60
GL 28 15.10 41.40 35.70 8 25.90 57.20 47.00
Phalanx II Bd 3 09.50 14.10 11.00 2 22.00 22.90 22.50
Bp 3 11.40 15.40 12.40 2 19.20 34.70 25.00
GL 3 19.60 23.80 22.90 2 28.20 35.40 30.00
Phalanx III Ld 6 38.00 50.90 46.00
Metatarsus Bd 4 18.50 26.90 26.00
Bp 9 18.00 26.70 24.00
GL 3 57.90 135.10 82.50
Radius Bd 3 27.70 30.20 30.00
Bp 4 29.60 35.00 32.00
GL 1 117.60
Tibia Bd 5 24.64 28.40 26.70
Os centrale GB 2 22.70 34.90 28.00
TABLE 15.34: DISTRIBUTION OF SKELETAL ELEMENTS IN RARE ANIMAL SPECIES FROM

FOUR STRATA
Species: Canis Sus Equus Came/us Equus asinus Cervus Gazella

familiaris scrofa caballus dro- sp. gazella
medarius.
Stratum: VIII VII v VI VI VII VI v VII Vlll VI
Mandible
Cranium frag.
Molars 2
Radius
Calcaneum
Astragalus
Metatarsus
Phalanx I
Phalanx II
Metapodia 2
Costa
TOTAL 3 3 2 2
341
TABLE 15.34 (CONT.)
Species: Damadama Spalax Gallus gallus Pisces sp.

mesopotamica ehrenbergi domestica
Stratum: VII VII VII VI VII VI
Cranium frag. 1
Incisors 2
Molars 6
Humerus
Ulna 2
Femur
Tibia
Tarsometatarsus 2
Metatarsus
Phalanx I
Vertebra 2
TOTAL 2 9 7 2
TABLE 15.35: MEASUREMENTS IN SEVEN ANIMAL SPECIES (IN MM.)
Species: Sus Came/us Cervus Damai;lama Gazella

scrofa dromedarius sp. mesopotamica gazella
Stratum: VIII VI VII VII VI VIII
Msr. No. Mean No. Mean No. Mean No. Mean No. Mean No. Mean
Humerus Bd 22.43
Bp 61.76
Radius Bp 27.18
Metatarsus Bp 27.89
Phalanx I Bd 30.90 09.13
Bp 34.50 12.10
GL 60.31 42.77
Phalanx II Bd 14.00 21.60
Bp 14.80 23.70
GL 25.10 35.50
TABLE 15.35 (CONT.)

Species: Gallus domesticus Columba livia

Stratum: VI v v
Msr. No. Mean No. M.ean No. Mean
Femur Bd 36.97 19.15
Tarsometatarsus Bd 11.10
Tibiotarsus Dd 09.70
Humerus Dip 04.40
Bd 05.30
GL 17.00
342
TABLE 15.36: RATIO OF FUSED AND UNFUSED BONES IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE
ACCORDING TO PERIODS (IN %)*
Species: Ovis/Capra Bos taurus

MBII 68.2 31.8 60.0 40.0
MBIII 73.9 26.1 100.0
LB 79.6 20.4 61.5 38.5
Iron Age I 87.9 12.1 72.1 27.9
Iron Age II 82.2 17.8 90.9 9.1

Hellenistic 84.0 16.0 91.7 8.3
Roman 100.0 100.0
* The horizontal line separates periods with large quantities of bones from those with small assemblages
TABLE 15.37: DISTRIBUTION OF SHEEP/ GOAT AND CATTLE BONES ACCORDING TO

PERIODS
Periods: MBII MBlll LB IA I IA II Hell. Roman

S/G c S/G c S/G c S/G c S/G c S/G c S/G c
Metapodia 127 12 134 6 173 18 ll2 42 11 10 6 6 14 3
Costae 102 16 78 6 695 46 161 17 12 3 16 4 19 1
Vertebrae 73 7 87 lO 341 41 75 32 7 4 3 I 13 2
Mandible 17 l 19 5 139 lO 66 22 ll 5 1 7
Maxilla 3 1 4 3 l
Cranium frag. 41 8 23 161 19 44 3 3 3 2 2
Horn core 4 5 19 4 7 2 2
Phalanx I 8 25 8 97 13 40 21 3 3 3 2 3
Phalanx II 1 3 3 21 10 1 15 2 2
Phalanx III 2 9 3 18 7
Total sample
size of S/G 549 549 2623 1014 99 62 113
Total sample
size of C 75 76 253 306 41 32 31
TABLE 15.38: RATIOOFPROXIMALANDDISTALBONESINSHEEPJGOATANDCATTLE

(IN %)

MBII 58.3 41.7 66.7 33.3
MBIII 66.7 33.3 53.3 46.7
LB 65.8 34.2 75.0 25.0
Iron Age I 50.8 49.2 35.8 64.2
Iron Age II 63.3 36.7 42.8 57.2

Hellenistic 58.3 41.7 80.0 20.0
Roman 65.0 35.0 75.0 25.0
343
TABLE 15.39: RIGHT AND LEFT SEPARATION IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE BONES
(IN%)
Species: OvisfCapra Bos taurus

MBII 50.4 49.6 37.5 62.5
MBIII 65.9 34.1 65.2 34.8
LB 52.7 47.3 53.2 46.8
Iron Age I 48.3 51.7 37.6 62.4
Iron Age II 53.3 46.7 70.0 30.0
Hellenistic 66.7 33.3 57.1 42.9
Roman 55.8 44.2 33.3 66.7
TABLE 15.40: BODY-PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE (IN%)
Species: OvisfCapra Bos taurus

Cranial Fore Hind Trunk Feet Cranial Fore Hind Trunk Feet
limbs limbs limbs limbs
MBII 25.8 15.2 15.4 41.5 2.1 32.8 7.8 20.3 35.9 3.1
MB III 21.5 14.4 17.1 40.2 6.8 29.0 2.9 26.1 23.2 18.8
LB 25.2 11.9 15.4 42.3 5.2 26.4 8.5 17.0 37.0 ILl
Iron Age I 27.9 18.3 21.1 26.2 6.5 28.8 11.0 25.4 18.6 16.3
Iron Age II 26.1 22.7 28.4 21.6 1.1 48.4 6.4 9.7 22.6 12.9
Hellenistic 14.3 26.8 19.6 33.9 4.3 30.8 19.2 1l.5 19.2 19.2
Roman 28.3 17.2 19.2 32.3 3.0 28.6 10.7 28.6 10.7 21.4
TABLE 15.41: THE RATIO BETWEEN SMALL AND LARGE RUMINANTS ACCORDING TO
PERIODS
Species: Ovis/Capra Bos taurus Total

No. % No. % No.
MBU 549 87.9 75 12.1 624
MBIII 549 87.8 76 12.2 625
LB 2623 91.2 253 8.8 2876
Iron Age I 1014 76.8 306 23.2 1320
Iron Age II 99 70.7 41 29.3 140

Hellenistic 62 66.0 32 34.0 94
Roman l13 78.5 31 21.5 144
344
TABLE 15.42: COMPARATIVE MEASUREMENTS OF SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE BONES:

LATE BRONZE AND IRON I

Period: LB Iron Age I LB Iron Age I
Msr. No. Mean No. Mean No. Mean No. Mean
Calcaneum Gl 9 60.00 5 57.80
Astragalus Bd 26 19.25 14 18.80 3 44.00 5 40.00
GLm 26 29.50 13 27.50 4 69.00 5 60.00
GLi 26 33.55 13 29.50
Phalanx I Bd 73 12.50 32 11.50 12 28.50 9 26.50
Bp 13 29.00 10 28.60
GL 72 38.00 28 35.70 12 59.00 8 47.00
Phalanx II Bd 7 23.90 2 22.50
Bp 7 30.00 2 25.00
GL 7 39.25 2 30.00
Phalanx III Ld 4 51.00 6 46.00
Metatarsus Bp 14 25.00 9 24.00
TABLE 15.43: SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN THE LB/IRON I TRANSITION
LB Iron Age I
Sample size 2973 1350
No. of species 13 12
%Domestic 97.7 91}.1
% Ovis /Capra 88.2 75.1
%Cattle 8.5 22.7
%Right side 0/ C 63.6 48.3
% Unfused (0/C) 20.4 12.1
% Unfused (Bos) 38.5 27.9
%Trunk elements (0/C) 42.3 26.2
%Trunk elements (Bos) 37.0 18.6
%Proximal limb elements (0/C) 65.8 50.8
%Proximal limb elements (Bos) 75.0 35.8
Body size (Bos + 0 I C) Bigger Smaller
No. Phalanx III (OIC) 9 18
0 I C: Bos proportions 92:8 77:23
No. Sus scrofa bones 5 1

No. Cervus sp. bones 65 7
No. Canis familiaris bones IO 10
345
TABLE lp.44: THE FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGE AT FOUR MIDDLE BRONZE SITES (IN%)
Site: Shiloh Lachish Tel Tel

MBII MBIII Seasons Season Michal Aphek
I-VI XI
Ovis/Capra 84.3 85.2 73.6 86.9 44.5 49.4
Bos taurus 11.5 ll.8 10.3 6.5 41.0 33.5
Susscrofa 3.5 3.1 O.l 6.3 7.7
Canis familiaris 0.5 0.1 1.7 5.6 0.7
Equus asinus 0.1 1.4 0.1 2.1
Equus caballus 0.9 0.4
Came/us dromedarius 3.6
Cervus sp. 0.3 0.1 1.5
Dama dama mesopotamica 0.3 0.0
Gazella gazella 0.1 4.5 O.l 5.6
Vulpes sp. 0.1
Spa/ax ehrenbergi 0.2
Aves sp. 0.1 0.8
Gallus domesticus 0.1
Anser sp. 2.4
Reptilia 0.4
Pisces 0.3 3.1 0.01 0.1
Mollusca 0.1 0.1 0.2
Total No. of bones 651 644 292 5084 llO 1129
TABLE 15.45: BODY PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE IN FOUR

MIDDLE BRONZE SITES (IN%)
Site: Shiloh Lachish Tel Tel

MBII MBIII Seasons Season Michal Aphek
I-VI XI
OvisfCapra Cranial 25.8 21.5 20.1 31.5 36.4 34.7
Forelimbs 15.2 14.4 17.2 10.5 27.3 37.0
Hindlimbs 15.4 17.1 28.2 7.7 29.5 24.0
Trunk 41.5 40.2 36.4 2.3 1.2
Feet 2.1 6.8 34.5 13.8 4.5 3.8
Bos taurus Cranial 32.8 29.0 13.0 45.1 26.3 31.2
Forelimbs 7.8 2.9 21.7 6.3 23.7 18.6
Hindlimbs 20.3 26.0 8.7 6.3 26.3 26.8

Trunk 35.9 23.2 12.6 2.2
Feet 3.1 18.8 56.5 29.7 23.7 2l.l
346
TABLE 15.46: LONG-BONE FUSION OF SMALL ~ND LARGE RUMINANTS IN FOUR

MIDDLE BRONZE SITES (IN %)
Ovis/Capra Bos taurus

Shiloh
MBII 68.2 31.8 60.0 40.0
MBIII 73.9 26.1 100.0
Lachish 85.3 14.7 94.8 5.2
Tel Michal 98.0 2.0 95.5 4.5
Tel Aphek 96.6 3.4 96.4 3.6
TABLE 15.47: THE FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGE AT THREE LATE BRONZE SITES (IN%)
Shiloh Tel Michal Tel Lachish

Seasons I- VI
OvisJCapra 88.2 45.1 51.5
Bos taurus 8.5 40.2 21.8
Sus scrofa 0.2 0.3 0.2
Canis familiaris 0.3 1.9 0.2
Equus asinus 0.1 0.3 2.5
Equus cabal/us 0.1
Came/us dromedarius 0.03
Cervus sp. 0.5 6.2 2.7
Dama dama mesopotamica 1.7 3.4
Gazella gazella 0.03 0.5 0.2
Gallus domesticus 0.2
Anser sp. 4.1
Columba Iivia 1.2
Alectoris graeca 1.2
Anser sp. 0.7
Pisces O.o3 3.9
Mollusca 0.03
Total No. of bones 2973 641 802
347
TABLE 15.48: BODY PART BREAKDOWN IN SHEEP/GOAT AND CATTLE IN THREE LATE
BRONZE SITES (IN %)
Shiloh Tel Michal Tel Lachish

Seasons I- VI
Ovis/Capra Cranial 25.2 29.0 26.3
Forelimbs 11.9 34.9 19.8
Hindlimbs 15.4 29.7 29.6
Trunk 42.3
Feet 5.2 6.3 24.3
Bos taurus Cranial 26.4 26.6 10.7

Forelimbs 8.5 29.8 13.6
Hindlimbs 17.0 23.8 29.3
Trunk 37.0
Feet 11.1 19.7 46.4
TABLE 15.49: LONG-BONE FUSION OF SMALL AND LARGE RUMINANTS IN TWO LATE
BRONZE SITES (IN %)

Shiloh 79.6 29.4 61.5 38.5
Tel Michal 95.5 4.5 95.3 4.7
TABLE 15.50: THE FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGE OF EIGHT IRON AGE I SITES (IN%)
Site: Shiloh cizbet Beer- Tel Arad Mount Tel Hesban

Sartah sheba Masos XII Ebal Miqne
OvisjCapra 75.1 52.7 77.5 66.1 81.5 65.0 45.0 71.3
Bos taurus 22.7 34.3 12.5 20.7 17.7 21.0 37.0 22.5
Sus scrofa 0.1 0.4 0.2 O.l 18.0 4.8
Canis familiaris 0.7 0.3 1.0 0.4
Equus asinus 0.1 0.7 1.8 2.3
Came/us dromedarius 8.4 3.0
Cervus sp. 0.3 2.7 0.8
Damadama
mesopotamica 0.2 0.6 2.4 10.0

Gazella gazella 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.0
Aves sp. 0.2 0.7
Gallus domesticus 0.4 6.5
Anser sp. 0.1
Columba Iivia 0.1
Pisces 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3
Mollusca 4.8 0.1
Total N of bones 1350 1203 1303 779 331 770 1800 639
348
TABLE 15.51: THE BODY PART BREAKDOWN IN SMALL AND LARGE RUMINANTS IN
EIGHT IRON I SITES (IN%)
Site: Shiloh Mt. Ebal Beer-sheba Miqneh Masos Arad cizbet Hesban
v (Main IX-VI B III-I XII Sartah E04
structure) ll/-1 E05
Ovis/Capra Cranial 27.9 35.0 34.0 30.0 43.7 34.9 22.94

Forelimbs 18.3 12.0 23.0 41.0 34.0 28.7 26.6 19.84
Hindlimbs 21.1 18.0 22.0 47.0 29.0 14.7 18.1 28.24
Trunk 26.2 30.0 15.0 10.9 15.5 28.88
Feet 6.5 5.0 6.0 12.0 6.0 2.0 4.9 1.08
Bos taurus Cranial 28.8 29.0 30.0 11.0 48.5 27.1 26.70
Forelimbs 11.0 14.0 19.0 40.0 27.0 3.1 23.1 18.63
Hindlimbs 25.3 16.0 21.0 25.0 34.0 10.9 18.7 19.64
Trunk 18.6 35.0 15.0 29.7 17.3 28.96
Feet 16.3 6.0 15.0 35.0 27.0 7.8 13.8 6.06
TABLE 15.52: LONG BONE FUSION OF SMALL AND LARGE RUMINANTS AT FIVE IRON I
SITES (IN%)
Species: Ovis/Capra Bos taurus Came/us dromedarius

Fused Unfused Fused Unfused Fused Unfused
Shiloh 87.9 12.1 72.1 27.9
clzbet Sartah 92.6 7.4 96.6 3.4 97.1 3.9
Beer-sheba 93.2 6.8 98.3 1.7
Mount Ebal 98.6 •1.4 93.3 6.7
Arad XII 86.0 14.0 100.0
REFERENCES
Besold, K. 1966. Geschlechts und Gattungsunterschiede an Metapodien und Phalangen mitteleuro-

piiischer (Ph.D. thesis). University of Munich.
Boessneck, J. 1969. Osteological differences between Sheep ( Ovis aries Linne) and Goats (Capra hi'rcus
Linne). In: Brothwell, D. and Higgs, E., eds. Science in Archaeology. Bristol. pp. 331-358.
Cornwall, I.W. 1968. Bones for the Archaeologist. London.
Davis, S.J.M. 1987. The Archaeology of Animals. London.
Driesch, von den A. 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites.
Peabody Museum Bulletin I. Cambridge.
Drori, I. 1979. Tel Lachish: Subsistence and Natural Environment during the Middle, Late Bronze and
Iron Age Periods (unpublished M.A. thesis). Tel Aviv University. (Hebrew)
Habermehl, K.H. 1975. Die Altersbestimmung bei Haus- und Labortieren 2. Berlin.
Hellwing, S. 1984. Human Exploitation of Animal Resources in the Early Iron Age Strata at Tel
Beer-Sheba. In: Herzog, Z. Beer-sheba II: The Early Iron Age Settlements. Tel Aviv.
349
Hellwing, S. forthcoming. Animal Remains from the Early and Middle Bronze Ages at Tel Aphek. In:
Beck, P. and Kochavi, M. Aphek-Antipatris I.

Hell wing, S. and Adjeman, Y. 1986. Animal Bones. In: Finkelstein, I. cIzbet Sartah: An Early Iron Age
Site near Rosh Hacayin, Israel. BAR S299. Oxford. pp. 141-152.
Hellwing, S. and Feig, N. 1989. Animal Bones. In: Herzog, Z., Rapp, G. and Negbi, 0., eds. Excavations
at Tel Michal, Israel. Minneapolis. pp. 236-248.
Hesse, B. 1986. Animal Use at Tel Miqne-Ekron in the Bronze Age and Iron Age. BASOR 264:17-28.
Hesse, B. and Wapnish, P. 1985. Animal Bone Archaeology. Washington D.C.
Horwitz, L. 1986-87. Faunal Remains from the Early Iron Age Site on Mount Ebal. Tel Aviv
13-14:173-189.
Horwitz, L. 1989. Diachronic Changes in Rural Husbandry Practices in Bronze Age Settlements from
the Refaim Valley, Israel. PEQ 121:44-54.
Horwitz, L. and Tchernov, E. 1987. Faunal Remains from the PPNB Submerged Site of Atlit. Mitekufat
Haeven 20: 72-78.
Prumel, W. and Frisch, H.T. 1986. A Guide for the Distinction of Species, Sex and Body Side in Bones
of Sheep and Goat. Journal of Archaeological Science 13:564-574.
Rosen, B. 1986. Subsistence Economy of Stratum II. In: Finkelstein, I. cIzbet Sartah: An Early Iron Age
Sade, M. 1988. Domestic Mammals in the Iron Age Economy of the Northern Negev (unpublished
M.A. thesis). Tel Aviv University. (Hebrew)
Schmid, E. 1972. Atlas of Animals Bones. New York.
Silver, I.A. 1969. The Ageing of Domestic Animals. In: Brothwell, D. and Higgs, E., eds. Science in
Archaeology. Bristol. pp. 283-302.
Tchernov, E. and Drori, I. 1983. Economic Patterns and Environmental Conditions at Tel Masos
during the Israelite Settlement Period. In: Fritz, V. and Kempinski, A., eds. Ergebnisse der
Ausgrabungen auf der Hirbet el-Mesas (Tel Masos) 1971-1975. Wiesbaden. pp. 215-221.
Watson, J.P.N. 1979. The Estimation of the Relative Frequencies of Mammalian Species: Khirokitia
1972. Journal of Archaeological Sciences 6:127-137.
Weiler, D. 1981. Saugetier knochenfunde vom Tell Hesban in Jordanien (Ph.D. thesis). University of
Miinchen.
Zeder, M. 1988. Understanding Urban Process through the Study of Specialized Subsistence Economy
in the Near East. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 7:1-56.
350
CHAPTER 16
PALAEOBOTANICAL REMAINS
Nili Liphschitz*
The excavations at Shiloh yielded 52 carbonized wood fragments from five strata (VIII-IV; MB II to
Iron I I - Table 16.1). Analysis ofthis palaeobotanical material provides valuable information regarding
the past vegetation and macroclimate of the region.
METHOD
Charred pieces of wood 1-1.5 cu. em. were aspirated in absolute ethyl alcohol for 90 min., dipped in
methyl-benzoate-celloidin for 24 hrs., transferred to benzene for 20 min. and finally to 50-55°C paraffin
for 96 hrs. Blocks were prepared and cross-sections, as well as longitudinal, tangential and radial
sections of 10-12 Jl thickness were made with a rotary microtome. After deparaffination the sections
were mounted in Canada balsam. Anatomical identification of the wood was made from these sections.
Samples taken from live trees of known species were used for reference.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Three species of tree were identified at Shiloh:
Olea europaea (olive) - 36 samples, 69%;
Quercus calliprinos (Kermes oak)- 10 samples, 19%;
Pistacia palaestina (terebinth)- 6 samples, 12% (Table 16.1).
Quercus calliprinos and Pistacia palaestina are two of the main constituents of the Mediterranean
maquis. Today this plant association characterizes the Mediterranean hill country from the upper
Galilee and the northern district of the Golan Heights in the north to the Hebron hills in the south
(Zohary 1959). The Shiloh remains confirm palaeobotanical data from other sites in the hill country of
Samaria! which show that this was the dominant plant association in the Mediterranean hilly zone of
Israel also in antiquity. The question as to whether the climax vegetation of Quercus calliprinos in the
Mediterranean territory was that of a forest or of a maquis is still disputed (Zohary 1960; Schmida
1980).

1. For example, Iron Age I Mount Ebal (Liphschitz 1986-7), Iron Age II Klica, Byzantine Khirbet el-Burak and Mameluk
Qarnei Shomron (Liphschitz 1987b; see also Liphschitz and Biger 1989).
351
TABLE 16.1: WOOD REMAINS FROM SHILOH
No. Area Locus Reg. No. Period Tree species Remarks

I. F 1527 MBIII Olea europaea
2. 15343
3. 15388
4. 1522
5. 1533 15218
6. 15304
7. 15310
8. 15211
9. 15262
10. D 1415 14197 LB
11. c 1318 13121 Iron I
12. 13127
13. 13120
14. 13128
15. 13131
16. 13132
17. 13117
18. 1301 13032
19. 1301 13082
20. 13070
21. 13021
22. 307 3146
23. 306 3167
24. 312 3100
25. 335 3396
26. 312 6206
27. 336 6263
28. 613 6131
29. D 1408 14051 silo
30. 14056
31. 1430 14173
32. 14153
33. 14194
34. E 509 5066
35. c 1301 13004
36. F 807 8035 mixed
37. D 1428 14240 MBII Quercus calliprinos
38. 1449 14396 LB
39. c 613 6078 Iron I
40. 617 6124

41. 610 6102
42. 6083
43. 307 3169
44. D 1430 14194 silo
45. c 1313 13091 mixed
46. 13085
47. c 335 3395 Iron I Pistacia palaestina
48. 3396
49. 613 6105
50. 610 6125
51. 1313 13069 mixed
52. 606 6066
352
On the western flank of the hill country of Samaria, from an elevation of 250-300 m., numerous
stands of Quercus calliprinos and Pistacia palaestina exist today, for example along Wadi Qana. Several
large-sized Quercus calliprinos trees appear above the 500 m. elevation (Zohary and Hartman 1983).
However, despite favourable ecological conditions of elevation and precipitation (over 700 mm .. mean
annual rainfall), central Samaria has been deforested in recent generations and is characterized by a
batha formation. This is due to overusage of the woody vegetation by man, rather than to climatic
changes.
Olea europaea is also a typical Mediterranean tree species. Single trees growing naturally and groves
of olives occur all over the Mediterranean hilly region of the country, most of the trees being either
cultivated or escapes. Dendroarchaeological investigations show that this was the most common species
in antiquity, the highest percentages of wood remains gathered in excavations in the Mediterranean
region being olive (Liphschitz 1987a). This probably resulted from the fact that aged groves ceased to be
of economic value as fruit trees. Olives were most probably cultivated in the environs of the site, as can
be seen from their abundance in the wood assemblage especially in Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Age
strata.
REFERENCES
Liphschitz, N. 1986-7. Paleobotanical Remains from Mount Ebal. Tel Aviv 13-14:190-191.
Liphschitz, N. 1987a. Olives in Ancient Israel in View of Dendroarchaeological Investigations. In:
Heltzer, M. and Eitam, D., eds. Olive Oil in Antiquity. Haifa. pp. 139-145.
Liphschitz, N. 1987b. The Landscape of Vegetation and Weather Conditions in Judah and Samaria in
Ancient Times. Rotem 22:21-26, 114. (Hebrew)
Liphschitz, N. and Biger, G. 1989. Dominance of Quercus calliprinos (Kermes oak)-Pistacia palaestina
(terebinth) Association in the Mediterranean Territory of Eretz Israel during Antiquity. Hasadeh
69: 1087-1090. (Hebrew)
Schmida, A. 1980. On the Problems of Forest and Maquis of Quercus calliprinos in Eretz Israel. Teva
Vaaretz 22:52-57. (Hebrew)
Zohary, M. 1959. Geobotany. Merhavia, Israel. (Hebrew)
Zohary, M. 1960. The Maquis of Quercus calliprinos in Israel and Jordan. Bulletin of Research Council,
Israel9D:51-72.
Zohary, M. and Hartman, M. 1983. The Arboreal Vegetation Units of Western Samaria. Rotem
9:30-36, 68. (Hebrew)
353
CHAPTER 17
FOOD REMAINS
Mordechai E. Kislev*
Charred plant remnants from Shiloh were processed in our laboratory in order to evaluate their possible
economic role in the different strata unearthed at the site. Part of the food remains was retrieved from
Stratum VII, dated to the MB III, and a smaller amount from Stratum VIII (MB II) (Table 17.1).
However, most of the food material comes from Stratum V, dated to the Iron Age I (Tables 17.2-3).
CEREALS
The only cereals found at Shiloh are a particular kind of naked wheat (Triticum parvicoccum) and
two-rowed barley (Hordeum distichon) (Tables 17.1-3). The largest quantity, 74litres, was unearthed in
Stratum V Silo 1462 in Area D. It contained mainly wheat, with a considerable quantity (about 28%) of
barley. No insect damage was observed. An attempt was made to check whether the. crops were grown as
a mixture in one field, or as separate species. This was done by examining 10 samples of 100 cc. each in
order to trace differences in the wheat/barley ratio, as well as to reveal the weed composition in various
parts of the lot. The results showed no significant differences between the sub-samples. It is worth noting
that in the Mishnah (Roman period) there is literary evidence for sowing two crops in one field
(Mishnah, Peah, 2, 5).
Altogether 2000 cc. were examined. In order to facilitate microscopic examination, the charred
material was sieved through a series of sieves of 2.0, 1.0 and 0.5 mm. mesh; only 60% of the fraction
smaller than 1 mm. was examined. The wheat grains are similar in shape and dimensions to those found
at other sites in the ancient Near East (Table 17.4; Kislev 1980). There were also a considerable number
of rachis fragments of both wheat and barley (Figs. 17 .1-2). The dimensions of barley kernels were also
measured (Table 17.5) and may be compared with those of Kadesh-Barnea (Kislev 1989).
RAISINS
The outstanding archaeobotanical find from Shiloh is the considerable quantity of charred raisins
(Tables 17.1-2, Figs. 17.3-5). Although raisins can be preserved over the ages in dry form, they are
recorded only once in ancient Egypt (in the tomb of Tutankhamun- Germer 1989:49; Hepper 1990:67),
* Department of Life Sciences, Bar-Han University. Special thanks are due to Mrs. M. Marmorstein for technical help. The
photographs were prepared by Y. Langsam and T. Ankar.
354
apparently because vines were not commonly grown in that country. The grape fruits from Pompeii,
exhibited in the National Museum in Naples (Meyer 1980), should be interpreted as charred raisins.
Raisin remnants were probably not found elsewhere. The find of empty grape skins together with pips
and stalks at Early Minoan Myrtos in Crete may possibly represent the residues of wine-making
(Renfrew 1973:131).
Experiments to artificially char grapes and raisins, even at a relatively low temperature (2sooq, show
considerable balloon-like puffing of the fruits (Kislev, unpublished). This is mainly due to the high sugar
content which decomposes during heating to water and carbon dioxide, as well as to the water in the
berry itself, which rapidly vaporizes, stretching and usually splitting the fruit skin. In this state the
charred fruit is very fragile and therefore likely to have been crushed in the ruins or during excavation.
This is probably the reason why raisin finds are rare in archaeological excavations. Only extremely dry
raisins may survive charring without ballooning.
Raisins were frequently prepared in ancient times, as today, because of their high sugar content
(rather rare in primitive fruit cultivars), their pleasant taste and the long shelf life ofthe dry berries. The
TABLE 17.1: PLANT LIST AREA F, STRATA VIII-VII (MB II-III)
Stratum
Plant name Plant organ VIII* VII**
Cereals
Triticum parvicoccum grain 20
Hordeum distichon kernel 92
Legumes
Lens culinaris seed 6
Vicia ervilia seed 26
Fruits
Ficus carica nutlet 31
Olea europaea kernel 5 108
Pistacia palaestina nutlet 1
Punica granatum kernel 2
Rubus sanguineus nutlet 1
Vitis vinifera pip 13
Vitis vinifera raisin 32
Weeds
Galium tricornutum mericarp 2
Lathyrus sp. seed
Lolium temulentum grain

Malva parvijlora mericarp 2
Onobrychis caput-galli seed
Ononis ornithopodioides / viscosa seed
Papilionaceae seed 4
Phalaris paradoxa grain 7
Scorpiurus muricatus seed
Vicia galilaea seed
Vicieae seed 4
Total 6 357
* L. 1710
** L. 1522, 1525, 1526, 1527, 1532, 1533 and 1736
355
amount of sugar in the grapes rises with time; among other reasons, late-ripening varieties and grapes
that remain longer on the vine are sweeter since they contain less water.
Raisins are prepared by various methods, three of which are briefly described here:
1. The cluster is left to dry on the vine, the vascular connection to the plant being reduced by a small cut.
2. Clusters of ripe grapes are arranged in a layer, 8-10 em. thick, on special platforms in the vineyard.
Each night they are covered with a cloth to prevent moistening by dew. The raisins are ready after
two-three weeks. 100 kg. of grapes produces 35 kg. of raisins.
3. Fully-ripe grapes are immersed for a few seconds or more in a (usually hot) solution of soda water and
oil, and then spread in the sun to dry. The preparation is as follows: About 3 kg. of lye is added to 20
litres of water. Wood of oak or vine is generally used to make the lye, as they are readily available in the
vineyard or its vicinity. The mixture is boiled for some time, water being added to maintain the original
quantity, and then left overnight to cool and for the lye to sink. Olive oil, 20-33% (sometimes only 5%),
is added to the clear solution. The soda removes the wax covering the grape skin, perforates it, and
permits faster drying. Olive oil gives the raisins a glossy appearance and prevents damage by insects.
Nowadays a 5-10% solution of sodium bicarbonate is used instead of lye. The raisins are ready after
several days of drying. 4 kg. of grapes produce 1 kg. of raisins. The raisins are dried down to 10%
moisture (Chizik 1952:600-:602).
TABLE 17.2: PLANT LIST- AREA C, STRATUM V (IRON I)
Locus
Plant name Plant organ 308 335 336 610 1301 1318 1323 Total
Cereals
Triticum parvicoccum grain 8 8
Triticum parvicoccum glume base 17 17
Hordeum distichon Kernel 3 5 9
Legumes
Lens culinaris seed 91 3 96
Vicia ervilia seed 8 9
Fruits
Ficus carica nutlet 4 5
Olea europaea kernel
Vitis vinifera pip 86 245 332
Vitis vinifera undeveloped pip 2 28 30
Vitis vinifera raisin 268 269

Vitis vinifera small raisin 64 64
Vitis vinifera raisin stalk 2 2 4
Weeds
Cephalaria syriaca fruits 10 10
Lolium temulentum grain 4 5
Papilionaceae seed 3 3
Phalaris paradoxa seed 10 10
Rapistrum rugosum fruit 4 5
Thymelaea passerina nutlet
Vaccaria hispanica seed l
Vicieae seed 2 3
Total 5 198 53 3 612 10 882
356
TABLE 17.3: PLANT LIST- AREA D, SILO 1462 (IRON I)*
Plant name Plant organ Quantity

Cereals
Triticum parvicoccum grain 13,345
Triticum parvicoccum rachis frg. 2,218
Triticum parvicoccum glume base l3
Hordeum distichon kernel 5,226
Hordeum distichon rachis frg. 403
Hordeum vulgare kernel
Hordeum vulgare rachis frg. 2
Legumes
Lens culinaris seed 4
Vicia ervilia seed 19
Viciafaba seed
Fruits
Pistacia palaestina fruit
Vitis vinifera pip
Oil/fibre plants
Linum usitatissimum seed 5
Weeds
Avena sp. grain
Avena sp. spikelet
Bellevalia sp. seed
Brachypodium distachyon grain
Bupleurum lancifolium mericarp
Centaurea crocodylium fruit
Centaurinae fruit
Coronilla repanda/ scorpioides seed
Galium tricornutum mericarp 72
cf. Heliotropium nutlet
Hippocrepis sp. seed
Lathyrus cicercula seed 2
Lolium rigidum grain 6
Lolium temulentum grain 659
Lolium temulentum rachis frg. 45
Neslia apiculata fruit
Papilionaceae seed 4
Phalaris paradoxa grain l3
Phalaris paradoxa spikelet 14
Oryzopsis miliacea grain
Rumex pulcher nutlet

Vaccaria hispanica seed
Vicieae seed 2
Total 22,070
* 2000 cc. sample of 74\itres; only 60% of the 0.5-l.O·mm. fraction was examined.
357
In some cases classical authors did not distinguish clearly between half-dried grapes, grapes preserved
in jars, and raisins. This is because of the various methods for preserving grapes, only one of which
involves drying in the sun. The following passages illustrate this situation:
Some grapes will last all through the winter if the clusters are hung by a string from the ceiling,
and others will keep merely in their own natural vigor by being stored in earthenware jars with
casks put over them, and packed round with fermenting grape skins; others can be given a flavor
by smoke ... Moreover, raisins are called 'passi' from having 'endured' the sun (Pliny, Natural
History, XIV, 3, 16).
Fig. 17.1: Triticum parvicoccum, base of rachis Fig. 17.2: Hordeum distichon, rachis fragment (x15;
(xl5; SEM micrograph). SEM micrograph).
TABLE 17.4: DIMENSIONS (MM.) AND RATIOS OF TRITICUM PARVICOCCUM GRAINS

FROM SILO 1462 (N=lOO) "
Length Breadth Thickness L/B T/B

Minimum 4.0 2.2 1.9 1) 0.7
Average 4.93±.40 2.94±.34 2.50±.29 1.69±.19 0.85±.08
Maximum 6.2 3.8 3.2 2.2 1.2
358
TABLE 17.5: DIMENSIONS (MM.) AND RATIOS OF HORDEUM DISTICHON KERNELS

FROM SILO 1462 (N=lOO)
Length Breadth Thickness L/B T/B

Minimum 5.8 2.5 2.1 1.6 0.6
Average 7.32±.67 3.41±.30 2.70±.32 2.16±.23 0.79±.07
Maximum 9.6 4.2 3.9 3.1 1.0
Fig. 17.3: Vitis vinifera, raisins (x2).
359
The Greeks and the Romans knew how to make a special kind of wine from raisins.
Psithian and black psithian are kinds of raisin-wine with a peculiar flavor which is not that of
wine ... Next after the raisin-wine of Crete those of Cilicia and Africa are held in esteem. Raisin-wine
is known to be made in Italy and in the neighboring provinces from the grape called by the Greeks
psithia and by us 'muscatel', and also scripula, the grapes being left on the vine longer than usual
to ripen in the sun, or else being ripened in boiling oil. Some people make this wine from any sweet
white grape that ripens early, drying them in the sun till little more than half their weight remains,
and then they beat them and gently press out the juice (Pliny, Natural History, XIV, 11, 80-81).
Dioscorides describes raisins from the medical point of view:
Every grape which is but new-gathered, disturbs the belly and puffs up the stomach, but that
which has hanged for some time does partake but little of these qualities (because that much of the
moisture is dried up), and it is good for the stomach and a recaller of the appetite and fit for such
as are weak; but they, taken out of their own rubbish and out of earthen pots, are pleasing to the
mouth, good for the stomach, binding the belly ... But of the uva passa (raisins), the white is the
more binding, and the flesh of them being eaten is good for the arteries (windpipes), and coughs,
and the kidneys, and the bladder, and for the dysentery being eating by itself with the stones, as
also being mixed with meal of milium and of barley and an egg and fried with honey, and so
taken ... But that passum (wine made of raisins) which is made of the sun-dried grape, or dried on
the branch is nourishing (Dioscorides, Book V, Chapters 3, 4, 9).
Fig. 17.4: Vitis vinifera, raisin with a stalk (xlO; SEM Fig. 17.5: Vi tis vinifera, Broken raisin showing the
micrograph). pips (xl5; SEM micrograph).
360
Wine made from grapes that had been dried for 15 days is already mentioned by Hesiod:
But when Orion and Sirius are come into mid-heaven, and rosy-fingered Dawn sees Arcturus
(September), then cut off all the grape-clusters, Perses, and bring them home. Show them to the
sun ten days and ten nights; then cover them over for five, and on the sixth day draw off into
vessels the gift of joyful Dionysus (Hesiod, Works and Days, Lines 609-614).
The Hebrew word '~immuqim' in its two meanings, as dried separate grapes and as clusters of raisins
or cakes made of them (from the root ~mk to dry up), appears four times in the Bible, always in the
plural (I Sam. 25: 18; I Sam. 30: 12; II Sam. 16: 1; I Chr. 12: 40). Ugaritic texts also mention ~mq (raisin)
(Sasson 1972). The word '~immuqim' (in the narrow meaning - dried grapes) is found also in the
Rabbinic literature as well as in modern Hebrew.
Due to the fragmentary nature of the archaeological and literary evidence, it is difficult to evaluate the
importance of raisins in the ancient economy. However, it might be possible to compare the frequency
of the mention of raisins to that of a fruit similar in sweetness as well as in the regions where it grows. In
the Bible, the frequency of 'devela' (cake made of dried figs, pressed together in lumps - 5 times) is
more or less equal to that of '~immuqim' (4 times). However, in the Mishnah 'gerogeret' (dry fig) and
'devela' are much more common (mentioned 21 and 22 times respectively) than '~immuqim' (mentioned
3 times only). The conclusion should be that in Roman Palestine dry figs were more common than
raisins. The word for dry figs also comes first when they are both mentioned (e.g. Mishnah, Bikkurim 3,
3). One of the obvious reasons for this is that most grapes were pressed for making wine, rather than
turned into raisins.
The few remains or'grape stalks and the absence of sprigs of grape-cluster in the Shiloh raisins reveal
that separate raisins were brought to the site and kept there rather than clusters or a cake made of them.
The presence of raisins is not surprising as vineyards are mentioned in the Bible in connection with
Shiloh (Jud. 21: 19-21).
REFERENCES
Chizik, B. 1952. Otzar Hatsmahim. Herzliyah. (Hebrew)

Germer, R. 1989. Die Pflanzenmaterialien aus dem Grab des Tutanchamun. Hildesheim.
Hepper, F.N. 1990. Pharaoh's Flowers: The Botanical Treasures of Tutankhamun. London.
Kislev, M.E. 1980. Triticum parvicoccum sp. nov., the Oldest Naked Wheat. Israel Journal of Botany
28:95-107.
Kislev, M.E. 1989. Multiformity in Barley from an Iron Age Store in Sinai. Dissertationes Botanicae
133:67-80.
Meyer, F.G. 1980. Carbonized food plants of Pompeii, Herculaneum, and the Villa at Torre Annunziata.
Economic Botany 34:401-437.
Renfrew, J.M. 1973. Palaeoethnobotany: The Prehistoric Food Plants of the Near East and Europe.
New York.
Sasson, J.M. 1972. Flora, Fauna and Minerals. In: Fisher, L.R., ed. Ras Shamra Parallels, Vol. I.
Rome. pp. 383-452.
361
CHAPTER 18
ECONOMY AND SUBSISTENCE

Baruch Rosen*
The economic role of Shiloh in the surrounding hill country and the mode of subsistence of its population
can be reconstructed from three sources of information: archaeological data derived from the e*cavation,
results of the survey in the vicinity of the site and the environmental conditions in the region.
ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE

Data was obtained from numerous sources, the most important being the Atlas of Israel, Soil and
Geological maps of Israel and all revevant editions of the 1:20,000, 1:50,000 and 1:100,000 survey maps
of Palestine and Israel. In addition, the area was surveyed on foot several times during the spring and
summer over two years.
The site is located on a hill surrounded on the west and east by deep valleys and on the north by a
narrow, deep ravine. Thus the economic value of the terrain immediately adjacent to the mound is
limited. Nevertheless, certain parcels of land near the site are terraced and cultivated, and were probably
treated in a similar way in the past.
The most important natural resource of the site and its daughter settlements must always have been
the valley of the village of Turmus cAiya, located immediately to the south of the mound, and the hilly
slopes surrounding it (Fig. 18.1). This valley is ca. 5 km. long from west to east and 3.0 km. wide
(north-south), thus encompassing about 3750 acres of good arable soil. It lies 660 m. above sea level and
is bordered on the west, north and east by ridges averaging 750 m., and in a few place more than 800 m.,
above sea level. On the south the hills rise even higher. The valley is drained westward by a single gulley
that runs due northwest just below the mound.

Some of the soils in the heart of the valley are dark colluvial-alluvial grumusol, a rare occurrence in
this part of the country. Under proper drainage, as is the case here, this soil has high agricultural
, potential 1 Traditionally, this dark soil has been used less for arboreal crops and more for winter and
· summer field crops, such as cereals, legumes and summer cucurbites (Dan and Raz 1970:45-47). Towards
the periphery of the valley the ground changes into the more typical red and brown calcareous mountain
soils suitable for cultivating cereals and Mediterranean arboreal crops. Today these peripheral areas
support extensive olive groves and some winter cereals.
* Department of Food Sciences, Volcani Institute.
362
In the hilly areas there are many small and medium-sized plots of cultivable red mountain soil which
support olive groves or vinyards. Remnants of degraded natural vegetation grow on other patches,
which were perhaps more extensive in periods when human activity in the region was limited. Such
nuclear areas of pristine, unspoiled land may be seen as reservoirs of plants and animals for repopulating
the area when the human pressure on the environment declined. It is possible that at times of dramatic
• 0
0
160 160
+----L---------------L------~L---~--.---~~~----------~--------~~~~150
180 190
j::::-::-:-::.1 WADIBED WITH GOOD SOIL 0 WATER CISTERN
-FLAT PLOWABLE AREA fl SPRING
Fig. 18.1: Arable land and water-sources around Shiloh.
363
population decrease the whole area, even the best arable land of the central valley, was 'conquered' by
this natural vegetation.
Practically all the soils of the area, especially uncultivated land, provide pasture for almost a full
annual cycle.
The area has an annual rainfall of from over 600 to 500 mm. (the hills to the west and to the east ofthe
valley respectively), an amount sufficient for all forms of traditional Mediterranean agriculture. A
permanent spring Ein Seilun - is only 900 m. northeast of the mound and must have been one of the
crucial factors in establishing Shiloh in this location. Scores of water cisterns are found on the mound
and in the surrounding area and several small springs are located in the vicinity. During the winter
drinking water for man and beast may also be found in temporary pools all over the area.
The mean annual temperature is 17-l90C. The mean temperature of the hottest month (August) is
24-26°C and that ofthe coldest month (January) 8-lloc. For at least three months (January to March)
human habitation without shelter and some heating is not comfortable and may at times be dangerous
for less sturdy members of the human population and for some domestic animals (Sohar 1980:122).
At present, and in the recorded past, the area has been under typical Mediterranean mixed agriculture
(Grigg 1974:123-151). This is reflected in the 16th century C.E. Ottoman taxation lists (Htitteroth and
Abdulfattah 1977) and in the Village Statistics of the 1930's and 1940's (Government of Palestine 1945).
Under pre-modern subsistence farming the valley of Shiloh could support 100-300 families, i.e.,
450-1500 people, depending on the intensity of land utilization .. An average estimate is based on the
assumption that a nuclear family of 4-5 needs approximately 25 acres of cereals as a subsistence base.
Accordingly, the 3750 acres of the valley could support 150 families, i.e., ca. 600-750 souls. Land
utilization might have been as follows: fallow-cereal-fallow in the ploughable cereal-growing soils;
cultivation of olives, grape and minor arboreal crops such as figs and pomegranates on all other soils;
and maintenance of ovine herds on rocky marginal areas and on the fallow and the stubble. A larger
population could have been reached by better crop rotation, i.e., summer crops in place of the fallow
and soil improvement on the neighbouring hills. Another way to increase the carrying capacity of the
area might have been intensive animal husbandry. Such a system would include a seasonal routine of
herding in the desert fringe areas to the east of the valley during the winter, on the stubble in the arable
areas after the harvest, and in the cool, wet parts of the central range during the summer.
The pattern of settlement and the subsistence economy of the population in the valley in the 16th
century C. E. may be reconstructed from the Ottoman deftar (Hiitteroth and Abdulfattah 1977:114, 130,
133). The village of Seilun, located on the mound, had 25-30 inhabitants (calculating 4-5 people per
family respectively), 20-25 people lived in the village of Istuna (Kh. Kafr Istuna, on the eastern margin
ofthe valley- G.R. 18041599), 170-215 people dwelt in the village ofTurmus cAiya in the southwest of
the valley and the village of Sinjil, located on the slopes to the west of the valley, had 220-275
inhabitants. Altogether the valley supported 435-545 people who practised the type of dry Mediterranean
agriculture described above. I The first two villages were later abandoned. In the 19th century C.E. about
1700-1900 people are recorded in the the two villages of Turmus cAiya and Sinjil (Ben Arieh 1985:99). If
nomadic elements are added to the sedentary population, a possible number of ca. 2000 souls derived
sustenance from the valley and its surroundings. The population of these villages in the middle of this
century was about the same (Government of Palestine 1945).
1. Wheat, barley, summer crops, olives, vineyards, minor fruit trees and ovines are all recorded in the taxation lists.
364
Comparing the economic patterns of the Middle Bronze-Iron I periods to those of recent generations
is a complicated task. One reason is that it is not certain that land utilization in the earlier periods was as
intensive as described above. However, the results of the Land of Ephraim Survey afford a reliable
reconstruction of the pattern of settlement in the valley in both the Middle Bronze Age and the Iron Age
I, the two main periods of occupation at Shiloh (Finkelstein 1988-89). The survey recorded three small
Middle Bronze Age sites near the central site of Shiloh. The built-up area of all four sites reached about
5.5 acres. In the Iron Age I there were seven small sites around the valley, in addition to the large site of
Shiloh; the built-up area of all eight sites is again estimated at ca. 5.5 acres. Using a density coefficient of
80-100 persons per one built-up acre, it can be calculated that 450-550 people lived around the valley in
both the Middle Bronze Age and the Iron Age I.
ANIMAL ECONOMY IN LATE BRONZE SHILOH

Shiloh of the Late Bronze Age was apparently no more than an uninhabited cult site (Chapter 19).
Moreover, only a very limited number of Late Bronze Age sites have been recorded in the region
(Finkelstein 1988-89). In view of the nature of the site in this period, the pattern of settlement in the
vicinity and the high ratio of ovines compared to bovines in the faunal assemblage recovered from the
Late Bronze Age deposit, the excavator suggested that most of the population of the region lived in
pastoral frameworks during that period (Finkelstein 1985:166-167). They could have been engaged in a
west-east herding routine - grazing in the valleys and in the hilly areas of the central range in the
summer and in the desert fringe and the Jordan valley in the winter. Similar pastoral systems are known
from other areas around the Mediterranean (Grigg 1974:125-128). A cult site at Shiloh could have been
the focal point of this herding cycle.
The possibility that the bone ratio may stem from selective sacrificing practices rather than from the
structure of the herds is less appealing. One reason is that at Iron I Mt. Ebal the ovine I bovine bone ratio
from the hypothetical cult area was quite similar to that from other parts of the site (Horwitz 1986-87).
The composition of domestic ruminants at Mt. Ebal is consistent with a settled farming community in
this region (Rosen 1986: 161-165). Thus the faunal assemblage in the Shiloh Late Bronze Age favissa
should be taken as representing the composition of the herds maintained by the communities in question.
The land around the site was densely occupied in the Middle Bronze Age and in the Iron Age I. The
polymorphous agricultural tradition ofthe former was probably maintained in a suppressed form in the
latter period and expanded again in the Iron Age I. The shift of the population from a 'ploughing
society' in the Middle Bronze Age toward a more pastoral nomadic mode of life in the Late Bronze Age
is also marked by other finds in the faunal assemblage: an increase in bones of undomesticated species;
the appearance of horse bones (which are generally not found before the Late Bronze Age); and the
increase in the size of all domestic ruminants (Table 15.47). Intensive sedentary agriculture was resumed
in Iron Age I and reached its peak in the Iron Age II.
TERRAIN UTILIZATION IN THE IRON AGE I

Terrain division and utilization in the vicinity of Shiloh in the Iron Age I can be postulated by drawing
Thiessen polygons, using the large and medium-sized Iron I sites as centres (Finkelstein 1988: Numbers
17, 20, 23, 27, 31 and 38). In general, each polygon, which includes one or two large or medium-sized
sites and at least two small sites, contains a cultivable alluvial valley surrounded by hills. Thus it seems
365
that in the Iron I, as in other periods, the arable valleys were the focus of settlement activity. The
economic potential of the surrounding hills was probably not neglected. In order to increase the carrying
capacity of the area, the hills served as grazing areas for ovines. As the intensity of human exploitation
increased, terraces were constructed and plots of arable soils in the hills were used for cereals and
especially for orchards.
The hills were also the source for building stones and other materials, such as burned and slaked lime.
Local timber was used for the production of the lime from the dolomite and limestone formations.
Liphschitz (Chapter 16) indicates that local Mediterranean timber could easily serve the needs of the
population. The substantial quantities of Olea europea found at Shiloh hint that much of the natural
vegetation around the site was cleared as early as the Middle Bronze Age and that the hilly areas were
already under intensive Mediterranean arboriculture. Thus later appearances of maquis or forest, if not
representing limited enclaves, indicate a decline in human activity followed by outgrowth and spread of
secondary maquis-forest from pockets of uncleared remnants. Burned raisins found in both Middle
Bronze and Iron Age I strata (Chapter 17) show that the people of Shiloh grew grape vines.
The dominant role of cereals as the chief element of Mediterranean polyculture is demonstrated by
the large number of Iron I silos, two of which were found full of burned wheat (Chapter 3). The cardinal
role of the plough in this period is underscored by the pronounced presence of cattle, man's partner at
the yoke. The ratio of bovines to caprovines in Iron Age I Shiloh (Chapter 15) is typical of a cereal-
growing population using a cattle-drawn plough (Rosen 1986).
IRON I SHILOH AS A REDISTRIBUTION CENTER

The results of the excavations seem to indicate that economic activity at Iron Age I Shiloh was more
complex than that in typical hill country subsistence communities. There is also a certain discrepancy
between the limited size of the population and the intensive economic activity at the site.
If the entire 3 acre area of the Iron I site (Chapter 19) was populated at a density of 100 people per
acre (Broshi and Gophna 1984:148), then the population numbered about 300 people. However, most of
the structures were not used as living quarters (e.g. the storage buildings of Area C, the industrial-storage
sections in Areas D and E, and the area of the supposed temple), so that there is good reason to believe
that the population was much smaller. In any case, as demonstrated above, these numbers are far below
the carrying capacity of the area.
The multitude of silos attest to the massive quantities of cereals stored at the site. Wine and/ or oil
were most probably the commodities stored in the large number of pithoi unearthed. 2 The botanical
remains indicate the presence of vinyards and olive groves, the products of which must have been
converted into storable and trl:].nsportable long-shelf-life commodities.
The possibility that Shiloh served ,as a redistribution centre indicated by the archaeological I finds is
supported by biblical sources. The economic role of temple sites as centres for the collection, storage and
distribution of agricultural commodities in pre-market societies is well known. In fact, ancient Near
Eastern economies were dominated by palace or temple complexes:
From the point of view of social structure and economic potentials, there was a symbiosis between
a city organized, at least originally, along village-community lines, and the palace or temple. This
2. The proximity of Ein Seilun seems to lessen the possibility that they were used for drinking water (contra Zertall988).
366
fostered the accumulation of staples in the royal or divine household, compelling it to evolve
bureaucratic methods to deal with those accumulations by stock-taking, budgeting, and assigning
income and expenditures on a large scale (Oppenheim 1957:31; see also Finley 1973:28).
The case of Shiloh demonstrates the importance of temple sites in the emergence of complex political
systems (Child 1950). The destruction of Shiloh by the Philistines may therefore be seen as an attempt to
eliminate the economic roots of the growing Israelite political power.
REFERENCES
Ben-Arieh, Y. 1985. The Sanjak of Jerusalem in the 1870s. Cathedra 36:73-122. (Hebrew)
Broshi, M. and Gophna, R. 1984. The Settlement and Population of Palestine in the Early Bronze Age
II-III. BASOR 253:4- 53.
Child, G.V. 1950. The Urban Revolution. Town Planning Review 21:3-17.
Dan, J. and Raz, Z. 1970. The Soil Association Map of Israel. Tel Aviv. (Hebrew)
Finkelstein, I., ed. 1985. Excavations at Shiloh 1981-1984: Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 12:123-180.
Finkelstein, I. 1988-89. The Land of Ephraim Survey 1980-1987: Prel~minary Report. Tel Aviv
15-16:117-183.
Finley, M.I. 1973. The Ancient Economy. Berkeley.
Government of Palestine 1945. Village Statistics. Jerusalem.
Grigg, D.B. 1974. The Agricultural Systems of the World. Cambridge.
Horwitz, L. 1986-87. Faunal Remains from the Early Iron Age Site on Mount Ebal. Tel Aviv 13-14:
173-189.
Hutteroth, W.D. and Abdulfattah, K. 1977. Historical Geography of Palestine, Transjordan and
Southern Syria in the Late Sixteenth Century. Erlangen.
Oppenheim, A.L. 1957. A Bird's Eye View of Mesopotamian Economic History. In: Polany, K. et al.,
eds. Trade and Markets in the Early Empires. Chicago. pp. 27-37.
Rosen, B. 1986. Subsistence Economy of Stratum II. In: Finkelstein, I. cIzbet Sartah An Early Iron Age
Sohar, E. 1980. Man and Climate. Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Zertal, A. 1988. The Water Factor during the Israelite Settlement Process in Canaan. In: Heltzer, M.
and Lipinski, E., eds. Society and Economy in the Eastern Mediterranean (c. 1500-1000 B.C.).
Leuven. pp.34lc.-352.
367
Account: s4309548
PART FIVE
CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 19
THE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF SHILOH FROM THE

MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II TO IRON AGE II
Israel Finkelstein*
The results of the Bar-Han excavations, combined with the results of the Danish expedition (Shiloh
1969) and with information collected in the course of the Land of Ephraim Survey (Finkelstein 1988-89),
provide enough data for a reliable reconstruction of the history of Shiloh and its environs.
EARLIEST REMAINS IN THE VICINITY OF SHILOH

The valley of Shiloh was first settled in the Chalco lithic period, with activity expanding during the Early
Bronze Age. Two sites, almost adjacent to one another, were inhabited during these two periods. They
were examined in the course of the Land of Ephraim Survey:
1. A site at G.R. 17630 16200, 1.2 hectares in size, revealed Chalcolithic, Early Bronze I and Early
Bronze II-III pottery. It was inhabited in the Middle Bronze Age, and also yielded a few Iron I sherds;
2. Khirbet er-Rafid, G.R. 17670 16180 (see also Kallai 1972:169). This ruin, 0.3 hectares in size (Fig.
19.1), was inhabited in the Early Bronze II-III, Middle Bronze II, Iron I and possibly also in the Iron II.
On the basis of a few pottery sherds found by the Danish excavators, Buhl suggested that settlement
at Shiloh began in the Early Bronze Age (Shiloh 1969:60; see also QDAP 1934:180; BASOR 1932:15).
However, not a single sherd from this period was found in the new excavations. Possibly mediaeval
sherds, abundant at the site, were mistakenly identified as belonging to the Early Bronze Age.
In the Intermediate Bronze Age the valley of Shiloh was not occupied by a sedentary population. A
shaft tomb of this period was found in the village of Sinjil on the southwestern margin of the valley
(Dever 1971). Large Intermediate Bronze Age cemeteries and a few settlement sites were investigated
around cEin Samiya, 8 km. to the southeast of Shiloh (Finkelstein 1990a). The settlement pattern of the
Intermediate Bronze Age in southern Samaria reflects a dimorphic society with few sedentary sites, most
of them in the desert fringe, and with large pastoral groups who buried their dead in central cemeteries
(Finkelstein 1991).
Very few Middle Bronze I sedentary sites have been recorded in the central hill country, none in
southern Samaria. However in almost all Intermediate Bronze Age cemeteries, including cEin Samiya
and Sinjil, there was reuse of tombs in this period (Dever 1975). It seems therefore that the southern part
371
Fig. 19.1: Khirbet er-Rafid, looking northwest.
of the central hill country is characterized by a certain degree of continuity in the settlement pattern in
the transition from the Intermediate Bronze Age to the MB I.
MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II (STRATUM VIII)

The first settlement at Shiloh itself (Stratum VIII) dates from the mid-MB II early MB III. The only
evidence for this settlement is the large quantity of pottery found in the lowest layer of the glacis in Area
D, in the Middle Bronze fills uncovered in Areas F, H, K and M, and in the fill underneath the floors of
the Stratum VII rooms in Areas F and H.
Stratigraphically, it is important to note that the ceramic material of Stratum VIII was found in Areas
F and H in fills laid between the MB III floors and bedrock. Typological analysis of this pottery
(Chapter 6) indicates that it is earlier than the assemblage uncovered in the Stratum VII rooms adjoining
the fortification wall in Area F. According to the pottery (Chapter 6), seal impression 14285 (Chapter 8)
and ibex-shaped jug spout 14186 (Chapter 9), the Stratum VIII settlement should be dated to ca.
1750/1700-1650/1600B.C.E.
Since no architectural remains from this early stage have been discovered, it is not possible to
reconstruct the nature or extent of the settlement but only to assume that it was unfortified and of
372
limited size. It was probably confined mainly to the summit of the mound, although even if it had
extended down to the perimeter it is obvious that the extensive building and filling activity there during
the MB III would have removed all traces of it. It seems that material taken from the ruins of the first
settlement was used in the construction of the glacis and fills of Stratum VII. The nature of the fills
(chalky material packed with many sherds, some of them large pieces, and numerous bones) is indeed
typical of occupational waste (see Chapter 13).
The ceramic finds of Stratum VIII resemble material collected during the survey from several nearby
sites, whereas only a few of the types characteristic of the MB III assemblage found in Area F (Stratum
VII) have been retrieved at these sites. Especially noteworthy is the abundance at the latter of the
hand-made erect cooking-pot with flat bottom, and the absence of the holemouth cooking-pot (Table
19.1; compare Table 6.1 in Chapter 6). In fact, it seems that some of these sites were established
somewhat earlier than the Stratum VIII settlement at Shiloh. If this observation is correct, it means that
in the first phase of the Middle Bronze wave of settlement small unfortified sites were founded in and
around the fertile valley; some of them may have been not more than seasonal encampments of pastoral
groups. In a later phase one of these settlements - Shiloh - developed into the main centre for the
local population, while many of the other sites were abandoned. The Middle Bronze settlement pattern
around Bethel was apparently similar (Finkelstein 1988-89: 141-142).
TABLE 19.1: POTTERY COLLECTED AT MIDDLE BRONZE SITES IN THE VICINITY OF

SHILOH (1-5) AND AROUND BETHEL (6-14)
No. Name G.R. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total
1 Kh. Sur 1737 1644 6 2 8

2 1750 1631
3 Kh. er-Rafid 1767 1618 8 4 1 14
4 1763 1620 4 5 1 6 1 5 23
5 1769 1628
6 1737 1469 1 3 1 6
7 1737 1484 3 6 4 5 3 21
8 1746 1479 6 3 2 2 5 5 23
9 1744 1497 1 13 2 1 4 1 23
10 Kh. cArnutiya 1707 1508 1 2 4

11 1706 1528 2 1 2 6
12 1716 1520 4 5 5 1 16
13 Kh. cu rei tis 1722 1507 1 1 2
14 1698 1518 1 1 5 1 9
TOTAL 3 35 45 23 10 20 1 11 8 157
I - bowls; 2 - flat bottomed cooking-pot with rope decoration; 3 --- holemouth cooking-pot; 4 -
storage jar with thickened rim; 5 -storage jar with ridge under rim; 6- storage jars with plain, everted
rim; 7 - other storage jars; 8 - sherds with rope decoration; 9 - bases; 10- other types.
373
MIDDLE BRONZE III (STRATUM VII)

The impressive settlement of Stratum VII, with its immense stone and earthworks, is dated to ca.
1650/1600-1550 B.C.E. (Chapter 6).
Layout of the Site

Excavations in the various parts of the mound, especially at its northern end, cast light on the layout and
nature of the MB III settlement, but also evoke intriguing questions regarding its character. The
following discussion treats the three main elements exposed: the 'fortification wall', the 'glacis', and the
remains inside the site. As will be shown below, the stone and earthworks which were constructed in
Shiloh in the Middle Bronze Age apparently did not serve as parts of a defense system. Consequently,
the 'fortification wall' will henceforth be called 'the peripheral stone wall'. For the sake of convenience,
the term 'glacis' will continue to be used for the counterbalancing fill which was laid outside this wall.
The Peripheral Stone Wall

The peripheral stone wall, which encompasses an area of about 1. 7 hectares, was exposed at seven
different places around the site (Areas C, D, F, H, J, K and M). The 3-5.5 m. wide wall was founded on
bedrock and was constructed of large boulders, the smaller ones measuring ca. 0.5x0.5x0.5 m. and the
larger ones reaching 1.2x0.75x0.6 m. In the deep section cut on its outer face in Area D it was preserved
to a height of 6. 7 m. In Area F it stands to a height of over 4 m. Most of the stones for the construction
of the wall apparently came from the quarry located in the natural terrace immediately to the north of
the mound (see Chapter 13).
The building technique is not uniform along the entire length of the peripheral stone wall. It is
difficult to determine whether this is the result of using different construction methods to suit the
varying topography, the work of different groups of stonemasons or the development of the encircling
system in stages. Area Dis a case in point: Wall M332, which was built in order to support stone Fill 417
and to separate it from the earth fills to the south, is bonded to the segment of the peripheral stone wall
(L30 1) that continues to the northwest. The continuation of the peripheral stone wall southward (N321)
is narrower, and it joins the northern segment without being bonded to it.
Area D provides the most important evidence for the function of the peripheral stone wall. The upper
part of the northern section of Wall L30 1 was found flat, with the stones well laid, which indicates that it
was preserved to its full original height. There is no sign of brick construction on top of the stone wall,
and there is no brick debris around it. It is evident, therefore, that it did not carry a brick superstructure.
Stone Fill 417, which was found on the inner side of the wall, reaches the upper course of the wall and
the glacis on its outer side leaves only a limited section ( 1-1.5 m.) of the wall exposed. Most ofthe wall
was therefore buried in stone and earth debris on both its sides.
The fact that the northern terrace of the hill was left outside the site is further proof that the builders
did not intend to create a formidable stronghold. Correct strategy for deriving maximum defense benefit
from the topography would be to establish the peripheral stone wall on the edge of this terrace which is
protected to the north by a steep slope and a deep ravine. Instead, the wall was constructed on a flat area
to the south, missing the defensive advantage.
The Glacis
The glacis was checked at five locations around the site (Areas C, D, Hand J) which made it possible to
investigate its method of construction and its adaptation to the topography. It was found that the
374
different components of the stone and earthworks were not uniformly combined in all places. This is
especially true for the glacis (see also Biran 1990 for Dan; Kempinski and Dunayevsky 1990:26 for
Hazor). The most elaborate segment was laid in the eastern, steepest side of the mound, where heavy
stone fills were deposited inside the peripheral stone wall (Chapter 13). On the western and southern
sides of the site the glacis was less impressively built, despite the fact that in the south the slope is
moderate and the site more vulnerable. Furthermore, in the north where there is no natural topographic
barrier to stop an aggressor, there was no trace of a glacis nor were there fills leaning on the inner face of
the wall, but a row of sunken storage rooms.
These observations are of great significance when debating the long-disputed question of the reason
for constructing such glacis and of their role in fortification systems. Naturally, our conclusions are
applicable mainly to the hill country sites, since in the lowlands the topographic and lithological
conditions are completely different.
Most scholars believed that the function of the glacis was to protect the city wall by distancing the
enemy from its foundations, and preventing them from employing battering rams in order to breech or
undermine it (Kenyon 1952:71; Yadin 1955; Kaplan 1975:2-3). Others have postulated that the glacis
protected the slope of the mound (and consequently also the city wall) from erosion (Parr 1968:43-44;
Kaplan 1975:2; Pennells 1983). At Shiloh, however, the purpose of the glacis is completely different.
Four points should be stressed here:
1. The peripheral stone wall did not project much above the surface of the glacis, that is, there was no
real wall to protect;
2. Since the peripheral stone wall was founded on bedrock, it was not possible to undermine it;
3. The gradient of the glacis in Area D seems to be more or less identical to that of the bedrock, and in
some places it is even more moderate than the gradient of the dumps that form the surface of the slope
today. In other words, the glacis facilitates an easy approach to the wall;
4. The stone and earth fills which were laid inside the site created enormous pressure on the peripheral
stone wall. Therefore, places where the slope was steep obliged the builders to lay a counterweight to the
inner fills. Thus the glacis served as an outer reinforcement to the peripheral stone walL A similar
situation can apparently be detected at Shechem and other hill country sites {see below).
Construction Within the Site

The data regarding the interior of the MB III settlement is limited to the northern sector (Areas C, D, F,
H, K and M), the summit and the southern sector having been damaged by intensive building activity in
later periods.
In Area C, earth fills were laid just inside the peripheral stone wall (the fills were unearthed in Square
G38, on the upper terrace, whereas the peripheral wall E381 was uncovered on the lower terrace).
Extensive fills of light-coloured earth were laid inside the peripheral stone wall in the southern part of
Area F. In Area D Stone Fill417, in which several supporting walls were embedded, was deposited
inside the peripheral stone wall. In Square N35, in the southern part of Area D, we reached earth fills
similar to those found in Area F.
Between Wall H312 in Area Fin the west to beyond Area Min the east a row of rooms was built
against the inner face of the peripheral stone wall. A long stretch of these rooms was uncovered in Area
F, and (by the Danish expedition) in Area H. Our probes in Areas K and M show a similar layout. On
the inward side of the site, these rooms are bounded by a wall, which is backed by fills of light-coloured
earth (with stone fills at several spots- in Squares K31 and N31 in Area F). These fills, deposited on
375
bedrock, reached the top of the closure wall of the rooms (J314). The latter is well finished on the side
facing the interior of the rooms, but was left rough on the side against the fills. In Areas K and M the
fills were laid sloping obliquely up the mound. They were apparently intended to shape the slope of the
mound.
It is thus clear that there was a standard building plan along the northern edge of the mound, in a strip
about 115 m. long. The elements of this plan (Fig. 19.2) consisted of a row of rooms, varying from
2.5-4.0 m. in width, adjoining the solid peripheral stone wall and bounded on their inner side by a wall
that also served as a support for earthen fills deposited toward the centre and summit of the mound.
These fills were stabilized by stone walls incorporated into them (such as Wall U281 in Area K and Wall
G383 uncovered on the upper terrace of Area C) which ran parallel to the peripheral stone wall.
In this construction plan the hilly topography of the mound was efficiently exploited and the V-shaped
'pockets' formed between the peripheral stone wall and the sloping bedrock surface were utilized for fills
or rooms. In the case of the latter, further fills were deposited on the bedrock in order to create an
under-floor bedding.
The rooms adjoining the peripheral stone wall were in fact cellars, which undoubtedly accounts for
their excellent state of preservation. In Area F their walls were preserved to a height of about 2.5 m.
Judging by the depth of the stone and brick debris which reached a height of about 1.2 m. above floor
level, it appears that the walls were originally even higher, or else (though less likely) there was a second
storey above the cellars. The finds from Areas F-H show that these cellars were used for storage; the
small rooms were found packed with vessels, mainly storage jars.
Apart from the rooms along the peripheral stone wall and the two walls that projected from the
earthen fill in Area F, no Middle Bronze architectural remains were found in any of the areas excavated.
Theoretically it is possible that the residential area of the site was located on the southern slope.
However, almost no Middle Bronze pottery was found in the mixed loci unearthed in the squares
excavated in this section of the mound.
Fig. 19.2: Area Fin the MB III: schematic reconstruction of the main earth and stone elements.
376
Two facts point to the presence of a cult place at Shiloh in the MB III:
1. The objects from the storerooms adjoining the peripheral stone wall in Area F included cult stands,
votive bowls and a bull-shaped zoomorphic vessel. Some of the metal objects from Room 1527 are also
of a cultic nature (Chapter 9), indicating that these storerooms may have been associated with a nearby
cultic building;
2. If there were no cultic installation at Shiloh in the MB III, it would be difficult to explain the existence
of a cult site there in the subsequent Late Bronze Age I when the site was apparently uninhabited. The
only possible explanation for the existence of an isolated Late Bronze Age cult place at Shiloh is that it
continued a Middle Bronze Age tradition.
Assuming that there was indeed a cult place at MB III Shiloh, it probably stood on or near the
summit of the mound. This hypothesis is supported by the evidence from the Area F storerooms, by the
earthen fills deposited toward the summit and by the Late Bronze I favissa debris found on the
northeastern slope (Area D). Regarding the location of this supposed cult place, the plans of
neighbouring Shechem and Bethel may be relevant, since they have much in common with Shiloh (see
below). At Shechem the sacred temenos stood in the northwestern sector (Wright 1965:100; Fig. 13).
The excavator of Bethel presumed that a shrine stood in the northwest of the site (Kelso 1968:13-14,
26-27). By analogy, we may postulate that at Shiloh too a MB III temple was located in the northern or
northwestern sector.
To sum up, MB III Shiloh was a relatively small site with enormous stone and earthworks. A row of
storerooms was built in the northern part of the site and a shrine (possibly also a palace?) was supposedly
erected on the summit of the mound. There is no evidence for dwellings in Middle Bronze Age Shiloh.
Shechem and other Hill Country Middle Bronze Sites

The results of the excavations at Shiloh turned the spotlight on nearby Shechem, the most important
Middle Bronze Age site in the central hill country. Only the northern section of the site has been
investigated since the southern part is covered by the modern village of Balatah. It is therefore difficult
to estimate the size of Middle Bronze Age Shechem. Wright reconstructed a round site of about 4
hectares (e.g. 1965: Fig. 13) while the minimal possibility is ca. 3 hectares. Two main features of second
millennium B.C. E. Shechem were uncovered by the Drew-McCormick expedition: fortifications and the
temenoi.
The following occupational phases have been described by the excavators (Seger 1975):
The unfortified settlement ofthe MB I was encircled in the beginning of the MB II by Wall D. In the
next MB II phase a massive fill (the 'embankment') oflocal chalk and marl was thrown on the outside of
and against Wall D. The embankment was 38m. at its base. Wall C formed a battered stone footing for
its slope. The excavators argued that the embankment must have risen to a height of 15m. and that it
was crowned by a defense wall. The embankment continued to serve as Shechem's main fortification in
the two succeeding phases of the MB II. At the beginning of the MB III the 'cyclopean' WaH A was
added. Except for the uppermost courses, this wall was never free-standing; at the same stage the top of
the embankment was levelled and the displaced fill was dumped behind Wall A, in order to create a
'defensible plateau' inside the site. The Northwest Gate and the massive Migdal Temple were built at the
same time. The latter was constructed on a fill which covered the Courtyard Temple. In the closing
phase of the MB III, Wall B and the East Gate were added.
Upon rechecking the stratigraphic and architectural evidence from Tell Balatah, Lederman reached
the conclusion that all elements of the fortifications and the Migdal Temple were built in one phase.
377
According to his interpretation, Wall A served as the exterior defense line of the site, while an earthen
fill was constructed inside its perimeter to create a raised platform for the Migdal Temple. Wall C served
as a supporting 'foot' for this fill (Lederman 1985; see also Wright 1985:44).
Recently Ussishkin (1989) has thoroughly investigated the issue of the Shechem fortifications. His
main conclusion is that the cyclopean wall is a stone revetment which was erected in order to support
constructional fills rather than as a proper city wall. Ussishkin pointed out that the cyclopean wall was
supported by a glacis-fill on its outer side as well. His conclusion is that "a single monumental
fortification system was built at one time and according to one scheme. That system included Wall A in
the northern side of the site, the Northwest Gate, and the huwwar fill ... the East Gate ... Wall B, Wall A
in the eastern side of the site ... and the glacis in the eastern section between Walls A and B" (Ussishkin
1989:49).
Thus, there is a great similarity in the layout of Middle Bronze Age Shiloh and Shechem. At both sites
a small unfortified MB I/ MB II settlement was buried under later fills. In the MB III both sites were
encircled by a huge stone wall, which retained earthen fills. In order to counterbalance the pressure of
these fills, a supporting glacis was laid outside the peripheral stone wall. The inner fills were stabilized by
retaining walls. The main structures, including cult places, were built on top of the fills, in the northern
section of the sites. At neither site is there evidence for Middle Bronze Age residential quarters. The few
dissimilarities between the two sites probably stem from the different topographic conditions of a
mound in the plain as opposed to one on a steep hill: the fills at Shechem were intended to create a
podium, whereas at Shiloh a natural podium existed and all that was needed was to smooth the surface
of the slope by covering it with white earth.
The large stone fortification of Middle Bronze Age Hebron is similar in its dimensions and
construction methods to the wall of Shiloh. The size of the site in this period is not clear, but according
to the plan published by Hammond (1968:254) it is doubtful whether it exceeded 1.5 hectares. 1 In one
place a glacis was traced adjacent to the wall, and in another, inside the site, a light earthen fill was
found.
Bethel was an unfortified, sprawling settlement in the Middle Bronze Age II (Kelso 1968:46).2 In the
Middle Bronze Age III Bethel was surrounded by a strong stone wall. The fortification resembles that of
Shiloh in appearance, but probably because of the type of rock available locally it was built of smaller
stones. In one place the excavators discerned an earth and stone glacis (Kelso 1968: 15-16). They
assumed that a shrine stood at the northwestern side ofthe mound (Kelso 1968:13-14; 26-27). The area
of MB III Bethel was apparently similar to that of Shiloh.
Political Entities in the Highlands in the Middle Bronze Age

The layout of Middle Bronze Age Shiloh and Shechem (and probably also Bethel and Hebron) was
totally different from that of contemporary lowland sites. In the highlands huge peripheral stone walls
served as revetments for fills at sites which were virtually empty of dwelling units. In the lowlands the
sites were much larger in area, and most important, had significant residential areas (e.g. Kempinski
1992). Consequently, if we accept the definition of the main lowland fortifications as city walls and the
sites as fortified cities, the hill country sites must be differently defined. The best way to describe their
special features would apparently be 'highland strongholds'. The different layout most probably reflects
1. Contra Ofer (1989:90) who argued that the size of Middle Bronze Age Hebron was 2.4-3 hectares.
2. According to Dever (1972) a small MB I village was abandoned in the MB II, to be reoccupied in the MB III.
:378
a distinct socio-political organization. There is consensus on the definition of the main second millennium
B.C.E. lowland sites as city-states. The political formations of the highlands will be discussed below.
In order to understand the nature of these highland strongholds, one has to consider the manpower
needed for their construction. At Shiloh, the volume of earth dumped in the glacis in the 175 m. of the
eastern, steep slope of the mound is ca. 14000 cu. m. The entire volume of earth laid in the glacis can be
estimated at ca. 25000 cu. m. Adding the earth of the fills inside the mound, a total of 40000-45000 cu.
m. (ca. 75000 tons) seems to be a realistic assumption. Some of the earth may have come from the waste
material from the quarry on the terrace to the north of the mound; the rest must have come from farther
afield (Chapter 13). Assuming that the average height of the peripheral revetment wall was 5 m. we can
estimate that 55000 boulders were used in its construction. The overall weight of these stones may be
approximated to be ca. 20000 tons. The whole project required a minimum of 250000 workdays of
porters, builders and workers at the quarries (for manpower calculations see Cotterell and Kamminga
1990:194; Atkinson 1961; Ashbee and Cornwall 1961).
At Shiloh there is a sharp contrast between the work invested in construction activities and the limited
population of the site. If we use the generally accepted density coefficient for calculating population size,
about 250 persons per hectare (e.g. Broshi and Gophna 1986), we find that the entire site, even if filled
with dwelling units, would have accommodated only about 400 inhabitants. Since most of the area
lacked such dwellings, we must consider a much lower figure. In other words, there were probably not
more than a few dozen male adults at the site, most of them apparently dignitaries. It has been suggested
that in early political entities no more than 20% of the population could be enrolled in public works,
three months a year (Renfrew 1984:238).3 Accordingly, the people of Shiloh would have needed ca. 150
years in order to finish the project. The solution to the manpower problem should therefore be sought in
the population of a larger highland territory. A population of ca. 3000 people could allocate the people
needed for the completion of the work in five years.
However, according to the survey of the_close vicinity, Shiloh was not associated with an extensive
system of satellite villages at that time. Only eight other sites are known within a radius of 5 km. (only
three of them in the valley itself- Fig. 19.3), with an average size of about 0.3 hectares. As noted above,
some of these may already have been abandoned when Shiloh's peripheral stone wall was being
constructed. If so, it is doubtful whether the limited local population could have contributed much
towards solving the manpower problem. Was there some population in the region that has left no
archaeological traces? Perhaps we should somehow connect the massive building project of Shiloh with
the population of an extensive highland area and with Shechem, its neighbour to the north, or perhaps
even with Bethel, which is about the same distance to the south? In the absence of written material, these
questions remain unanswered.

At Shechem, the volume of earth laid as a podium for the Migdal Temple alone can be estimated at
ca. 40000 cu. m., or 60000 tons (according to the section published by Seger 1975:36*-37*). This was
only a limited portion of the earth and stone works undertaken at the site, which included a huge
revetment (Wall A), a glacis, stabilizing walls and other fills. The 'cyclopean' Wall A, which is ca. 4 m.
wide, was preserved in one place to a height of 10m. The circumference of the wall was ca. 750 m. It was
built of huge boulders, some over 2 m. in width (Wright 1965:57-58). To date no residential quarters
3. See also Mendelssohn 1977:143, 192. According to the data published by Stanhill (1978), Palestinian peasants of the
beginning o~ this century also could not leave their farms for more than few months a year.
379
have been found at the site. Thus in Shechem too, the manpower for the gigantic constructions must
have come from the surrounding countryside.
The fortified centres of Shechem, Shiloh, Bethel and Hebron (and possibly other places, such as
Jerusalem, Beth-Zur, Kh. curmeh and Tell Abu-Zarad) were apparently government strongholds for
chiefs who ruled over large territories with mixed sedentary and pastoral groups. These strongholds
were different from the conventional settlements of the lowlands. They served as the seats of the chiefs,
with storage facilities and central cult places but with almost no residential quarters. The impressive
stone and earth works which were undertaken by the population of large territories demonstrated the
power of the chief and the legitimacy of his rule. 4
It is extremely difficult to reconstruct the precise mechanisms which led to the emergence of large
political entities in the highlands of Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age, but some of the components seem
to be traceable. This was the first period in which the central hill country had a significant population as
there was a demand for the highland agricultural products in the prosperous lowland centres. As a
result, some of the groups expanded into inhospitable niches which were conducive only to the practice
of horticulture. This in turn led to the development of specialized agriculture which needed balancing
institutions to control the intra- and inter-regional flow of commodities. 5
At Shiloh, the content of the storage installations and the indications for contacts with the north
(Chapter 9) supply some archaeological evidence for the phenomenon of these regional political centres.
Were all these fortified strongholds centres of independent highland entities? The fact that historical
sources of both the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Ages mention only two main political bodies in the
central hill country hints at another possibility. There were several chiefs, each ruling from a highland
stronghold, but organized under two main political entities a northern one with Shechem as its
centre, including the chiefs of Shiloh and Bethel, and a southern one with Jerusalem as its centre,
including the territory of Hebron. 6 Shechem and Jerusalem were therefore the supreme leaders among
the Middle Bronze highland strongholds.
The question remains as to how to describe the peculiar socio-political system of the highlands of
Canaan in the second millennium B.C.E. Alt was the first to distinguish between lowland city-states and
territorial formations of the highlands ( 1925). Kempinski referred to the Middle Bronze Age central hill
country "state of Shechem" (1989:62), and Na'aman viewed Late Bronze Age Shechem as a territorial
state rather than as a city-state (1982:216; 1986a:466).
This turns the discussion to Rowton's seminal works on the dimorphic society of the ancient Near
East, and especially on the phenomenon of a city in a nomadic environment (1973; 1976). In western
Asia the nomads operated either in pastoral enclaves in the sedentary lands or on their fringe. The
combination of city-state, tribe and nomadism is typical to mountainous and steppe regions. Rowton
described four possible socio-political systems in these areas: feudal chiefdom, tribal chiefdom, dimorphic
chiefdom and dimorphic state. In the feudal chiefdom there is no nomadic component; in the tribal
chiefdom there is no non-tribal component. Dimorphic chiefdom is a political system based on a
government urban centre in a tribal territory; it is generally connected to areas of enclosed nomadism.
4. On the construction of fortifications as propaganda see Whitelam 1986. On Middle Bronze stone and earth works as
propaganda see Finkelstein 1992.
5. For similar processes in the same ecological niche in the Early Bronze Age and the beginning of the Iron II see Finkelstein
and Gophna 1993; Finkelstein 1989 respectively.
6. Contra Bunimovitz (l990) who suggested that in the Middle Bronze Age the central hill country was politically fragmented.
380
The population of a dimorphic chiefdom is therefore composed of both sedentary and nomadic groups.
The difference between a dimorphic chiefdom and a dimorphic state is that the former is autonomous
while the latter is sovereign. Dimorphic chiefdoms can be parts of larger political entities. When central
states deteriorate, the pastoral enclaves grow in size and the dimorphic chiefdoms can then redevelop
into a real state. Destruction of a dimorphic chiefdom may cause political turmoil and may even lead to
nomadization of the population (Rowton 1973; 1976).
Rowton presented examples of dimorphic chiefdoms in Iran and Turkey in the Middle Ages and in
recent generations. The ruling dynasties of these entities built forts from which they governed their
territories. The dimorphic chiefdom of Sadhandjan in southern Kurdistan "combined clans living in
tents with strongholds serving as treasuries and refuges in time of danger" (Minorsky 1960). Another
interesting example of a dimorphic chiefdom in the mountainous parts of western Asia in recent
generations is the Kalat Khanate of Pakistan (Swidler 1972). The population there comprised all
components of a dimorphic society, from villagers to nomads.
The socio-political formations in the central hill country in the second millennium B.C.E. fit Rowton's
description of dimorphic chiefdoms. Indeed, some of their characteristics, especially the government
strongholds, also match the definitions of feudal chiefdoms although their large pastoral component
rules out such interpretation. Possible exceptions may be Middle Bronze Age sites in sedentary northern
Samaria, such as Tell el-Farcah. The term dimorphic chiefdom is applied here to mountain enclaves with
both sedentary and pastoral elements, governed from central strongholds. In fact, if we look at the
details of Rowton's discussion of dimorphic entities, it is possible to describe Middle Bronze Age
Shechem as a dimorphic state encompassing several dimorphic chiefdoms.
LATE BRONZE AGE (STRATUM VI)

The Danish excavations in the northwestern sector uncovered several Late Bronze Age finds in
contaminated contexts (e.g. Shiloh 1969: Figs. 6:64-65; 7: cooking-pots) including a scarab (ibid.: Pl.
XXIV:194) dated to the 18th or 19th Dynasty (Glueck 1933:166). Wall AA, which runs parallel to and
outside the Middle Bronze Age peripheral stone wall in this area, was assigned by Buhl to the Late
Bronze Age (Shiloh 1969:60; but cf. Kjaer's view, ibid.:48, 54). Some twenty years ago Aharoni suggested
that the small amount of LB pottery found by the Danish expedition should be attributed to an early
stratum of an Israelite settlement that, in his opinion, had existed at the site. This pottery was one of the
factors that persuaded him that the Settlement process began already in the 13th or even the 14th
century B.C.E. (Aharoni, Fritz and Kempinski 1975:121).

The new excavations clarified the nature of Late Bronze Age Shiloh. A deposit of this period was
discovered in Area D, but elsewhere on the mound it was represented only by few scattered sherds. We
re-examined Wall AA of the Danish excavations, which turned out to be a Byzantine terrace wall. It
therefore seems that there was no real settlement here at this time and that contemporary activity was
very limited.
In view of the nature of the accumulation of the Late Bronze Debris 407 uncovered in Area D, I am
inclined to suggest that this was a dump that was in all likelihood associated with a cult place. The
pottery vessels were brought to the site as offerings, were broken after use and buried together with the
numerous bones that remained from the sacrifices. At first it appeared that the deposits in Area D were
the actualfavissae, but further investigation of the debris renders this hypothesis uncertain. Firstly, most
381
of the pottery retrieved here is of the LB I horizon, i.e., from the time immediately following the
destruction at the end of the Middle Bronze Age. Since stretches of the peripheral stone wall under the
Late Bronze Age debris were found to have been robbed, we may assume that quite some time had
passed following the destruction of the site and prior to the deposition of the material at this spot.
Secondly, no layering whatsoever was found within the Late Bronze dump and there were even
concentrations of stones in several places. Thirdly, although the sherds came from hundreds of vessels,
they were not grouped in concentrations that enabled easy reconstruction, but were scattered over a
wide area. The obvious conclusion is that the material was dumped here after the LB I. This occurred no
later than early in the Iron Age I, since the silos of this period were cut into the Late Bronze Age
deposits. The course of events may therefore be reconstructed as follows: Sometime in Late Bronze Age
II, but more likely in the early phase of Iron Age I, while preparing the ground for new buildings, a
favissa of the Late Bronze Age cult place (or perhaps the cult place itself) was cleared out and thrown
into a large robber pit of the stones of the MB III peripheral wall on the slope. Shortly afterward the
Iron Age silos were cut into these dumps.
The ceramic assemblage discovered in the deposit of Area D shows that activity at the site was
renewed in the LB I, a short time after the destruction of the MB III stronghold. This activity continued
until the first part of LB II (see Chapter 6 and some of the objects in Chapters 8-9), although it gradually
decreased and ceased completely before the end of the Late Bronze Age.
In the Late Bronze Age Shiloh was therefore occupied solely by a cult place. Possibly the population
from the surrounding area continued to visit a ruined Middle Bronze Age shrine, and perhaps they even
partially restored it. These visits gradually tapered off and finally stopped altogether. The data on the
animal bones retrieved form the Late Bronze Age deposit (Chapters 15, 18) plus the fact that the survey
did not record any sedentary site in the vicinity, hint at the possibility that the people who were active in
Shiloh at that time had a pastoral rather than a sedentary background.
The history of Shiloh during the transition from the Middle Bronze to the Late Bronze Age, as shown
by the excavation results, matches the settlement picture that emerges from the Land of Ephraim survey.
A strong wave of settlement took place in this area in the Middle Bronze Age, as it did in other parts of
the central hill country. Scores of Middle Bronze Age sites were recorded during the Land of Ephraim
survey, although not all of them were contemporary with each other. Most of them were apparently
established in the MB II, and many were abandoned in the MB III when the strongholds of Shiloh and
Shechem were constructed. At the end of the Middle Bronze Age the fortified sites were destroyed and
the few remaining rural sites were abandoned. In the Late Bronze Age we find only five sites in the entire
area, located on the major mounds, while the scattered, unfortified settlements have disappeared
altogether. Moreover, even on the main mounds, the settlements were now smaller. At Shiloh there was
probably only a cult place and at Kh. el-cUrma (biblical Arumah; G.R. 180 172) and Tell Abu Zarad
(G.R. 171 167; the site of Tappuah- Abel 1936) only a few sherds of this period were found in the
survey, in contrast to the abundant Middle Bronze Age material. The situation at Kh. Marjama near
cEin Samiya is not sufficiently clear. It seems that only Bethel flourished during LB II, following a short
interval of abandonment (Kelso 1968:28-31).
The picture that emerges is one of drastic deterioration of the network of permanent settlements and a
reduction of activity to a few sites, some of which shrank considerably in size. A similar situation may be
observed in other parts of the hill country (Zertal 1988; Finkelstein 1991), and in fact almost all over
Canaan (Gonen 1979:185, 226-227; 1984; Na'aman 1982:174-175). The reasons for this process are still
obscure. It is very doubtful whether the responsibility can be attributed solely to Egyptian conquest of
382
the country (Bunimovitz 1989). It is more probable that it stemmed from local social and political
affairs.
Finally, we should note that the phenomenon of isolated cult places, located far from urban centres or
just outside cities, is known in other parts of Late Bronze Age Canaan (Campbell and Wright 1969). To
the former type belongs the temple at Tell Deir cAlla, which Franken described as a central shrine for
the nomadic tribal population of this part of the Jordan Valley (Franken 1969:19-20; see also Mazar
1984). Examples ofthe second type include the building at the foot of Mount Gerizim (Boling 1969) and
the Fosse Temple at Lachish. It seems likely that this phenomenon reflects the settlement and social
systems of the period, namely that considerable numbers of people lived outside the urban system but
still remained in contact with the major centres. The phenomenon of burial grounds not connected to
sedentary sites (Gonen 1992; Ofer 1990) also points in the same direction.
THE IRON AGE I (STRATUM V)

Chronology and Stratigraphy
When the Iron Age I settlers arrived at Shiloh the site had already been abandoned for two centuries.
The pottery found in Debris 407 indicates that activity at the site had ceased in the LB IIA. It is difficult
to establish exactly when the new settlers arrived, but it is now clear that there is no justification for
dating the foundation of the new settlement as early as the 13th century B.C. E. (contra Aharoni, Fritz
and Kempinski 1975:121).
It is impossible to determine whether there were one or more Iron Age I occupational phases at
Shiloh. The main phase is clearly represented by the construction of the pillared buildings on the
western slope, but with no stratigraphic link we could not determine the relative date of the other Iron I
remains found at the site silos in Areas D, Hand K, an installation in Area E and work surfaces at the
northern end of Area D. The latter, for instance, may have belonged to temporary buildings from an
earlier Iron Age settlement, but it is more likely that they were industrial areas associated with the other
Iron I remains in the eastern sector. These were possibly contemporary with the pillared buildings of
Area C. We therefore decided to assign all Iron I remains to a single phase Stratum V.
It is of paramount importance to establish the date of construction of the Area C pillared buildings
because their erection marks the peak of Shiloh's eminence as a cultic, economic and political centre.
The pottery assemblage from the buildings should be dated to relatively late in the Iron Age I, but before
Philistine pottery penetrated into the heart of the hill country (Chapter 6). However since the assemblage
belongs to the time of the destruction of this stratum, it cannot date the construction of the pillared
buildings. We have no alternative but to base the date of their foundation on architectural considerations.
In the light of the accumulated evidence from Iron Age I sites in the central hill country and its
environs, it is doubtful whether such sophisticated pillared buildings can be dated earlier than the
late-12th-early 11th century B.C.E. Without going into the complexities of the origins of the pillared
buildings, we shall merely note that in early Iron I sites such as cizbet Sartah Stratum III and Giloh
there are no elaborate pillared buildings. These structures, whose ground plan was gradually becoming
formalized in this period, probably reached their fully evolved form only in a more advanced phase of
the Iron Age I settlement process in the hill country, at sites such as Kh. Raddana, cAi, Shiloh and Kh.
ed-Dawwara (Finkelstein 1988:237 ff.; 1990b). Consequently, a date for the crystallization of this
architectural style in the second half of the 12th or the beginning of the 11th century B. C.E. accords well
383
with the presently available evidence. From the above, and from the fact that there are almost no
indications for phases of construction in the Area C pillared buildings, it emerges that the period of
Shiloh's floruit was short lived - about fifty years or a little longer, possibly at the end of the 12th
century and mainly in the first half of the 11th century B. C.E.
Size and Layout of the Site

The results of the excavation enable us to define the built-up area of early-11th century B. C. E. Shiloh
with considerable accuracy. Area C was obviously the western boundary of the settlement. Its eastern
border is not very far east of Area E, which may have been the industrial sector of the site. No buildings
were found in Area D, only silos. The east of the mound may have been preferred for grain storage
because it is the driest and warmest side. Nor were there any Iron Age I traces in Area G. Only silos were
found in the northern sector, from which we may conclude that the built-up area began to the south of
Area K. The dump found in Area J indicates that the built-up area probably ended just to its north. If
the above delineation of the borders of habitation are correct, then the built-up area did not exceed 1.2
hectares, which was about the size of large hill country villages of this period, for example, Kh. Raddana
and c Ai (Cooley 1975: 13; Callaway 1976:29). At Shiloh, however, the sanctuary and associated buildings
probably occupied a considerable part of the site, especially the summit of the mound (see below).
The question therefore arises whether Shiloh was an ordinary village with a cult place or whether it
was totally taken up by a sacred enclosure. The answer might well have been given by excavating the
southern slope, the only part of the site whose nature during this period is unknown. However this slope
has unfortunately been damaged by later construction and the chances of encountering any early
structures are very slim. Hence the question remains unanswered despite there being considerable
evidence that most of the activity at Shiloh in the Iron Age I, as in the Bronze Age, was connected with
its role as a cult centre.
Any attempt to establish the layout of Shiloh in the Iron Age I hinges largely on defining the function
of the Area C pillared buildings. Although there were broad flat spaces suitable for building on the
northern side of the mound, considerable effort was expended on their construction which involved first
removing a large stretch of the Middle Bronze Age glacis. Thus we may safely assume that they were not
simple dwellings. The ceramic finds corroborate this conclusion. The assemblage from these buildings
consisted mainly of storage vessels (76% of the restored vessels) with a relatively small amount of
kitchen ware (24% - Chapter 6). Hall 306 and the southern unit of Structure 335 were in fact packed
with pithoi, proving that at least part of the complex served as storerooms.
The difficulty of constructing these pillared buildings on the slope and their exact north-south -
east-west orientation suggest that they were associated with a larger building complex that extended
eastwards in the direction of the summit. This assumption naturally raises the question of the location of
the Iron Age sanctuary. The early explorer Wilson (1873:37-38; recently also Kaufman 1988) proposed
that the tabernacle was accommodated on the natural terrace extending outward from the north of the
mound, where traces of quarrying are visible. This theory must be rejected since recent excavation by
Yeivin revealed that activity at the spot did not start before the late Iron Age II (Had. Arch. 77
[1981]:19-20).
Although our excavations have not provided a definitive answer regarding the location of the
sanctuary, the negative evidence from the northern, eastern and western sectors is of considerable value.
Since it is inconceivable that the sacred place was anywhere except inside the settlement, this leaves only
the summit and southern slope as candidates. Two lines of evidence lead us to the first alternative:
384
1. The well-planned buildings on the western slope, which imply continuation of construction in the
direction of the summit;

2. The circumstantial evidence that cult places of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages apparently stood on
or near the summit, from which we may assume that the Israelite sanctuary conformed with this
tradition.
The dump found in the northern part of Area C (L. 623) above the brick debris of Structure 335 bears
similar implications. Among the items retrieved were fragments of a cult stand, sherds of two (votive?)
vessels decorated with animal heads and many animal bones. This material was probably dumped down
the slope at the end of or after Iron Age I when the higher area to the east was being cleared in
preparation for new construction.
In conclusion, there is a high degree of probability that the Iron Age I sanctuary was located on or
near the summit of the mound and that the pillared buildings of Area C were some of its auxiliary
structures. Accordingly, most of the area of Iron Age I Shiloh was covered by buildings which did not
serve as dwellings.
If our theory as to the function of the Area C buildings is correct, then they are the only public
buildings known so far in Iron Age I hill country sites. In their plan, construction method and adaptation
to the slope these structures represent the acme of early Israelite architecture. This would also seem to
reflect the character of the sanctuary itself. Scholarly opinion is divided between those who interpret I
Sam. 1 as evidence that a stone-built temple stood at Shiloh (e.g. Krause 1966:176; Eissfeldt 1957:146;
1975:564-565; de-Vaux 1978:707) and those who doubt the existence at Shiloh of a stone sanctuary (e.g.
Noth 1960:95; Haran 1962:22-24; Woudstra 1965:135-139; Cross 1981:173-174). The excavation results
would seem to reinforce the former view.
Some Historical Problems

Two problems concerning the history of Shiloh in the Iron Age I have beset research since the 19th
century:
1. Was Shiloh the central shrine of the Israelites in the pre-monarchic period, or was it but one of a series
of contemporaneous temples in the hill country?
2. What were the historical circumstances of the destruction of Shiloh and its temple?
The recent excavations at the site, as well as other archaeological studies in the hill country, shed some
light on both questions although they fall short of solving them.
Shiloh and the Question of a Pan-Israelite Sanctuary

From the early days of biblical research scholars have been divided on the question of the early Israelite
shrines. One school has argued for the existence of central sanctuaries in pre-monarchic Israel (for 19th
century scholars such as Ewald and Kittel see summary in Schley 1989; Albright 1942:102; 1966:54-55;
Kraus 1966:126-127; Alt 1966:58, 193; Bright 1974: 158, 162). The maximalist view regarding the role of
Shiloh as an early Israelite sanctuary was stated by N oth, who saw Shiloh as the last in a chronological
series of central shrines of the amphictyonic league of the twelve tribes of Israel. According to Noth,
such a central shrine was one of the prerequisites for creating this amphictyony (Noth 1960:93 ff.). Other
scholars too were of the opinion that Shiloh was the only, or at least the principal, sacred centre in the
period of the Judges (Albright 1942:103-105; Cross 1947:56; Nielsen 1955:36; Woudstra 1965:127, 133;
Liver 1971:196; Bright 1974:162). Among the scholars who agree with Noth's chronological order of
these central shrines - Shechem, Bethel, Gilgal and Shiloh were Kraus (1966:127) and Kingsbury
385
(1967: 134-136). Other scholars follow a different chronological sequence for the sacred centres of the
Israelites: Lemaire, for example, saw Shiloh as the first of the series rather than the last ( 1973:242-243).
A second school opposed the view of a central pre-monarchic shrine and argued that Shiloh was one
of several local, contemporaneous early Israelite cult places.?
Evidently, it is extremely difficult to solve this dispute with archaeological tools, but several points
stand out:
1. The high level of planning and construction at Shiloh, the public nature of the pillared buildings
unearthed in Area C and the fact that no living quarters were found at the site, all indicate that Iron I
Shiloh was not an ordinary village with a cult place but rather a religious temenos. In other words, of all
the hill country Iron I sites, Shiloh is the only one to exhibit definite evidence of public activity.
2. The importance of Shiloh in the Iron Age I is clearly reflected in the results of the survey of the
surrounding area (Fig. 19.3). The density of the neighbouring villages is double or treble that known in
other parts of southern Samaria. Of 115 sites of this period found throughout the survey area, 26 are
located within a radius of 5-6 km. of Shiloh. If we look to Bethel for comparative data (including the
results of the recent comprehensive surveys of the plateau of Benjamin- Finkelstein and Magen 1993),
we see that only 12 villages of this period are known in an area of roughly the same radius. Elsewhere in
the hill country the concentration of sites is even lower. The advantages of settling in the small fertile
valleys of Shiloh and Lubban esh-Sharqiyyeh are clear. However, Shiloh itself undoubtedly played an
important role in fostering settlement; more than half the sites in the vicinity were apparently founded in
an advanced phase of Iron Age I when Shiloh was at the height of its prosperity (for details see
Finkelstein 1988: 178-182).
3. The comprehensive surveys of recent years reveal that in the first half of the 11th century B.C.E., at
the peak of Shiloh's prosperity, the Israelite settlement process8 was still in its initial phases in many
parts of the country, such as the Upper Galilee, the Beer-sheba Valley and the Judean hills. In other
regions, such as the eastern Lower Galilee, it had not even begun. 9 No cult site in the Samaria hills could
possibly have served the isolated and remote populations of distant regions. On the other hand, most of
the proto-Israelite population (Dever 1992) lived in the area between Jerusalem and the Jezreel Valley.
Hence, we can still only remain non-committal on the subject of a central shrine in pre-monarchic
Israel. In the first half of the 11th century B.C.E. Shiloh was probably an important centre for the
population of the highlands of Samaria. Nevertheless the archaeological evidence does not answer the
cardinal question - whether it was the one and only shrine of this population, or whether there were
contemporaneous cult centres at sites such as Bethel and Shechem. It.is also impossible to determine
whether there were earlier shrines in the central hill country which served populations of large areas. In
my opinion the Mt. Ebal finds do not furnish any information regarding the territorial influence of that
site. Therefore we still lack evidence for an inter-regional organization in the highlands in the 12th
century B.C.E.
Be that as it may, the concentration of sites around Shiloh, the public building activity and the
7. For the early scholars see summary in Schley 1989, especially Wellhausen 1957:40; for a variety of opinions on this subject,
see Basters 1965; Irwin 1965; Orlinsky 1962:375 ff.; Haran 1978:28-39; Mayes 1974:34-35; de Geus 1976:195199; de Vaux
1978:703-709; for a slightly different approach see de Vaux 1961:304; Lemche 1985:303; Miller and Hayes 1986:133; Schley
1989:187-188.
8. For my definition of the term 'Israelite' in the Iron Age I see Finkelstein 1988:27-28.
9. For details see Finkelstein 1988:324-330; for the Judaean hills see Ofer 1990; for the eastern Lower Galilee see Gal 1982.
386
content of the Area C pillared buildings are clear evidence for intensive economic and administrative
activity at the site (for trade in collared-rim jars see Chapter 11 ). It seems safe to suggest that in the early
11th century B.C.E. Shiloh served as a redistribution centre for an extensive hinterl{tnd. This makes
Shiloh an important stage in the transition of the Iron Age I hill country population from a social
system concentrated around small, isolated groups into the formation of an early monarchic state
(Finkelstein 1989).
Another question that arises is why and how Shiloh acquired its special cultic and political role in the
history of early Israel. The absence of previous sacral associations related to the site perplexed a number
of scholars (e.g. Noth 1960:95) while others saw the transformation of a previously inconsequential site
~
......
())
0 U'l
@]
0 A
D
0
0
D @]
0
165 165
0
0 0
0
0
160
0 0
Kh. et-Tello
0
D MB SITE
0 IRON AGE I SITE
0
- MODERN ROAD
~VALLEY
0
155 155
.....
.....:!
(J"'
Fig. 19.3: Middle Bronze and Iron Age I sites in the vicinity of Shiloh.
387
into an early Israelite cult centre as the very reason for its subsequent importance (e.g. Bright 1974:162).
The recent excavations provide evidence for the existence of earlier sacred traditions associated with this
place (see also Schley 1989: 134-136). Although the site was deserted for two centuries before activity
recommenced in the Iron Age I, one cannot ignore the evidence for continuity of cult activity here from
the MB II to the LB IIA.
N a'aman ( 1985) opposed the notion of continuity of sacred tradition in the highlands from the Bronze
Age into the Iron Age. In his opinion, the cult places of pre-monarchic Israel were deliberately established
outside the ancient urban centres, testifying to the revolutionary nature of the Israelite religion in the
period of the Judges and the beginning of the Monarchy. This theory encounters two difficulties:
1. It does not explain why and by what process the open air cult centres were eventually transferred into
the cities of the monarchic period;
2. The central hill country has by now been almost completely explored and archaeological surveys have
revealed hundreds of Iron I sites. However, except for the Mt. Ebal site (Zertal 1986-87), not a single
cult installation has been found in the vicinity of the ancient Middle and Late Bronze Age centres.
The morphological differences between southern and northern Samaria (divided by the Shechem
area), the former rugged mountainous terrain while the latter typified by broad valleys .and relatively
benign rock formations, is also significant. It forms the background for the entirely different settlement
patterns in the two regions in the Late Bronze and Iron Age I. In southern Samaria dense Iron Age I
settlement has been recorded in an area that had been only sparsely inhabited in the Late Bronze Age
(only five sites of this period are known in the region) whereas in northern Samaria at least 25 Late
Bronze Age sites have been discovered (Zartal 1988). Both these factors- environmental conditions
and the density of settlement in the Late Bronze Age - are linked to a third difference between these
two areas. Some of the Iron I sites of northern Samaria, most of them already inhabited in the Late
Bronze Age, were much larger than those of southern Samaria and the other highland regions. The
obvious conclusion is that there was a certain degree of continuity of settlement in northern Samaria
from the Late Bronze to the Iron Age, that is, the region's population in the Iron Age I was composed of
an indigenous sedentary element alongside newly-settled groups. The existence of a strong Canaanite
population in northern Samaria is also reflected in the biblical description of the relationship of
Shechem and Manasseh (Noth 1960:145, 152-153) and in the inclusion of Shechem, Tirzah and Hepher
in the genealogical list of Manasseh (Alt 1932:28-29; Aharoni 1979:194; 1982:65-66; Weippert 1971:20).
There are even some hints of Canaanite influence in northern Samaria during the time of the Monarchy
(e.g. Albright 1942:160-161).
The Date of the Destruction of Shiloh

Since the 19th century scholars have debated the question of when and under what circumstances Shiloh
lost its importance as a pre-eminent Israelite cult centre. One school has argued that the biblical
tradition on the destruction of Shiloh (Jer. 7:11, 14; 26:6, 9) relates to the aftermath of the battle of
Eben-ezer (for the 19th century scholars see Schley 1989; Eisfeldt 1957) while other scholars contended
that the biblical tradition relates to the destruction of the site by the Assyrians in the 8th century B. C. E.
(for 19th century scholars see Schley 1989; Haran 1978:27; Schley 1989:181-183).
The 1929 excavations, that revealed an Iron I destruction layer, led Kjaer (1930:105) and Albright
(1929:4) to suggest that the site was indeed destroyed by the Philistines following the defeat of the
Israelites at the battle of Eben-ezer. However, Buhl's later error in dating the structures on the western
slope of the mound (Shiloh 1969:33-34, 60-62; see critique of Shiloh 1971 :68-69) was one of the factors
388
that influenced Pearce (1973) and Schley (1989:70-71) to revive the theory for Assyrian conquest of
Shiloh in the 8th century B.C.E. Schofield (1962:314) came to a similar conclusion based on biblical
considerations (for a different view see Day 1979).
The results of the recent excavations lay this problem to rest. First and foremost, Iron Age I Shiloh
was destroyed in a great conflagration whose traces were clearly visible everywhere in Area C as well as
in Area E and possibly in the burnt silos of Area D (Chapter 14). Furthermore, it is now clear that the
site was not occupied in the early phases of the Iron Age II, that in the late-Iron Age II it was a tiny,
insignificant settlement, and that this late-Iron II site was not destroyed by fire but was apparently
gradually abandoned. The ceramic evidence that Shiloh was already abandoned at the end of the 11th
century B. C.E. also rules out the theory that the site emerged as a sanctuary of national importance only
in the days of Saul (Miller and Hayes 1986:133; Schley 1989:163, 195-197).
Finally, dump Debris 623 which seems to date slightly later than the Area C pillared buildings
(Chapters 6 and 11) may hint that for a short time after the destruction of Iron I Shiloh people from the
vicinity continued to bring offerings to the ruined site, a practice which somewhat resembles the Late
Bronze Age activity at Shiloh.
IRON II (STRATUM IV) AND LATER OCCUPATIONS

After an indefinite period of abandonment, activity at Shiloh was renewed in the late-Iron Age II (7th
century B.C.E. and possibly 8th century B.C.E.). Some meagre traces of this settlement were discovered
in the eastern sector, and it is possible that it extended to the south as well. However, no significant
remains from this period were found in the northern or western sectors. At the end of the Iron Age,
buildings were also constructed on the natural terrace to the north of the mound (Had. Arch. 77
[1981]: 19-20). In contrast to the decline of Shiloh, settlement in southern Samaria flourished during the
Iron Age II and the number of sites almost doubled, most of them also increasing in size (Finkelstein
1988-89: 151-154). Taking the Shiloh valley as an example, there is an increase from four Iron I sites
(Shiloh and three small settlements, two of them probably farmsteads) to eight sites, the central one
probably located where the Arab village of Turmus cAiya stands today.
Scant remains from the Persian period were found by Yeivin on the terrace to the north of the mound
(Had. Arch. 77 [1981]:19-20) and two(!) Persian sherds were retrieved from mixed loci in Areas D and
K (Fig. 6.68:5-6). A group of sherds of the late-Persian-early Hellenistic period was unearthed in Area J
and some Hellenistic pottery was retrieved from Area G. However, full-scale occupation of the site was
resumed only in the late Hellenistic period. Late Hellenistic and early Roman pottery as well as
Byzantine pottery was found in several locations on the mound (see Table 1.1 and Shiloh 1969; Shiloh
1985).
REFERENCES
Abel, F.M. 1936. Tappuah. RB 45:103-112.

Aharoni, Y. 1979. The Land of the Bible. London.
Aharoni, Y. 1982. Possession and Settlement. In: Mazar, B., ed. The History of Israel: The Judges.
Jerusalem. pp. 56-73. (Hebrew)
389
Aharoni, Y., Fritz, V. and Kempinski, A. 1975. Excavations at Tel Masos (Khirbet el-Meshash):
Preliminary Report on the Second Season, 1974. Tel Aviv 2:97-124.

Albright, W.F. 1929. New Israelite and Pre-Israelite Sites: The Spring Trip of 1929. BASOR 35:1-14.
Albright, W.F. 1942. Archaeology and the Religion of Israel. Baltimore.
Albright, W.F. 1966. Archaeology, Historical Analogy and Early Biblical Tradition. Baton Rouge.
Alt, A. 1925. Die Landnahme der Israeliten in Paliistina (trans. Alt 1966:135-169).
Alt, A. 1932. Die Reise. PJb 28:18-46.
Alt, A. 1966. Essays on Old Testament History and Religion. Oxford.
Amiran, R. 1969. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. Jerusalem.
Ashbee, P. and Cornwall, I.W. 1961. An Experiment in Field Archaeology. Antiquity 35:l29-134.
Atkinson, R.J.C. 1961. Neolithic Engineering. Antiquity 35:292-299.
BASOR 1932. Notes and News of the School in Jerusalem. BASOR 48:13-15.
Basters, A. 1965. Le sanctuaire central dans Jud. xix-xxi. Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses
41:20-41.
Biran, A. 1990. The Middle Bronze II Ramparts of Tel Dan. Eretz-Israe/21:56-65. (Hebrew)
Boling, R.G. 1969. Bronze Age Buildings at the Shechem High Place: ASOR excavations at Tananir.
BA 32:82-103.
Bright, J. 1974. A History of Israel. Philadelphia.
Broshi, M. and Gophna, R. 1986. Middle Bronze Age II Palestine: Settlements and Population. BASOR
261:73-90.
Bunimovitz, S. 1989. The Land of Israel in the Late Bronze Age: A Case Study of Socio-Cultural
Change in a Complex Society (unpublished Ph.D. thesis). Tel Aviv University. (Hebrew with
English abstract)
Bunimovitz, S. 1990. Cultural Processes and Socio.:..Political Changein the Central Hill Country in the
Late Bronze-Iron I Transition. In: Na'aman, N. and Finkelstein, I., eds. From Nomadism to
Monarchy: Archaeological and Historical Aspects of Early Israel. Jerusalem. pp. 257-283.
(Hebrew)
Callaway, J.A. 1976. Excavating Ai (et-Tell), 1964-1972. BA 39:18-30.
Campbell, E.F. and Wright, G.E. 1969. Tribal League Shrines in Amman and Shechem. BA 32:104-116.
Cooley, R.E. 1975. Four Seasons of Excavation at Khirbet Raddana. Near Eastern Archaeological
Society Bulletin N.S. 5:5-20.
Cotterell, B. and Kamminga, J. 1990. Mechanics of Pre-Industrial Technology. Cambridge.
Cross, P.M. 1947. The Tabernacle. BA 10:45-68.
Cross, P.M. 1981. The Priestly Tabernacle in the Light of Recent Research. In: Biran, A., ed. Temples
and High Places in Biblical Times. Jerusalem. pp. 169-180.
Day, J. 1979. The Destruction of the Shiloh Sanctuary and Jeremiah VII 12, 14. VTSup 30:87-94.
Dever, W.G. 1971. An MB I Tomb Group from Sinjil. BASOR 204: 31-37.
Dever, W.G. 1972. Archaeological Methods and Results: A Review of Two Recent Publications.
Orientalia 40:459-471.
Dever, W.G. 1975. Middle Bronze IIA Cemeteries at cAin es-Samiyeh and Sinjil. BASOR 217:23-36.
Dever, W.G. 1992. How to Tell a Canaanite from an Israelite. In: Shanks, H. et al. The Rise of Ancient
Israel. Washington DC. pp 26-56.
Dunayevsky, I. and Kempinski, A. 1990. The Eastern Rampart of Hazor. Atiqot 10:23-28. (Hebrew)
Eissfeldt, 0. 1957. Silo und Jerusalem. VTSup 4:138-147.
390
Eissfeldt, 0. 1975. The Hebrew Kingdom. CAH II,2b:537-605.

Finkelstein, I. 1988-89. The Land of Ephraim Survey 1980-1987: Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv
15-16:117-183.
Finkelstein, I. 1989. The Emergence of the Monarchy in Israel The Environmental and Socio-Economic
Aspects. JSOT 44:43-74.
Finkelstein, I. 1990a. Archaeological Soundings at Dhahr Mirzbaneh. Eretz-Israe/21:239-248.
Finkelstein, I. 1990b. Excavations at Khirbet ed-Dawwara: An Iron Age Site Northeast of Jerusalem.
Tel Aviv 17:163-208.
Finkelstein, I. 1991. The Central Hill Country in the Intermediate Bronze Age. IEJ 41:19-45.
Finkelstein, I. 1992. The Middle Bronze 'Fortifications': Reflection of Social Organization and Political
Formations. Tel Aviv 19(2):201-220.
Finkelstein, I. and Gophna, R. 1993. Settlement, Demographic and Economic Patterns in the Highlands
of Palestine in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Periods and the Beginning of Urbanism. BAS OR
289:1-22.
Finkelstein, I. and Magen, Y., eds. 1993. Archaeological Surveys in the Hill Country of Benjamin.
Jerusalem.
Franken, H. J. 1969. Excavations at Tell Deir cAlla I. Leiden.
Gal, Z. 1982. The Settlement of Issachar: Some New Observations. Tel Aviv 9:79-86.
de Geus, C.H.J. 1976. The Tribes of Israel. Amsterdam.
Glueck, N. 1933. Palestinian and Syrian Archaeology in 1932. AJA 37:160-172.
Gonen, R. 1984. Urban Canaan in the Late Bronze Period. BASOR 253:61-73.
Gonen, R. 1992. Burial Patterns and Cultural Diversity in Late Bronze Age Canaan. ASOR Dissertation
Series 7. Winona Lake.
Hammond, P.C. 1968. Hebron. Chronique arch ologique. RB 75:253-258 ..
Haran, M. 1962. Shiloh and Jerusalem: The Origin of the Priestly Tradition in the Pentateuch. JBL
81:14-24.
Haran, M. 1978. Temples and Temple Service in Ancient Israel. Oxford.
Irwin, H. 1965. Le sanctuaire central isra~lite avant 1'establissement de la monarchie. RB 72: 161-185.
Kallai, Z. 1972. The Land of Benjamin and Mt. Ephraim. In: Kochavi, M., ed. Judaea, Samaria and the
Golan. Jerusalem. pp. 153-195. (Hebrew)
Kaplan, J. 1975. Further Aspects of the Middle Bronze Age II Fortifications in Palestine. ZDPV
91:1-17.
Kaufman, A.S. 1988. Fixing the Site of the Tabernacle at Shiloh. BAR 14(6):46-52.
Kelso, J.L. 1968. The Excavation of Bethel (1934-1960). AASOR 39.
Kempinski, A. 1983. Syrien und Paliistina (Kanaan) in der letzten Phase der Mittelbronze JIB-Zeit
(1650-1570 v. Chr). Wiesbaden.
Kempinski, A. 1989. The Middle Bronze Age. In: The Archaeology of Ancient Israel in the Biblical
Period. Tel Aviv. (Hebrew)
Kempinski, A. 1992. Urbanization and Town Plans in the Middle Bronze Age II. In: Kempinski, A. and
Reich, R., eds. The Architecture of Ancient Israel. Jerusalem. pp. 121-126.
Kenyon, K.M. 1952. Excavations at Jericho, 1952. PEQ:62-82.
Kingsbury, E.C. 1967. He Set Ephraim before Manasseh. Hebrew Union College Annua/38:129-136.
391
Kraus, H.J. 1966. Worship in Israel. Oxford.

Lederman, Z. 1985. The Middle Bronze Age IIC Defence System. In: Finkelstein, I., ed. Excavations in
Shiloh 1981-1984: Preliminary Report. Tel Aviv 12:140-146.
Lemaire, A. 1973. Asriel sr'l, Israel et l'origine de la confederation israelite. VT 23:239-243.
Lemche, N.P. 1985. Early Israel. VTSup. 37. Leiden.
Liver, J. 1971. The Israelite Tribes. In: Mazar, B., ed. The World History of the Jewish People, Vol. Ill
-Judges. Givatayim. pp. 183-211.
Mayes, A.D.H. 1974. Israel in the Period of the Judges. London.
Mazar, B. 1984. The Valley of Succoth. In: Schiller, E., ed. Zev Vilnay's Jubilee Volume. Jerusalem. pp.
215-217. (Hebrew)
Mendelssohn, K. 1977. The Riddle of the Pyramids. New York.
Miller, J.M. and Hayes, J.H. 1986. A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. Philadelphia.
Minorsky, V. 1960. cAnnazids. Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition), Vol. 1:512-513.
N a'aman, N. 1982. The Land of Israel in the Canaanite Period: The Middle and Late Bronze Ages
(approximately 2000-1200 B.C.E.). In: Efal, I., ed. The History of Eretz-Israel /: The Early
Periods. Jerusalem. pp. 129-256. (Hebrew)
Na'aman, N. 1985. Bethel and Beth-aven: An Investigation into the Location of the Early Israelite Cult
Places. Zion 50:15-25. (Hebrew)
Na'aman, N. 1986. The Canaanite City-States in the Late Bronze Age and the Inheritances of the
Israelite Tribes. Tarbiz 55:463-488. (Hebrew)
Nielsen, E. 1955. Shechem: A Traditio-Historical Investigation. Copenhagen.
Noth, M. 1960. The History of Israel. London.
Ofer, A. 1989. Excavations at Biblical Hebron. Qadmoniot 87-88:88-95. (Hebrew)
Ofer, A. 1990. The Judaean Hill Country- from Nomadism to a National Monarchy. In: Na'aman, N.
and Finkelstein, I., eds. From Nomadism to Monarchy: Archaeological and Historical Aspects of
Early Israel. Jerusalem. pp. 155-214. (Hebrew)
Orlinsky, H. 1962. The Tribal System of Israel and Related Groups in the Period of the Judges. Studies
and Essays in Honour of Abraham A. Newman. Jerusalem.
Parr, P.J. 1968. The Origin of the Rampart Fortifications of Middle Bronze Age Palestine and Syria.
ZDPV84:18-45.
Pearce, R.A. 1973. Shiloh and Jer. VII 12, 14 and 15. VT23:105-108.
Pennells, E. 1983. Middle Bronze Age Earthworks: A Contemporary Engineering Evaluation. BA
46:57-61.
QDAP 1934. Excavations in Palestine, 1932-3. Seilun. QDAP. 3:180.

Renfrew, C. 1984. Approaches to Social Archaeology. Edinburgh.
Rowton, M.B. 1973. Urban Autonomy in a Nomadic Environment. JNES 32:201-215.
Rowton, M.B. 1976. Dimorphic Structure and the Tribal Elite. In: Al-Bahit: Festschrift Joseph
Henninger. Studia Instituti Anthropos 28. St. Augustin bei Bonn. pp. 219-257.
Schley, D.G. 1989. Shiloh: A Biblical City in Tradition and History. JSOT Supplement Series 63.
Sheffield.
Schofield, J.N. 1962. Judges. In: Black, M. and Rowley, H.H., eds. Peake's Commentary on the Bible.
London. pp. 304-315.
Seger, J.D. 1975. The MB II Fortifications at Shechem and Gezer. Eretz-/srae/12:34*-35*.
392
Shiloh 1985. Andersen, F.G. 1985. Shiloh, The Danish Expedition at Tall Sailun, Palestine in 1926,
1929, 1932 and 1963 II: The Remains from the Hellenistic to the Mamluk Periods. Copenhagen.
Shiloh, Y. 1971. Reviews: M.-L. Buhl and S. Holm-Nielsen. Shiloh, The Danish Excavations at Tall
Sailun, Palestine in 1926, 1929, 1932 and 1963. IEJ 21:67-69.
Stanhill, G. 1978. The Fellah's Farm: An Autarkic Agro-Ecosystem. Agro-Ecosystems 4:433-448.
Swidler, N. 1972. The Development of the Kalat Khanate. In: Irons, W. and Dyson-Hudson, N., eds.
Perspectives on Nomadism. Leiden. pp. 115-121.
de Vaux, R. 1961. Ancient Israel, Its Life and Institutions. London.
de Vaux, R. 1978. The Early History of Israel. Philadelphia.
Ussishkin, D. 1989. Notes on the Fortifications of the Middle Bronze II Period at Jericho and Shechem.
BASOR 276:29- 53.
Weippert, M. 1971. The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Palestine. London.
Wellhausen, J. 1957. Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel. New York.
Whitelam, K.W. 1986. The Symbols of Power: Aspects of Royal Propaganda in the United Monarchy.
BA 49:166-173.
Wilson, C.W. 1873. Jerusalem. PEFQSt :37-38.
Woudstra, M.H. 1965. The Ark of the Covenantfrom Conquest to Kingship. Philadelphia.
Wright, G.E. 1965. Shechem: A Biography of a Biblical City. London.
Wright, G.R.H. 1985. Ancient Building in South Syria and Palestine. Leiden.
Yadin, Y. 1955. Hyksos Fortifications and the Battering-ram. BASOR 137:23-32.
Zertal, A. 1986-87. An Early Iron Age Cultic Site on Mount Ebal: Excavation Seasons 1982-1987. Tel
Aviv 13-14:105-165.
Zertal, A. 1988. The Israelite Settlement in the Hill Country of Manasseh. Haifa. (Hebrew)
393
LIST OF LOCI
Locus Area Square Stratum* Description

No.
300 c C39 Mixed Surface debris
306 c C40-42 v Lower unit in Building 312
307 c C39 v Collapse debris west of Building 335
309 c D43 V? Silo, dug into MB glacis
311 c C43 V? Silo?, dug into MB glacis
312 c D41,42 v Pillared building
313 c D43 IV Corner of a building
315 c C43 IV Pit, dug into MB glacis
317 c C42 v Room; 'House B' of the Danish excavations
319 c C41,42 v 'House A' of the Danish excavations; southern part of Hall 306
326 c D/E39 Mixed Surface debris
327 c D(E40 Mixed Surface debris
330 c E39 v Earth debris
334 c E39 v Upper part of Debris 623
335 c D39,40 v Unit of building; pillared building
336 c C4l v Shallow ash pit in Hall 306
340 c D/E39,40 Mixed Removal of baulk
402 D L31 Mixed Surface debris
403 D L30 v Pebbles surface on top of MB W30l
404 D L30 v Pebbles surface adjacent to top of MB W30l; continuation of L. 403
405 D M(N29 Mixed
407 D M31 VI Pit with debris ofjavissa; for its size see Fig. 3.3
409 D K(L29 v Continuation of L. 403
413 D L31 VIII/VII Part of Stone Fill417
414 D M31 v Silo
415 D L3l v Silo
416 D M3l vm;vn Part of Stone Fill417
417 D L30 VIII/VII Stone fill; for its size see Fig. 3.3
422 D M32 Mixed
424 D M32 v Silo
425 D M32 v Silo
427 D L32 v Silo
504 E K42 IV? Part of a buiiding? mixed material
505 E L42 IV? Part of a building? mixed material
507 E K42 Mixed
508 E K42 IV or II Silo
509 E K42 v Upper part ofinstallation 519
5H E L42 IV? Part of a building? mixed material

517 E L43 IV or II Room; building
519 E K42 v Rock-cut installation
520 E K42 v Surface around Installation 519
601 c D(E38 Mixed Surface debris
604 c C3\l Mixed Probe in western part of the square
606 c D/E4l Mixed Surface; over northern part of Building 312
607 c C41,42 v Collapse debris west of Hall 306
610 c C39 v Collapse debris; continuation of L. 307
6ll c D/E40 v Corridor between Buildings 312 and 335
613 c D/E4l v Northern part of Building 312
* Stratum VIII/VII designates a Locus which contains Stratum VIII material, constructed in Stratum VII.
394
c
617 C39 v Central longitudinal unit in Building 335; see also L. 1301
618 c D/E38 v Debris dumped over Building 335; upper part of Debris 623
621 c D40 I Installation
623 c DjE38 v Debris dumped over Building 335; see also L. 618
626 c C40 v Uncovering the continuation of Wall C423
705 D L33 VI Part of Debris 407
706 D M33 v Surface debris
707 D L33 VIII/VII Part of Stone Fill417
7!1 D M32 Mixed
712 D M33 Mixed
714 D M34 Mixed
716 D L33 Mixed
721 D M/N30,31 v Silo
723 D M-027-29 VIII/VII Glacis
724 D M34 VIII/VII Part of Stone Fill 417
727 D M30,3l v Continuation of L. 403
731 D K29 v Continuation of L. 403
733 D N35 Mixed
740 D M32 v Silo
741 D M33 v Silo
802 F K31 Mixed
804 F 131 II Building
805 F K31 Mixed
807 F K30 Mixed
809 F K31 VIII/VII Earthen fill
810 F K30 II Building
903 G T53 IV or III Building
907 G T54 IV Building
913 G U/T52 Mixed
1003 H M28 v Silo
1012 H L37 Mixed
1017 H L/M28,29 VII Floor of 'Room S' of Dani.sh excavations
1018 H 028 Mixed Cleaning of section of Danish excavations
1019 H L29 VII 'Room T' of the Danish excavations
1021 H N28 VIII/VII Earthen fill under floor of Stratum VII room
1023 H K/L29 Mixed
1102 1 157 Mixed Probe in Lower Area 1
1106 1 M59 II Probe in Lower Area 1
ll08 1 H57 v Probe; dumped debris
1109 1 152 II Building
1112 1 E/F53 II Walls
ll13 1 F53 Mixed Under L. 1112
1201 K U28 Mixed Surface

1202 K U28 Mixed Foundation trenches
1203 K U28 v Silo
1206 K U28 VIII/VII Earthen fill
1207 K U:i8 v Silo
1210 K U27 Mixed
1301 c D/E38 v Central1ongitudinal unit of Building 335
1305 c DjE37 Mixed
1309 c CjD39 v Uncovering Wall C393
1310 c D38 Mixed
1311 c D/E38 v Northern longitudinal unit of Building 335
1315 c E38 v Eastern and of Unit 1301 in Building 335
1320 c E38 V and IV Cistern
395
1322 c F/G38 Mixed

1352 c G38 Mixed
1400 D N31 v Silo
1404 D N33 Mixed
1408 D N33 v Silo
1415 D M32 VI Part of Debris 407
1417 D L/M29,30 VIII/VII Glacis 723 between WL301 and WM291
1418 D N33 Mixed
1419 D M-027-29 VIII/VII Glacis
1426 D M33 Mixed
1427 D M29,30 VIII/VII Probe down to bedrock in Glacis 723
1428 D N/027,28 VIII/VII Probe down to bedrock in Glacis 723
1430 D N33 v Silo
1431 D N32 VI Part of Debris 407
1436 D N33 v Silo?
1438 D N33 v Silo
1439 D N33 VI Part of Debris 407
1440 D M33 VI Part of Debris 407
1442 D M34 Mixed
1445 D M31,32 Mixed Removal of baulk
1446 D M31,32 Mixed
1447 D M34 v Surface debris
1448 D N35 Mixed
1449 D N35 Mixed
1453 D N31 v Silo
1454 D N33 v Silo
1455 D N33 v Silo
1461 D N35 VI Continuation of Debris 407(?)
1462 D N35 v Silo
1505 F K3l VIII/VII Earthen fill, continuation of L. 809
1522 F J/K30 VII Room
1525 F K30 VII Room, before separating into Rooms 1532 and 1533
1526 F H/J3l VII Room
1527 F 131 VII Room
1532 F K30 VII Room
1533 F J/K30 VII Room
1535 F 132 Mixed
1536 F 132 Mixed
1537 F H32 Mixed Surface debris
1539 F H32 Mixed
1603 E K45 Mixed Surface debris
1604 E J43 IV or II Building
1607 E J38 Mixed

1700 F H32 II Building
1703 F J32 Mixed
1704 F 132 VIII/VII Earthen fill
1710 F H32 VIII/VII Earthen fill
1712 F H32 VIII/VII Make-up of floor in Room 1526
1713 F 131 VII Northwestern corner of Room 1527
1715 F 132 VII Grey layer
1717 F K29,30 VII 'Room U' of the Danish excavations
1718 F 132 VIII/VII Earthen fill
1719 F K29,30 VIII/VII Earthen fill under floor of 'Room U' of the Danish excavations
1729 F H/131 VIII/VII Earthen fill; probe under floor of Room 1526
1731 F H/132 VIII/VII Earthen fill
396
1738 F H/J32 VIII/VII Earthen fill

1739 F J32 vm;vn Probe in earthen fill down to bedrock
1740 F K29 Mixed
1805 K U27 v Silo
1807 K U27,28 VIII/VII Earthen fill
1808 K U31 Mixed Stratum II walls in test square
1812 K U26 VII Room
1813 K U27 v Silo
1814 K U26 VII Room
1815 K A26 VII Room
2003 M F28 v Pit
2005 M F28 v Pit
2006 M F28 VIII/VII Earthen fill
2008 M F28 VII Brick material in room adjacent to Wall F272
2009 M F27 V and II Silo
397
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
A ASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan
AJA American Journal of Archaeology
AS Anatolian Studies
BA Biblical Archaeologist
BAR Biblical Archaeology Review
BAS OR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
BIES Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society
CAH Cambridge Ancient History
EAEHL Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land
El Eretz-Israel
ESI Excavations and Surveys in Israel
Had. Arch. Hadashot Archeologiot
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
.JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JEA Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JPOS Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
LA Liber Annus
L/A Institute of Archaeology, University of London
OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis
PEFA Palestine Exploration Fund Annual
PEFQSt Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly Statement
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly
PJb Palastinajahrbuch des Deutschen evangelischen Instituts fiir Altertumswissenschaft des Heiligen Landes zu
Jerusalem
QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine
RB Revue Biblique
RDAC Report of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus
SCE The Swedish Cyprus Expedition
SIMA Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology
VT Vetus Testamentum
VTSup Supplement to the Vetus Testamentum
ZDPV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins
398

Finkelstein I Etal 1993 Shiloh - The Archaeology of A Biblical Site

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Finkelstein I Etal 1993 Shiloh - The Archaeology of A Biblical Site

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Copyright © 1993. The Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University. All rights reserved.

MONOGRAPH SERIES OF THE INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY

This publication was made possible through grants from the

Published by the Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology

PART ONE: STRATIGRAPHY AND ARCHITECTURE

PART TWO: THE FINDS

Appendix 1: Identification of Bone Raw Material Used in Artefact

PART THREE: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL ANALYSES

Chapter 11 PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSES OF MIDDLE BRONZE AGE III, LATE

PART FOUR: ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY

Chapter 17 FOOD REMAINS

Chapter 18 ECONOMY AND SUBSISTENCE

PART FIVE: CONCLUSION

Chapter 19 THE HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF SHILOH FROM THE

Fig. 3.11. Sectional trench in Glacis 723. 42

Fig. 4.8. Area H, excavation in Room U (Square K29). 54

Fig. 9.18. Stone objects. 252

* Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.

.,.,...-·- ............. -·-· ,. /

10km. -·-·Boundary of the Land

172 174 176 178 180

172 174 176 178 180

Fig. 1.2: Shiloh and its environs.

General view of the mound, looking west.

STRATUM VIII: mid-MB II- early MB III4

Area C: Pottery in glacis (the latter laid in Stratum VII)

STRATUM VII: late MB III

STRATUM VI: LB 1-IIA

Area D: Dumped debris

STRATUM V: Iron Age I

Area C: Pillared buildings

STRATUM IV: late Iron Age II

STRATUM Ill: Hellenistic Period

STRATUM ll: Late-Hellenistic-Early Roman Period

Area C: Walls in upper squares

STRATUM 1: Byzantine Period

Albright, W.F. 1923. The Danish Excavations at Shiloh. BASOR 9:10-11.

Richardson, A.T. 1927. The Site of Shiloh. PEFQSt: 85-88.

AREA C: THE IRON AGE I PILLARED BUILDINGS

distinguished. The results are reviewed below in chronological order.

STRATUM VIII: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE II

* Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.

Fig. 2.1: ScJlematic plan of Area C.

Fig. 2.2: Aerial view of Area C, looking east (1982).

STRATUM V: IRON AGE I

carefully paved with large, smooth flagstones.

ashes of destruction layer in foreground.

Fig. 2.18: Isometric reconstruction of the Iron I pillared buildings in Area C.

STRATUM IV: IRON AGE II

STRATA II-I: ROMAN-BYZANTINE PERIOD

Roman period or even later.

Hall306 was used as a rectangular ash pit.

AREA D: MIDDLE BRONZE AGE STONE AND EARTH WORKS,

STRATUM VIII: MIDDLE BRONZE II

STRATUM VII: MIDDLE BRONZE III

K' L' o'

§ MIDDLE BRONZE AGE ]Ic 34

LATE BRONZE AGE DEPOSIT

K' l' M' N' 0'

Fortification Walls L301-N321 and M332

Fig. 3.2: Aerial view of Area D, looking southwest.

General plan of the MB and LB remains. (Surveyed by Zvi Lederman.)

Fig. 3.4: General view of

~ 0~53 z:::::::=