Madaba Plains Project:The 1987 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent StudiesOther Volumes in the Madaba Plains Project Series:Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity andSubsequent Studies. Lawrence T. Geraty, Larry G. Herr, 0ystein S. LaBianca, Randall W. Younker, editors.Madaba Plains Project:The 1987 Season atTell el-cUmeiri and Vicinityand Subsequent StudiesEditorsLarry G. Herr Lawrence T. Geraty 0ystein S. LaBianca Randall W. Younker1991Andrews University Press Berrien Springs, MI 49104in cooperation with the Institute o f Archaeology, Andrews UniversityAssociate EditorRalph E. HendrixTechnical AssistantsR. William Cash, computer specialistLarry W. Coyle, chief field photographerStefanie P. Elkins, publication illustratorJennifer L. Groves, editorial assistant (appendices)Denise D. Herr, editorial assistant (field chapters)Stephanie C. Merling, proofreaderEric Shults, series cover designerToni A. Stemple, editorial assistant (general)Mark S. Ziese, publication photographerMadaba Plains Project 2: The 1987 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent StudiesCopyright ® 1991: Andrews University Press and the Institute o f Archaeology.Berrien Springs, Michigan 49104ISBN 0-943872-98-7Library o f Congress Catalog Card Number: 91-73700 Printed in the United States o f America. All rights reserved.First Printing 1991ContributorsJames R. Battenfield California State University, Long BeachR. William Cash St. Mary’s CollegeGary L. Christopherson University o f ArizonaDouglas R. Clark Walla Walla CollegeJon A. Cole Walla Walla CollegeP. M. Michele Daviau Wilfrid Laurier UniversityLawrence T. Geraty Atlantic Union CollegeLarry G. Herr Canadian Union CollegeHoward P. Krug Rochester, New York0ystein S. LaBianca Andrews UniversityNancy Lapp Pittsburg Theological SeminaryJohn I. Lawlor Baptist Bible SeminaryGloria A. London University o f WashingtonRussanne D. Low University o f Maryland, Munich CampusJames E. Miller Madison, WisconsinElizabeth E. Platt University o f Dubuque Theological Seminary Heather Plint University o f Alberta Donald B. Redford University o f TorontoDouglas W. Schnurrenberger University o f Maryland, Munich CampusMarlene Sinclair Athabasca UniversityJennifer Smith University o f AlbertaWarren C. Trenchard Canadian Union CollegeJane C. Waldbaum University o f Wisconsin—MilwaukeeRandall W. Younker Andrews UniversityPREFACEAs anyone who has conducted a major archaeological project knows, fieldwork is a time-consuming and expensive undertaking. The Madaba Plains Project has been especially fortunate in that it has attracted generous financial backing from a number of faithful supporters. In addition to the financial support of the consortium institutions (Andrews University, Atlantic Union College, Canadian Union College, Walla Walla College, and Wilfrid Laurier University) and volunteer fees, contributions were made by William Berecz, Jr., James M. Byers III, Ronald and Sheila Geraty, Thomas and Hazel Geraty, Robert D. Ibach, Jr., Salim Japas, Enid and John Leung, Gloria G. and John T. Martin, Charles A. Platt, Elizabeth E. Platt, C. Murray Robinson, Barbara Russell, Zorka Sandic, Stanley Squier, C. Erwin Syphers, Gary A. and Carolyn Waldron, and Ernest S. and Dorothy L. Zane.Fieldwork would also be impossible without the cooperation and support of scholars and officials in the host country. Special thanks are extended to Dr. Adnan Hadidi, former Director-General of Antiquities in Jordan (under whose auspices the 1987 season of excavation was conducted), Amman Antiquities Inspector Hefzi Haddad, and Department of Antiquities Representative Nazmiyeh Rida. Special appreciation is also extended to businessman/scholar Raouf Abujaber, landowner of Tell el-cUmeiri, for his continued support of the excavations.The administrators and staff of the American Schools of Oriental Research (ASOR) and its local affiliate, the American Center of Oriental Research (ACOR) provided essential assistance, especially ACOR director David McCreery, administrative director Glen Peterman and administrative assistant Ibtisam Dababneh.Other important supporters in Jordan include Prince Raad ibn Zeid, and Richard T. Krajczar, Superintendent of the American Community School in Amman. Finally, special mention should be made of the Baptist School near Shmeisani, Amman andits former principal Wilson Tatum, who generously allowed us to use the school as dig headquarters.Of course, a most important part of any research project is the publication of the results. In addition to those individuals acknowledged in the appropriate sections of the following chapters, special appreciation is extended to the following: Mark S. Ziese, whose willing "can-do" attitude served through many lonely hours in the darkroom; Stefanie P. Elkins, whose talent and creativity is apparent in much of the artwork; R. William Cash, Jennifer Groves, and Toni A. Stemple, who undertook the tedious job of preparing the locus sheets and specialist reports for publication; Denise D. Herr, who dedicated many hours proofing the pottery descriptions; Stephanie C. Merling, who proofread the volume; and last, but not least, Ralph E. Hendrix (director of publications at the Institute of Archaeology), who laid out and typeset the entire volume, served as managing editor, and generally functioned as a backstop for what slipped by everyone else.Finally, very special thanks are due W. Richard Lesher (Andrews University President), Arthur O. Coeztee (Andrews University Vice-President of Academic Administration), and Delmer I. Davis (Director of the Andrews University Press, and Director of Scholarly Research) without whose support this volume could not have come into existence, and to our spouses and families, whose patience and encouragement may very well become legend.Lawrence T. Geraty, Senior Project Director Larry G. Herr, Director 0ystein S. LaBianca, Director Randall W. Younker, DirectorAndrews University,Berrien Springs, Michigan December 10, 1991viDEDICATIONTensions between nomadic pastoralists and sedentary cultivators are well known the world over. The Madaba Plains Project has had as one of its chief objectives the elucidation of die see-saw occurance of sedentarization and nomadization. No one has contributed more to an understanding of the latest cycle in Jordan — that of sedentarization since the mid-nineteenth century A.D. -- than Dr. Raouf Sa3d Abujaber.He has done so through his own research culminating in the publication of his Pioneers Over Jordan: The Frontier o f Settlement in Transjordan, 1850-1914 (London: I. B. Tauris, 1989). His main aim in writing this book "was to put on record the different historical, social and economic factors that played such an important role in the lives of the settled and nomadic populations alike" (pp. xiii, xiv). As Albert Hourani said of this book in his Forward, it is "not only a work of research, it is also a testimony to the skill, enterprise and courage of the pioneers over the River Jordan" (p. xii).He has also done so through his patronage of the Madaba Plains Project whose excavation and survey have taken place on his family land holdings around Yadudeh, since 1984. How well I remember our first meeting, and how fortunate I felt that the one who owned the tell we wished to excavate happened to be the President of the Friends of Archaeology in Jordan! He did not disappoint us, but has generously facilitated our work, sometimes through difficult circumstances.Born in es-Salt and educated in his native Jordan, as well as Lebanon and England, Dr. Abujaber received his B.B.A. in 1946 from the American University of Beirut, his M.A. in 1984 from the Jordan University in Amman, and his D.Phil. in 1987 from Oxford University. In addition to his educational achievements, he has excelled in at least three areas of endeavor.In business, he was a founding partner of Messrs. SaDd Abujaber and Sons, and helped establish Jordan’s first insurance agency,subsequently serving as president for five terms of the Jordan Insurance Association. He has been the chairman or president of several key companies in Jordan since that time, in addition to serving the Netherlands as its honorary consul general in Amman.In community service, he has given unstintingly of his time and energy. For instance, he has served the following organizations as president: Orthodox Philanthropic Society, Amman Y.M.C.A., Bishop’s School Alumni Club, Royal Riding Club, and the Friends of Archaeology. He has been vice president of the Friends of the Jordan Universities Society and governor of the local Rotary District. He has also been a member of the following boards: Jordan University, Yarmouk University’s Anthropology and Archaeology Institute, Friends of the Arab University in Jerusalem, Arab Orphan Society, Jordan-Turkish Friendship Society, Jordan’s Foreign Affairs Council, and The Higher Education Council.But it is for his own scholarly endeavors (in addition to his book, he has published over fifty articles in Arabic and English about industry, insurance, history, and interfaith dialogue), and his enthusiastic support of the scholarly work of others, including our own, that Dr. Abujaber has endeared himself to the members of the Madaba Plains Project. It is with praise and esteem, then, that we dedicate this volume to Dr. Raouf SaDd Abujaber — businessman, community leader, scholar, and friend.Lawrence T. Geraty Senior Project Director Madaba Plains ProjectAtlantic Union College,South Lancaster, Massachusetts May 25, 1991, on the 100th anniversary of the birth of William Foxwell Albright, pioneer in the archaeology of Jordan.vnTABLE OF CONTENTSPreface viDedication viiPART ONE: OVERVIEWChapter 1 An Overview of the 1987 Season of Excavation and Survey in the Madaba Plains 3Lawrence T. Geraty, Larry G. Herr,Oystein S. LaBianca, Ra?idall W. YounkerPART TWO: TELL EL-CUMEIRIChapter 2 Organization of Excavation and Summary of Results on the Tell 8Larry G. HerrChapter 3 Field A: The Ammonite Citadel 15John I. LawlorChapter 4 Field B: The Western Defense System 53Douglas R. ClarkChapter 5 Field C: The Northern Suburb 74James R. BattenfieldChapter 6 Field D: The Lower Southern Terrace 87P. M. Mictele DaviauChapter 7 Field E: The Water System 156James R. BattenfieldChapter 8 Field F: The Eastern Shelf 170Russanne D. LowChapter 9 Pottery Typology and Chronology 232Larry G. Herr (with notes by Nancy Lapp and Jane C. Waldbaum)Chapter 10 The Objects 246Elizabeth E. PlattviiiPART THREE: VICINITYChapter 11 An Introduction to the 1987 Tell el-cUmeiri Hinterland Surveys and Excavations 2660ystein S. LaBiancaChapter 12 The Judgment Survey 269Randall W. YounkerChapter 13 Architectural Remains from the Hinterland Survey 335Randall W. YounkerChapter 14 Limekilns from the Regional Survey 343Gary L. ChristophersonChapter 15 A Note on Seasonally Occupied Cave Villages 3530ystein S. LaBiancaChapter 16 The Necropolis at Tell el-cUmeiri (East) 356Howard P. KrugChapter 17 Preliminary Comments on the Geology of the Tell el-cUmeiri Region 370Douglas W. SchnurrenbergerPART FOUR: SUBSEQUENT STUDIESChapter 18 The Seal of Shimcaz 377Larry G. HerrChapter 19 The Scarab Seal Impression 379Donald B. RedfordChapter 20 The Bronze Ptolemaic Coin of Rujm Selim 381James E. MillerChapter 21 Aspects of Early Bronze and Late Iron Age Ceramic Technologyat Tell el-cUmeiri 383Gloria A. LondonChapter 22 An Ethnoarchaeological Survey of Potters in Jordan 420Gloria A. London and Marlene SinclairChapter 23 Preliminary Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from Tell el-cUmeiriand Hinterland Sites, 1987 429Gloria A. London, Heather Plint and Jennifer SmithAPPENDICESAppendix A Tell el-cUmeiri Field Locus Sheets 441R. William Cash and Warren C. TrenchardAppendix B Tell el-c,Umeiri Specialist Reports 601R. William Cash and Randall W. YounkerIndex 619IXTable o f Archaeological PeriodsEarly Bronze I Early Bronze II-III Early Bronze IVca. 3200-3000 B.C. ca. 3000-2300 B.C. ca. 2300-2000 B.C.Middle Bronze IIA Middle Bronze IIB-Cca. 2000-1800 B.C. ca. 1800-1550 B.C.Late Bronze I Late Bronze IIca. 1550-1400 B.C. ca. 1400-1200 B.C.Iron I Iron IIIron II/Persian (Iron III)ca. 1200-920 B.C. ca. 920-539 B.C. 539-332 B.C.Hellenistic 332-63 B.C.Roman 63 B.C.-A.D. 324Byzantine A.D. 324-640UmayyadAbbasidFatimidSeljuq-ZengidA.D. 630-750 A.D. 750-969 A.D. 969-1171 A.D. 1171-1174AyyubidMamlukOttomanA.D. 1174-1263 A.D. 1250-1516 A.D. 1516-1918Modern A.D. 1918-Present\CHAPTER 1An Overview o f the 1987 Season o f Excavation and Survey in the Madaba PlainsLawrence T. Geraty Atlantic Union College Larry G. Herr Canadian Union College 0ystein S. LaBianca Andrews University Randall W. Younker Andrews UniversityIntroductionA second season of excavation and survey at Tell el-cUmeiri, Jordan (fig. 1.1) and vicinity took place between June 18 and August 6, 1987. A team of 118 took part in the interdisciplinary project, which included excavations on the tell, surveys and soundings within a 5 km radius of the tell, processing finds in camp laboratories, and camp logistical activities (figs. 1.2-3).1Once again the objectives of the project focused on detailing cycles of intensification and abatement in settlement and land use at Tell el- cUmeiri and its vicinity. Central to this goal was the study of the food systems employed by the inhabitants through time.2 Implementation of project objectives was accomplished during the 1987 season by expanding excavation areas on the central tell and enlarging the regional survey to five teams, each with discrete objectives.Previous work by the Madaba Plains Project during five seasons of excavation at Tell Hesban in the 1960s and 1970s and one season at Tell el- cUmeiri in 1984 has indicated that a series of five broad cycles of settlement intensification and abatement took place in the frontier region of central Transjordan.3VAN OVERVIEW OF THE 1987 SEASONCycle 1. Prior to the Early Bronze Age, a coherent picture of general regional intensification and abatement in settlement patterns is not available. From time to time, specific sites were settled intensively, such as Neolithic cAin Ghazzal (Rollefson and Simmons 1985) and Chalcolithic Ghassul (North 1960), but broad regional settlement patterns have not yet been documented. Beginning with the Early Bronze Age, however, surveys have shown large increases in inhabited sites (see especially the Hesban survey, Ibach 1987; also our 1984 survey, Geraty, et al. 1986: 125; and, among others, Miller 1979; and MacDonald 1982). Work so far seems to suggest that, with the beginning of the Early Bronze Age, a period of settlement intensification began. The EB III period seems to have been the period when Tell el-cUmeiri (West), the Bronze and Iron Age site, was most extensively settled. Late in the EB III or early EB IV period, the cycle seems to have begun the abatement process with inhabited sites in the region decreasing in quantity and quality, until, by the Middle Bronze Age, very few sites appear to have been occupied. Tell el-cUmeiri (West) was, however, a significant exception.Cycle 2. The period of general abatement in the Madaba Plains region continued through the Late Bronze Age, although Tell el-cUmeiri (West) was still occupied, until the Iron I period when settlements began to increase again. Intensification continued through the Iron II period. A climax seems to have been reached during the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. when many major and minor sites were occupied.Cycle 3. Little is known of the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods, but beginning with late Hellenistic settlements when Rujm Selim (Site 34) flourished, the process of intensification began again, building slowly through the Roman centuries and reaching its greatest extent in the Byzantine era when, next to the Modern period, the region seems to have been most heavily populated. Tell el-cUmeiri (East) was occupied during these periods. The evidence is very strong that there was only a slight abatement during the initial years of Islamic rule, but when the caliphate moved to Baghdad with the Abbasids, the region seems to have been only lightly inhabited.Cycle 4. Perhaps due to the importance of the region to the Islamic reconquest of the Holy Land4AN OVERVIEW OF THE 1987 SEASONFig. 1.3. The 1987 Madaba Plains Project Team.from the Crusaders, settlement again increased during the Ayyubid and Mamluk periods when large numbers of sites, including Tell el-cUmeiri (North), were occupied. Then with Turkish control, intensification ceased and another period of abatement began.Cycle 5. Few settlements seem to have existed in the region until late Ottoman times when cave villages such as that at Tell el-cUmeiri (North), see chapter 15, and fortified farm villages such as Yadudeh, began the fifth cycle of intensification. This intensification has carried on unabated until the present.This 1987 seasonal publication volume is divided into sections as reflected in its title: Tell el-^Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. These sections are briefly described as follows.Tell el-cUmeiri ExcavationsExcavations at Tell el-cUmeiri (supervised by Larry G. Herr) had two goals related to the understanding of cyclic intensification and abatement. 1) The intensification/abatement hypothesis needed to be tested by excavation. This was done initially by the project for cycles 3-5and, to a lesser extent, cycle 2, at Hesban. Tell el-cUmeiri with its Bronze and Iron Age occupation allowed for more detailed study of the earlier cycles. How did a major site reflect the cycles of intensification and abatement? 2) Exceptions to the hypothesis needed to be examined to understand how sites occupied during periods of abatement functioned. Indeed, this was a major reason for the choice of Tell el-cUmeiri for excavation because preliminary surveys had suggested occupation during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages (Ibach 1987), a time when the region was generally in abatement. How did a major site function during periods when sedentary regional support systems were not in evidence?Part two of this volume, Tell el-cUmeiri, presents the results of the 1987 excavations at Tell el-cUmeiri, providing a detailed look at the settlement patterns on the tell during its occupied history.The VicinityThis section includes a discussion of the methodology and results of the hinterland survey supervised by 0ystein S. LaBianca.5AN OVERVIEW OF THE 1987 SEASONThe work of the regional survey during the 1987 season represents, for the most part, a continuation of research begun during the 1984 season. Investigations by the survey staff during the 1987 season involved five projects. A landuse survey, investigating and documenting in greater detail past and present methods of water (Jon A. Cole) and soil management (Douglas W. Schnurrenberger), was conducted. A seasonal site survey, seeking to identify recent and ancient traces of seasonal occupation (including kilns and cave dwellings), was conducted by Gary L. Christopherson and 0ystein S. LaBianca. A permanent site survey, examining and recording in greater detail traces of year-round occupation, was directed by Randall W. Younker. It identified and documented fifty-nine new sites, supplementing the fifty-five sites noted during'the 1984 season. A hinterland excavation (Lorita E. Hubbard) concentrated on survey Site 34 (Rujm Selim), ca.2.0 km north of the main tell. A fifth project, the random survey conducted by Jon A. Cole, encompassed the data collection strategies of the landuse, seasonal and permanent settlement surveys localized within random squares.These multiple surveys represent a development in the practices of the 1984 season. Each was designed to solve a problem explicitly related to the task of reconstructing food system cycles within the area of Ammonite influence. Whereas the 1984 seasonal settlement survey was concerned with how people survived under low intensity food system conditions, the addition of a permanent settlement survey in 1987 addressed theissue of how people lived under higher levels of food system intensity. Furthermore, the 1987 survey benefited from enhanced versions of the techniques developed during the previous season. To varying degrees, these techniques of random, aerial, judgmental, environmental, and ethnographic survey were used by each of the survey teams described above to accomplish their objectives.Subsequent StudiesPart four of this report includes consideration of three objects recovered during the season’s excavations: the seal of Shimcaz (Larry G. Herr), a Thutmosid scarab seal impression (Donald B. Redford), and a bronze Ptolemaic coin (James E. Miller). With the purpose of illuminating the ceramic culture of die region, additional studies are included concerning Early Bronze and Late Iron Age ceramic technology (Gloria A. London), potters in Jordan (Gloria A. London and Marlene Sinclair), and petrographic analysis of pottery from Tell el-cUmeiri and vicinity (Gloria A. London, Heather Plint, and Jennifer Smith).AppendicesAppendices include detailed locus sheets of the 1987 season’s work provided in appendix A by R. William Cash and Warren C. Trenchard. Specialist reports, collated by R. William Cash and Randall W. Younker, are in appendix B.NOTES1The authors of this report are indebted to each member of the Madaba Plains Project staff who helped to make possible the collection of the data presented herein. The field season, June 18 to August 6, 1987, took place primarily through Andrews University in consort with Atlantic Union College, Canadian Union College, and Southwestern Adventist College.Field adminstration was divided into four sections: excavation, regional survey, analytical laboratories, and camp logistics. Responsible for planning and overall execution of the field season were Lawrence T. Geraty, Larry G. Herr, and 0ystein S. LaBianca, co-directors of the Madaba Plains Project.Larry G. Herr supervised the excavation staff which excavated six Fields on the tell, and one at survey Site 34 (Rujm Selim) ca. 2.0 km to the north. Each Field on the tell utilized one local workman per square. Field supervisor for Field A, the Ammonite Citadel, was John I. Lawlor with square supervisors Nicholas Kronwall, Desmond Potts, Thomas Potts, and Nazmiyeh Rida, assisted by volunteers James Byers, Charles M. Castleberg, Monique Escamilla, Sharon Penley, Malcom Potts, Steven Russell, James Sawtell, and Dena Zook. Field B, the Western Defensive System, was supervised by Douglas R. Clark with square supervisors Gillian Geraty, Gary Kent, David Merling, and Gotthard Rheinhold with volunteers Hans-Dieter Bienert, Caroline Cameron, Rafael Figueroa, Vanessa Martin, Kevin Nelson, Nora Peppers, C. Erwin Syphers, and Janelle Willis. Field supervisor for Field C, the Northern Slope, was James R. Battenfield assisted by square supervisor Taleb Smadi with volunteers Linda Paustian and Sandra Smith. Field D, the Lower Southern Terrace,was supervised by P. M. Michele Daviau assisted by square supervisors Timothy Harrison, George McCourt, Marilyn Murray and Katrina Rounsefell with volunteers Wallace Amundson, Bonnie Battenfield, Randall Clark, Lynda DuPreez, Ron DuPreez, John Giddings, Carla Jones, Zlatko Kanacki, Kimberly Murray, Warren Ruf, Lynn Smith, and Charles Urquhart. James R. Battenfield also supervised Field E, the Water System, assisted by square supervisors Curtis Cherry and Bryce Cole with volunteers Boguslav Dabrowski, Jeff Fisher, Jonathan Fisher, Tracy Wilmott, Kim Wilhite, and Nathaniel Yen. Field supervisor for Field F, the Eastern Shelf, was Russanne L-ow assisted by square supervisors Wendell Buck, James Fisher, Denise D. Herr, and Katariina Mantyneimi with volunteers Jon Asgeirsson, Nina Asgeirsson, Alessandro Bruno, Ann Fisher, Brent Geraty, Thomas Wehtje, and Wiley Young. Field supervisor for Site 34, Rujm Selim, was Lorita E. Hubbard assisted by square supervisors James Miller, Todd Sanders and Lloyd Willis. Also participating were volunteers Kristy Hansen, Tamara Hoffer, Julio Juarez, Doris Strawn, and Ronda Westman. Glenn E. Johnson led the drafting team including Ronald Haznedl and Carlene Johnson.0ystein S. LaBianca directed the regional survey. Field supervisors for the major survey operations were Gary L. Christopherson, Jon W. Cole, and Randall W. Younker. They were assisted by Dorothy Irvin (ethnographer), John Lee (lithicist), Douglas W. Schnurrenberger (geologist), along with volunteers Judy K. Christianson, Howard P. Krug, Raymond Pelto, John E. Podgore, Rhonda Sandic, and Anthony C. Squier. Translator for the survey team was Naji Tannous.6AAN OVERVIEW OF THE 1987 SEASONSeparate processing stations and procedures were established to facilitate identification, documentation, and conservation of pottery, objects, flints, skeletal remains, animal and plant remains, ethnobotanical samples, geological samples, and other artifacts. A work station was provided for the regional survey team where maps and aerial photographs could be examined in preparation prior to fieldwork. Pottery processing included locations where sherds were washed, read, counted, registered, technologically analyzed, mended, drawn, photographed, and further analyzed as needed. Pottery Registrar was Mary Ellen Lawlor, assisted by Kathleen E. Mallak, Nancy Lawlor, and Renee Lawlor. Ceramic technological studies were conducted by Gloria A. London assisted by Marlene Sinclair. Pottery washing was organized by Vanessa R. Martin.Processing of small finds was the responsibility of the object registrar Elizabeth E. Platt, assisted by Karis Lawlor. This station included the cleaning, identifying, registering, drawing, photographing, and conserving of artifacts. Peter D. Erhard, Monique Escamilla and Alessandro Bruno served as artists.Randall W. Younker supervised the ecological laboratory (eco- lab) which included separate processing stations each with its own equipment (scales and microscopes) for processing flotation samples, human and animal osteological remains, ethnobotanical samples, earth and rock samples, flint chips and artifacts. Preliminary flotation identifications were made by Russanne Low with volunteers Ramona Hubbard, Sandra L. Penley and Phyllis Richards. Charles M. Castleberg cleaned the bones. Douglas W. Schnurrenberger and George H. McCourt processed the geological samples. Flint remains were analyzed by Peter Sheppard.Field identifications resulting from each of these processing operations were compiled and integrated into the stratigraphic recordsby a computer system assembled and programmed by James K. Brower, who also entered the field data on a weekly basis, providing checks to the recording procedures of each supervisor.A darkroom for processing and developing film was located at headquarters. The photography team was headed by Larry W. Coyle, assisted by Judy K. Christiansen, Tamara Hoffer, Rhonda Sandic, Anthony C. Squier, Thor Storljell, and C. Erwin Syphers.Daily logistic needs of the staff were supervised by Lawrence T. Geraty, and camp staff: J. Bjomar Storfjell and Wallace Amundson (part-time administrative directors), Drs. C. Erwin Syphers and James Byers (physicians), Ted Pottle (head cook), Ramona Hubbard, Ann Syphers, and Mary Ziemke (assistant cooks). In addition many volunteers also helped with the kitchen work (especially Sandra L. Penley, Phyllis Richards, and Doris Strawm). Ray Pelto served as handyman. Lloyd Willis was camp chaplain. Nora A. Peppers and Rafael Figueroa produced a series of video presentations about the dig.At the conclusion of the 1987 field season, diagnostic sherds, bones, and flints were either released to the Department of Antiquities, stored in stackable crates along with the rest of the project’s equipment, or shipped to North America for further analysis. Of the items shipped to North America, publishable pottery is temporarily housed at Canadian Union College until the project is completed at which time they will be permanently stored along with the small objects already stored in the Siegfried H. Horn Archaeological Museum at Andrews University.2For a full discussion of the theoretical framework for the project, its history, and previous work done in the region, see Geraty, et al. 1989.REFERENCESGeraty, L. T., et al.1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-144.' 1989 Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tellel-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Ibach, R.1987 Archaeological Survey o f the Hesban Region: Catalogue o f Sites and Characterization o f Periods. Hesban 5. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology and Andrews University.MacDonald, B.1982 The Wadi el-Hasa Survey 1979 and Previous Archaeological Work in Southern Jordan. Bulletin of the American Schools o f Oriental Research 245: 35-52.Miller, J.1979 Archaeological Survey of Central Moab, 1978.Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 234: 43-52.North, R.1960 Ghassul 1960. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.RoIIefson, G. and Simmons, A.1985 The Early Neolithic Village of cAin Ghazal, Jordan: Preliminary Report of the 1983 Season. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 23: 35-52.7CHAPTER 2Organization o f Excavation and Summary o f Results on the TellLarry G. Herr Canadian Union CollegeIntroductionThe methods of excavation and record keeping this season were virtually identical to those used in 1984 (Herr 1989a). The greatest change was in the method of computer data entry: once each week, supervisors submitted their locus sheets to the data processor who entered them during the afternoon and night, printing sheets with the new data on them in time for work the next morning. Each of the six Fields of excavation had its own day for submitting locus sheets.Not only did new work take place in each of the four Fields begun last season, but two additional Fields were opened (figs. 2.1., 2.2., and 2.3). The locations of the new Fields were again determined by reference to the random surface survey completed at the beginning of the 1984 season (Herr 1989b) and an analysis of the topographic features of the site.Field A, at the western edge of the acropolis, was expanded by adding four new Squares to the ' north of the 1984 location. The two northern Squares enabled the expanded Field A to connect with the eastern extension of Field B.Field B, located on the western slope of the site, abandoned the checkerboard pattern of Squares in 1984. One previously opened Square was continued, while a new Square was opened at the bottom of the slope and two more wereexcavated at the top, giving a total of eight Squares so far opened. This formed a linear sounding of the fortification system. The upper two Squares connected with Field A.Field C, on the northern slope of the site, was excavated to bedrock in four of the five Squares in 1984. This season bedrock was reached in places in the remaining Square (the northern Square in fig. 2.2).Field D, on the lower southern terrace, was expanded by adding four Squares to the north of the 1984 location (see especially fig. 2.3).Field E was a new Field opened to examine the structures associated with the water source at the bottom of the north slope. Two Squares were placed adjacent to the western side of the modern structure.Field F was another new Field located on the eastern edge of the acropolis where a depression marked what appears to have been an entrance into the ancient city. After the four original Squares were begun, a fifth was partially opened on the south.Settlement Patterns at Tell el-cUmeiriChapter 1 has described the cyclical settlement pattern in our region. Tell el- Umeiri (West)8tORGANIZATION OF EXCAVATION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON THE TELLFig. 2.1. Topographic map of Tell el-cUmeiri with the location of the 1987 Fields of excavation.9LARRY HERRORGANIZATION OF EXCAVATION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON THE TELLthe end of significant occupation at the site. -However, the economic and social strategies of the inhabitants do not seem to have followed the same pattern of degeneration, judging from the results of our excavations and from the assemblages of artifacts. Indeed, the greatest prosperity and highest degree • of job specialization probably occurred while the site was near its smallest size during Late Iron II.The following discussion is a synthesis of the data discovered o n ' the tell during the past two seasons of excavation seen in the light of the cyclic pattern of regional history outlined in chapter 1.Regional Cycle 1Fig.'2.2. Aerial view of Tell el-°Umeiri from the north. Field E is below the curving modemroad. The divided highway on the left is the Queen Alia International Airport Highway. . First intensification (EB III).The largest settlement at the site was occupied by. urban settlements during Cycles seems to have occurred during EB III. Domestic1 and 2 Only, but indications, of no'n-occupational structures from this period have been found onactivities from the other cycles have been both the northern and southern slopes (Fields Cuncovered. The evidence so far unearthed through and D, respectively), while pottery was found onthe 1984 random surface survey and two seasons the western shelf during the ; random surfaceof excavation suggests a steadily shrinking survey (Herr 1989b). The settlement thus coveredsettlement. From a maximum size in EB III, near . \ ca. 4.25 hectares. It is not known whether or notthe beginning of occupation at the site, each the settlement was fortified,subsequent settlement gradually diminished in size Although EB I I I . seems to have been theto a minimum during the Early Persian period at earliest date for occupation on the northern andsouthern slopes,- initial settlers of the site (most likely attracted by the water source at the base of the site) may have arrived somewhat earlier, first settling on top of the hill and only later extending down the slopes as the settlement grew. However, based on pottery found in secondary deposits, settlement probably did ( not begin earlier than EB II.The finds from Field D on the southern slope suggest moderately successful living strategies. A series of beaten-earth surfaces were used in several phases of a multi-roomed domestic complex whose plan changed through time. Many shallow surfaces, one laid on top of the i other apparently in rapid succession, indicated that changes were frequently made to the complex. On those surfaces were finds reflecting agricultural activities, such as Fig. 2 .3 . Aerial view of Tcii ei-'Umeiri from the southeast. 1 mortars and grinders for grain,10ORGANIZATION OF EXCAVATION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON THE TELLpithoi for storage (one contained over four thousand chick peas), and flint knapping. Hearths reflected cooking activities in the courtyard, and several sizes of spindle whorls suggested a variety of textile products. Although less well preserved, the remains in Field C on the northern slope (primarily excavated in 1984) suggested' similar conclusions. The remains from Tell el-cUmeiri thus reflect the regional intensification in settlement strategies during the Early Bronze Age.First abatement. Above the EB III remains, two phases of buildings dated to Late EB III were uncovered during 1984 in Field D and were mistakenly attributed to EB IV in Madaba Plains Project 1 (Mitchel 1989). The earliest phase consisted of two single-room dwellings, each with a single pillar supporting the roof. Beaten-earth surfaces inside the houses were ca. 0.30 m lower than the outside exposure surface and very few finds were made on them, except for a mortar in one house. The lack of well-trodden exterior surfaces and the large space between the houses (ca. 5.00 m) with no intervening out-buildings suggests a sparsely settled village in decline. The size of this settlement is unknown, but may have included the same area as the EB III town (ca. 4.25 hectares).Only foundations from the latest EB III settlement have been found. The walls were very narrow, made primarily of small, round cobbles with large spaces filled by mud mortar. The walls seem to have been too flimsy to support a significant superstructure and may have been nothing more than animal pens. There is reason, therefore, to suggest that the Late EB III finds represent a gradual transition from agriculture in EB III toward pastoral activities. Thus, the abatement process at the site seems to have included not only fewer inhabitants, but a shift in major economic and social strategies. It is, indeed, possible that at least the last phase in Field D represented seasonal occupation.The EB III abatement process at Tell el- cUmeiri thus generally reflects the regional abatement which occurred at the end of the Early Bronze Age. The evidence suggests, however, that the process was gradual.Second intensification (MB II). Although the rest of central Transjordan largely remained in an abated state throughout the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, Tell el-cUmeiri received new settlement impetus after a gap in EB IV.Middle Bronze II remains have been found on every part of the site, except the southern slope in Field D (for a total size of ca. 3.40 hectares). However, the new settlement was of a completely different nature than those of EB III. There is evidence that massive fortifications wereconstructed (at least around the acropolis and eastern shelf) and trade with other regions was suggested by a piece of Tell el-Yahudiyeh ware and obsidian fragments. It would thus seem that the site was refounded by a people with developed sedentary strategies.Unfortunately, at present only pieces of this period of occupation have been found. Stone wall fragments along with beaten-earth and cobbled surfaces from domestic structures were found in Field C on the northern slope. Here too, a complete bronze needle suggested textile activities.The date for the founding of the Middle Bronze settlement has not yet been established. A few potsherds found in later deposits seem to suggest an MB IIA corpus, but most of the pottery, including that from the earliest fragmentary surfaces in Field C, suggested MB IIC. It is possible that the site was refounded in MB IIA on top of the mound and slowly expanded outside the walls and down the slope only in MB IIC. The pottery also suggests that the Middle Bronze settlement may have lasted slightly into LB I.Partial abatement (Late Bronze). Again, Tell el-cUmeiri was an exception to general regional settlement patterns by continuing through the Late Bronze Age, but at a considerably reduced size. No Late Bronze remains have been found on the western shelf and extra-urban activities were suggested by the remains in Field C on the northern slope, whereas both areas were inhabited in the Middle Bronze occupation. The settlement had thus diminished to include only the acropolis and eastern shelf (ca. 1.53 hectares). In Field C a part of a terrace wall was found with Late Bronze pottery, indicating the area was then used most likely for agriculture. A biconical jug from LB II was found in Field B at the western edge of the acropolis in a secondary deposit.Regional Cycle 2Intensification (Iron I). In Field C a small addition that included Early Iron I pottery was made to the terrace wall suggesting a minimum of change during the Late Bronze/Iron I transition. Other deposits with Early Iron I pottery were found in Field B at the western edge of the acropolis. Again, the settlement seems to have been no larger than the acropolis and eastern shelf (ca. 1.53 hectares).However, settlement intensification is suggested by the construction of a casemate fortification system in this period. Excavation in Field B has uncovered both the outer and inner walls as well as two cross walls. Running up to the outer wall was a beaten-earth rampart {glacis) laid in layers corresponding to the stone courses in thei tORGANIZATION OF EXCAVATION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON THE TELLouter wall, strongly suggesting that the purpose of the rampart was to support the wall. The founding levels have not yet been reached, but indications are that it was constructed late in Iron I.Inside the wall, domestic architectural fragments were found in Fields A, B, and F (the latter on the eastern shelf), but were too small to indicate the economic and social nature of the settlement. The casemate fortifications, however, suggest significant civic or governmental concerns. Tell el-cUmeiri thus reflects the regional intensification pattern. Although the site did not grow in size, it appears to have intensified economically.Continued intensification (Iron II). The inner wall of the casemate fortification system apparently soon went out of use, giving way to a domestic storeroom at right angles to the outer wall during Early Iron II. The outer wall and the rampart continued in use, however. In Field F very hard beaten-earth surfaces and a wall fragment, probably domestic, were found. The settlement still did not grow outside the Late Bronze and Iron I limits.With the seventh century B.C., the process of change at the site took a significant turn when the settlement seems to have been reduced in size.Excavation in Field F on the eastern shelf produced what appears to be an outer bastion to a gate complex in a wall that seems to have enclosed only the acropolis. This wall, which excluded the eastern shelf for the first time in the history of the tell, shrank the settlement yet more to ca. 1.17 hectares. East of the bastion on the eastern shelf, no in situ remains from Late Iron II were found above the Early Iron II surfaces. Although this would appear to belie that intensification was taking place at the site, a major construction project occurred at the western edge of the acropolis at this time that can only be interpreted as economic and social intensification.Two seasons of excavation in Field A have uncovered large foundations to what we have called the "Ammonite Citadel." The builders first excavated down through Early Iron II and Iron I strata for basement foundations. There they laid the basement walls of the structure in a plan which seems to suggest in part an adapted four- room house similar to that of the citadel in Area B at Hazor, though much smaller. The seal impression of the servant of Baclyashac was found here in 1984, suggesting the structure was used in governmental activities. The settlement, althoughWtt Period Field A Field B Field C Field D Field E Field1 EB FP 10 FP 102 EB III FP 9 FP 93 EB III FP 8 FP 84 EB III FP 75 EB III FP 6B6 EB III FP 6A7 EB III FP 7 FP 58 EB III FP 49 MB II FP 10? FP 610 MB II FP 511 LB/Iron I FP 412 Iron I FP 5 FP 9 FP 713 Iron 1/Elron II FP 814 Elron II FP 715 LIron II FP 4B FP 6 FP 3 FP 5 FP 616 LIron II FP 4A FP 5 FP 517 LIron 11/EPersian FP 3B FP 4 FP 2 FP 4 FP 418 LIron 11/EPersian FP 3A FP 319 EPersian FP 2 FP 2 FP 320 Post-EPersian FP 3 FP 321 Byzantine FP 2 FP 2 FP 222 LOttoman FP 1 FP 1 FP 1 FP 1 FP 123 Modern FP 1Fig. 2.4. Integrated Phases by period and field.12ORGANIZATION OF EXCAVATION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON THE TELLat its smallest size, seems now to have taken on a highly specialized social (political) function reflecting the activities of a centralized government.Domestic occupation was suggested by a portion of a pillared house next to die "citadel." The great quantities and high quality of small finds from this period suggest that, in spite of its small size, this was the most prosperous settlement so far encountered at the site. The intensification process was thus still occurring. It is possible that the reduction in settlement size occurred when part of the population moved to nearby Tell Jawa, which seems to have been founded at this time (based on the results of our 1984 survey [Boling 1989]). Thus the tell, though small in size, reflects the increasing sophistication or intensification, common to central Transjordan.Abatement (Early Persian). The Ammonite Citadel in Field A was rebuilt with a reduction in both size and quality of construction, probably at the end of the sixth century or early fifth century B.C. (an Attic sherd was found beneath the floor). The lack of well-defined surfaces suggests that this citadel did not last long. Still later, after the citadel and the neighboring pillared house were destroyed, a small plastered pool with steps leading to its bottom was constructed into the ruins of the house. Only fragments of the surfaces that went with the pool were preserved.In Field F the gate bastion went out of use and was replaced by a series of pits and ephemeral terrace walls, suggesting that the acropolis was now functioning in a considerably abated state with no governmental activities and a minimum of domestic habitations as well. The pottery from the pool and the terraces was Early Persian. The abatement in settlement at Tell el- cUmeiri during Cycle 2 was, like that of Cycle 1, a relatively gradual process.The site was never settled again in any significant way. When regional intensification began again in Cycle 3 (Late Hellenistic) a new settlement was probably begun at Tell el-cUmeiri (East). Our site, Tell el-cUmeiri (West), was apparently used agriculturally, because Roman pottery has been found in small numbers in topsoil. In the Byzantine period, a small farm may have been built near Field F, where wall fragments and Byzantine pottery (especially a type of basin) have been found. Two sherds found in topsoil may indicate that farmers during the Ayyubid/Mamluk period seem to have used the site for agricultural activities.Stratigraphic Summary of the 1984 and 1987SeasonsThe stratigraphy of each Field in the reportswhich follow is broken down into "Field Phases" numbered from top to bottom. Each Field Phase (FP) is a coherent Field-wide stratigraphic unit reflecting a single phase of architectural and activity patterns. (The various stylistic uses of "FP" intext is in accordance with the convention adopted by the MPP directors). When the phasing from all Fields is combined, a total of twenty- three "Integrated" Phases (IP) stretching from the Early Bronze Age until modern times results (fig.2.4).However, it must be emphasized that this stratification reflects data collected only through the excavations of the 1987 season. Future excavations will undoubtedly modify the picture. Not only will more phases most likely be isolated adding to the total, but many connections must at present remain tentative. Connections between Fields C and D in the EB III phases have been established only on the basis of sequence and ceramic assemblages. Although connections are relatively secure between adjacent Fields A and B, the Iron Age phases in those Fields have been connected with Fields E and F only on the basis of ceramic assemblages and similarities in the types of structures and associated activity patterns. The IP numbers therefore, are "working" numbers and will be subject to change in subsequent reports.The Field ReportsIn the field reports which follow, a number of conventions should be explained. The list of loci, which appears at the head of each FP discussion, enumerates all loci associated with that phase, including those reused from earlier phases. On the phase plans, architectural features, installations, surfaces (with levels above sea level), and some objects are located. Although discussed in text, other loci are not included.Sequence charts which are provided for each field report represent an adaptation of the Harris matrix. They are intended to illustrate only the sequence of construction or deposition. Other relationships between the loci are mentioned in the text. On the sequence charts, some locus numbers appear with letters: "W" indicates a "wall," "I" indicates an "installation," "S" indicates a "surface," and no letter indicates an earth layer. Vertical lines are usually associated with walls and show how long they lasted.Each pottery plate is followed by a table of pottery descriptions with an entry for each item illustrated on the corresponding plate. The data in these tables are encoded. The following is an explanation of those codes.13ORGANIZATION OF EXCAVATION AND SUMMARY OF RESULTS ON THE TELLA. Colors—Munsell (number and verbal)B. Non-plasticsI. Type: L—lithic S-strawP—potteryII. Size: 7—granule (4.0 mm)6—very coarse sand (2.0 mm) 5—coarse sand (1.0 mm)4—medium sand (0.5 mm)3—fine sand (0.25 mm)2—very fine sand (0.125 mm) 1—silt (0.06 mm)A—0 - 39%B—40 - 69%C—70 - 89%D—90-100%III. Shape: A—angular A—0-39%S A—sub-angular B—40-69%SR—sub-round C—70-89%R-round D—90-100%IV. Density: H-high (<30%)MH-medium high (25%-30%) M—medium (15%-25%)L-low (7%-15%)VL—very low (>7%)C. VoidsFS—fissure simple FC—fissure complex PR—pit round PA—pit angular JR—join rim JH—join handle JB—join base JD—join decorationD. ManufactureW—wheel H—hand C—coil P—pinch7—granule A—0-39%6—very coarse B—40-69% 5—coarse C—70-89%4—medium D—90-100%3—fine 2—very fine 1—siltPD—paddle S—slab M—moldE. Surface TreatmentS—slip•WB—wheel burnish HB—hand burnish VB—vertical burnish DB—design burnish Sm—smoothing Ca—carbonF. DecorationIn—incisingAp—appliqueIF—impression (finger)IT—impression (tool)IM—impression (mold)Pa—paintRo—roulettingRi-ridgingPu—punctureCo—combingGr—groovingGB—gray burnishDB—design burnishMo—moldingCa—carbonGl—glazingBB—black burnishL—light + —more thanI—medium one sherd[—heavy R—rimN—neck Sh—shoulder Bo—body Ba—base-I—more than one sherdR—rimN—neckSh—shoulderBo—bodyCa—carinationBa—baseG. FiringU—underfired (core present)O—oxidation (pink)R—reduction (gray)V—vitrification (green or glassy)AcknowledgementsRegarding the pottery plates and ware descriptions in the chapters that follow, thanks must go to several students at Canadian Union College for their help in presenting the pottery.The sherds were drawn and inked by Sheila Spenst and Ken Lubell under my guidance, while the ware descriptions were done by Marlene Sinclair (a potter from Airdrie, Alberta), Dale McMullen, and Lauralee Cotton.REFERENCESBoling, R. G.1989 Site Survey in the el-cUmeiri Region. Pp. 98-188 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Herr, L. G.1989a Organization and Procedures of Excavation. Pp. 213- 215 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/institute of Archaeology.1989b The Random Surface Survey. Pp. 216-232 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/institute of Archaeology.Mitchel, L. A.1989 Field D: The Lower Southern Terrace. Pp. 282-295 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, Ml: Andrews University/institute of Archaeology.14CHAPTER 3Field A: The Ammonite CitadelJohn I. Lawlor Baptist Bible SeminaryIntroductionField A, situated at the western edge of the II phases found in 1984, extended northward atacropolis (fig. 3.1), was initially opened in 1984 least an additional nine meters. While no evidenceto investigate a hypothesized city gate (figs. 2.1, of the two ephemeral phases of the first season2.2, and 2.3). Although the presence of a city (FPs 1A and 2A) was encountered in the four newgate was not confirmed, the first season’s work Squares of Field A, both the stratigraphic andestablished the existence of two major Late Iron II architectural data from the new Squares supportedarchitectural phases, each of which was apparently followed by an ephemeral phase.The architecture of the multi-room complex in each of the major phases was such that it strongly suggested an administrative and/or defensive interpretation (the term "citadel" perhaps fits best).In 1987, Field A was expanded to the north to investigate the northern extensions of the citadel complex and to connect with Field B, enabling examination of possible relationships between the citadel and the ' defense system discovered in Field B. The northern expansion of the Field involved the opening of four new Squares (7K60, SW;7K61, SE; 7K70, NW; 7K71, NE).The two northern-most Squares connected with Squares 7K80 and 7K81 in Field B.Excavation demonstrated that the citadel, in both of its Late Iron °f 1116 westcm cdge of ““ acropolis with Fields A (top)15FP17K6112 3 .6 58 7W47K71FP2121510 912131415W17 W1611110 9 6198182021 1l1111213W725W24S17 S9 S20 S1823246141922S10 11 132728 293132332678 259S20 118 S12FP4BW19W4 W21 W22W11S34W5 W3 115 130 121 W2 W3FP5I 16 1 II W10 I W13 W14Fig. 3.2. Field A: Stratigraphic sequence chart of lociFIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELFIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELthe existence of the two major phases, as well as one earlier and two later phases. The stratigraphy of Field A was thus expanded from two major Late Iron II phases (each followed by an ephemeral phase), to a total of four major phases and three subphases, extending from Iron I to Early Persian (fig. 3.2). In the report to follow, the FPs assigned in 1984 have been corrected to 1987 designations.Field Phase 5 (fig. 3.3)Loci: 7K60:10 7K60:13 7K60:14 7K60:16WallWallWallEarth LayerField Phase 5 was attested only in Square 7K60. Wall 7K60:13, excavated to a depth of five courses (ca. 1.00 m), extended out of the west balk at approximately a 20° orientation. To the east, only Wall 7K6Q:14 (ca. 1.20 m long) remained after being cut by the builders of FP-4B Wall 7K60:4 (see fig. 3.5, below). This two-row wall (ca. 0.80 m wide), six-to-seven courses of which were exposed to a depth of ca. 1.50 m, was oriented approximately 112°-115°. Together Walls 7K60:13 and 7K60:14 created a doorway ca. 0.60 m wide between rooms to the north and south. The jamb of Wall 7K60:14 consisted of alternating headers and stretchers of roughly hewn blocks. Earth Layer 7K60:16, initially encountered south of the doorway, sealed against the south face of Wall 7K60:14. Passing through the doorway, it sealed against both the east face of Wall 7K60:13 and the jamb of Wall 7K60:14 and continuedFig. 3.3. Field A: Plan of FP 5.northward into the balk. Analysis of the ceramic remains from this earth layer dates it to the Iron I period (fig. 3.4). The founding courses of neither wall were reached, thus making a precise dating of the walls and doorway impossible at this point, except to say that they were built during or before the Iron I period.Wall 7K60:10 was a three-row wall which abutted the north face of Wall 7K60:14. It was ca.1.50 m long when it entered the north balk, but no sign of it was found in the adjoining Square. While it may have been associated with Wall 7K60:14 in the Iron I period, there was insufficient evidence to date the wall securely.These fragments of Iron I occupation were found west of Wall 7K60:3, a FP-3B retaining wall located at the extreme western edge of the acropolis. Our working hypothesis suggests that in order to construct the Late Iron II citadel, a large foundation area was dug into the Iron I and Early Iron II levels, the debris was dumped over the western edge of the acropolis on top of the rampart found in Field B (possibly accounting for the Iron I debris layers there), and only then were the foundations for the citadel laid.Field Phase 4B (FP 2B of 1984) (figs. 3.5 and3.6)7K60:4 Wall (=7K61:3)7K60:11 Wall7K60:19 Wall7K60:21 Wall (=7K61:5)7K60:22 Wall (=7K61:2)7K61:2 Wall (=7K60:22)7K61:3 Wall (=7K60:4)7K61:5 Wall (=7K60:21)7K61:15 Pier7K61:16 Wall7K61:17 Wall (=7K71:3)7K61:21 Pier7K61:30 Stairway7K61.-34 Surface7K70:17 Wall7K71:3 Wall (=7K61:17)7K71:14 Pillar7K71:15 PillarA series of five rooms was proposed for the four Squares excavated in 1984. While no additional observations have been made concerning Rooms 3, 5, and 6, additional data were recovered regarding Rooms 2 and 4. Moreover, the discovery of two more rooms to the north indicated that the FP-4B citadel was composed of at least six and probably seven, rooms (Rooms 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and the unnumbered room east of Room 3).17FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL1(A XNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 7K60 16 50 1 5YR7/4 25YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 6A R M FC4A W RiR u oPink Gray • Light 6A R FS4AReddish 6A R PR3ABrown 6A R2 Jug 7K60 16 51 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/3 5YR7/4 L 6A R MH PR5A W . . . . RiR VOPink Pink Pink- 6A A FS5A5A A FS4A5A R PR3A4A SA3A SA3 Jug 7K60 16 53 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR4/0 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R M FC5A w SL 5YR7/3 _ 2.5YR Pa: u oLight Dark Light 4A SR FS5A Pink 6/6 2.5YR4/4Red Gray Red 3A SA PA3A Light2A SR Red4 Flask 7K60 16 53 5 5YR7/3 . 7.5YR4/0 L 6A SR M FC5A H . . . • . . uoPink Dark 5A SA PA3AGray 3A SR .5 Bowl? 7K60 16 53 4 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 2.5YR6/4 L 5A A L FS5A W SL 5YR8/2 SL 5YR8/2 RiR uoLight Gray Light 4A SA PR3A R + Pinkish R + PinkishReddish Reddish White WhiteBrown Brown6 Platter 7K60 16 51 2 5YR5/1 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M PR5A W . . _ _ VRGray Gray 3A SA PR3A2A SA7 Cook Pot 7K60 16 53 l 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 6A R MH FS6A W . . . _ . VRLight . Gray Light 6A SR PR5AReddish Reddish 5A SA PR4ABrown Brown 5A SRI3A SR2A SR8 Jug 7K60 12 43 1 2.5YR6/6 10R6/1 2.5YR6/6 L 7A SAC M FS7A W SMR 2.5Y8/2 . . . RLight Reddish Light 6A SRA FS6B Ba WhiteRed Gray Red 5A4A3A2A______________________________________________ 1A_Fig. 3.4. Field A: Pottery descriptions and pottery from FP 5.18□ 4Bm 4a1 2MGJJILLGHSECTION OF 7K6T 30Fig. 3.5. Field A: Plan of FP 4B and FP 4A.FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL19FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELU H / - >■- w * • JApparently the northern remains were constructed in a modified four- room house plan, much like the Hazor Citadel of Stratum V in Area B (Yadin 1972: 188) and theNorthwest Tower at Tell Beit Mirsim (Albright 1975: 176), but smaller than both. Rooms 3, 4, and 7 were the three parallel longrooms, while Room 2 could be considered the perpendicular longroom.Because the overall size was similar to most domestic four-room houses, it may be that this northern building was the house of a , well-to-do family, living next to the citadel on the south, where the thick, monumental walls were located.Room 2 appears to have measured ca. 6.50 x 2.50 m. Wall 7X50:4B (=7K60:21, = 7X61:5,hereafter: 7K50:4B) is a two-row wall (ca. 5.00 m) which has been exposed to date for three to five courses (ca. 0.90-1.50 m). It formed the eastern boundary of the room and bonded with Wall 7K60:4 (=7X61:3) hereafter: 7K60:4), which served as the northern limit. Wall 7X60:19 ca. 0.35 m wide and ca. 1.60 m long, of which only two courses have been revealed so far, was found to abut the south face of Wall 7K60:4. It appears to have constituted the western wall of Room 2 by continuing south beneath the present level of excavation. Excavation in ; 7X60 stopped nearly one meter above the level of the corresponding surface reached in Square 7K50 during the previous season, so no surface equalling 7X50:14 was reached.To the east, Room 4 was initially reported to have been bounded on the north by Wall 7K51:5, a well-built wall which abutted the east face o f Wall 7K50:4B (see fig. 3.8, below). The discovery of the bonded corner of Wall 7K50:4B with Wall 7X60:4 suggested that initially Room 4 was nearly 4.00 m wide during FP 4B and that Wall 7K51:5 represented a later division of the room, perhaps during FP 3B. But because no FP 4B surface associated with these walls has yet been found, this cannot be confirmed at present.Situated to the north of Room 2 and Room 4 was Room 7. The components making up, and associated with, this room constituted one of the more coherent features of the FP-4B complex. Wall 7X60:4 formed the southern wall of this room which measured ca. 7.50 x 1.50 m. The northern extent of the room was set by Wall 7X61:2 (=7X60:22, hereafter: 7X61:2), which bonded with the western wall of the room, Wall1 r ■ . -V '- \ , v ,' v - • t-!v r:a\ T V V , ■ / r ■ •'X& -Jj t i l*Fig. 3.6. Field A: Northern end of the Ammonite Citadel (cf. figs. 3.5 and 3.8).7K60:11, a two-meter long wall oriented at 20°. The exact relationship of Wall 7K60:11 to Wall 7K60:4 was undetermined. Wall 7K60:11 was excavated to a depth of only two courses (ca. 0.50 m), but it appears to have abutted the north face of Wall 7K60:4.Stairway 7K61:30 was found to bond into the south face of Wall 7K61:2 one course below the top preserved course of the wall where Wall 7K61:2 entered the east balk. This provided access into Room 7 from above (fig. 3.7). It is possible that the preserved top of Wall 7K61:2, where relatively flat stones occurred, served as the threshold for this stairway.This one-meter wide stairway consisted of a , series of six narrow, irregular steps, ranging from about 0.17-0.34 m in height. The stairway was flanked by two installations: hewn piers carved in rough L shapes (7K61:15 and 7K61:21) creating a doorway ca. 0.50 m wide to the west into Room 7 and to the east into a (projected) similar room. At the foot of the stairway lay Surface 7K61:34, a platform made of large cobble-sized stones, whose western limit was approximately even with the western face of Pier. 7K61:15. No corresponding surface was found to the west, suggesting that Surface 7K61:34 was above the surface of the room. Excavation, however, did not proceed below this level. The bonded construction of Wall 7K61:2, Piers 7K61:15 and--7X61:21, Stairway 7X61:30, and Surface 7X61:34 indicated that these components comprised one contemporary feature.The discovery of this stairway may also serve as a clue to the overall interpretation of the20FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL \Fig. 3.7. Field A: Field Phase 4B stairway in 7K61.architectural remains of FP 4B. The existence of a stairway indicates a two-story construction; it is the present working hypothesis, therefore, that these rooms constituted the basement of the citadel, the superstructure of which is gone.North of Room 7, two north-south walls (oriented at 22°-25°) outlined Room 8! Two-row, boulder-and-chink Wall 7K70:17 was exposed for a length of ca. 2.85 m to a depth of two courses (ca. 0.60 m). Wall 7K70:17 does not seem to have been a continuation of Wall 7K60:11. Wall 7K70:17’s west face was offset to the west by nearly 0.40 m, and the two walls did not seem either to abut or bond together. The northern end of Wall 7K70:17 appears to have been destroyed when FP 2-Pool 7K70:11 was built (see fig. 3.18, below). Wall 7K71:3 (=7K61:17, hereafter:7K71:3) ran parallel to Wall 7K70:17, ca. 3.10 m to the east. This boulder-and-chink wall was exposed for a length of ca. 4.10 m to a depth of three courses (ca. 1.20 m). This wall did not abut the north face of Wall 7K61:2 during FP 4B, but stopped ca. 0.90 m short of it, creating an entrance into Room 8 from the east. The north end of Wall 7K71:3 also appears to have been destroyed by the FP-2 Pit 7K71:11. Two monolithic pillars were found in the center of the room in a line parallel to the two walls (7K71:14 and 7K71:15).In Room 11 to the east of Wall 7K71:3, a small, one-row wall in an L shape (7K61:16) was found next to Wall 7K60:22 (= 7K61:2). Because Room 11 has not been excavated below the FP-3B surface, neither the founding level nor function of this wall is known. One may speculate that it waspart of a stairway opposite the one in Room 7; however, it may not belong to this phase. No FP-4B surfaces have, as of now, been reached in either Rooms 8 or 11. It would appear that a domestic pillared complex is the best interpretation for Rooms 8 and 11.In summary, it is to be observed that all the north-south walls of the citadel complex were on a 20°-25' orientation, while the east-west walls were oriented at 115°-120°. This orientation roughly fits the contours of the site. It is also noteworthy that the FP-4B citadel has been exposed for a length of ca. 20 m (from the southern wall of Rooms 5 and 6 in the south to the northern face of Wall 7K61:2), and for a width of ca. 12.00 m along Wall 7K50.7, = 7K51:4B. While it appears that the preserved limits of the citadel have been located along the western edge of the acropolis where the FP-5 remains were cut (see fig. 3.3, above) and in the north where the pillared house adjoins the structure, its eastern and southern limits have yet to be determined. Its dimensions would seem to confirm the initial hypothesis that the complex was administrative and/or defensive in function. Thus our identification of the structure as a citadel still remains.The pottery from the debris layers running up to the walls and above the surfaces contained a few Early Persian sherds, including one Attic piece, suggesting that the end of the phase was as late as the fifth century B.C. However, the fill above the FP-4B surfaces may have been deposited when the next phase was constructed.Field Phase 4A (FP 2A of 1984) (see fig. 3.5, above)No additional evidence for FP 4A was uncovered during the 1987 season of excavations. For a discussion of this phase as recovered during the 1984 season, then numbered FP 2A, see the author’s previous analysis of Field A phasing (1989: 238).Field Phase 3B (FP IB of 1984) (fig. 3.8)Loci: 7K60:3 7K60:47K60:77K60:8WallWall (=7K61:3) (Cont. from FP 4B)Earth Layer Earth Layer21FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL7K60:97K60:117K60:177K60:187K60:207K60:217K60:227K61:27K61:37K61:47K61:57K61:67K61:77K61:87K61:97K61:107K61:117K61:127K61:137K61:147K61:167K61:177K61:187K61:197K61:207K61:227K61:237K61:247K61:257K61:267K61.-277K61:287K61:297K61:317K61:327K61:337K70:177K70:187K71:37K71:8SurfaceWall (Cont. from FP 4B)Earth Layer Surface Earth Layer Wall (=7K61:5) (Cont. from FP 4B)Wall (=7K61:2) (Cont. from FP 4B)Wall (=7K60:22) (Cont. from FP 4B)Wall (=7K60:4) (Cont. from FP 4B)Earth Layer Wall (=7K60:21) (Cont. from FP 4B)Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Surface Earth Layer Surface Earth Layer Earth Layer Wall (Cont. from FP 4B)Wall (=7K71:3) (Cont. from FP 4B) Threshold Earth Layer Surface (=7K71:8) Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Wall (Cont. from FP 4B)Wall (=7K71:15) Wall (=7K61:17) (Cont. from FP4B)Surface(=7K61:20)22FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL7K71.14 Pillar/Wall7K71-.15 PillarAVall (=7K70:18)7K71:22 Earth LayerField Phase 3B was the second major occupational phase represented in Field A. Characteristic of this phase was the reuse of most of the FP-4B architecture coupled with several modifications for FP-3B reuse. An example reported from the 1984 season was the extension of Wall 7K50:4A blocking the opening between Rooms 2 and 3, and the creation of a doorway between Rooms 3 and 10 in Wall 7K51:3. Additional evidence of this type of activity came to light in the four Squares opened this season.One of the more tentative examples of these FP-3B modifications was the construction of Wall 7K51:5. This ca. 0.70 m wide, two-row wall (the most compactly constructed wall in the whole of Field A) abutted the east face of Wall 7K50:4A, thus dividing FP-4B Room 4 into two rooms of about equal width (ca. 1.55 m). These are Room 9 to the north and Room 10 to the south.Surface 7K51:13 was apparently the surface associated with Room 10 (Room 4 in 1984). Excavation to the north of Wall 7K51:5 was minimal and thus did not reach a surface in Room 9, but Earth Layers 7K61:23 and 7K61:24 were excavated from the fill above it. Access to this room may have been gained to the east of the excavated portion. The four-room house plan of FP 4B was thus modified by the addition of a basement wall running down the center of the middle long room, much like the Hazor Citadel in Stratum V (Yadin 1972: 188). Alternatively, the house may have been smaller, visualizing Room 7 to the north as an add-on, similar to the Tell Beit Mirsim Northwest Tower (Albright 1975: 176).West of Wall 7K50:4A, Room 2 appears to have been widened for FP 3B. FP-4B Wall 7K60:19 went out of use and was dismantled, probably at the time of the construction of Wall 7K60:3 (=7K50:6, hereafter: 7K60:3). This one-row, five-course wall was set in place ca. 0.25-0.30 m west of Wall 7K60:19. Consequently, Room 2 was broadened to a width of ca.3.40 m. Surface 7K60:9 (of beaten- earth) along with its makeup debris (7K60:17), seems to have been the latest of two surfaces associated with Room 2 during FP 3B (Surface 7K60:18, with its makeup[7K60:20] was immediatelybeneath). No artifacts of any kind were found on the surfaces. Earth Layers 7K60:7 and 7K60:8 covered Surface 7K60:9.North of Rooms 2 and 9, Room 7 reused Walls 7K60:4 and 7K61:2 as its south and north walls, respectively. During FP 3B, however, the stairway associated with Wall 7K61:2 was put out of use by blocking up the narrow passageway between Wall 7K60:4 and the stairway piers (fig.3.9) with stone-filled Earth Layers 4, 11, 13, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, and 33 (all from Square 7K61). Although excavation of Wall 7K60:11, at the western end of the room, has not reached a point which allows for the drawing of a firm conclusion, it appears that a narrow opening may have been created between the north face of Wall 7K60:4 and the south end of Wall 7L60:11. With the stairway blocked at the east end of Room 7, a difficult entrance may have been gained from the west end. Alternatively, the contemporary surface (7K61:10) seems to have extended above the blocking stones, making access from the east also possible. Typical of most of the other surfaces associated with FP 3B, Surface 7K61:10 was somewhat uneven and difficult to trace, although it was apparent in the west balk of Square 7K61. Above Surface 7K61:10 in the stairway area were fill layers and pockets (Earth Layers 7K61:6, 14, 19, and 22).In the house complex to the north, FP-4B Wall 7K71:3 appears also to have been modified by the addition of a stone threshold north of Wall 7K61:2 (=7K61:22). This provided for a doorway between Room 8 to the west and Room 11 to the east. East of Threshold 7K61.T8, Surface 7K61.T2Fig. 3.9. Field A: Blockage which put the FP-4B stairway out of use.23FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELsealed against the south end and east face of Wall 7K71:3 and the north face of Wall 7K61:2. To the west of this threshold, and at a level about 0.10-0.12 m lower than the threshold and Surface 7K61:12, Surface 7K61:20 (=7K71:8) was found to seal against the north face of Wall 7K6T.2, the east face of Wall 7K70:17, and the west face of Wall 7K71:3.In the process of the excavation of Threshold 7K61:18 and the associated doorway, a small vessel was found sitting in a little niche in Wall 7K61:2 (fig. 3.10). The vessel appears to havebeen placed in this location intentionally and not deposited as part of fill. The form of the vessel is somewhat unusual and thought to be of Early Persian origin (see fig. 3.12:22, below). Approximately1.00 cm below the rim, on opposite sides of the neck, two small holes were drilled, as if the vessel were intended to be hung by strings (fig. 3.11).The two pillars (7K71:14 and 7K71:15) ascribed to FP 4B were apparently reused in FP 3B. A large bin, ca. 1.50 x 1.50 m in size, was created by the construction of narrow Walls 7K70:18 (=7K71:15) and 7K71:14 connecting Wall 7K70:17 with the two pillars to the east. These three ephemeral walls generally one row wide and one course high, were built atop Earth Layer 7K71:22. The specific purpose of this bin was undetermined; no surface or deposit of material culture was found associated with it. Above Surfaces 7K61:12 and 7K61:20 were Fill Layers 7K61:7, 7K61:8, and 7K61:9 west of Wall 7K61:16, and Earth Layer 7K61:25 east of the same wall.The northern limits of FP-3B Room 8 were undetermined due to the construction of the pool and storage pit of FP 2. Analysis of the pottery from the surfaces dates this phase to the Early Persian period (figs. 3.12-15).Fig. 3.11. Field A: Close view of the pot in situ in the FP-3B wall (note holes in the neck).Field Phase 3A (FP 1A in 1984) (see fig. 3.8, above)No remains from this ephemeral phase were' found in 1987. |Field Phase 2 (fig. 3.16):7K60:12 Earth Layer7K60:15 Earth Layer7K70:9 Earth Layer7K70:10 Earth Layer7K70:11 Pool (=7K71:4;= Field B7K80:24,= 7K81:6)7K70:12 Earth Layer7K70:13 Earth Layer7K70:14 Earth Layer7K70:15 Earth Layer7K70:16 Earth Layer(=7K71:5)24FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pith os 7K60 9 55 1 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown10YR6/1LightGray7.5YR7/4PinkL 5A3A2ASR L PA5PR3W SM 2.5YR -6/4LightReddishBrownUO2 Jar 7K61 28 74 6 5YR7/3Pink5YR7/3PinkL 6A5A5A4A3ASRRSASRSRM PR5APR3Aw VO3 Jar 7K61 24 61 2 2.5YR4/2WeakRed2.5YR6/2PaleRed2.6YR4/2WeakRedL 6A5A4A3A2ASARL PR3A w VR4 Jar 7K61 28 73 1 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/0GrayL 6A5A32SRSARBRAM PR4APR2Aw SM R +5YR6/6 -ReddishYellowUO5 Jar 7K60 9 55 4 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR6/0LightGray7.5YR7/2PinkishGrayL 6A5A3A2ASASASRSRM PR5APR3Aw UR6 Jar 7K61 31 79 6 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown7.5YR5/0 . Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 6A 5A 4A . 3ASARRRL FS5APR5APR4APR3Aw UR7 Jar 7K61 33 87 4 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/4 • PinkL 6A5A4A3ARRRRL FS4A w RiN UO8 Jar 7K61 27 70 7 2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YR6/0Gray2.5YR6/6LightRedL 6A5A3A2ASRRRRL FS4APR3Aw RiN UR9 Jar 7K60 9 55 2 , 5YR7/4Pink5YR6/1LightGray5YR7/4PinkL 5A3ASRSRL FC5AFS3APR2Aw * • * RN UO10 Jar 7K61 32 84 6 2.5YR6/6LightRed* 2.5YR6/6LightRedL 6A5A3ASASRRVL PR5APR4Aw ■ ■ ■ RiN VR11 Jar 7K61 33 87 5 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR6/2PaleRed2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 5A3ARRM PR4A w SM N +IFRRiNUR12 Jar 7K60 9 56 2 5YR6/0Pink7.5YR6/0 Light Gray5YR7/4PinkL 7A5A3AASARM PR3APR2Aw - - - RiR UR13 Jug 7K61 32 82 2 2.5R6/6LightRed5YR7/4Pink2.5YR6/6LightRedL 4A2ARRL PR3A w SM R +2.5YR - 6/6 Light RedRiN VO14 Jug 7K61 32 86 5 . 10YR6/3PaleBrown10YR5/1Gray10YR6/3PaleBrownL 6A5A4A3AARRRL PA5AFS4Aw SMR +10YR6/3 SM Pale R + Brown10YR6/3PaleBrownUO15 Jug 7K61 9 30 7 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR7/4PinkL 6A4A3A2AARRRVL FS5APR4APR3Aw VR16 Jug 7K61 28 . 73 4 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/2PinkishGray5YR7/4PinkL 4A3A2ARRRM FS3A w' 'VO17 Jug 7K61 9 94 3 7.5YR7/2PinkishGray7.5YR5/0Gray7.5YR7/2PinkishGrayL 6A5A4A3ARRRRM FS5APR3Aw - * - ■ UR18 Jug 7K61 28 73 5 2.5YR6/6LightRed5YR5/1Gray.2.5YR6/6LightRedL 5A4A3ARRRL PR3A w URFig. 3.12, co n tinued . Field A : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-18.26FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color19 Jug 7K61 9 94 2 2.5YR6/2PaleRed' 2.5YR6/2PaleRedL 5A3ARRVL PR3A W SM N +2.5YR6/2PaleRed- VO20 Juglet 7K61 32 85 1 10R6/6LightRed10R6/6LightRedL 6A5A4A2BAASABSRBM FS6BFS5BW SMRBa10R5/6Red'R21 Juglet 7K61 28 74 3 2.5YR5/8Red2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR5/8RedL 4A3ASRSRL PR3A w WB R +2.5YR5/8Red "* ■ VO22 Pot 7K61 12 43 1 7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR7/4PinkL 6A5A4A3B2AAASABSRBL FS6A w HBHRBa7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR7/4PinkR23 Krater 7K61 33 87 1 5YR6/3LightReddishBrown7.5YR5/0GrayL 7A6A5A4A3ASRSRSRRRM FS5APR4APR3Aw SMN 5YR6/3LightReddishBrownUR24 Krater 7K61 32 84 1 . 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR4/0DarkGray2.5YR5/0BlackL 6A5A3A2ASRSRRRVL FS5APR4BPR3Aw' 'WB N +2.5YRN2.5BlackAp N +UR25 Krater 7K61 29 75 6 Rim:5YR7/4Pink2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YR4/0DarkGrayL 5A R VL w UR26 Krater 7K61 29 75 3 7.5YR7/2PinkishGray7.2YR5/0Gray7.5YR6/2PinkishGrayL 6A3ARRVL FC7APR3Aw - - - - UR27 Krater 7K60 9 56 4 5YR7/3Pink5YR6/1LightGray5YR5/1GrayL 5A3ARRL PR3A w - ' - - - ' - UR28 Krater 7K61 33 87 3 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 5A3A2ARRRL PR3A w SM N +2.5YR 6/4 Light Reddish Brown .VO29 Krater 7K61 27 70 4 5YR7/3Pink7.5YR5/0GrayL 6A5A3A2ASRSRRRMH FS5APR3Aw' ' ' '* UR30 Krater 7K61 32 88 2 5YR7/6ReddishYellow• * 7.5YR7/0LightGrayL 5A4A3ARRRL PR5APR3Aw SM R +7.5YR7/4Pink- - RiN UR31 Krater 7K61 13 49 1 5YR7/4Pink2.5YR5/0GrayL 6A 5A 4A . 3AARRRL FS5APR5AFS4APR4Aw SLR 5YR7/6ReddishYellow ' 'UO32 Krater 7K61 31 78 5 5YR6/4LightReddish7.5YR5/0GrayL 7A6A5A4A3ASRRRRRM PR4APR3Aw Ap N +UR33 Krater 7K61 32 88 4 5YR7/4Pink10YR5/1GrayL 5A4A3A2ARRRRM FS7AFS6APR5APR3Aw' ' ' '* UR34 Krater 7K61 9 30 1 7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR6/0Gray' 7.5YR7/4 PinkL 5A5A3A2AARRRL PR3A w UO35 Krater 7K60 9 56 1 5YR7/6ReddishYellow7.5YR5/0Gray5YR5/0ReddishYellowL 6A2ASRRL PR4A w WB R +5YR7/6ReddishYellow- - - UOFig. 3.12, con tinued . Field A : Pottery descriptions for nos. 19-35.27£27\i *29Fig. 3.13. Field A: Pottery from FP 3B, continued.T 13028FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type So Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Krater 7K61 27 71 1 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR6/0LightGray5YR7/4PinkL 6A3A2ASRRRL FC6APR3AW SM WB N +5YR7/6ReddishYellow- - UO2 . Krater 7K61 28 73 9 5YR7/6ReddishYellow5YR5/1Gray5YR6/2PinkishGrayL 5A4ARRL PR3A W SL 5YR4/2 De- Dark sign Reddish Rings Gray5YR8/2PinkishWhiteu o3 Krater 7K61 24 64 2 7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/0Gray7.5YR7/4PinkL 5A4A3ASARRM FC7AFS6APR4Aw WB R +10R6/6LightRed- - . UR4 Krater 7K61 28 73 8 5YR7/6ReddishYellow* 5YR7/6ReddishYellowL 4A3ARRL PR6AFS5APR3Aw - - IFN +VO5 Krater 7K60 9 55 5 5YR7/6ReddishYellow7.5YR7/0LightGray7.5YR4/0DarkGrayL 6A5A3A2ARSRRRM PA5APA4APA3Aw' '■ " UR6 Bowl 7K61 29 75 2 7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/0Gray7.5YR7/4PinkL 4A R VL w WB R +2.5YR6/6LightRedWB R +5YR6/4 InR Light Reddish BrownVO7 Bowl 7K61 28 74 2 2.5YR5/8Red2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR5/8RedL 5A4ASRSRVL FS3A w WB R +2.5YR5/8RedWB R +2.5YR5/8 - RedVO8 Bowl 7K61 31 78 4 2.5YR6/6LightRed5YR7/4Pink2.5YR6/6LightRedL 5A3A2ARRRL PR4A w - - - Ro N +VO9 Bowl 7K61 9 30 . 4 5YR7/4Pink5YR5/1Gray5YR7/4PinkL 5A3A2ASRRRL PR3A w - * - - UO10 Bowl 7K61 9 30 2 . 5YR7/4Pink5YR6/1LightGray5YR7/4PinkL 3A R VL - w SM R +5YR6/6ReddishYellowWB 5YR6/6 -ReddishYellowVO11 Bowl 7K61 27 70 1 5YR6/2PinkishGray■ 5YR6/2PinkishGrayL 3A SRA L PR5APR3Aw SL R +5YR4/1DarkGraySL R +5YR4/1 RiR Dark >GrayVR12 Bowl 7K61 9 30 5 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR6/0Gray5YR7/4PinkL 6A 4 A 3ARRRL FS6A ■ • ■ - - VR13 Bowl 7K61 31 79 3 5YR7/3Pink- 5YR7/3PinkL 5A R VL FC6APR4Aw - - - ■ VO14 Bowl 7K61 31 78 2 5YR7/4 Pink .5YR7/4PinkL 5A4A3A2ARRRRM PR2A w WB R +2.5YR5/6RedSM R +2.5YR5/6 - RedVO15 Bowl 7K61 27 70 6 7.5YR6/2PinkishGray- 7.5YR6/2PinkishGrayL 4A3ARRL FS4APR3Aw - * - - VR16 Bowl 7K61 27 70 5 5YR6/6ReddishYellow7.5YR5/0Gray5YR6/6ReddishYellowL 5A3A2ASRRRL PR3A w - - DB 5YR6/6 RiR Reddish IF Yellow N +UR17 Bowl 7K60 9 55 3 5YR7/6ReddishYellow7.5YR6/0LightGray7.5YR4/0DarkGrayL 6A5A4A3A2ASASASRSRSRM PA6APA3APR2Aw SM R +5YR7/6ReddishYellowSM R +7.5YR4/0 -DarkGrayUR18 Bowl 7K61 32 86 7 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown10YR4/1DarkGrayL 6A5A4A3ARRRRVL FS6AFS5APR3Aw 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown10YR4/1 -DarkGrayUR19 Bowl 7K61 24 64 1 10YR6/3PaleBrown2.5YR4/0DarkGrayL 6A5A4A3AARRRMH FS6AFS5APR5Aw' '* * URFig. 3.13, con tinued . Field A : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-19.29FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color20 Bowl 7K61 31 78 1 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M FS5A W SMR 5YR7/4 UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR4A PinkGray 3A SR21 Bowl 7K61 31 79 2 10YR6/1 2.5YR5/0 10YR5/1 L 6A SA L PR5A W SM 7.5YR . . -URGray Gray Gray 4A R PR3A R + 6/43A R% .LightBrown22 Bowl 7K61 32 88 3 5YR6/4 \ . 5YR5/1 L 6A R L FS6A w SM 2.5YR . . - URLight . Gray 4A R PR4A N + 6/6Reddish 3A R PR3A LightBrown Red23 Bowl 7K60 9 56 6 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR5/0 L 6A SR M PR5A w SLR 2/5YR _ VRLight Gray 5A SR PR3A 7/4Reddish 3A R PinkBrown 2A R24 Bowl 7K61 32 86 3 2.5YR6/4 . 10YR7/3 L 6A R L PR5A w WBR 2.5YR _ . 2.5YR5/6 - VRLight Very 5A R PR3A 5/6 RedReddish Pale 4A R RedBrown Brown 3A R25 Bowl 7K61 32 84 3 5YR6/4 . 5YR4/1 L 5A SR M FS6A w SM 5YR6/4 SM 5YR4/1 - URLight Dark 4A SR PR5B N + Light N + DarkReddish Gray 3A R PR3A Reddish GrayBrown 2A R Brown26 Bowl 7K61 11 58 3 5YR7/4 5YR7/2 5YR7/4 L 5A SR MH PR2A w . . . . . VOPink Pinkish Pink 4A SRGray 3A SR27 Bowl 7K61 32 82 ■ 6 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 6A SR L PR4A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/4 - VRPink Pink 4A R PR3A R + 6/4 R + Light3A R Light Reddish2A R ReddishBrownBrown28 Bowl 7K61 9 30 3 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SA L FS5A w . . . ApR VOPink Light 5A R PR5ARed 4A R3A R29 Bowl 7K61 32 82 3 5YR7/4 5YR7/2 5YR7/4 L 5A R L FS4A w SM 5YR6/6 VOPink Pinkish Pink 3A R PR3A R + ReddishGray 2A R Yellow30 Bow! 7K61 9 33 1 2.5YR6/6 10YR4/1 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PR5A w , . . URLight Dark Light 4A R PR3ARed Gray Red 3A R2A RFig. 3.13, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 20-30.30FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELf 132Fig. 3.14. Field A: Pottery from FP 3B, continued.I >FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Rea Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Bowl 7K60 9 56 5 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR M PR5A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOLight Light Light 4A SR PR2A R + 6/6 R + LightRed Red Red 3A SR Light RedRed2 Bow! 7K61 24 64 3 5YR7/3 7.5YR5/6 5YR7/3 L 5A R L FS5A W SM 10R6/6 SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A R PR5A R + Light R + Light3A R PR4APR3ARed Red3 Bowl 7K60 9 56 3 2.5YR4/8 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR4/8 L 3A . R VL . . w WB 2.5YR WB 2.5YR4/8 - VORed Light Red R + 4/8 R4- RedReddishBrownRed4 Bowl 7K61 24 61 3 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 5A SR L PR2A w . . _ . VOPink Pink 4A R3A R5 Bowl 7K61 29 75 5 5YR7/4 •5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 4A R VL . w WB 10R5/6 WB 10R5/6 - VOPink Gray Pink R + Red R + Red6 Bowl 7K61 9 30 6 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 2^5YR6/6 L 6A SA M FS5A w . . . . UOPink Gray Light 5A R PR4ARed 4A R7 Bowl 7K61 28 73 10 5YR5/1 . 5YR5/1 L 4A R L PR2A w WB 2.5YR WB 2.5YR3/0 - VRGray Gray. 3A R 3/0 VeryVery DarkDark GrayGray8 Bowl 7K61 29 75 4 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR6/4 L 3A R VL . w . . - VOLight Pinkish LightReddish Gray ReddishBrown Brown9 Bowl 7K61 9 93 3 2.5YR4/0 . 2.5YR4/0 L 4A R VL . w DB 2.5YR . Ro VRDark Dark 3A R 3/0 R +Gray Gray VeryBlackGray10 Bowl 7K61 24 64 6 7.5YR7/7 7.5YR7/0 7.5YR7/2 L 6A A M PR4A w SL 7i5YR SL 7.5YR7/2 - UOPinkish Light Pinkish 5A SR PR3A R + 7/2 R + PinkishGray Gray Gray 3A R PR2A PinkishGrayGrayi i Bowl 7K61 9 33 2 10YR4/2 2.5YR5/0 5YR5/4 L 7A A M FS6A w . _ . . . URDark Gray Reddish 6A A FS5AGrayish Brown 5A R PR5ABrown 3A R PR4A2A R PR3A12 Bowl 7K61 32 88 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 5A SR VL PR4A w . . . VOPink Pink 4A SR PR3A3A SR13 Bowl 7K61 32 86 6 5YR8/3 5YR6/1 5YR8/3 L 6A A VL PR4A w DB 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VOPink Gray Pink 5A R PR3A 6/6 R + Light3A R Light Red2A R Red14 Bowl 7K61 32 86 1 2.5YR6/6 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R L FS5A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR5/6 - VOLight Pink Light . 3A R PR4A R + 5/6 R + RedRed Red 2A R Red15 Bowl 7K61 32 84 2 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 L 5A R VL PR4A w VOPink Pink 3A R PR3A16 Bowl 7K61 31 79 4 2.5YR6/4 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/4 L 4A R VL FS5A w SM 10R5/6 SM 10R5/6 - VOLight Pink Light 3A R R + Red R + RedReddish Bottom: ReddishBrown 5YR5/1GrayBrown17 Bowl 7K61 32 86 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R L FS4A w . . ■ . . VRLight Light Light 4A R PR4ARed Red Red 3A R18 Bowl 7K61 32 82 4 2. SYR 6/6 10R5/1 2.5YR6/6 L 6A R L PR5A w WB 2.5YR WB 2.5YR6/6 - URLight Reddish Light 5A R PR3A R + 6/6 R + LightRed Gray Red 3A R Light RedRed19 Bowl 7K61 24 61 4 4.5YR6/8 . 2.5YR6/8 L 5A SR L PR4A w _ . _ VOLight Light 3A RRed Red 2A RFig . 3.14, con tinued . Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-19.32FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color. Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color20 Bowl 7K61 27 69 2 2.5YR5/8 5YR7/.4 2.5YR5/8 L 4A R L PR4A W WB 2.5YR ApR VORed Pink Red 2A R PR2A 5/8Red21 Bowl 7K61 28 74 4 2.5YR6/6 _ 2.SYR6/6 L 4A R L PR5A w SM 2.5YR . _ VOLight Light 3A R R + 6/6Red Red 2A R LightRed.22 Bowl 7K61 24 64 4 10R6/6 5YR5/1 10R6/6 L 6A ' A L FC6A w . . . Ap VRLight Gray Light 5A SA FS5A N +Red Red 3A R PR3A2A R23 Bowl 7K61 32 84 5 5YR7/4 . 5YR L 6A SR L PR5A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 * VOPink Pink 5A SA PR2A N + 6/6 N + Lighth 5A SR Light Red3A R Red24 Bowl 7K61 27 69 1 5YR6/6 5YR6/3 5YR5/3 L 4A R L PR3 w SM 5YR6/6 WB 5YR5/3 - VRReddish Light Reddish 3A R R + Reddish ReddishYellow ReddishBrownBrown Yellow Brown25 Bowl 7K61 .24 61 1 2.5YR6/8 2.5YR6/0 2.5YR6/8 L 4A R VL PR2A w . DB 2.5YR6/8 - UOLight Gray Light 2A R LightRed Red Red26 Bowl 7K61 9 93 1 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 6A R M FS5A w . . . . URPink Gray Pink 5A R PR4A4A R3A R27 Bowl 7K61 9 33 3 5YR6/6 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 6A A MH FS5A w . . _ URReddish Gray Light 5A R PR5AYellow Reddish 4A R FS4ABrown 3A RB PR4A2A R PR3A28 Bowl 7K61 9 94 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M FS6A w SL 7.5YR SL 7.5YR3/0 - UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR3A N + 3/0 De- VeryGray 3A SR Very sign DarkDarkGrayGray2.5YR6/8LightRed29 Bowl 7K61 24 64 7 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 6A A L FS5A w SL 2.5YR _ _ VOPink Pink 5A SA PR4A R + 6/64A R PR3A Light3A R Red30 Bowl 7K61 28 73 3 5YR7/4 5YR7/2 5YR7/4 L 5A R L FS4A w . _ _ . VRPink PinkishGrayPink 4A R31 Bowl 7K61 32 82 8 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR L PR6A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VRLight Light 3A R PR4A . N + 6/6 N + LightReddish Reddish 2A R PR3A Light RedBrown Brown Red32 Bowl 7K61 29 77 2 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SA L FS6A w SM 2.5YR _ _ UOLight Gray Light 3A SR PR6A R + 6/4Reddish Reddish 2A SR PR3A LightBrown Brown ReddishBrown33 Plate 7K61. 28 74 1 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 4A R VL FS5A w _ . _ _ UOPink Light Pink 3A RGrayFig. 3.14, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 20-33.33\FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL329 302228Fig. 3.15. Field A: Pottery from FP 3B, continued.34FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Plate 7K61 28 74 4 2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YR6/2PaleRed2.5YR6/6LightRedL 6A6A4A3A2ASRSASRRRMH PR7AFS6APR3AW SLDesignInside2.5YR4/0 -DarkGrayUO2 Plate 7K61 29 77 1 5YR7/3Pink5YR7/3Pink5YR7/3PinkL 6A4A3A2ASRSRSRSRM FS5APR3AW VO3 Plate 7K61 32 84 4 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/5Gray5YR7/4PinkL 5A4A3A2AASRRRL FS6APR4APR3Aw - - WB R +2.5YR5/6 - RedUR4 Plate 7K61 28 73 2 5YR7/4Pink5YR6/2PinkishGray5YR7/4PinkL 5A3A2ASRRRL PR3A w - - DBR +2.5YR5/4 -ReddishBrownUR5 Plate 7K61 31 79 5 5YR7/3Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/3PinkL 5A4A3ARRRL FS6APR4Aw ■ WB R +2.5YR6/6 -LightRedUO6 Plate 7K61 32 82 9 5YR7/3Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/3PinkL 5A5A3A2AASRRRM PR4APR3Aw WBR +2.5YR5/8 - RedUR7 Cup. 7K61 32 82 5 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/4PinkL 4A3ARRVL PR4A w SM R +2.5YR6/6LightRedVO8 Mug 7K61 32 86 2 7.5YR7/4Pink• 7.5YR7/4PinkL 5A3ARRVL PR5APR4Aw SM R +5YR6/6ReddishYellowSM R +5YR7/6 -ReddishYellowVO9 Mug 7K61 32 88 5 5YR7/4 . Pink5YR7/4PinkL 6A5A4A3ARRRRM FS5APR3Aw VO10 Cook pot 7K61 24 64 5 2.5YR5/0Gray- 2.5YR5/0RedL 4A3AR VL PR5AJPR4APR3Aw - - Ri UR11 Cook pot 7K61 27 70 3 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 5A3ASRSRL FS3A w VR12 Cook pot 7K61 28 73 7 SYR 6/3 Light Reddish Brown5YR6/3LightReddishBrownL 4A R VL FS2A w RiR VR13 Cook pot 7K61 11 58 1 2.5YR6/4 Light Reddish Brown •5YR5/2ReddishGray2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 6A5A5A4A3AASAASRSRL PR4APR3Aw SM 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrownSM 2.5YR6/4 RiR Light Reddish BrownUR14 Cook pot 7K61 27 69 3 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR6/2PinkishGray5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 5A3A2ARRRL FS5APR3Aw RiR UR15 Cook pot 7K61 11 58 2 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR5/2ReddishGray2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 5A4A3ASASASRM PR3A w RiR UR16 Cook pot 7K61 29 77 3 2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YR6/2PaleRed2.5YR6/6LightRedL 5A3A2ARRRM PR5APR3Aw SM R +2.5YR6/6LightRedRo N +VR17* Cook pot 7K61 31 78 3 2.5YR6/6LightRed5YR6/2PinkishGray2.5YR6/6LightRedL 5A4A3A2ARRRRM PR4A w IFN UR18 Cook pot 7K61 22 63*■ ■7.5YR5/2Brown- 7.5YR5/2BrownL 5A3A2ASRSRSRM FC6AFC4APR3Aw - - - - VRFig. 3.15, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-18.35FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo TVPe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor F i r eExt Core Int Tvne Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color19 Cook pot 7K61-32 83 1 2.5YR5/4ReddishBrownHandle:2.5YR4/0Dark2.5YR5/4ReddishBrownL 5A 3A 2ASR MRRFS7AFS5APR4AW - ' Handle VRGrayBody:2.5YR5/4ReddishBrown20 Cook pot 7K61 9 30 8 5YR6/4 5YR6/2 5YR6/4 L 5A R L PR3A W . . . . VRLight Pinkish Light 4A RReddish Gray Reddish 3A RBrown Brown21 Cook pot 7K61 28 73 6 2.5YR6/6 . 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R M FS3A W . . . . • VRLight Light 3A RRed Red 2A R22 Cook pot 7K61 33 87 2 2;5YR6/4 . . 2.5YR6/4 L 4A R VL PR5A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR5/4 - VRLight Light PR3A N + 5/4 N + ReddishReddish Reddish Reddish BrownBrown Brown Brown23 Cook pot 7K61 27 70 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/6 L 3A R L FS3A W . IFR VOLight Light LightRed Reddish RedBrown24 Cook pot 7K61 24 64 8 10R6/6 2.5YR5/6 10R6/6 L 5A R VL JH7A H . _ UOLight Gray Light 4A R FS7ARed Red 3A R FS6AFS5AFS4A25 Cook pot 7K61 9 93 2 2.5YR6/2 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/2 L 5 A R M FS6A W . _ _ . URPale Gray Pale 4A R FS5ARed Red 3A R FS4A2A R PR4A26 Cook pot 7K61 33 87 6 2.5YR6/4 5YR6/1 2.5YR6/4 L 5A R M PR3A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/4 IFN URLight Light Light 3A R N + 6/4 N + toReddish Gray Reddish 2A R to 5YR3/1Brown Brown 5YR3/1 LightLightReddishBrownto VeryDarkGrayReddish Brown to Very Dark Gray27 Cook pot 7K61 29 77 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/3 2.5YR6/6 L 5A A L PR4A W . . IFR VRLight Pale Light 5A SRRed Red Red 4A R3A R28 Mortar 7K61 32 82 1 5YR7/6 7.5YR3/0 5YR7/6 L 6A R M FC7+A W Ledge URReddish Very Reddish 5A R FS7+A HandleYellow Dark Yellow 3A R PR6AGray PR3A29 Lamp 7K61 29 75 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A R VL . W . . . UOPink Light Pink 4A RGray30 Lamp 7K61 9 30 9 7.5YR6/0 . 7.5YR6/0 L 5A R VL PR4A w _ _ _ URGray Gray 3A R2A R31 Attic 7K61 28 74 5 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 . • . . . FS6A w Glaze 2.5YR Glaze 2.5YR2/5 Pa: VOWare Reddish Reddish 2/5 Black designYellow Yellow Black 10YR8/1Fig. 3.15, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 19-31.PlusBlackGlaze36)FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL37FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL7K71:47K7i:57K71:67K71:77K71:87K71:97K71:107K71:117K71:127K71:137K71:167K71:177K71:187K71:197K71:207K71:217K71:237K71-.247K71:25Pool(=7K70:11; = Field B 7K80:24, =7K81:6) Earth Layer (=7K70:16) Earth Layer WallEarth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer PitEarth Layer Earth Layer Wall WallEarth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer WallEarth LayerFig. 3.17. Field A: The plastered pool at the north end of the field.At the extreme north end of Field A, two major installations were discovered, both of which cut FP-3B structures and earth layers (forexample, Walls 7K70:17 and 7K71:3).The first feature was a plaster-lined installation (7K71:4, =7K70:11), the overall dimensions of which were about 4.00 x 5.00 m (fig. 3.17). This included the small-to-large, boulder-and-chink buttressing around the plastered interior. The buttressing on the west and east wasapproximately 1.00 m wide, while the buttressing at the south was ca. 1.35 m wide. In the north (Field B Squares 7K80 and 7K81) the buttressing was different both in size and in construction: not only was it ca. 1.50 m wide, but it also used smaller boulders than on the east, south, and west sides (which were characterized by medium-sized boulders). The buttressing on all sides was topped by a course of large boulders.The plastered interior measured approximately2.00 x 2.75 m. Five plastered steps (with evidence for a sixth at the top) were found to descend into the installation from the north. The top two preserved steps, ran the width of the installation and were ca. 0.25 m deep with risers of ca. 0.30 m. The next step to the south was also as wide as the plastered interior and had the same riser dimension as the top two steps, but was ca. 0.65 m deep. The final two steps into the installation were ca. 0.70 m wide and situated along the center axis, each ca. 0.30 m deep with a riser of ca. 0.35 m. At the southern (deepest) end of the installation, the plaster walls werepreserved to a height of ca. 1.45 m. Along the northern portion of the west wall the plaster was preserved to a height approximately 0.30 m above the rest of the installation, supporting the evidence for a sixth step and suggesting that the complete installation was at least ca. 0.30 m higher than preserved. It would appear, therefore, that originally the greatest depth of the installation measured at least ca. 1.75 m. However, based on the extraordinary width of the northern buttressing (ca. 0.25 m wider than the south side), it is possible that yet one more step (a seventh) may have raised the top of the installation by about 0.25 m, so that the original depth may have been about 2.00 m. No sign of the top of the installation was uncovered. Subsequent agricultural activities may have destroyed not only this, but also contemporary associated surfaces which were notably lacking.Although no clear evidence for a foundation trench to this installation appeared in either of the north balks of Squares 7K70 or 7K71, the removal of the east balk of Square 7K70 exposed evidence that a "trench" ca. 0.40 m wide existed between the north end of Wall 7K70:17 of FP 3B and the south end of the installation (fig. 3.18). This suggests that Wall 7K70:17 was partially dismantled at the time of the foundation of the installation. The bottom courses of the exterior of the installation were not reached; nor were any clear surfaces located which were used in association with it.The latest pottery from Earth Layer 7K71:23, the deepest earth layer removed along the east side of the installation which may have contained the38FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELFig. 3.18. Field A: The meter stick rests on Wall 7K70:17 which ends ca. 0.40 m south of the southern end of the pool buttressing (note the stone-lined pit with Wall 7K71:24).foundation trench, was Early Persian (see figs. 3.25-26, below).It should be noted that a rim sherd from a Late Iron II storejar in Earth Layer 7K71:6, located south of the water installation, mended with a sherd found in Square 7K80 of Field B. This might suggest that when the area was cleared in preparation for the construction of the feature, a fair amount of disturbance occurred, with fragments of the same jar being widely scattered (see chapter 4 for more data on destroyed storejars).The clearing of the interior of this installation yielded more than a dozen ashlar limestone boulders of varying sizes, all with well- preserved tooling marks (fig. 3.19). With the exception of several more ashlars discovered to the north of the installation this season, in Field B 7K81, no other similar stones have yet been discovered at the site. It is probable that these were remains of the superstructure of the installation. The most recent pottery taken from the fill inside the installation (7K70:16 (=7K71:5)was Early Persian. No later pottery or other finds were found in association with the installation.Although the general function of the installation must have involved water, the specific function is enigmatic; suggestions range from a cistern to a ceremonial bath complex. Close parallels of each, although several centuries later and not precise, are available from Qumran. There are no known parallels east of the Jordan, except perhaps Machaerus. We thus identify it as a "pool."The second major installation (7K71:11), located about 1.50 m to the east of the pool, was a stone-lined pit (fig. 3.20). The mouth of the pit, slightly oval-shaped, measured ca. 1.35 m (east- west) x ca. 1.00 m (north-south). Excavation of the fill in the pit proceeded to a depth of ca. 2.80 m, exposing 15-17 courses of stone lining (fig.3.21). To the west, the founding courses of medium-sized boulders appeared to have been laid on earth, while to the east they appeared to have been constructed on an earlier wall. Excavation ended when much harder occupational debris was reached.The pit seems to have cut FP- 4B Wall 7K71:3. The wall remnant may actually have served as a buttress on the south side of the upper courses. Wall 7K71:24, measuring about 1.75 m long x1.00 m high (five courses), lay immediately to the west of the stone-lined pit (see fig. 3.18, above). The west face of this wall had an 8 "-12° slope to the southeast. It seemed to "lean against" the west side of the upper courses of the pit to support the installation.Fig. 3.19. Field A: Northern edge of the pool. Two ashlars above the meter stick are similar to ashlars found in the pool fill.39FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELKg. 3.20. Field A: Stone-lined pit and pool.The question of the function of this pit is unresolved. Although various proposals have been made, such as a well, grain silo, or wine storage area, all lack support from the available evidence. The fact that the pit appears to have been founded on debris negates its function as a well shaft; there was no evidence from the flotation of earth samples that it was used as a grain silo; nor was there any support (in the form of restorable vessels) that it was used for the preservation of wine or other substances in jars. Of course, jars may not have broken there. The narrow shaft would have made it difficult to raise and lower jars from such a depth, but as our ceramic technologist, Gloria A. London, suggested, the jars could have been lowered and raised with a rope or hooked stick and the pit could have been used for cold storage.The two fill layers removed from the pit (Earth Layers 7K71:12 and 7K71:13) were each characterized by minimal amounts of pottery, the latest of which was Early Persian (see figs. 3.25- 26, below). The fill, which included many small pebbles and a few small boulders, did not give the appearance of having been laid in stages, but seems to have been rapidly deposited.A further point is the relationship between the plastered pool and the pit. Excavation of the area between the two installations exposed three short, generally east- west oriented walls (7K71:7,7K71:16, and 7K71:17) which had been set in place between the two features (see fig. 3.16, above). Wall 7K71:7, approximately 1.50 mlong, 1.00 m high and 0.35-0.50 m wide, extended eastward at a 95" orientation from the southeastcorner of the pool buttress to the point where it abutted Wall 7K71:3 (fig. 3.22). The eastern half of this "wall" consisted basically of one large boulder chinked in place over the top of one of the lower courses of Wall 7K71:24, which was robbed out at its southwestern end. It was also found to abut Wall 7K71:3.The western half was a pile ofsmall-to medium-sized boulders.Approximately 1.40 m north of Wall 7K71:7 was Wall 7K71:16 ona 110' orientation (fig. 3.23). Measuring ca. 1.25 m long and 0.45-0.50 m wide, this wall stood 0.80-1.00 m high and consisted primarily of one large boulder, ca. 0.80 m long, 0.45 m wide, and 0.45-0.50 m deep, tipped up on edge. This large boulder constituted the upper course at the west end of the wall which tightly abutted the pool buttress. The east half was composed of mediumsized boulders which tightly abutted Wall 7K71:24. This clearly gave the appearance of functioning as a short "wedge wall" between the pool buttress and the pit, perhaps to support both40FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELFig. 3.22. Field A: Buttressing wall 7K71:7 between 7K71:3 (top) and 7K71:4 (bottom).Fig. 3.23. Field A: Buttressing wall 7K71:16 between 7K71:4 (top) and 7K71:24 (bottom).structures during their use phase. This function, however, has not been clearly established.The third wall (7K71:17) was also one row (ca. 0.25-0.40 m) wide and stood three to four courses (ca. 0.90-1.00 m) high. It abutted the east face of the pool about 0.70 m north of Wall 7K71:16 and ran southeast, curving from a 100* orientation to 150° to the point at which it abutted the northwest end of Wall 7K71:24. The curve in this wall would seem to deny its function as a support wall.This network of three walls set between plastered Pool 7K70:11, Wall 7K71:24, and Pit 7K71:11 gives rise to the question of the temporal relationship of the two major installations. The stratigraphic evidence in hand to this point does not provide sufficient basis for drawing a conclusion beyond the observation that both installations seem to have cut FP-3B walls and that similar earth layers ran up to them: Earth Layers 7K71:9, 7K71:10, 7K71:19, and 7K71:20 between Walls 7K71:7 and 7K71:16; and Earth Layers 7K71:6, 7K71:8, 7K71:18, and 7K71:21 between Wall 7K71:7 and the south balk. Earth Layer 7K71:25 lay east of Wall 7K71:3. On the west side of the pool a series of earth and stone tumble layers ran up to the buttressing stones of the pool: 7K70:9, 7K70:10, 7K70:12, 7K70:13, 7K70:14, and 7K70:15. Earth Layers 7K60:12 and 7K60:15 may have belonged to this phase as well.North of Wall 7K71:17 a nearly complete ceramic rhyton was discovered in Earth Layer 7K71:10 (figs. 3.24 and 3.26:19). This conicalshaped vessel featured zoomorphic characteristicsw ■Fig. 3.24. Field A: Ceramic rhyton in situ northeast of Wall 7K71:17.4124Fig. 3.25. Field A: Pottery from FP 2.. 25 LGH42FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type1 Pithos2 Pithos3 Jar4 Jar5 Jar6 Jug7 Juglet8 • Krater9 Krater10 Krater11 Krater12 Krater13 Krater14 Basin15 Bowl16 BowlSq Locus Pail Reg 7K71 8 33 27K71 5 15 17K71 5 15 37K71 18 47 37K71 5 16 47K71 8 33 17K71 8 29 27K71 5 16 27K71 8 29 5 .7K71 8 29 47K71 8 29 37K71 8 29 77K71 8 32 27K71 6 24 47K71 10 36 17K71 18 47 2Fabric ColorExt Core Int5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR5/0Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrown7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR6/0Gray7.5YR7/4Pink5YR7/6ReddishYellow7.5YR6/0Gray. 5YR7/6 Reddish Yellow2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR5/0Gray2.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/3Pink2.5Y4/0DarkGray5YR7/3Pink5YR7/4Pink2.5YR5/0GrayHandle2.5YR4/0DarkGray5YR7/4Pink5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR6/1Gray5YR6/1Gray5YR7/6ReddishYellow7.5YR5/0Gray7.5YR4/0DarkGrayOuter:5YR6/4LightReddishBrownInner:5YR7/3Pink. 2.5YR5/0 GrayOuter:5YR6/3LightReddishBrownInner:5YR7/3Pink5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR7/3PinkRim:7.5YR5/0Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR7/4Pink7.5YR6/0Gray5YR7/4Pink2.SYR 6/6LightRed7.5YR5/0Gray7.5YR7/2PinkishGray5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR5/0Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR6/4LightReddishBrown2.5YR5/0Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR6/4LightReddishBrown7.5YR5/0Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR7/4Pink2.5YR6/0 . Gray5YR7/3PinkNon-Plastics _____________ VoidsType Size Shape DensityL 7A SA L FC7A5A R FC6A4A R FS4A3A RL 5A SR M PR7A4A R PR5A3A RL 4A SR L PR4A3A R2A RL 6A A L FS5A5A A PR3A4A R PR2A2A RL 4A R L • FS5A3A R FS4A2A R PR3AL 6A A M FS7A5A R FS6A3A R FS5A2A R PR3AL 5A SR M PR3A3A R PR2A2A RL 5A SA L PR3A4A R PR2A3A R2A RL 5A SR L PR3A4A R3A R2A RL 5A A VL FS4A4A R2A RL 6A SR L PR3A4A R3A R2A RL 5A SR L FS7A4A R PR4A3A RL 6A R M PR4A5A A4A R3A R2A RL 6A SA M PR6A6A SR FS5A5A R PR4A4A R PR3A3A R PR2AL 5A A L PR3A4A R (3A RL 4A SR L PR4A3A R PR3A2A RFig. 3.25, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.Manu_______Surface Treatment Decor Fire______ Ext Color Int Color_____ __________ _W SL Design N +5YR5/2 -ReddishGrayURW - - ■ - - URW SM 5YR7/6 SM 5YR7/6 In UOR + Reddish R + Reddish N +Yellow Yelloww SM 5YR7/3 SM Rim: UOR + Pink R + 7.5YR7/4PinkBottom:10YR6/3PaleBrownw - - . . . VRW UOw SM 5YR6/4 - VOR + LightReddish BrownW - - URW - - - - VOw - - - VOW SL 5YR4/1 WB 5YR7/6 RiR UOR + Dark ReddishGray YellowW - - - UOW SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/3 - UOR + Very R + Very.Pale PaleBrown BrownW InN UOW VOW WB 2.5YR SL R + 6/4 R + Light Reddish Brown2.5YR6/4 -LightReddishBrown5YR4/1DarkGrayUO43FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor F i r eExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color17 Bowl 7K71 5 15 4 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR6A W SL 7.5YR SL 7.5YR4/2 - URPink Gray Pink 4A R PR3A N + 4/2 N + Brown3A R Brown2A R18 Bowl 7K71 8 33 3 5YR7/3 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 5A A L PR3A W SM 5YR6/4 _ IFR VOPink Gray Pink 4A R R + Light3A R ReddishBrown19 Bowl 7K71 8 29 1 5YR7/6 10YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A A L FS5A w _■ . _ UOReddish Gray Pink 5A SA PR5AYellow 4A R PR3A3A R20 Bowl 7K71 18 47 1 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A S L FS4A w _ _ . ■ URLight Gray Pink 4A RReddish 3A RBrown 2A R21 . Bowl 7K71 5 15 2 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR4/0 L 6A R M PR6A w DB 7.5YR DB 7.5YR6/2 - VRDark Gray Dark 5A R R + 6/2 R + PinkishGray Gray 3A R SL Pinkish SL Gray2A R Gray22 Bowl 7K71 8 33 4 5YR6/3 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/3 L 5A A . L FS4A w SL 2.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 RJRt UOLight Gray Light 4A R PR3A R + 6/6 R + LightReddish Reddish 3A R De- Light De- RedBrown Brown sign Red sign23 Bowl 7K71 10 60 1 7.5Y R7/4. 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 4A SR L PR2A w DB 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 RiN UOPink Gray Pink 3A R N + 6/6 R + LightSLR Light Red' Red24 Bowl 7K70 10 45 1 5YR7/6 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 4A R L FS5A w SM 5YR7/6 SM 5YR7/6 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 3A R PR4A R + Reddish R + ReddishYellow Yellow 2A R Yellow Yellow25 Bowl 7K70 13 74 1 5YR7/6 10YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SA L PR7A w SM 5YR7/6 DB 5YR7/6 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 3A R R + Reddish R + ReddishYellow Yellow 2A R Yellow YellowFig. 3.25, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-25.44FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELJ7FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Bowl 7K71 10 61 1 5YR6/3 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/3 L 6A A M FS6A SL 10YR7/3 SL Rim: URLight Light Light 5A A PR6A R + Very R + 7.5YR5/2Reddish Gray Reddish 4A R PR5A Pale BrownBrown Brown 3A R PR3A Brown 7.5YR5/0Gray2 Bowl 7K71 8 29 6 10YR6/1 7.5YR5/0 10YR6/1 L 5A SR L PR5A W . . . InR URGray Gray Gray 4A R PR3A3A R2A R3 Bowl 7K71 18 47 4 7 5YR6/2 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/0 L 5A A L FS5A W . . _ . URPinkish Gray Light 5A SR PR4AGray Gray 4A A PR3A4A R3A R4 Bowl 7K71 5 16 5 2.5YR6/4 5YR7/3 5YR5/3 ■ 'L . 5A SR L FS5A w SM 5YR6/4 _ . . VOLight Pink Reddish 4A R PR5A LightReddish Brown 3A R PR3A ReddishBrown 2A R Brown5 Bowl 7K70 10 45 2 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR6/4 L 5A A M FS5A w SL 7.5YR SR + 7.5YR7/4 - URLight Dark Light 5A R PR4A R + 7/4 PinkBrown Gray Brown 4A R PR3A Pink3A R2A R6 Bowl 7K71 5 16 3 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 4A R L PR3A w SLR 2.5YR _ RiR uoLight Gray L ight. 3A R PR2A 6/6Reddish Reddish LightBrown Brown Red7 Bowl 7K71 6 24 2 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 4A R L FS5A w . _ . IM URLight Gray Light 3A R PR4A R +Reddish Reddish 2A R PR3ABrown Brown8 Bowl 7K71 6 24 1 Outer: 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PR7A w _ InBo UO2.5YR6/6 Gray Pink 5A SR FS6ALight Red 4A R PR3AInner: 3A R7.5YR7/4Pink9 Bowl 7K60 8 35 1 7.5R25/0 10R5/1 7.5R L 5 A R M PA5A w WB _ WB . ■ URBlack Reddish 2.5/0 4A R PA3AGray Black 3A R2A R10 Cup 7K71 13 43 1 5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR4/0 L 6A SA VL PR3A HP . 5YR6/4 . 7.5YR4/0 - URLight Dark Dark 4A SA Light DarkReddish Gray Gray 2A R Reddish GrayBrown Brown11 Mortar 7K71 5 15 5 5YR7/6 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/6 L 5A R M PR5A W . _ In URReddish Gray Reddish . 4A R PR3A N +Yellow Yellow 3A R12 Cook pot 7K71 8 32 1 7.5YR4/0 •Rim: 7.5YR4/0 L 6A R L FS6A w _ _ . _ VRDark 7.5YR6/0 Dark 5A R PR3AGray Light Gray 4A RGray 3A R7.5YR6/0LightGray13 Cook pot 7K71 5 15 6 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PR5A W . . •' In UOLight Gray Light 4A R PR3A N + •Red Red 3A R2A R14 Cook pot 7K71 5 16 1 5YR5/3 10YR6/1 5YR56/3 L 6A R M PR5A W - , . . URReddish Gray Reddish 5A R PR3ABrown Brown 4A R2A R15 Lamp 7K60 8 36 1 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SA L PA4A W _ . _ UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR2AReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown16 Lamp 7K70 6 24 3 5YR7/6 10YR5/1 5YR7/6 L 7A A M FS6A HC - 2.5YR - _ . UOReddish Gray Reddish 6A A FS5A 6/6Yellow Yellow 6A R PR3A Light5A R Red4A R3A RFig,. 3.26, con tinued . Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.46FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor F i r eExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color17 Stand 7K71 16 6 26 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 10YR6/3 L 6A SR M FS6A W SL 7.5YR SL 7.5YR6/4 InR u oLight Light Pale 5A R PR6A R + 5/2 R + LightReddish Gray Brown 4A R FS5A Brown BrownBrown 3A R PR3A 10YR7/3PR2A VeryPaleBrown18 Stand 7K71 6 26 1 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 10YR6/3 L 6A SA L FS5A W _ ■ . RiR URLight Light Pale 5A SR PR4AReddish Gray Brown 4A R PR4A' Brown 3A R PR3A2A. R19 Rhyton 7K71 10 57 1 5YR6/3 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/3 L 6A A M FS6A W . . URLight Light Light 5A A PR6AReddish Gray Reddish 4A R PR5ABrown Brown 3A R PR3A20 Jar 7K71 6 22 1 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/0 2.5YR6/0 L 7A SA M FC7A W _ _ _ URPink Gray Gray 6A SA PR5A5A SA 4A R 3A RFig. 3.26, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-20.47FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELFig. 3.27. Plan of the architectural remains of FP 1 in Fields A and B.FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELat its curved, narrow end, and had a "drilled hole" near the bottom through which the liquid contents could flow, either while used for drinking or perhaps offering a libation. The earth layer in which it was found appeared to have been an Early Persian fill layer, based upon ceramic evidence.Field Phase 1 (fig. 3.27)Loci: 7K60:1 7K60:2 7K60:5 7K60:6 7K61.1 7K70:1 7K70:2 7K70:3 7K70:4 7K70:5 7K70:6 7K70:7 7K70:8 7K71:1 7K71:2TopsoilTopsoilEarth LayerHearth"TopsoilTopsoilTopsoilEarth LayerWallEarth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Earth Layer Topsoil Topsoilthus seem that the users of the hearth excavated into the ruins of the FP-3B complex, perhaps to provide shelter for the installation. It is possible that the hearth was associated with a beduin seasonal settlement.Field Phase 1 was an ephemeral phase represented in Square 7K70 and possibly in Square 7K60. In Square 7K70 it included Wall 7K70:4, measuring ca. 5.00 m long and oriented at 88°. This one-row (ca. 0.80 m wide) wall ranged in height from ca. 0.60 to ca. 0.80 m, and was of rather poor boulder-and-chink construction. No foundation trench was found, rather, it was founded upon Earth Layer 7K70:10 of FP 2, which contained Early Persian pottery. The south face of the wall appears to have been the exposed face: Earth Layers 7K70:3, 7K70:5, 7K70:6, 7K70:7, and 7K70:8 all sealed against the north side, making that side higher than the south. It appears to have functioned as a terrace wall.Located south of FP-5 Wall 7K60:14 and west of FP-3B Wall 7K60:3 was Hearth 7K60:6 which measured approximately 0.25 m x 0.30 m. It was made of small cobbles. Possibly associated with the hearth was an ashy surface (Earth Layer 7K60:5) (fig. 3.28). The clump of ashy debris situated directly on the hearth yielded nothing of particular significance through flotation. The latest pottery from the surface was Late Islamic (fig. 3.29:13).Walls 7K60:3 and 7K60:14, which originated in earlier phases, seem to have been reused in some way during this ephemeral phase, because Earth Layer 7K60:5 ran up to them. It is possible that Hearth 7K60:6 belonged to FP 2. It wouldConclusionTwo seasons of excavation in the area of the Ammonite Citadel have resulted in the exposure of fragments of what may originally have been a major Iron I phase, two major Late Iron II/Early Persian architectural phases with corresponding ephemeral subphases, one fragmentary Early Persian phase, and one Ottoman phase. Until further excavation is conducted along the western edge of the acropolis, nothing more can be said regarding the Iron I phase (FP 5).The second season of work uncovered more of the citadel complex to the north. Alternatively, the citadel may have existed only in the southern portion of the Field (Rooms 1 and 12), where the walls appeared thicker and were made of larger stones, while to the north was a large four-room house (Rooms 2, 3, 9, 10, and possibly Room 7).Portions of another domestic complex, this one with pillars, were uncovered farther to the north (Rooms 8 and 11). It must be emphasized that the founding dates for the walls associated with these two major phases have not yet been established, although the latest pottery from the FP-3B surfaces and the fill layers beneath them was Early Persian, while the one FP-4B surface thus far exposed was Late Iron II (Lawlor 1989). This season’s exposure of the Early Persian pool494C9FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADEL13Fig. 3.29. Field A: Pottery from FP 1 (nos. 1-13) with secondary deposits dating to the Late Iron II and Early Persian periods (nos. 14-20).50FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pithos 7K60 5 40 6 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SA MH FC7A W SM 5YR7/4 - 5YR7/4 Ri u /oPink Gray Pink 5A SR FC6A Pink Pink R + N4A SR PA4A2A SR PR3APR2A2 Jar 7K60 5 . 42 3 2.5YR6/6 5YR7/6 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R MH PA4A W . . RiR VOLight Reddish Light 4A SR PA2ARed Yellow Red 3A SR2A SR3 Jar 7K60 5 42 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/1 7.5YR6/2 L 6A A MH FC7A w _ _ _ _ URLight Dark Pinkish L 6A SA FS6ABrown Gray Gray L 5A SR PA5A •L 3A SR PR3A2A SR PR2A4 Mortar 7K70 6 34 1 5YR7/4 _ 5YR7/4 L 5A SR L PR5A w _ _ _ VOPink Pink 3A R2A R5 Jug 7K60 5 40 4 2.5YR6/6 5YR6/1 2.5YR6/6 L 5A . SR L PA5A w _ . . . _ UOLight . Light Light L 4A SR PR4ARed Gray Red L 3A R PR2AL 2A R6 Jar 7K60 5 42 2 5YR6/6 7.5YR4/0 5YR4/1 L 6A R L PA4A w SM 5YR6/6 - _ RiR UR-Reddish Gray Gray 5A SR PR3A ReddishYellow . 2A SR PR2A • Yellow7 Basin 7KG0 5 41 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/6 L 6A R M FC7A w SL 10YR8/2 SL 10YR8/2 NR UOLight Gray Light L 5A A PA5A White WhiteRed Red L 4A SA PR3AL 3A SR PR2A8 Bowl 7K60 5 40 1 5R6/3 10R6/1 5R7/2 L 4A R L FC7A w SL .5YR4/1 - . . UOLight Light Pinkish L 3A R PR3A GrayReddish Gray Gray L 2A R PR2ABrown L 1A R PR1A9 Bowl 7K60 5 40 2 10YR6/1 2.5Y5/0 10YR6/1 L 6A SA M PA6A w _ . . URGray Gray Gray L 5A SA PA5AL 3A SA PR3A1 L 2A R PR2A1A R10 Bowl 7K60 5 41 2 2.5YR6/6 5YR4/1 2.5YR6/6 L 6A R MH FC5A w _ _ _ _ UOLight Dark Light L 6A A PA3ARed Gray Red 5A A PR2A4A SR3A SR11 Mug 7K60 5 40 5 2.5YR6/6 5YR6/1 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR H PA5A w _ _ . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4ARed Red 3A SR PR3A1A SR PR2APR1A12 Cook pot 7K60 5 40 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR4/0 2.5YR6/6 L 4B SR MH PA5A w . . . . UOLight Dark Light L 3A SR PR3ARed Gray Red 2A . SR PR2A13 Pipe 7K60 5 38 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/0 -2.5YR6/6 L 3A R VL PA6B H /C + H B 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 RoR UOLight Gray Light L 2A R PA4A P SL 6/6 LightRed Red PA3A Light RedFS3AFS2ARed14 Krater 7K70 2 103 1 5YR7/4 5YR6/2 5YR7/4 L 4A R VL FS4A W . . R + UOPink PinkishGrayPink N +15 Krater 7K70 2 108 3 5YR7/6 5YR7/2 5YR7/6 L 5A SR VL PR2A W _ _ Ri UOReddish Pinkish Reddish 3A SR N +Yellow Gray Yellow .16 Bowl 7K70 2 108 2 5YR6/1 . 5YR6/1 L 6A- R L PR3A W . _ . . VRGray Gray 5A R3A - R17 Bowl 7K61 1 22 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SA MH FC7A W _ . . Pa .Pink Gray Pink 5A SR FC6A 2.5YR3/24A SR PA4A Dusky3A SR PR3A RedPR2A 10YR8/1WhiteFig. 3.29, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-17.51FIELD A: THE AMMONITE CITADELNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color18 Bowl 7K70 2 108 4 5YR7/4 5YR6/2 5YR7/4 L 5A R L PR2A W RiN + UOPink Pinkish Pink 3A R Sh +Gray 2A R19 Strainer 7K70 2 12 1 2.5YR5/6 5YR4/1 2.5YR5/6 L 5A R L FS6A W _ Sieve URRed Dark Red 4A R HolesGray 3A R20 Cook pot 7K60 2 .'11 1 10R6/6 10R6/1 5YR6/3 L 7A A L PA7A W . UOLight Reddish Light L 6A SA FS7ARed Gray Reddish L 5A SR PR4ABrown L 4A SR PR2AL 2A SRFig. 3.29, continued. Field A: Pottery descriptions for nos. 18-20.and storage pit at the north end of Field A both broadens the historical horizon of Tell el-cUmeiri and raises questions regarding the relationship of the pool to the two preceding major phases.Further work in Field A should follow a two- step approach. First, it is desirable to excavate Squares 7K40, 7K50, 7K51, 7K60, 7K6.1, 7K70, and 7K71 to the level of the FP-4B surface in Square 7K41 in order to obtain a broad horizontal exposure of FP 4B prior to probing any deeper. Second, a six meter expansion of Field A to theeast, along its entire north-south extent would provide wider horizontal exposure. This is desireable in order to determine the eastern limits of the Citadel and domestic complexes, gain further insight into the nature and precise function of the various parts of the buildings, and relate the structures to other parts of the acropolis to the east. Expansion to the south would expose more of the monumental architecture associated with the Citadel.REFERENCESAlbright, W. F.1975 Beit Mirsim, Tell. Pp. 171-178 in Encyclopedia o f el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds.Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, ed. M. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: AndrewsAvi-Yonah. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. University/Institute of Archaeology.Lawlor, J. I. Yadin, Y.1989 Field A: The Ammonite Citadel. Pp. 233-243 in 1972 Hazor. London: Oxford.Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell52CHAPTER 4Field B: The Western Defense SystemDouglas R. Clark Walla Walla CollegeIntroductionThe western slope of Tell el-cUmeiri was the most vulnerable to military attack since its elevation above the surrounding topography was less than half that of the other sides of the tell. This is due to an adjoining saddle which connected the acropolis to die ridge a few hundred meters to the west (now part of the Amman National Park). Excavation there should consequently expose significant defensive structures (see figs. 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3).Field B was expanded this season from the checkerboard pattern of Squares begun in 1984, which left numerous stratigraphic connections unclear. We therefore placed new Squares adjacent to the old ones to form a straight line of six Squares aligned east to west (7K81, 7K80, 7J89, 7J88, 7J87, 7J86) (see fig. 3.1). This resulted in a trench which cut the western slope perpendicularly. The two eastern-most Squares allowed us to connect with excavations in Field A as well as to examine domestic remains inside the defenses.The 1984 season produced seven Field Phases (FPs) dating from at least as early as Iron I to Late Iron II/Early Persian. Field Phase 7 was represented by a large mudbrick structure that was unexcavated and undated. Field Phase 6 (most likely from Iron I) included a casemate wall system with an associated beaten-earth rampart, sloping at 25°-40°. The next four phases were ofa more limited scale, each stratigraphically well- defined in only one or two Squares. Field Phase 5 (Iron I/Early Iron II) consisted of three superimposed surfaces (two of cobblestone) and a wall fragment in 7J89. An Early Iron II storeroom and its related surfaces, also in 7J89, constituted FP 4. A layer of ash on the storeroom floor, ca. 0.03-0.04 m thick and strewn with ballistic missiles and arrowheads, suggested a military destruction. Numerous overlapping pits in 7K90 comprised FP 3 (Late Iron II). Field Phase 2 consisted of a small stone-lined silo, later covered by a thin layer of ash (suggesting a temporary hearth), in use with a fragmentary surface on which numerous domestic animal bones were found. Finally, FP 1 included an occupational surface and three associated wall fragments in 7K90, dated to Late Iron II. The 1987 season altered the 1984 stratigraphic picture by dividing FP 1 into three phases and adding one more, making a total of 10 phases (fig. 4.1). In the discussion which follows, only the loci which were excavated in 1987 are included in the lists.Field Phase 10 (FP 7 of 1984) (fig. 4.2)Loci: 7K80:37 Structure/Tumble (=7K81:22) 7K81:22 Structure/Tumble (=7K80:37)53FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEM7J86 7J88 . 7J89 7K80 7K61FP112W51212W28312 10 W3 5FP2S8 = S6 10.S15 = S l l . S17 12 13W4 19 12418978 16 20FT19 W14515516FP329 3021 34 S31 122 135S18 S16 W2613FP432S275 V 36n W411 = 12 = 17 21FP53FP64FP7W'*5 W19FP8S21FP9W6 W6 = w ;2526.2 W27FP10137 122Fig. 4.1. Field B: Stratigraphic sequence chart of loci.The 1984 excavations revealed a massive mudbrick structure at least 1.40 m deep which covered nearly all of Square 7K90 and extended into Square 7J89. Most of the bricks observed lay at an angle of 40 ° -45 °, with a downward slope to the north in 7K90 and to the south in 7J89. In 1987 more of this feature was plotted in Square 7K81 and, to a lesser degree, in Square 7K80.Nearly all of Square 7K81 was excavated to mudbrick, except a ca. 1.00 m strip along the east balk and a ca. 2.00 m strip along the south balk which have not yet reached the brick. Mudbrick inSquare 7K80 appeared only in isolated locations. Thus, in two seasons we have uncovered an area of mudbrick approximately 9.00 x 10.00 m in size. No definite edge has been defined. As was true in 1984, some of the bricks had been fired, others not. Some of the unfired bricks have survived remarkably well, demonstrating a high clay content. Unlike the somewhat regular angle at which the bricks in Square 7K90 lay, those in Squares 7K80 and 7K81 were mostly fragmentary and lay in an amorphous pile as if they were brick rubble. Fragments of chalk mortar were mingled54FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEM0-10 3 - ^>cro O Q - JFig. 4.2. Field B: Plan of FP 10 indicating the extent of the mudbrick structure/tumble.55FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMFIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMwith the bricks. Although most of this rubble has not yet been excavated, it may very well overlie a wall or platform as suggested in the 1984 report (Clark 1989).Many features from FP 9 through FP 1 were founded upon mudbrick. It would thus seem that subsequent inhabitants undertook substantial leveling operations in one or more periods. Because FP-9 walls (probably Iron I) were founded into it, the mudbrick structure was used prior to, or during, Iron I.Field Phase 9 (FP 6 of 1984) (figs. 4.3 and 4.4)7J86:6 Wall7J88:6 Wall (= 7J89:22)7J89-.22 Wall (= 7J88:6)7J89:25 Earth Layer7J89:26 Ash Layer7J89:27 WallIn 1984, FP 9 was the most extensive phase in Field B. It included a casemate wall system (with one crosswall near the top of the western gradient), a sloping rampart made of nari and clay layers running up to the outer casemate wall on7 J8 8Fig. 4.5. Field B: Schematic section of FP 9 showing the construction technique of the outer casemate wall and the rampart.the west, a stabilizing row of stones across the face of the rampart, and a wall inside the fortification system running east from the inner casemate wall and bonded to it (Geraty, et al. 1986: 129-131, fig. 7). The 1987 excavations added an important reassessment of the construction of the outer casemate wall, a second crosswall in the casemate system, a destruction layer inside the casemate wall, and a revetment wall near the bottom of the rampart.The founding level of the outer casemate wall (7J88:6, =7J89:22) was not discovered thisseason, although new information about its construction, use, and one of its destructions was found. Previous reports suggested two possible phases of use for the wall: the lower (earlier phase) courses of which leaned out approximately 10" to the west, while the upper (later phase) courses were vertical. However, it was noted this season that Earth Layers within the rampart excavated in 1984 ran up to the wall course-bycourse, suggesting that the outward lean of the lower courses was actually a construction technique. As each course of the wall was laid, a layer of beaten earth with nari and charcoal flecks was laid against it. Each subsequent course was widened by laying the stones of the outer row ca. 0.05-0.10 m farther west than the course beneath, allowing the wall to be thicker at the top than at its foundations and using the rampart layers to support the wall (fig. 4.5). Atop these foundation courses, and set in ca. 0.20-0.30 m from the outer edge of the foundation, the superstructure was then constructed vertically. Unfortunately, what remained of the superstructure was badly57FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMdeteriorated and seems to have been partially reconstructed in later phases.A ca. 2.00 x 6.00 m probe through the earth just inside the outer casemate wall (7J89:25) revealed a destruction layer composed of ashy earth (7J89:26). This layer of ash, although not completely excavated, was at least 0.10-0.20 m deep. The lower extremity of a charred wooden post, apparently set vertically into the ground and later burned in the fire, was covered by the ash layer where it stood near the outer casemate wall. The post appeared to be in situ, because of its vertical stance and penetration into earth beneath the ash. Further excavation may be able to demonstrate connections between the post and surrounding architectural features.An east-west wall (7J89:27) was alsounearthed in the southern part of the probe. The wall bonded with the inner face of the outer casemate wall (fig. 4.6). Although its extant top level was lower than that of a parallel wall found in 1984 [ca. 5.00 m to the north (Wall 7J89:9)], both walls are undoubtedly crosswalls within the casemate system. They appear to have been contemporaneous because the northern wall (7J89:9) bonded to the internal casemate wall and die other (Wall 7J89:27) bonded to the external casemate wall. Unfortunately, both extended into the balks in such a fashion as to prevent measuring their width or observing the relationship of each with the opposite casemate walls. Further excavation should make this relationship clearer. The remaining upper courses of Wall 7J89:27 were made of mudbrick.It appears that Wall 7J86:6, in the Square farthest down the slope, was the lower revetment wall for the FP-9 rampart. It functioned for rampart layers of FP 5 (Colluvium 7J86:3) and of FP 6 (Rampart Layer 7J86:4). Although its founding level has not been reached, it is reasonable to think that it played the same role in FP 9.Figure 4.4 reveals, almost entirely, the remains of the FP 9 defensive system in Field B. Although the inner casemate wall is hidden beneath debris, the outer casemate wall, crosswalls, rampart, and revetment wall make up a coherent fortification system.Analysis of the pottery from the probe in Square 7J89 suggested an Iron I date for the ashy destruction running up to the outer casemate wall (fig. 4.7:1-3). A few Late Bronze sherds were also included (see fig. 4.9:31 below). The fortification system was thus in use at least as early as Iron I.Field Phase 8 (FP 5 of 1984)Locus: 7J89:21 SurfaceIn 1984, FP 8 was restricted to Square 7J89 where cobble surface 7J89:17 represented a significant stratigraphic separation between the inner casemate wall of FP 9 and the storeroom of FP 7 (Clark 1989). A connection between this cobble surface and its associated (possible curbing) stones (Wall 7J89:20) with the cobble surface downslope to the west (Surface 7J89:21) was posited. The latter may have functioned as a lower step in a walkway down the slope. This season the cobbles of Surface 7J89:21 were removed and were clearly seen to overlay the FP-9 destruction layer (Ash Layer 7J89:26) as did the cobbles of Surface 7J89:17. It would thus seem likely that Surfaces 7J89:17 and 7J89:21 belonged to the same phase, both situated immediately above FP-9 remains. Field Phase 8 was a transitional phase between Iron I (FP 9) and Early Iron II (FP 7). Its sketchy remains told us very little about architectural patterns or human activities associated with them.Field Phase 7 (FP 4 of 1984) (fig. 4.8)Fig. 4.6. Field B: FP-9 ashy destruction layer 7J89:26 (foreground) sealed against the inner face of the external casemate wall 7J89:22 (upper right), and one of the crosswalls 7J89:27 (left).Loci: 7K80:197K80:25WallWall58FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEM59FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor F i r eExt Core Int Tvne Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 7J89 25 79 1 10YR7/3 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/3 L 6A A M FS6A W UOVery Gray Light 6A SA PR6APale Reddish 5A SR FS5ABrown Brown 5A R PR5A4A R PR4A3A • R PR3A2 Bowl 7J89 25 79 2 10YR6/3 5YR6/1 10YR6/3 L 6A R VL FC7A W . _ SL 10YR7/3 - UOPale Light Pale 3A R FS6A R + VeryBrown Gray Brown FS5A PalePR5A BrownPR4APR3A3 Jug 7J89 25 79 3 7.5YR6/2 10YR4/1 10YR5/1 L 6A A VL FC7A w _ . . . URPinkish Dark Gray 6A SA FC6AGray Gray 5A R FS6A4A R FS5APR5APR4A4 Jar 7J86 4 93 1 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR6/4 L 6A R L FS6A W . _ RiN UOLight Dark Light 5A R FC6ARed Gray Brown 4A R PR5A3A R PR4APR3A5 Jar 7J86 4 99 4 2.5YR6/8 10YR4/1 2.5YR6/8 L 6A A M FS7A W . . . UOLight Dark Light 5A A FS6ARed Gray Red 5A R PR5A4A R PR4A3A R6 Jar 7J86 4 98 5 10YR6/3 10YR5/1 7.5YR5/4 L 6A R VL FS5A W . 2.5YR - . VRPale Gray Brown 3A R 5/6Brown Red7 Jar 7J86 4 98 6 5YR6/4 2.5YR4/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SA M PR3A W . _ . UOLight Dark Light 4A RReddish Gray Reddish 3A RBrown Brown8 Jar 7J86 4 99 1 . 10YR6/3 10YR5/1 10YR6/3 L 5A R M FS6A W _ 2.5YR - 7.5YR6/4 - UOPale Gray Pale 4A PR5A 6/6 LightBrown Brown 3A PR4A Light BrownPR3A Red9 Jug 7J86 4 100 1 2.5YR6/6 10YR5/1 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R L FS6A W SL 5YR7/3 - 10YR7/3 - UOLight Gray Light 4A R PR5A R + Pink VeryRed . Red 3A R PR4A PalePR3A Brown10 Jar 7J86 4 100 4 7.5YR6/4 10YR5/1 2.5YR5/4 L 5A R M FS6A W . . . UOLight Gray Reddish 4A R PR4ABrown Brown 3A R11 Jug 7J86 4 100 3 2.5YR5/4 7.5YR6/4 2.5YR5/4 L 6A SA L FS5A W VOReddish Light Reddish 5A R PR4ABrown Brown Brown 4A R3A R12 Jug 7J86 4 101 6 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 6A SR L PR6A W _ 7.5YR - . UOLight Gray Light 4A R PR5A 6/4Reddish Reddish 3A R PR4A LightBrown Brown FS4A Brown13 jug 7J86 4 93 3 5YR7/6 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 5A R M FC7A W . , . UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A R FS5AYellow Yellow 3A R PR4APR3A14 Jug 7J86 4 99 3 " 7.5YR5/2 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR6/4 L 3A R VL PR3A W . . _ VRBrown Gray LightBrown15 Jug 7J86 4 99 6 10YR5/2 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR5/4 L 5A R L PR3A W _ 10YR3/1 - . URGrayish Dark Brown 4A R VeryBrown Gray Inner: 3A R Dark10YR5/2 GrayGrayishBrown16 Jug 7J86 4 101 9 10R5/6 5YR6/4 5YR6/4 L 6A A L FS4A w _ . . UORed Light Light 5A RReddish Reddish 3A RBrown Brown17 Jug 7J86 4 101 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR M FS6A w SL 2.5YR SL 5YR4/1 - VOLight Gray Light 5A SR FS5A R + .4/2 R + DarkRed Red 4A R PR5A Weak GrayPR3A RedFig. 4.7, con tinued . Field B: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-17.60FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMNo Type_____Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color________________________ Non-Plastics_______ Voids Manu_______Surface Treatment . Decor F i r eExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color18 Jug 7J86 4 102 3 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR5/0 L 6A R M FS5A W SL 10YR7/3 SL 10YR6/3 - UOPinkish Gray Gray 5A R PR4A R + Very R + PaleGray 4A R PR3A Pale Brown3A R Brown19 Jug 7J86 4 99 2 2.5YR6/4 10YR7/3 2.5YR6/4 L 5A R L FS6A W SL 10YR8/3 - . VOLight Very Light 4A R PR5A R + VeryReddish Pale Reddish 3A R PR4A PaleBrown Brown Brown PR3A Brown20 Krater 7J86 4 101 1 10YR6/2 10YR5/1 10YR6/2 L 6A A M FS6A w . . . URLight Gray Light 5A R FS5ABrownish Brownish 4A R PR5AGray Gray 3A R PR3A21 Krater 7J86 4 101 7 10R5/6 10YR6/1 2.5YR5/4 L 6A SR L FS5A w . . . VORed Gray Reddish 4A R PR4ABrown 3A R22 Bowl 7J86 4 98 1 10YR6/3 2.5YR5/0 10YR6/3 L 6A R L PR4A w . _ URPale Gray Pale 5A RBrown Brown 4A R3A R23 Bowl 7J86 4 102 1 7.5YR6/4 10YR6/1 2.5YR5/4 L 5A SA L PR3A w . _ 7.5YR6/4 - VOLight Gray Reddish 4A R LightBrown Brown 3A R Brown24 Bowl 7J86 4 102 2 5YR6/4 10YR6/2 SYR 6/4 L 5A R L PR4A w .. . VOLight Light Light 4A RReddish Brownish Reddish 3A RBrown Gray . Brown25 Bowl 7J86 4 99 5 10YR5/1 10YR5/1 10YR5/1 L 5A R L PR5A w . _ . VRGray Gray Gray 4A R PR3A3A R26 Bowl 7J86 4 101 3 2.5YR5/4 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR5/4 L 6A SA M PR4A w . . _ VOReddish Pinkish Reddish 5A RBrown Gray Brown 4A R3A R27 Bowl . 7J86 4 101 5 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR4/0 10R5/6 L 5A R L FS6A w _ . . UOLight Red Dark Red 4A R PR5AInner: Gray Inner: 3A R PR4A5YR7/3 5YR7/3Pink Pink28 Bowl 7J86 4 101 2 10YR6/3 2.5YR4/0 5YR6/4 L 6A A L FS5A w _ . UOPale Dark Light 5A R PR5ABrown Gray Reddish 4A R PR3ABrown 3A R29 Cook pot 7J86 4 100 2 . 5YR5/3 7.5YR3/0 5YR5/4 L 4A R L FS5A w _ _ URReddish Very Dark Reddish 3A RBrown Gray Brown30 Cook pot 7J86 4 98 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/6 L 6A A L PR3A w _ . _ URLight Gray Light 4A RRed Red 3A R31 Cook pot 7J86 4 98 3 2.5YR5/4 7.5YR3/0 2.5YR5/4 L 6A A M PR3A w . . URReddish Very Reddish 5A RBrown Dark Brown 4A RInner: Gray Inner: 3A R7.5YR5/4 7.5YR6/4Brown LightBrown32 Cook pot 7J86 4 93 2 5YR4/2 5YR4/1 5YR5/3 L 5A R L FS6A w _ . _ VRDark Dark Reddish - 4A R PR5AReddishGrayGray Brown 3A R33 Cook pot 7J86 4 98 2 Outer: 7.5YR3/0 Outer: L 7A A M PR3A w . _ VR2.5YR4/6 Very 2.5YR4/4 5A RRed Dark Reddish 3A RInner: Gray Brown10YR6/4 Inner:Light 10YR6/4Yellowish LightBrown YellowishBrown34 Lamp 7J86 4 101 8 2.5YR5/4 10YR5/1 2.5YR5/4 L 6A A VL PR3A W - - - VOReddish Gray Reddish 4A RBrown Brown 3A RInner: Inner:10YR6/2 10YR6/2Light LightBrownish BrownishGray GrayFig. 4 .7, co n tinued . Field B: Pottery descriptions for nos. 18-34.61FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMFig. 4.8. Field B: Plan of the FP-7 storeroom.In 1984 the storeroom in the southeastern portion of Square 7J89 was bounded by walls on the north, west, and south (Clark 1989). Three Early Iron II storejars and a jug were found in the room. Over its surface an ash layer, scattered with ballistic missiles and arrowheads, strongly suggested a military destruction.In 1987, Square 7K80 (east of Square 7J89) produced the easterly continuation of the boulder- and-chink north wall of the storeroom (Wall 7K80:25). Its upper surviving course was visible in the topsoil in the western portion of the Square, but farther east the wall broke off where Trench- Pit 7K80:3 of FP 1 cut it. The wall stretched ca. 2.40 m into the Square and, when added to Wall 7J89:5 to the west (ca 1.25 m), showed the room to be at least 3.65 m long, its width ca. 2.50 m.Another boulder-and-chink wall (7K80:19) appeared with a north-south orientation to the east of Wall 7K80:25, extending into the south balk. This wall was preserved very fragmentarily, and was not excavated. If Wall 7K80:19 functioned as the eastern wall of the storeroom, the room would have been about 5.00 m long. Because no new surfaces were found this season, the 1984 ceramic data (Early Iron II) must be reused.Field Phase 6 (FP 3 of 1984)Loci: 7J86:4 Rampart Layer (=7J87:5,— 7J s 8 * 3)7J86:6 Wall (cont. from FP 9)In the 1984 report it was suggested that certain layers of the beaten-earth rampart (7J87:5 and 7J88:3) might belong to this phase (Clark 1989). However, there was no stratigraphic evidence to support the proposal since the casemate wall separated the Square 7K90 pits of this phase from the rampart. The suggested connection was based on ceramic data and the probable necessity to repair the rampart following the destruction observed in the FP-7 storeroom.Uncovered this season, Rampart Layer 7J86:4 (made of beaten earth) was probably the same as Layers 7J87:5 and 7J88:3 of 1984. Excavation in 1987 was incomplete, but showed the Rampart Layer to consist of light yellowish-brown earth containing charcoal and nari flecks. Its slope of 10°-15“ demonstrated a flattening tendency as the rampart reached its lower extent. Rampart Layer 7J86:4 ran up to Wall 7J86:6 which acted as a revetment (still in existence from FP 9) supporting the bottom of the rampart.Analysis of the latest ceramics placed this phase during the Late Iron II period, although most of the pottery was from Iron I (fig. 4.7:4- 34). It is probable the earth was brought down the slope from the digging of the large foundation pit for the Ammonite Citadel in Field A (see chapter 3, FP 5, above).62FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMNo Type Sa Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor F i r eExt Core Int Tvne Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pyxis 7J86 3 82 1 10YR6/3 10YR6/3 10YR6/3 L 5A R VL PR3A W Sm 2YR5/4 . 2.5YR5/4 . VOPale Pale Pale 3A R R + Reddish ReddishBrown Brown Brown SL Brown BrownN + 7.5YR6/4LightBrown7.5YR3/2DarkBrown2 Bowl 7J86 3 119 1 10YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 10YR6/4 L 3A R VL PR5A W SL 5YR6/6 DB 5YR5/4 RiR VOLight Gray Light PR4A Reddish R + ReddishYellowish Yellowish Yellow BrownBrown Brown 10YR4/2DarkGrayishBrown3 Krater 7K81 21 62 2 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 6A A L FS6A W _ _ . . . UOLight Gray Light 5A R PR5AReddish Reddish 4A RBrown Brown4 Mortar 7K81 21 62 3 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A A VL FS7A W SL 10YR8/3 SLR 10YR8/2 RiR UOPink Gray Pink 3A R FS6A R + Very WhitePR4A PalePR3A Brown5 Cup-in- 7K81 21 62 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 6A R L FC7 + W . 7.5YR . 7.5YR7/4 . VObowl Pink Pink Pink 5A R PR6A 6/4 Pink4A R PR4A Light3A R Brown6 Plate 7K81 21 62 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR6/4 L 4A R VL . W . DB 5YR6/4 . VOLight Gray Light LightBrown Brown ReddishBrown7 Jar 7K80 4 105 1 5YR8/3 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR5/0 L 5A SA L PA5A w _ _ _ _ . URPink Gray Gray 4A SR PR3A3A R2A R8 Krater 7K80 17 100 1 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR5/0 L 6A R M FS6A W . . . . InR URPinkish Gray Gray 5A R FS5AGray 4A R PR3A3A R2A R9 Bowl 7K80 4 105 2 2YR7/3 7.5YR6/0 2YR7/3 L 5A A L FS5A W . . . . . VRPink Gray Pink 5A R3A R2A R10 Bowl 7K80 11 90 3 2.5Y5/0 2.5Y5/0 2.5Y5/0 L 4A R VL PR2A W DB 2.5Y2/0 . 2.5Y2/0 _ VRGray Gray Gray Black Black11 Plate 7K80 11 90 1 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 L 3A R VL PR5A W . . SL 2.5YR6/6 . VOPink Pink Pink R + LightRed12 Cook pot 7K80 17 101 1 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A R L FS5A W . . . _ _ VRPink Gray Pink 4A R PR4A3A R13 Cook pot 7K80 17 100 2 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/4 L 6A SR L PR4A w . _ . RoR VRLight Light Light 5A SRBrown Brown Brown 4A R3A R14 Stand 7K80 11 90 2 10YR7/3 10YR6/1 10YR6/3 L 6A SA M PR5A w . . . . InN URVery Pale Gray Pale 5A SA PR3ABrown Brown 4A R3A R2A R15 Jar 7K80 3 17 1 5YR7/3 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR L FS6A w SL 7.5YR _ RoR + UOPink Gray Pink 5A R PR3A R + 5/24A R Brown3A R16 Jug 7K80 3 96 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/3 5YR7/4 L 6A R _ FS5A w SL 10R5/6 _ 10R5/6 Pa: ' VOPink Pink Pink 4A R PA3A De Red Red 2.5YR3/23A R PA2A sign DuskyRedFig. 4.9, con tinued . Field B: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.65FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMNo Type__ : Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor F i r eExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color17 Jug 7K88 2 18 3 10YR6/3 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M FS7A W UOPale Gray Reddish 5A R FS6ABrown Yellow 4A R PR5A3A R PR4A18 Juglet 7K88 2 18 4 10YR7/2 10YR7/2 10YR7/2 L 4A R VL _ W SL 10YR7/4 SLR 10YR7/3 - VOLight Light Light N + Very VeryGray Gray Gray Pale PaleBrown Brown19 Bowl 7K81 5 34 1 5YR7/4 2.5YR5/6 5YR7/4 L 6A A L PR4A W SL 10YR6/3 SL 5YR7/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 5A R R + Pale R + Reddish4A R Brown Yellow3A R20 Bowl 7K81 5 48 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 5A R L FS5A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VOPink Pink Pink 4A R FS3A R + 6/6 R + Light3A R Light RedRed21 Bowl 7K81 5 36 4 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 6A SR M FS5A w . . . URLight Light Light 5A SR PR5AReddish Gray Reddish 4A R PR3ABrown Brown 3A R22 Bowl 7K81 5 36 3 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A R M FS6A w _ _ . UOPink Gray Pink 5A R FS5A3A R PR4A2A R23 Bowl 7K81 5 36 2 Outer: 7.5YR4/0. 5YR7/3 L 5A R L PR3A w . . InR UO2.5YR6/6 Dark Pink 4A RLight Gray 3A RRedInner:. 5YR7/3Pink24 Bowl 7K81 5 36 1 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR4/0 2.5YR6/6 L 5A A M FS5A w . . InR UOLight Dark Light 4A SA PR3ARed Gray Red 3A RInner: Inner: 2A R5YR7/3 5YR7/3Pink Pink25 Bowl 7K80 3 69 1 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR6/0 L 5A A L PR3A w SM Band: VRPinkish Gray Gray 4A R R + 10YR5/1Gray 3A R Gray2A R 7.5YR6/2PinkishGray \26 Bowl 7K80 3 73 2 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 L 4A SR L FS5A w _ _ - In VOPink Pink Pink 3A R R +2A R27 Bowl 7K88 2 18 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR6/4 L 6A A L FS5A w UOLight Dark Light 5A R PR4ABrown Gray Brown 4A R3A R28 Base 7K88 2 18 2 , 10YR7/3 2.5YR5/0 10YR6/3 L 7A A M FC7A w . . UOVery Pale Gray Pale 6A . SA FS6ABrown Brown 5A R PR6A4A R PR5A3A R PR4APR3A29 Mortar 7K81 5 30 1 5YR7/6 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/6 L 7A A M FS6A w . RoBo UOReddish Gray Reddish 5A SA FS5AYellow Yellow 4A R PR5A3A R PR4A2A R PR3AAtticware7K80 3 49 1 7.5YR7/2PinkishGray7.5YR7/2PinkishGray7.5YR7/2PinkishGrayJug 7K89 25 77 1 7.5YR6/2PinkishGray2.5YR4/0DarkGray7.5YR6/2PinkishGray3A R VL - W SM 5YR6/6 SM 5YR6/6 Pa:r Reddish Reddish 2.5YR2/0Yellow Yellow Black7A SA L JH7A W SL 10YR7/3 - . Pa:6A SA FS7A R + Very R +5A R FS6A Pale 10R4/34A R FS5A Brown Weak3A R PR4A 5YR7/4 RedPinkFig. 4.9, continued. Field B: Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-31.66FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMField Phase 5 (FP 2 of 1984)Loci: 7J86:3 Colluvium7J86:6 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)In 1984, stratigraphic separation for FP 5 was observed only in Square 7K90 (Clark 1989). A stone silo, reused as a hearth, the surface of which sealed against it, reflected domestic activity. We suggested, moreover, although no stratigraphic connections could be made across the earlier casemate wall system, that the rampart of FP 6 deteriorated in FP 5, reflected by a colluvial layer of fallen stones and sheetwash.The 1987 season contributed no further evidence for or against this interpretation, but revealed in Square 7J86 a thick (ca. 1.25 m), dark yellowish-brown colluvial layer (7J86:3) above the rampart which equalled 7187:4, excavated in 1984. The slope decreased in steepness, to about 1 0 ' as it neared the bottom and sealed against Wall 7J86:6, the revetment wall still standing from FP 9. Pottery from this layer suggested earth from Iron I deposits was still being used.The colluvium contained large numbers of artifacts. More than 1200 bone fragments, over fifty jar stoppers, grinding stones, spindle whorls, zoomorphic figurine fragments, five ballistic missiles, a pendant seal, and nearly 2 0 ,0 0 0 pottery sherds were found in ca. 45 nr of earth. It is likely that this accumulation resulted from trash thrown over the wall, collecting at the bottom of the slope with colluvial earth deposits. Analysis of the latest ceramic remains pointed to a date in Late Iron II or Early Persian (fig. 4.9:1-2).Field Phase 4 (FP 1 of 1984) (see fig. 3.8 above)7K80:5 Wall7K80:7 Wall7K80:25 Wall (Cont. from FP 7)7K80-.27 Surface7K80:32 Ash Layer7K80:36 Earth Layer (=7K81:11, =7K81:12, =7K81:17)7K81:4 Wall7K81:11 Earth Layer (=7K81:12, =7K81:17, =7K80:36)7K81-.12 Earth Layer (=7K81:11, =7K81:17, =7K80:36)7K81:17 Earth Layer (=7K81:11, =7K81:12, =7K80:36)7K81.-21 Earth LayerIn 1984 several walls were assigned to FP 1 (Clark 1989). It now appears that FP 1 should be divided into three phases: FP 4, FP 3, and FP 2.In 1984, east-west Wall 7K80:7 now assigned to FP 4 partially sealed over the FP-5 pits. Examination of the 1987 discoveries showed that this wall should be connected with architecture in Squares 7K80 and 7K81.Probably to prepare the area for construction, the builders of these phases had cleared virtually the entire area of Squares 7K80 and 7K81 down to the mudbrick of FP 10 upon which they founded their structures. The irregular, tumbled bricks and fragments lay directly beneath some of the features, but were elsewhere leveled with a clay or cement-like layer, making a better base for construction (Earth Layer 7K80:36, =7K81:11, =7K81:12, =7K81:17). The clay layer varied in thickness from ca. 0.05 to 0.16 m, and in color from pale brown through light brownish gray to pink (possibly tinted by fired mud brick fragments in its composition). This layer was quite level in both Square 7K80 (Earth Layer 7K80:36) and Square 7K81 (Earth Layers 7K81:11 and 7K81:12), not varying more than ca. 0.10-0.12 m. Another layer, 7K81:17 (to the east), was slightly lower. None of these layers could be connected and all were only partially preserved, having been separated and damaged by later robbing and digging activities. But because of their similar levels and descriptions, they nevertheless appeared to have constituted a unified leveling operation over the mudbrick. Because some fragments of similar material at the same elevation appeared in the southeastern portion of Square 7K81 near the pool of FP 2, the leveling layer may have existed in that region as well (Earth Layer 7K81:21).Upon this leveling layer were founded the following: east-west Wall 7K80:5 (extending from the north balk just into Square 7K81), north-south Wall 7K80:7 (bonding with Wall 7K80:5), cobble Surface 7K80:27 (which sealed against Walls 7K80:5, 7K80:7, and FP-7 Wall 7K80.25 which was still in use), and east-west Wall 7K81:4. Although Wall 7K80:5 has not been completely excavated, what appeared to be its founding level was only ca. 0.10-0.15 m different from that of Wall 7K90:7. As fig. 3.8 in the Field A report (above) shows, Wall 7K80:5 most likely equalled 7K90:7 found in 1984.Wall 7K80:7 bonded perpendicularly with Wall 7K80:5 and extended south about 1.85 m into the Square. Although not completely excavated, it appeared to be founded at the same level as Wall 7K80:5 upon leveling Earth Layer 7K80:36 but was disrupted, like other features in the Square, where FP-1 Trench-Pit 7K80:3 destroyed all features. Cobble Surface 7K80:27 sealed against Walls 7K80:5 and 7K80:7. It also ran to the west, extending beneath north-south Wall 7K80:26 of FP 3.63FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMFig. 4.9. Field B: Pottery from FP 5 (nos. 1-2), FP 4 (nos. 3-6), FP 2 (nos. 7-14), FP 1 (nos. 15-30), and a Late Bronze sherd from a secondary deposit (no. 31).64FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMWhether or not the east-west, boulder-and- chink wall in Square 7K81 (Wall 7K81:4) belonged to FP 4 is uncertain. Its orientation of 106" was generally in keeping with most other walls in Field B, but differed from Wall 7K80:5 by 14°. Wall 7K81:4 was founded about 0.30- 0.40 m lower than Wall 7K80:5, and although of similar width, it was constructed of larger boulders and appeared more substantial. Yet because Wall 7K81:4 was founded upon a clay leveling layer (Earth Layer 7K8L21) similar to those noted above, it seems to be connected with FP 4. It was difficult to determine the function of the wall, however, since only about 2.10 m remained. This extended westward from the east balk with no associated walls or surfaces. A small cylinder seal was found when Wall 7K81:4 was removed.The bases of two large storejars were found in situ in the balk between Squares 7K80 and 7K81, buried ca. 0.75-0.85 m into the FP-10 mudbrick. They were not removed and the FP-1 trench-pit destroyed any associated features, but it is likely they belonged to this phase.Field Phase 4 seems to have marked a transitional phase in Field B’s history, and perhaps the whole of Tell el-cUmeiri’s history as well. At the beginning of the phase a clearing operation removed earlier remains down to the mudbrick of FP 10, upon which was laid a leveling layer of hard clay to provide a foundation for free-standing walls and surfaces, making up at least two rooms. The size of the FP-4 walls and the presence of in situ storejar bases suggested domestic utilization. There were no visible signs of destruction at the end of FP 4. Analysis of the pottery suggested a Late Iron II date for the phase (fig. 4.9:3-6).Field Phase 3 (FP 1 of 1984) (fig. 4.10)7K80:5 Wall (Cont. from FP 4)7K80:7 Wall (Cont. from FP 4)7K80:16 Surface7K80:18 Surface7K80:21 Ash Layer7K80:22 Hearth7K80:25 Wall (Cont. from FP 7)7K80:26 Wall7K80:29 Earth Layer7K80:30 Earth Layer7K80:31 Surface7K8Q:34 Fill7K80:35 Pit7K81:13 Earth LayerBut for one locus, this phase was limited this season to Square 7K80. Earth Layer 7K81:13, located south of FP-4 Wall 7K81:4 (and just beneath topsoil), seems to have belonged to this phase (based on analysis of the pottery), but stratigraphic connections were lacking. We know only that Earth Layer 7K81:13 accumulated next to the wall after the wall was used (it thus could have represented the final stages of FP 4), and that it was cut by the foundation trench for the pool of FP 2. Within the layer was the base of a large storejar which was sliced in half by the FP-2 pool.Field Phase 3 was discerned by Wall 7K80:26 and its corresponding surface (7K80:18), which were laid directly atop cobble Surface 7K80:27 of FP 4. The walls of FP 4 (7K80:5, 7K80:7, and 7K80:25) were reused in FP 3.Two rooms were excavated. In the northeast portion of Square 7K80, two surfaces and one earth layer (one on top of the other) were enclosed by Wall 7K80:5 (on the north) and Wall 7K80:7 (on the west). Both walls were truncated by the FP-1 trench-pit on the east and south. The surfaces survived to measurements of approximately 1.00 x 0.50 m, and were also cut on the south by the FP-1 trench-pit. The lower surface (7K80:16), a very pale brown, plaster-like surface, was ca. 0.03-0.05 m thick. Its elevation, and the fact that it sealed against Wall 7K80:5, suggested contemporaneous usage with Surface 7K80:18 in the room to the west, but there was no stratigraphic connection and the composition was not the same. Above Surface 7K80:16 was Surface 7K80:31, which resembled Surface 7K80:18 in its beaten-earth composition, but differed in level. Earth Layer 7K80:30, about 0.08 m thick, overlaid Surface 7K80:31 and appeared to have been fill deposited at the end of the phase.More significant for this phase was the western room which measured ca. 3.50 x 2.00 m. It included walls reused from earlier phases: Wall 7K80:25 (on the south), Wall 7K80:5 (on the north), and Wall 7K80:7 (on the east), as well as new Wall 7K80:26 (on the west). Unfortunately, the southeastern corner of the room was cut by the FP-1 trench-pit. A doorway has not been located. Wall 7K80:26 was one to four courses high, measured ca. 1.00 m wide, and was constructed of small- to medium-sized boulders. Surface 7K80:18 ran up to all these walls and included Hearth 7K80:22, its ashes (Ash Layer 7K80:21), shallow Pit 7K80:35, and its fill (7K80:34).67FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMOX -jq: o OO _l00N-s a R |5 213CDOOFig. 4.10. Field B: Plan of FP-3 architectural features, with FP-7 Wall 7K80:25 and FP-4 Walls 7K80:5 and 7K80:7 which appear to have continued in use.68FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMperiod of use or periodic cleaning.Immediately to the northwest of the hearth, located a few centimeters from Wall 7K80:26, was the small, stone-lined pit 7K80:35). It also was constructed of medium- to large-sized cobble stones in a circular fashion, measuring ca. 0.81 x 0.67 m. and was ca. 0.15 m deep in the center, forming a shallow bowl. The yellowish-brown earth which filled the pit (7K80:34) gave no clues whatsoever to its function. Even its close proximity to the hearth was of little help. The earth north of Wall 7K80:5 (Earth Layer 7K80:29) was somewhat arbitrarily assigned to this phase. It has not been completely excavated. Two arrowhead fragments and the head of a bovine figurine have surfaced in the debris to this point.The earth making up Surface 7K80:18, ca. 0.04-0.12 m thick, which sealed against Walls 7K80:7 and 7K80:26, constituted a living surface with an accumulation of occupational debris. The hearth was constructed mostly of medium- to large-sized cobbles laid somewhat in a pattern of concentric circles and measured approximately 1.48 x 1.10 m (fig. 4.11). The dark grayish- brown ash layer (7K80:21) on the hearth was about 0.04 m thick and only two bones were removed with the ash, suggesting either a briefThe two rooms in FP 3 with their small walls, did not seem to reflect military or administrative activities. However, there remained little evidence for domestic utilization beyond the hearth and pit. Even these may have been only briefly employed. A short-lived domestic function seems most likely. Analysis of the pottery suggested an Early Persian date.Field Phase 2 (FP 1 of 1984) (see fig. 3.16 above)Fig. 4.12. Field B: Foundation Trench 7K81:19 (center) for the northern revetment wall of the FP-2 pool (left), dug into FP-10 mudbrick (right).Loci:7K80:47K80:57K80:67K80:77K80:8 7K80:9 7K80:10 7K80:117K80:127K80-.137K80:157K80:177K80:247K80:26WallWall (Cont. from FP 4)Surface (=7K80:8) Wall (Cont. from FP 4)Surface (=7K80:6) StepEarth Layer Surface(=7K80:15) Earth Layer Earth Layer Surface(=7K80:11) SurfaceWall (=7K81:6; =Field A 7K70:11,= 7K71:4)Wall (Cont. from FP 3)69FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEM7K81:6 Wall (=7K80:24; -Field A7K70:11, —7K71:4) 7K81:7 Earth Layer7K81:8 Surface7K81:9 Fill7K81:14 Wall 7K81:15 Surface 7K81:16 Surface 7K81:18 Earth Layer 7K81:19 Trench 7K81:20 FillThe major feature of FP 2 was the plastered pool. The foundation trench for the pool (Trench 7K81:19) and its yellOwish-brown fill (7K81:20) measured ca. 3.30 m long, ca. 0.10-0.50 m wide, and ca. 0.25-0.40 m deep (fig. 4.12). The extant top level of the trench was nearly 0.90 m below the top surviving step of the installation because the FP-1 trench-pit destroyed higher remains. On the eastern side' of the pool no foundation trench was visible, but the pool builders clearly cut through earlier remains, including an in situ storejar in FP-3 Earth Layer 7K81:13 (fig. 4.13).Alternatively, it is possible that die northern foundation trench (7K81:19) was cut much earlierfor a wall which itself was later utilized as a foundation for the pool. The orientation of the north side of the pool, approximately 106", was identical to nearly all other east-west walls in Fields A and B, suggesting that although most of these walls had gone out of use, the pool may have reused them as foundation supports.Remarks about the construction of the pool itself are limited in this report, because the major part of the facility surfaced in Field A (see chapter .3, above). However, completely located within Field B was northern buttress Wall 7K80:24 (=7K81:6) made up of "alternating courses of cobblestones and medium-sized boulders. Whether this represented an earlier wall reused or one built for this purpose was not clear, but its construction and width (ca. 1.50 m) would have provided solid support against the water pressure in the pool. Although five steps were preserved descending into the pool, the plaster at the outer edge of the uppermost surviving step turned upward, suggesting yet one more step. Beneath this step were subsurfaces: Earth Layer 7K81:7 and cobble Surface 7K81:8.Northeast of the northern buttress wall and immediately adjacent‘to it was Wall 7K81:14, an extension to FP-4 Wall 7K81:4. It added ca. 1.20 m to Wall 7K81:4 and survived ca. 0.42 m high, ,but was constructed differently from Wall 7K81:4. Whether it extended farther west or not cannot be known because it was Cut by the FP-1 trench-pit. Nor is it clear what function it served. Below the wall were two probable surfaces in fragmentary condition [Surface 7K81:15 (pink and ca. 0,:07 m thick) and Surface 7K81:16 (light gray plaster, about 0.01-0.02 m thick)]. This wall and its surfaces could have belonged to an earlier phase.Northwest of the pool, in the portions of Square 7K80 undisturbed by the trench-pit, there was solid stratigraphic reason for distinguishing FP 2 from FP 3. North-south Wall 7K80:4 was built upon Surface 7K80:18 in the western room of FP 3 without a foundation trench and, along with Walls 7K80:5 and 7K80:7 (reused from FP 4), was sealed against by three new surfaces (cobble Surface 7K80:17 and subsequent beaten- earth Surfaces 7K80:15 and 7K80:8).For a reason we could not identify, the builders placed Wall 7K80:4 directly against FP-3 Wall 7K80:26, even though the latter still remained several courses high. This reduced the size of the room by nearly one half, so that it was scarcely more than a hallway (fig. 4.14). The 1984 excavations in Square 7K90 (north of Square 7K80) revealed a similar phenomenon where east- west Wall 7K90:4, most likely of FP 2, was constructed parallel to, and against, the remains of Wall 7K90:7 of FPs 4-3. The remains were too70FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMFig. 4.14. Field B: Possible narrow hallway in FP 2 between Wall 7K80:4 (upper center) and Wall 7K80:7 (upper right).fragmentary to suggest a good explanation for this apparent waste of available space. As mentioned above (FP 4), similarities in construction patterns, founding levels, and orientation showed that Wall 7K80:5 equalled Wall 7K90:7. We may thus consider Wall 7K90:7 a constituent feature of FP 2. It would also appear that Walls 7K90:4 and 7K90:3, excavated in 1984, were built at this time and formed parts of a room to the north (Clark 1989).Cobble Surface 7K80:17 ran up to Walls 7K80:4, 7K80:7, andprobably 7K80:5, though this last ran into the balk just before the point of contact (fig. 4.15). Surface 7K80:17 overlaid FP 3 Surface 7K80:18, but measured only ca.2.70 x 0.90 m.Over cobble Surface 7K80:17 in the same room, lay a ca. 0 .0 2 m thick surface of pale brown earth (Surface 7K80:15) most likely occupational surface buildup.Fragments of a similar surface, 7K80:11 (below which were Earth Layers 7K80:12 and 7K80:13), appeared about 2.50 m to the southeast on the other side of the trench-pit sealing against the northwest corner of the plastered pool described above. This surface fragment was the same color, thickness, and level as Surface 7K80:15 to the north, suggesting that they should be equalled. Prior to being cut by die trench-pit, Surface 7K80-.15 (=7K80:11, hereafter: 7K80.15)extended to the pool buttressing stones, thus linking the pool with the walls and surfaces of FP 2. The level of the surface would have been about 0.40-0.50 m below the projected top level of the highest step of the installation, or about two steps down. The pool would thus appear to have been partially above ground.Atop both fragments of Surface 7K80:15 lay another surface which likewise was cut by FP-1 Trench-Pit 7K80:3. Surface 7K80:8 (above 7K80.T5) and 7K80:6 (above 7K80:11) were both light brownish gray in color with small pebble inclusions, and both had similar top levels indicating 7K80:6=7K80:8 (hereafter: 7K80:6). We thus have evidence for a second surface connecting the FP-2 remains on either side of the trench-pit. Surface 7K80:6 sealed against a possible cobble step (7K80:9), which appears to have stepped down from the pool to Surface 7K80:6. The recovery of numerous bones and a few small objects (stamped jar handles with no apparent decoration on the stamp, jar stoppers, pestles, etc.) on these surfaces suggested domestic use, although they could have been roads or alleys as well. Between Surfaces 7K80:15 and 7K80:6Fig. 4.15. Field B: Cobble Surface 7K80:17 (lower center) which sealed against Wall 7K80:4 (left) and FP-4 Wall 7K80:7 and (probably) FP-4 Wall 7K80:5 in the north balk.71FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMnext to the pool, was a pale-brown Earth Layer 7K80:10. Analysis of the pottery from FP 2 suggested that it dated to the Early Persian period (fig. 4.9:7-14). ,Field Phase 1 (see fig. 3.27 above)Loci: - 7J86:1 Topsoil7J86:2 Topsoil ’7J86:5 Wall7J 8 8 :1 Topsoil7J88:2 Topsoil7K80:1 Topsoil7K80:2 Topsoil7K80:3 Trench-Pit (=7K81:5)7K80:28 Wall (=7K81:3) ,7K81:1 Topsoil7K81:2 Tumble7K81:3 Wall (=7K80:28)7K81:5 Trench-Pit (=7K80:3)7K81:10 Earth LayerField Phase 1 represented the latestoccupational phase in Field B as well as the natural deterioration of architectural features and : the accumulation of loess and colluvium after the site was abandoned.As the foundation trench for the pool interrupted FP 4 and FP 3 features in 7K80 and 7K81, so Trench-Pit 7K80:3 (=7K81:5) and its fill, broke up FP-2 remains (see fig. 3.16, above), possibly as part of the building stage of FP 1. In both Squares it was an irregular, flattened V- shaped trench ca. 1.50 m wide at the bottom widening to ca. 2.50 m at the top, bending around the pool on the north and west sides. It varied inFig. 4.17. Field B: FP-1 Wall 7K81:3 (lower left to upper center) as it entered the west balk.depth from ca. 0.78-1.66 m and extended to the mudbrick of FP 10 in most places.It was filled with earth and tumble which included over 1200 bone fragments, dozens of ceramic stoppers, numerous gaming pieces and spindle whorls, approximately forty domestic food-grinding tools, thirteen weapon fragments, several figurines and pendants, a stamped jar handle (clearly not in situ) with an Egyptian hieroglyphic inscription including a cartouche of Thutmose III (Redford, chapter 19, below), and almost 19,000 potsherds. It also contained eight to ten ashlar building blocks just to the north of the pool. These were similar to others found in the fill of the pool. Whether these blocks came from the superstructure of the pool (in which case the trench-pit would have had to be open when the pool collapsed) or were secondarily used pridr to being deposited in the trench-pit fill could not be determined. No ashlar stones of this quality have been found elsewhere at the site.The best explanation for this feature may be a robber trench dug to remove stones from a projected FP-2 wall, founded on the mudbrick of FP 10, constructed of ashlar blocks, and surrounding the pool on the northern and western72FIELD B: THE WESTERN DEFENSE SYSTEMFig. 4.18. Field B: FP-1 Tumble 7J88:2 immediately downslope of the external casemate wall. Note the arrangement of rows, suggesting collapse of the wall in a single episode.sides. However, such a wall would have interrupted the apparent clear connection of FP-2 Surfaces 7K80:15 and 7K80:6. Nor would the proposed wall have surrounded the pool on all sides (there was no similar trench-pit to the south and east). Alternatively, it is possible other features from lower phases were being robbed. (We have chosen the term "trench-pit" to reflect this ambiguity). The trench- pit was then used as a massive dump for secondary debris derived from many periods (including the Thutmose III stamped jar handle).Two unrelated wall lines provided further stratigraphic differentiation between FPs 2 and 1.Wall 7J86:5 was one row wide and stood one to two courses high (fig.4.16). It was made primarily of small boulders apparently battered into the bottom of the slope by hundreds of small cobbles on the down slope side. This wall may have functioned as a revetment wall toward the bottom of the colluvial deposits building up on the rampart. However, it was too near topsoil to be certain.The other wall line, Wall 7K81:3 (=7K80:28), was more significant (fig. 4.17), consisting of one row of large boulders measuring ca. 0.50-0.75 m wide and two courses high. The founding level was higher than nearly all surviving portions of the pool and extended over part of it. It was built across the top of the filled trench-pit. There appeared to be no other architectural features associated with the wall.The remaining loci of FP 1 consisted of rock tumble, loess, and colluvium which accumulated through centuries of abandonment following the end of occupation at the site. The deposition of this material was not always gradual, as seen in Locus 7J88:2 where the tumble from the outer casemate wall of FP 9 (7J88:6) fell in somewhat well-ordered rows (fig. 4.18), suggesting an earthquake. It also suggests that the outer wall of the FP-9 fortifications survived through FP 2. No pottery from Field B FP 1 dated later than the Early Persian period (fig. 4.9:15-30), but the data from FP 1 of Field A may indicate activities during the Islamic periods.ConclusionBecause the citadel of Field A and the defenses of Field B are now separated by only one balk, future work in both Fields should seek to outline the relationships between the two. Besides the pool, which was common to both Fields this season, we can as yet say very little about earlier connections. Field A citadel architecture appeared to break before reaching Field B.We have achieved our purpose of a coherent exposure of most of the FP-9 defense system. Our goal now must include examination of earlier defensive constructions. Proposed excavations should include the area from the lower revetment wall to the mudbrick structure at the top of the western escarpment.REFERENCESClark, D.1989 Field B: The Western Defense System. Pp. 244-257 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell. el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Geraty L. T., et al.1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-144.73CHAPTER 5Field C: The Northern SuburbJames R. Battenfield California State University, Long BeachIntroductionField C was located on the upper of two broad terraces on the northern slope. Here, two topographic ridges (wall lines) ran downhill in a V-shape, converging just above the water source at the bottom of the tell (figs. 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and5.1). The northern slope was separated from the acropolis by a major fortification wall. Thus, the area was completely surrounded by what appear to be fortification walls, suggesting the term "suburb." In 1984, six Squares were excavated and all but one 8L82 (the northernmost), reached bedrock. Because 8L82 promised to yield remains from periods not easily available elsewhere on the site, it was to this single Square that attention was focused in 1987. A total of ten Field Phases (FPs) were discovered in the one Square 8L82 (fig. 5.2).Field Phase 10 (FP 7 of 1984)Locus: 8L82;30 Bedrockactivities of the first occupants on the northern slope. Approximately 5.00 m2 of bedrock were exposed in a line stretching across the Square near the south balk. Because bedrock had been used as an activity surface in the other Squares of Field C (Battenfield and Herr 1989), we consideredBedrockfoundationprovided a ready for the domesticFig. 5.1. Field C: Aerial View.74FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURB8L82FP1 1FP2 2 6S3 ■= S8FP3 14 = 15FP41W5A1W5B4 - 9 = 11FP5 t S20 i 1S21 | = S22 1 - S23 1 = S28W10 W13 W32FP6 1 S29S24 1 = S25W7FP7 W17 19FP8 1 18S26 1 = S27W16FP9 31FP10 B30Fig. 5.2. Field C: Stratigraphic sequence chart of loci.Bedrock 8L82:30 as the earliest use surface in the Square. As in the other Squares excavated in 1984, EB III pottery was included in the earth immediately above, but this material may have been laid considerably later. Bedrock dipped down to the north sharply and it is reasonable to anticipate that there may be much deeper debris (with intervening phases) farther north.Field Phase 8 (FP 6 of 1984) (fig. 5.3)Loci: 8L82:16 8L82:18 8L82:26 8L82:27WallEarth Layer Surface (=8L82:27) Surface (=8L82:26)Fig. 5.3. Field C: Plan of FP 8.Stone Wall 8L82:16, oriented east-west, was laid on bedrock with no foundation trench (fig.5.4).Field Phase 9Locus: 8L82:31 Ash LayerAsh Layer 8L82:31 was found immediately above bedrock in the southwestern portion of the Square where bedrock was highest. Although it covered most of the Square, it could not be excavated before the end of the season. Visible at its top were burned sherds, but no oven fragments or indications of a hearth were recovered. It most likely was a destruction layer, representing the end of FP 9 (or possibly FP 10). Analysis of the pottery in the layers immediately above the ash were EB III, suggesting an EB III or earlier date for the ash layer itself. Fig. 5.4. Field C: Walls of FPs 8, 7, 6, and 5 in the southern part of Square 8L82. On the left are the bottom courses of FP-4 Wall 8L82:5 after the upper courses were removed.75FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBFig. 5.5. Field C: Pottery from FP 8 (nos. 1-6) and FP 6 (nos. 7-22).76FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBNo TVPe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-PlasticsExt Core Int Type Size Shat1 Jar 8L82 26 123 1 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR5/4 L 7A SRReddish Reddish 6A SRBrown Brown 5A SR4A SR3A SR2A SRP 7A SR6A SR5A SR4A SR3A SR2 Pithos 8L82 26 113 1 2.5YR5/6 7.5YR6/2 _ L 5A SARed Pinkish 4A SAGray 3A SA2R SR3 Pith 06 8L82 26 123 3 2.5YR5/6 7.5YR5/0 2.5YR5/6 L 5A SRRed Gray Red 4A SRInner: Inner: 3A SR5YR7/3 5YR7/3 2A SRPink Pink P 5A SR4A SR3A SR4 Pithos 8L82 26 124 3 10R5/6 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/4 L 6A ARed Light Light 5A ABrown Brown SR4A SRSA3A SA2A SR5 Bowl. 8L82 26 123 2 2.5YR5/6 2.5YR4/0 2.5YR5/6 L 6A SRRed Dark Red 5A SRInner: Gray Inner: 4A SR5YR7/3 5YR7/3 3A SRPink Pink 2B SR6 Platter . 8L82 26 124 1 7.5YR7/4 10YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 6A SRPink Gray Light 5A SRReddish ABrown 4A SR3A SR7 Jar 8L82 25 108 1 5YR6/4 2.5YR4/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SALight Dark Pink 6A SRReddish Gray 5A RBrown 4A R3A R8 Jar 8L82 24 117 2 7.5YR6/2 10YR6/1 7.5YR6/2 L 6A APinkish Gray Pinkish 5A SAGray Gray 4A R3A R9 Bowl 8L82 25 108 2 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 5ALight Gray Light 3AReddish Reddish 2ABrown BrownInner: Inner:5YR7/3 5YR7/3Pink Pink10 Bowl 8L82 24 117 3 5YR7/3 . 5YR7/3 L 4A APink Pink 3A SR2B R11 Bowl 8L82 24 120 4 2.5YR6/6 . 2.5YR6/6 L 7A SRLight Light 5A SRRed Red 4A SR3A SR2A SR12 Bowl 8L82 25 108 4 5YR7/3 7.5YR8/2 7.5YR8/2 L 6A RPink Pinkish Pinkish 5A RWhite White 4A R13 Bowl 8L82 25 108 3 5YR6/4 10YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 7A ALight Light Light 6A SAReddish Gray Reddish 5A RBrown Brown 3A R14 Bowl 8L82 24 120 2 7.5YR7/2 7.5YR7/2 7.5YR7/2 L 4A RPinkish Pinkish Pinkish 3A SRGray Gray Gray 2C SRFig. 5.5, continued. Field C: Pottery descriptions for nos . 1-14.Voids Surface Treatment FireExt Color Int ColorMPA4APA3APR5APR3AVOFS6AFS5APA5APA4APA3APA5APA4APR3APR2AFS6AFS5APA5APA4AFS7AFS6APA5APA4APA3APR3APR2AFS6APA6APA5APA4APR4APR3APR5AWW SMW SL 5YR6/6 SL 5YR6/6 RiRR + Reddish R + Reddish Yellow YellowM FS7A W SM 10YR7/3 SM 10YR7/3FS5A Very VeryPR4A Pale PalePR3A Brown BrownR PR3A W . . _RRLL PR3A W SM 10YR8/2 - 10YR8/2White WhiteL PR3A W SM 5YR7/4 -PR2A PinkL FS4A W SM 10YR8/3 SM 7.5YR8/4R + Very R + PalePinkBrownL FS4A w . SL 10YR8/2R + WhiteL . PR3A w SL 10YR7/3 SH 10YR8/2PR2A R + Vety SL Pale R + BrownWhiteUOuoUOuoURURUOVOVOVO77FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Res Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color15 Bowl00 24 120 3 5YR6/4 7.5YR7/2 5YR6/4 L 4A SR M PR3A W . . VOLight Pinkish Light 3B SRReddish Gray Reddish 2B SRBrown Brown16 Bowl 8L82 24 120 1 2.5YR6/4 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PA3A W SL 10YR7/3 SL 10YR7/3 - VOLight Pink Light 4A SR PR2A Very VeryReddish Reddish 3A SR Pale PaleBrown Brown 2B SR Brown Brown17 Cook pot 8L82 25 108 5 5YR5/3 7.5YR5/2 5YR4/3 L 5A R L FS5A W _ . . 10R5/6 - VRReddish Brown Reddish 4A R PR4A RedBrown Brown 3A R PR3A2A R18 Cook pot 8L82 25 112 1 10YR3/1 _ 10YR3/1 L 5A SR M FS5B W _ . URVery Dark Very Dark 4A SRGray Gray 3B SR2A R19 Cook pot 8L82 24 120 5 5YR4/4 2.5YR4/0 2.5YR4/2 L 5A SR M PA4A w SL . SL URReddish Dark Weak 4A SR PA3A R + R +Brown Gray Red 3A SR PR3A2C SR20 Cook pot 8L82 24 117 1 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR4/4 L 6A SA M FS5A w _ 2.5YR 2.5YR3/4 - VRReddish Reddish 5A SA 3/4 DarkBrown Brown 4A SR Dark Reddish3A R Reddish BrownBrown21 Cook pot 8L82 25 108 6 2.5YR4/2 10YR4/1 2.5YR4/2 L 5A R L FS4A w . . . VRWeak Dark Weak 3A R FS3ARed Gray Red PR3A22 Tell el- 8L82 25 112 2 10YR4/1 . 10YR4/1 L 4A SR MH PR4A w SM . PuBo VRYahu- Dark Dark 3A SRdiyeh Gray Gray 2B RwareFig. 5.5, continued. Field C: Pottery descriptions for nos. 15-22.Its width could not be determined, because its southern face was in the south balk of the Square, but if it was two rows wide, its width would have been about 1.00 m. Only one course of its boulder-and-chink construction was preserved, extending about 2.20 m. The best explanation is that it functioned as a terrace wall for constructions farther up the slope, like those found in this phase during 1984 in Square 8L63 (Battenfield and Herr 1989).Surface 8L82:26 (=8L82:27, hereafter:8L82:26) ran from the east (8L82:26) to the west balk (8L82:27). Among the flat-lying sherds was part of a large jar. The surface ran southward and sealed against the north face of Wall 8L82:16, but no other walls were found related to it. If Wall 8L82:16 was a terrace wall, Surface 8L82:26 would have been the downslope surface associated with it. Because domestic remains were found farther to the south in other Squares of this phase, it is suggested that the remains in Square 8L82 reflected a shallow terrace with domestic occupation. Earth Layer 8L82:18 was non-surface debris at the western edge of Wall 8L82:16 and above Surface 8L82:26. It may have represented debris deposited in the area at the end of the phase. Analysis of the pottery from the surface dated it to EB III (fig. 5.5-1-6).Field Phase 7 (FP 5 in 1984) (fig. 5.6)Loci: 8L82:17 Wall8L82:19 Earth LayerWall 8L82:17 was ca. 1.45 m long, its average width was only ca. 0.20-0.28 m, and it stood one to two courses high (see fig. 5.4, above). It seems to have been founded upon Surface 8L82:26 of FP 8 . Because it was too narrow to have functioned as a wall for a building, it may have been a small silo, bin, or similar enclosure. A better interpretation is that it held back a shallow terrace, which would explain its lack of a south face. Were it not for the small size of its stones and its loose construction, one would find it difficult to distinguish between it and Wall 8L82:7 of FP 6 immediately adjacent and parallel to it on the north.Earth Layer 8L82:19 was located south of Wall 8L82:17 and could not be completely sampled because of limited space (only about 0.94 x 0.32 m), but it did not have the texture and consistency of a surface. Its bottom was not reached, and only one pail of pottery was removed. If Wall 8L82:17 was the northern part of a storage installation, then Earth Layer 8L82:19 may have been its fill. If, however, the wall was a78FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBFig. 5.6. Field C: Plan of FP 7. Fig. 5.7. Field C: Plan of FP 6.terrace wall, Earth Layer 8L82:19 would have been the earth it retained. Because the earth showed no signs of having been cut, and because it fit snugly against the irregularly-shaped stones of Wall 8L82:17, the material was probably deposited as fill when the wall was built. Analysis of the latest pottery yielded an EB III date. The FP-7 surfaces were probably leveled during preparations for FP-5 construction.Field Phase 6 (fig. 5.7)Loci: 8L82:7 Wall8L82:24 Surface (=8L82:25)8L82.-25 Surface (=8L82:24)8L82:29 SurfaceWall 8L82:7 was a two-row wall running east- west near the south balk for about 1.90 m (See fig. 5.4, above). It was constructed immediately in front of the north face of FP-7 Wall 8L82:17, putting that phase out of use. Like Walls 8L82:16 and 8L82:17 of earlier phases, it probably rested on bedrock, though this relationship was not clearly established. The 1984 report states that Wall 8L82:7 may have served as an animal pen, storage area, or the like, but only one row had then been excavated (Battenfield and Herr 1989). With two rows exposed it can now be identified as a fragment of a house wall.Running up to Wall 8L82:7 on the north was Surface 8L82:24 (=8L82:25, hereafter: 8L82:24). Whereas Surface 8L82-.25 was traced in the eastern half of the Square, Surface 8L82:24 was found in the western half. At its northern extent the surface was cut by FP-4 Wall 8L82:5, breaking any architectural connections to the north, but others may have existed outside the Square to the east and west. Nothing beyond a fragmentary plan can thus be suggested for FP 6 .Fragmentary cobble Surface 8L82:29 represented a resurfacing of 8L82:24. It consisted of approximately fifty small cobbles and some twenty medium-sized ones lying flat over an area in the middle of the Square measuring ca. 4.00 x1.50 m and extending into the, west balk (fig. 5.8). Ashy pockets immediately below the cobbles on Surface 8L82:24 were clues that burning had taken place in the area necessitating the surface repair. Gobble surfaces can be interior surfaces: they may provide ease in walking, protect against insects or rodents rooting in the surface, and hinder the gathering of moisture. But no finds of a domestic nature were made on either surface.Analysis of the latest pottery placed it at the end of the Middle Bronze Age (see fig. 5.5:7-22, above). Included was a body sherd of Tell el- Yahudiyeh ware (see fig. 5.5:22,' above). Especially frequent were cream-colored sherds with a thick cream slip, highly burnished, and thin brown-painted lines (wavy and straight). On79FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBflV0/• J / _V12* v r13 14T \ i /* 15\i 16/ V I17 <^ : " A/18Vc.19' Jp u a a o r ? : ;20\ i ^ 7-c.■ ' . 24( 1( \) = r 7 - <27\ I +25f 26 28I I2i = = =9JA30 ,I : A31 323334350 10LGHFig. 5.12. Field C: Pottery from FP 5 (nos. 1-24), FP 4 (nos. 25-34), and a single Middle Bronze sherd from a secondary deposit (no. 35).82FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pithos 8L82 23 103 1 5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 5YR6/4 L 6A SA L FS7A W 5YR5/3 URLight Dark Light 5A R FS6A ReddishReddish Gray Reddish 4A R FS5A BrownBrown Brown 3A R FS4APR5APR4A2 Jar 8L82 13 91 4 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/4 . L 6A A L FS5A W . . . . ' RiN UOPink Gray Pink 4A R FS4A3A R PR4A2A R3 Jar 8L82 13 91 3 2.5YR6/6 ■ 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR6/6 L 6A A M FS4A w . . . . RiR VOLight Pinkish Light 5A SARed Gray Red 3A R2A R4 Jug 8L82 13 91 5 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR4/0 L 6A A L FS6A w SL 5YR7/4 SL 10YR8/2 . UOLight Gray Dark 5A SA FS4A R + Pink R + WhiteRed Gray 3A B2A R5 Jug 8L82 28 118 4 7.5YR8/2 . 10YR7/3 L 4A R L . PR4A w . . . . . VOPinkish Very 3A R PR3AWhite Pale 2L SR PR2ABrown6 Jug 8L82 22 105 4 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 7A A L PR5A w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/2 . UOLight Gray Light 6A SA PR4A R + Very R + WhiteReddish Reddish 5A R PR3A PaleBrown Brown 3A R Brown7 Jug 8L82 13 114 1 7.5YR6/4 10YR6/1 7.5YR6/4 L 6A R M PR5A w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/2 _ VOLight Gray Light 5A R PR4A R + R + WhiteBrown Brown 4A R3A R8 Krater 8L82 28 118 2 10YR8/2 10YR7/1 10YR8/2 L 5A SR M PA4A w _ _ _ . . VOWhite Light White 4A SR PR3AGray 3A SR PR2A2B SR9 Krater 8L82 22 106 1 5YR6/4 5YR6/4 SYR 6/4 L 6A SA L PR5A w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/3 _ VOLight Light Light 5A R R + Very R + Very PaleReddish Reddish Reddish 3A R Pale BrownBrown Brown Brown Brown10 Bowl 8L82 23 103 2 5YR6/4 10YR6/1 5YR6/1 L 5A R M PR6A w SL 5YR8/1 SL 5YR8/1 _ UOLight Gray Light 4A R PR5A R + White R + WhiteReddish Reddish 3A R FS5ABrown Brown PR3A11 Bowl 8L82 28 118 1 5YR5/4 7.5YR8/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR L FS5A w SM 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/3 _ UOReddish White Pink 4A SR PA4A Very R + VeryBrown 3A SR PA3A Pale Pale2B SR PR2A Brown Brown12 Bowl 8L82 22 105 3 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR6/4 L 6A SA VL PR6A w SL 5YR8/2 SL 10YR8/2 _ UOLight Dark Light 5A R PR5A R + Pinkish R + WhiteBrown Gray Brown 3A R PR4A White13 Bowl 8L82 13 111 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR6/2 L 5A R L PR4A w . . . . . VOLight Pinkish Pinkish 4A R PR3ABrown Gray Gray 3A R14 Bowl . 8L82 13 91 2 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4' L 6A R L PR5A w SL 5YR8/2 SL 5YR8/2 . UOPink Light Pink 5A R PR3A R + Pinkish R + PinkishGray 3A R White White15 Bowl 8L82 22 105 1 2.5YR5/6 10YR7/3 2.5YR5/6 L 4A R VL PR4A w SL 5YR8/2 SL 5YR8/2 . VORed Very Pale Red 3A R R + Pinkish R + PinkishBrown White White16 Bowl 8L82 22 106 6 5YR7/6 5YR7/6 2.5YR6/6 L 4A R VL PR4A w SL 5YR8/1 SL 5YR8/1 _ VOReddish Reddish Light R + W hite. R + White- Yellow Yellow Red17 Platter 8L82 22 106 2 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/4 L 6A R VL PR5A w SL 5YR8/1 SL 5YR8/2 . UOPink Gray Pink 5A R PR3A R + White R + White3A R18 Bowl 8L82 28 125 1 7.5YR7/4 ' . 7.5YR7/4 L 6A R L PA4A w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/2 _ VOPink Pink 5A R R + Very R + White4A SR Pale3A SR Brown2A SR19 Cook pot 8L82 22 106 4 5YR4/1 . 5YR4/2 L 5A R VL FS7A w . . . . VRDark Dark 4A R FS6AGray Reddish 3A R FS5AGray PR4A______ PR3AFig. 5.12, continued. Field C: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-19.83FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBNo Type _ s a _ Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape; Density Ext Color Int . Color20 Cook pot 8L82 22 106 5 10YR6/2 2.5YR6/2 10YR6/2 L 6A A VL FS3A W VOLight Light LightBrownish Brownish BrownishGray Gray Gray21 Bowl 8L82 22 98 1 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A R VL FC7A W SL 10YR8/2 SL 10YR8/2 . UOPink Gray Pink FC6A WB White WB WhitePR5APR3ABa + Ba +22 Jug 8L82 22 105 2 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 4A R VL , w SL 5YR8/2 . Pa: UOPink Gray Pink R + Pinkish 7.5YR6/4WB White Light10R3/4DuskyRedBrown' 23 Jug 8L82 22 106 3 10YR7/3 7.5YR6/0 10YR7/3 L 5A R VL PR5A w SL 10YR8/3 Pa: UOVery Gray Very 3A R Bo+ Very 10R4/3Pale Pale Pale WeakBrown Brown Brown Red24 Lamp 8L82 13 91 1 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 5A R L PR5A w _ . . . VRLight Gray Light 4A B PR4AReddish Reddish 3A RBrown Brown25 Jar 8L82 5 . 107 1 7.5YR5/2 5Y6/1 7.5YR5/2 L 6A SA L FS6A w . URBrown Gray Brown 4A R PR4A26 Jug 8L82 5 109 3 5YR5/3 5YR5/1 5YR5/3 L 5A R L FS6A w . . . . VOReddish Gray Reddish 4A R PR3ABrown Brown 3A R27 Jug 8L82 5 109 2 5YR6/4 10YR4/0 10YR7/3 L 5A R L FC6A w . . . . UOLigjit Dark Very 4A R PR6AReddish Gray Pale 3A R PR4ABrown Brown28 Bowl 8L82 5 122 1 7.5YR6/2 10YR5/1 7.5YR6/2 L 6A A L PR5A w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/2 UOPinkish Gray Pinkish 4A R PR4A R + Very R + WhiteGray Gray PR3A PaleBrown29 Bowl 8L82 5 109 1 10YR7/3 10YR7/3 7.5YR7/4 L 6A A L FC6A w _ . SL 10YR8/2 . VOVery Very Pink 5A R PR5A R + WhitePale Pale 4A RBrown Brown30 Cook 8L82 5 122 4 5YR5/4 10YR3/1 5YR5/4 L 6A A L FC7A w 5YR3/1 7.5YR4/2 URBowl Reddish Very Reddish 5A R PR5A Very DarkBrown Dark Brown 4A R PR4A Dark BrownGray 3A R Gray31 Cook pot 8L82 5 126 2 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR4/4 L 5A R L PR5A w SL 2.5YR _ . InR VOReddish Reddish 4A R PR4A R + 4/4Brown Brown 3A R N ReddishBrown32 Cook pot 8L82 5 126 1 2.5YR4/4 2.5YR4/0 2.5YR5/4 L 6A A L PR6A w _ _ . _ . URReddish Dark Reddish 5A R PR5ABrown •• Gray Brown 3A R PR4A33 Cook pot 8L82 5 122 2 7.5YR5/4 10YR6/3 7.5YR5/4 L 4A R L FC6A w . 7.5YR _ 7.5YR4/2 . VRBrown Pale Brown 3A R FS5A 4/2 DarkBrown PR4A DarkBrownBrown34 Cook pot 8L82 5 107 2 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR6/4 L 5A 1R L FS5A w . . . UOLight Dark Light 4A R PR4ABrown Gray Brown 3A R35 Cook pot 8L82 5 122 3 5YR5/4 10YR3/1 5YR5/4 L 6A A L FC7A w _ 2.5YR 2.5YR4/2 Ap N URReddish Very Reddish 5A R FS5A 4/2 Weak ImBrown Dark Brown 4A R FS3A Weak RedGray RedFig. 5.12, continued. Field C: Pottery descriptions for nos. 20-35.84FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBField Phase 4 (fig. 5.13)Loci: 8L82:48L82:5A8L82:5B8L82-.98L82:11Ash Layer (=8L82:9, = 8L82:11)WallWallAsh Layer (=8L82:4, = 8L82:11)Ash Layer (=8L82:4, = 8L82:9)Fig. 5.13. Field C: Plan of FP 4.One of the most architecturally striking features in Field C in 1984 and 1987 was terrace revetment Wall 8L82:5 (Battenfield and Herr 1989). Excavation has so far exposed eight courses composed of large cobbles. In 1984 it was interpreted as a possible pit lining for the ash dump to its north designated 8L82:4 (=8L82:9). But as excavation proceeded this season it was seen that Wall 8L82:5 was built in two stages, both revetted against earlier material to the south (see fig. 5.10, above). Both sections of the wall were constructed so that their north faces leaned inward to the south.Roughly one-half of the exposed wall in the west was built first (Wall 8L82:5A). Its stones appeared well dressed and laid with care. A clear vertical line was traceable, as if the western half of the wall was built first and ended in a corner, turning south (see fig. 5.10, above). However, no architectural fragments to the south aligned withthat "corner" (including the FP-6 Walls 8L82:13 and 8L82:32). However, the eastern portion of the wall (8L82:5B) was revetted in such a way that it leaned both to the south, like the western portion, and slightly to the west. The stones in Wall 8L82:5B were not as well hewn and not constructed as securely as those in Wall 8L82:5A. The stones seem to have been reused.At its greatest length in the Square, the wall (with its combined parts) measured ca. 4.40 m, its width varied from about 0.80-1.00 m, and its height, as it has been so far exposed, was about1.30 m. The builders of the wall cut the remains from all earlier phases to the south (FPs 9-5). To the north it was sealed against by Ash Layer 8L82:4 (=8L82:9, =8L82:11, hereafter: 8L82:4). Ash Layer 8L82:4 sealed against Wall 8L82:5A. 8L82:9 sealed against Wall 8L82:5B. Ash Layer 8L82:11 was the remainder of the debris left unexcavated beneath Ash Layers 8L82:4 and 8L82:9 when space between the north balk and Wall 8L82:5 became too narrow. As with most revetment walls, no foundation trench was found.In order to trace this wall further, one would have to open two new Squares: Square 8L83 to the east and Square 8L92 to the north. Though its function is still not clear, it may have been a terrace wall, possibly to improve natural bedrock contours. The pottery from the wall suggested that the western portion was first constructed in the Late Bronze period and the eastern portion in the Iron I. Pottery from the Ash Layer 8L82:4 was Iron I. However, no Late Bronze/Iron I surfaces were found which might be considered contemporary. They were probably removed by FP-3 activities (Battenfield and Herr 1989).The terrace may have been used for open-air food preparation, which may explain the ash layer. Occupants may have thrown ash downhill over the wall from burning activities taking place on the terrace above. Alternately, the terrace could have been used for crops, while weeds and brush were burned on the terrace below. In either case it is interesting to note that settlement intensity at Tell el-cUmeiri seems to have abated from the domestic features of the EB III and MB II phases (FPs 8-5) to the probable extra-urban activities reflected in FP 4.Of more importance were the ceramic indications that this phase lasted from late Late Bronze into the Early Iron I period, suggesting a continuity of occupation without destruction (see fig. 5.12:25-34, above). However, if the northern slope was outside the settlement during FP 4, as we suggest, the area may not have reflected the stratigraphic nonconformities of the site.85FIELD C: THE NORTHERN SUBURBField Phases 3-2 ConclusionLoci: 8L82:2 8L82:3 8L82:6 8L82:8 8L82:14 8L82:15Earth Layer 8L82:14 (= 8L82:15, hereafter: 8L82:14) was dry and crumbly. (Locus number 8L82:14 was assigned at the end of 1984, while number 8L82:15 was assigned to the same layer at the beginning of the 1987 season.) It was probably a fill layer for Surface 8L82:3 (=8L82:8) immediately above. Analysis indicates that the latest pottery was Late Iron II.The following objects were found: two spindle whorls, one grindstone, one small mortar, one loaf-shaped grindstone, and one bone tool fragment. These objects argue for a measure of human occupation of the domestic sort in the area. The remainder of these phases have been discussed in the 1984 report (Battenfield and Herr 1989).Field Phase 1No new information surfaced for FP 1 in 1987.Earth Layer (=8L82:6) Surface (=8L82:8)Earth Layer (=8L82:2) Surface (=8L82:3) -Earth Layer (=8L82:15) Earth Layer (=8L82:14)The stratigraphic history of the northern slope of Tell el-cUmeiri has been clarified to some extent since 1984, despite the lack of outstanding architecture. The question of whether the area was urban or extra-urban in its various periods has not been finally answered, though tentative suggestions may be proffered. The numerous occupational surfaces, especially in the Early Bronze and Middle Bronze phases, implied more than extra-urban exposure surfaces. Ash Layer 8L82:31 of FP 9 (EB III) suggested a possible destruction. During Middle Bronze times, the fragmentary architectural remains suggested a domestic compound, but nothing specific could be determined. Ash Layer 8L82:4 of FP 4 (Iron I) suggested possible extra-urban crop preparation.Meanwhile the relationship of the northern suburb, which extended downslope toward the water source, and the source itself still eludes us. The hypothesis that there was a staircase from the source to the summit of the tell remains an attractive one, though none of our remains may be so interpreted. The two apparent lines of defense visible on the surface and forming a converging V-shape immediately above the source need excavation and study. The idea of opening a Field on the lower eastern leg of the V has merit for future seasons.REFERENCESBattenfield, J. R„ and Herr, L. G. el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T.1989 Field C: The Northern Suburb. Pp. 258-281 in Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell Institute of Archaeology./865K96 5K97 6K06 6K07FP1FP2FP3FP4FP5FP6B2 7 8W9 W12W137 16 123 112 8B 11413AS ll S17 9 13BS35 49S22 S23 S12S21 S32W30S7S14 16 15 17611S331315 8 12S16 S17 115118S19S22 23S24S25 S20 S30S21 S34S26FP7S14 S28 S17518519 121528 S24 13252926S25S31S21P15S34P20 13C S35 13D527528533534519520S29S37S31S38S27W32S2829W35FP8S20S23S25W30 W16 W36 W27FP9S27 W24 S29 W5 122W llW8 W24 W18W13FP10B6Fig. 6.2. Field D: Stratigraphic sequence chart of loci.ooVOFIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEFIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACE0 1I ■ IGJPMDLGH2M6K06 I 6K07Fig. 6.3. Field D: Plan of FP 10 and FP 9.90CHAPTER 6Field D: The Lower Southern TerraceP. M. Michele Daviau Wilfrid Laurier UniversityIntroductionExcavation on the lower southern terrace of Tell el-cUmeiri was initiated in 1984. Four Squares (5K76, 5K77, 5K86, and 5K87) located immediately north of the south lip of the terrace (see figs. 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, above) yielded four phases of Early Bronze III occupation (Mitchel 1989). The tops of the earliest remains, Field Phase (FP) 5, were exposed only in a limited area (5K76) and are yet to be uncovered in the rest of these Squares. Major walls, occupational surfaces, and architectural installations were found in FP 4. The structures of this phase have been identified as houses with rectangular rooms and courtyards probably dating to Late EB III. The last phase with complete architecture (FP 3) consisted of two small houses (one rounded, the other angular) dug into the d e b r is o f th e F P -4 destruction/abandonment and were tentatively dated to the EB IV period, but should now be dated to EB III. Another phase (FP 2) of fragmentary architecture should also be considered Late EB III (Geraty, et al. 1986: 135).In 1987 four additional Squares were opened in the hope that better preserved EB IV remains would be found making possible the establishment of a sequence of occupation in Late EB III. New Squares 5K96, 5K97, 6K06, and 6K07 were located north of those previously excavated, and extended to the upper edge of the terrace (fig. 6. 1) .87Field D: East Balk Section of Square 6K06 and Square 5K96.88FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACE6K06 | 5K96FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEDiscovery of bedrock in the northern part of Squares 6K06 and 6K07 revealed the northern limit of occupation on the terrace. A complex of rooms dating to EB III was uncovered. Eight phases of occupation and debris were distinguished in 1987, bringing the total number of Field Phases in Field D to ten (note that no additional data were gathered for FP 5 and FP 4). These eight phases will be described in the order of deposition and appear in tabular form in fig. 6.2.Field Phases 10 and 9 (fig. 6.3)Field Phase 10Loci: 5K96:36 Bedrock 6K06:6 Bedrock(=6K06:36,=6K07:7)6K06:36 Bedrock (=6K06:6, =6K07:7) 6K07:7 Bedrock (=6K06:6,= 6K06:36)Field Phase 9Loci: 5K96:5 Wall 5K96:11 Wall 5K96:22 Installation 5K96:24 Wall 5K96-.27 Surface(=6K06:35) 5K96:29 Surface 6K06:8 Wall 6K06:13 Wall 6K06:18 Wall 6K06:24 Wall 6K06:35 SurfaceThe earliest architectural features on the lower southern terrace (FP 9) were founded on bedrock. In the northeast corner of Room 2 at the junction of Walls 6K06:8 and 5K96:5, Bedrock 6K06:36 (=6K06:6, = 6K07:7) was uncovered beneath the founding courses. It extended under beaten- earth Surface 6K06:35 in Room 2, but its extent to the south under Surface 5K96:29 has not yet been determined. Bedrock was also foundFig. 6.4. Field D: The EB m domestic complex viewed from the south.protruding through the lowest FP-8 surface in Room 3, 5K96:25, in the angle where Wall 5K96:5 abutted Wall 5K96:11 (fig. 6.4). The earliest walls appear to have been Wall 5K96:11 and Wall 6K06:13 which were bonded perpendicularly to each other, although the lowest course of Wall 6K06:13 has not yet been reached. All the other walls in this complex seem to abut this major feature. Wall 6K06:18 was built against and over a bedrock lip (6K06:6), although its founding course is yet to be uncovered, andFig. 6.5. Field D: Room 1 of the EB HI domestic complex, threshold in the upper right.91FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEremained sealed by Surface 6K06:37 of FP 7 (fig. 6.5). The projected west wall of Room 1, probably outside the Square to the west, may have been founded on bedrock as well. Further excavation to the west may illuminate this situation. Wall 6K06:24 (east of Wall 6K06:13) may also have been founded on bedrock, although excavation in Room 4 has not proceeded below Surface 5K96:18 of FP 7.While bedrock was found under the angle where Walls 5K96:5 and 5K96:11 met in Room 3, the founding courses remained sealed by Surface 5K96:25 of FP 8 at their southern and eastern ends respectively. In fact, while the upper four courses of Wall 5K96:11 seemed to form a corner to the north near its eastern end, the lowest course included an additional wall stone or threshold sealed against by Surface 5K96:25. Whether Wall 5K96:11 was associated with Wall 5K97:36 farther east (tentatively FP 8) is unknown at this stage of excavation, although the orientation (126°) seems to be similar (see fig. 6.8, below).Wall 5K96:11 was the most impressive wall uncovered in FP 9. At first thought to be a terrace wall with only the southern face finished, it soon became apparent that this wall functioned as a major construction feature with rooms on both sides. The wall itself was built of small limestone boulders ranging in size from ca. 0.25-0.50 m with cobble chinkstones. It was preserved to a height of ca. 0.77-1.20 m, made of four or five courses and was three rows wide (ca. 0.94 m).Although Wall 5K96:11 bonded with Wall 6K06:13, the construction was not the same in both. Like the other FP-9 walls, Wall 6K06:13 was made up of only two rows of boulder-and- chink construction. Nevertheless, the width of the walls was comparable, ca. 0.85-0.90 m. While most walls appeared to be dry-laid, some evidence for the use of mud mortar was found in Wall 6K06:13. Three courses of this wall have been exposed but the founding course has not yet been reachedWhere Wall 5K96:5 abutted Wall 6K06:8, Installation 5K96:22, a bin, was incorporated into the wall. The floor of the bin was formed of the lower courses of the wall itself while the outer lining was made of one large flat stone on edgeW $Fig. 6.6. Field D: Bin in Room 2 of the EB n i domestic complex.and several large cobbles (fig. 6.6; see also fig. 6.14, below).Wall 5K96:24 ran westward from Wall 5K96:5, making up the south wall of Room 2, abutting Wall 5K96:5 at a 90’ angle and was parallel to Wall 6K06:8 to the north. To date, only one course of Wall 5K96:24 has been exposed on its north face above Surface 5K96:29. The southern side has not been excavated to FP-9 levels. Surface 5K96:29, the earliest in Room 2, was laid on bedrock along Wall 6K06:8 where it was excavated as Surface 6K06:35 (=5K96:27). It extended southward to the north face of Wall 5K96:24 where it was not excavated. Above it, Surface 5K96:27 appeared to run up to Wall 5K96:24 as well.The bedrock terrace formed the north and east perimeters of this complex, but its relationship to the FP-9 structures is difficult to determine. Fill layers behind (north of) Wall 6K06:18 could have served to connect sections of the bedrock terrace with the wall, but because of its proximity to the balk, Earth Layer 6K06:16 (probably of FP 6B), was only partially excavated. While it sealed against the north face of Wall 6K06:18, it could not be accurately connected with remains south of the wall. Additional loci under the lip of the bedrock to the north of FP-6B Wall 6K06:30 remain to be identified (see fig. 6.4, above).The most distinctive feature of the bedrock was uncovered in Square 6K07 where the south face of the limestone had been cut in antiquity to form a curved shelf (see fig. 6.4, above). At some92FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo TYPe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 6K06 35 84 4 10YR7/2 10YR7/3 L 6A SR MH PA5A H VRLight Very 5A SR PA4AGray Pale 4A SR PA3ABrown 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A2 Pith os 6K06 35 84 6 5YR6/4 5YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M FS7A W . . . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR FS6AReddish Reddish 3A SR PA7ABrown Brown 2B SR PA5APA4APA3APR3A3 Jar 6K06 35 84 1 5YR7/4 5YR4/1 5YR7/3 L 6A SR MH PA5A H - . . _ URPink Dark Pink 5A SR PA4AGray 3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3A4 Platter 5K96 27 69 1 2.5YR5/2 . 2.5YRN4/ L 6A SR M FS5A H SL 7.5YR SM 7.5YR7/2 - URWeak Dark 5A SR FS4A 7/2 PinkishRed Gray 4A SR PA4A Pinkish Gray3A SR PA3A GrayP 2B SR PR3A5A R4A R5 Cook pot 6K06 35 84 5 5YR6/2 5YR6/4 10YR7/3 L 6A SR H FS5A H VRPinkish Light Very . 5A SR PA4AGray Reddish Pale 4A SR PA3ABrown Brown 3A SR PR3AP 2B SR5A SR4A SR6 Cook pot 6K06 35 84 3 2.5YR . 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR H PA5A H . . . VOGray Light 5A SR PA4AReddish A PA3ABrown 4A A PR3A3A SASB SA7 Cook pot 6K06 35 84 2 5YR6/1 . 5YR6/1 L 6A R MH PA4A H URGray Gray 5A A PA3A4A A3A SA2B SA8 Cook pot 5K96 27 73 1 7.5YRN5/ _ 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SR H PA4A H _ VRGray Pink 5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SR9 Cook pot 5K96 27 69 2 7.5YR7/4 . 7.5YR7/2 L 6A R MH PA5A H VRPink Pinkish 5A SR PA4AGray A PA3A4A SR3A SR2B SRFig. 6.7. Field D: Pottery and pottery descriptions from FP 9.93FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEpoint after this was done, a section of bedrock broke off. The pottery in the crack between the two sections was dated to the Early Bronze Age and may be fill associated with equivalent Surfaces0l _16K07:17 (FP 6 B) and 6K07.T3 (FP 6 A), the latest Early Bronze use layer to cover the shelf. The pottery from the surfaces of FP 9 was EB III (fig.6.7).2 M .1GJPMDLGH6K06 6K07Fig. 6.8. Field D: Plan of FP 8.94FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEField Phase 8 (fig. 6.8)Loci: 5K96:55K96:115K96:165K96:205K96:225K96:235K96:245K96:255K96:305K97:275K97:305K97:335K97:366K06:86K06:136K06.186K06:24Wall (Cont.Wall (Cont.WallSurfaceInstallationSurfaceWall (Cont.SurfaceWallWallSurface (= Surface (= WallWall (Cont. Wall (Cont. Wall (Cont, Wall (Cont.from FP 9) from FP 9)(Cont. from FP 9) from FP 9)5K97:33)5K97:30)from FP 9) from FP 9) from FP 9) from FP 9)Field Phase 8 was discovered only in Square 5K96, and perhaps Square 5K97, where excavation of surfaces reached the lowest levels. But because the major walls in the field were already in use during FP 9, it can be assumed that full use of the complex continued in the other Squares and complete discovery only awaits further excavation. Three thin (ca. 0.05-0.10 m) beaten-earth surfaces (5K96:20, 5K96:23,5K96:25) that sealed against Walls 5K96:5, 5K96:11, and 5K96:16 in Room 3 were part of FP 8 . The earliest, Surface 5K96:25, was unexcavated. All three surfaces continued south and west of Wall 5K96:16. Corresponding surfaces were not reached in the remaining three Squares.Walls 5K96:5 and 5K96:11, described above (FP 9), remained in use. Wall 5K96:16, the south wall of Room 3, extended eastward from Wall 5K96:5 in a very ruined condition (fig. 6.9). Tumbled stones appeared in Surface 5K96:25 to the south of Wall 5K96:16 and cannot be well understood until Surface 5K96:25 is excavated. Running northeast and perpendicular to Wall 5K96:16 was a line of stones that was sealed against by Surface 5K96:25 and may represent an earlier, eastern wall (5K96:30) that was still in use with this surface, but not with Surfaces 5K96:20 and 5K96:23 which ran over it (see fig.6.9).The finds from these surfaces demonstrate what would be typical of a domestic occupation layer. In 96 baskets of earth (ca. 0.87 m3), Surface 5K96:23 yielded 1 spindle whorl, 1 flint blade, 126 flint pieces, 661 sherds, 65 sheep/goat and 5 cattle bones, and an ash pocket. A similar proportion of finds was uncovered in the 105 baskets (ca. 0.95 m3) of earth from Surface 5K96:20: 2 spindle whorls, 1 basalt grinder, 1 quern, 2 gaming pieces, 1020 sherds, bones (75 sheep/goat, 5 cattle, and 20 large mammal), an ashy area, and several large patches (ca. 0.50-1.00 m) of burned bricky material. While this material was embedded in Surface 5K96:20 and left red- rust burn marks on the courses of Walls 5K96:5 and 5K96:11, it was not clear that this patchy material represented destruction debris. Some domestic or craft activity may account for these remains as there was no evidence for fallen mudbrick wall or ceiling material.Certain loci in Square 5K97 may also have belonged to FP 8 , although they are at present unexcavated: Walls 5K97:27 and 5X97:36 and beaten-earth Surface 5K97:30 (=5K97:33). The situation was unclear because the balk between Squares 5K96 and 5K97 (only partiallydismantled) interrupted connections of the surfaces (see fig. 6.4, above). Note the pithos base discovered on Surface 5K97:30 (discussed below in FP 7). The pottery from the FP-8 surfaces was EB III (figs. 6.10 and 6.11).Fig. 6.9. Field D: Room 3 of the EB UI domestic complex.95FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEV TIT24 25681417f31Fig. 6.10. Field D : Pottery from FP 8.10 ,^ LGH3296FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type Sq L o c u s Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 5K96 23 63 2 10YR4/1 2.5YR5/4 L 6A SR H PA6A W VOGray Reddish 5A SR PA5ABrown 4A SA3A SR2A SR2 Jar 5K96 20 57 6 10YR6/3 10YR6/1 10YR7/3 L 6A SA MH FS5A H . _ _ _ URPale Gray Pink 5A A PA4ABrown 4A A PA3A3A A PR3A2B SA PR2A3 Jar 5K96 20 57 7 2.5YR5/2 _ 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR M PA5A H . _ _ _ VRWeak LightReddish5A SR PR4ARed 4A SR PR3ABrown 3A SR PR2A2B SR4 Jar 5K96 20 57 3 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR5/4 L 5A SR M PA4A H _ . . VRReddish Reddish 4A SR PR3ABrown Brown 3A SR2B SR5 Jar 5K96 20 57 1 5YR7/3 . 5YR7/3 L 7A SR M PA5A H . _ . VRPink Pink 6A SR PA4A5A A PA3A4A SA PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SA6 Jar 5K96 20 57 9 SYR 6/3 _ 5YR6/3 L 5A SR M PA3A H . . . , VOLight Light 4A SA PR3AReddish Reddish 3A SABrown Brown 2B SA7 Jar 5K96 20 58 1 2.5YR5/4 2.5YR6/4 10YR7/4 L 6A SR MH PR4A H _ . _ . VRReddish Light Very 5A SR PA3ABrown Reddish Pale 4A SRBrown Brown 3A SR2B SR8 Jar 5K96 20 59 3 5YR6/2 5YR5/2 5YR5/1 L 6A R H PA5A H _ . . . VRPinkish Reddish Gray 5A SR PA4AGray Gray 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR9 Jar 5K96 20 59 6 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR MH FS7A H . . . VOLight Light 4A SR PA5AReddish Reddish 3A SR PA4ABrown Brown 2B SR PR3AP 5A R PR2A4A SR10 Jar 5K96 20 59 7 5YR6/1 . 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A H _ _ _ . VOGray Pink 5A SR PA3A4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR11 Jar 5K96 20 58 5 5YR5/1 . 5YR5/1 L 6A SR H PA3A H . _ . _ VRGray Gray 5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SR12 Jar 5K96 20 59 4 2.5YR5/4 i 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA3A H . . . _ VOReddish Pink 4A SR PR2ABrown 3A SR2B SR13 Jar 5K96 20 59 5 2.5YR5/4 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR MH PA4A H . . . VOReddish Light Light 4A SR PR4ABrown Reddish Red 3A SR PR3ABrown 2B SRP 5A R14 Jar 5K96 20 59 11 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR MH FS5A H . _ _ _ u oPink Gray Pink 4A SR FS4A3A SR PA4A2B SR PA3AP 4A R PR3A15 Pithos 5K96 20 58 6 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 6A R M PR3A W SL 5YR7/4 SL 5YR7/4 - u oLight Gray Light 5A R Pink PinkRed Red 4A SR3A SR2B SRFig. 6.10, con tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-1597FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type So Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color16 Pith os 5K96 20 58 8 2.5YR6/6 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M FS5A W SM 7.5YR SM 7.5YR7/4 - u oLight Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A 7/4 PinkRed 3A SR PA3A Pink2B SR PR3AP 5A . R4A R -17 Jar 5K96 23 60 1 5YR6/4 _ 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M FS6A W SL 10YR4/4 - . VOLight Pink 5A SR PA5A R + WeakReddish 4A SR PA4A RedBrown 3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3A18 Jar 5K96 23 60 4 2.5YR5/6 10YR5/1 2.5YR5/6 L 5A SR M FS7A H . u oRed Gray Red 4A SR FS6A3A SR PA5A2B SR PA4AP 4A R PA3AJPR2A19 Jar 5K96 20 57 4 2.5YR5/2 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR5/2 ■ L 5A SR M FS5A H SM 10YR7/2 - . URWeak Gray Weak 4A • SR PA4A LightRed Red 3A SR PA3A Gray2B SR PR3A20 Jar 5K96 20 59 8 5YR6/2 . 5YR6/2 L 5A SR H PA4A W _ . ■ . VRPinkish Pinkish 4A SR PR3AGray Gray 3A SR2B SR21 Jar 5K96 20 59 12 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR6/4 L 6A A MH PA4A H _ . . VOLight Pink Light 5A A PA3AReddish Reddish 4A . A PR3ABrown Brown 3A A2B A22 Jar 5K96 20 58 10 7.5YR6/2 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR6/2 L 5A SR M . W _ . . URPinkish Gray Pinkish 4A SRGray Gray 3A SR2B SR22 Jar 5K96 23 63 1 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SA M PA4A W . . ‘ . URDark Dark Pink 4A A PA3AGray Gray 3A A2A SA24 Jug 5K96 23 63 3 5YR7/3 7.5YR4/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PA5A W _ _ . UOPink Dark Pink 5A A PA4AGray SR PA3A/ 4A SA PR3A3A SA2A SR25 Jug 5K96 20 59 10 7.5YR7/4 . 7.5YR7/4 L 4A SR M PR3A H . . VOPink Pink 3A SR2B SRL 5A R4A SR3A SR26 Bowl 5K96 20 57 10 2.5YR6/6 . 2.5YR6/6 L 6A R L PA3A W SM 10YR5/4 - . . VOLight Light 5A SR PR3A HBM WeakRed Red 4A SR PR2A Red3A SR2B SR27 Bowl 5K96 20 58 3 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA4A H . _ . UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PA3AYellow Yellow 3A SR2B SRP 5A SR28 Bowl 5K96 20 57 5 2.5YR6/6 10YR5/1 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR MH FS5A H . _ UOLight Gray Light 5A SA FS4ARed Red 4A SA PA5A3A SA PA4A2B SA PA3AP 5A SA PR4A4A SR PR3APR2A29 Bowl 5K96 20 59 1 7.5YR7/4 2.5YRN5/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A R M PA4A W . SL 2.5YR5/2 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A R PA3A Weak3A R PR3A Red2B R PR2AFig. 6.10, con tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 16-2998FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type Sq Locus Pail ReR Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor Fire'Ext Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color30 Bowl 5K96 20 59 2 SYR 6/8 . SYR 6/8 L 5A SR M PA5A H SMR 10YR5/4 SM 7.5R4/4 DB VOReddish Reddish 4A SR PA4A Weak HB WeakYellow Yellow 3A SR PA3A Red Red2C SR PR4APR3A31 Platter 5K96 20 57 2 5YR7/6 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/4 L 4A SR L PA5A H SLR 10YR8/3 - - VOReddish Pink Light 3A SR PA4A VeryYellow Reddish 2B SR PA3A PaleBrown PR3A Brown;WhitealongRim32 Plate 5K96 20 58 4 2.5YR6/6 5YR4/1 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR M FS6A H . _ UOLight Dark Light 5A SR PA5ARed Gray Red 4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3AFig. 6.10, continued. Field D: Pottery descriptions for nos. 30-32.1 21No Type_____Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color___________________________Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment_______ Decor FireExt Core Int Tvne Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Cook pot 5K96 23 60 3 10YR4/1 . 7.5YR6/2 L 5A SR MH PA5A H - VRDark Pinkish 4A SR PA4AGray Gray 3A SR2B SRP 5A R4A R3A R2 Cook pot 5K96 23 60 2 2.5YR5/4 . 7.5YR6/2 L 6A SR MH PA5A HB - UOReddish Pinkish 5A SR PA4ABrown Gray 4A SR PR3A2B SRP 6A R5A * R4A R3A R3 Cook pot 5K96 23 60 5 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR M PA6A W - VRLight Pinkish Light 5A SR ,PR3AReddish Gray Reddish 4A SRBrown Brown 3A SR2B SR4 Cook pot 5K96 20 58 9 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR6/4 L 7A R MH PA3A H . - - VOLight Pink Light 6A RReddish Reddish 5A SRBrown Brown 4A SR3A SR2B SRP 5A R4A RFig. 6.11. Field D: Pottery from FP 8, continued; and pottery descriptions for nos. 1-4.99FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Tvoe So Locus Pail Rec Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color5 Cook pot 5K96 20 58 11 5YR7/6 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SR MH JR H . VOReddish Pink 5A SRYellow 4A SR3A SR2B SR6 Cook pot 5K96 20 58 2 2.5YR5/2 - 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R M PA3A H . VRWeak Light 4A SR PA2ARed Red 3A SR2B SR7 Cook pot 5K96 23 63 4 10YR4/1 2.5YR5/4 L 6A SR H PA5A W . VODark Reddish 5A SR PR4AGray Brown 4A SA PR3A3B SR -2A SRFig. 6.11, con tinued . Field D: Pottery descriptions for nos. 5-7.Field Phase 7 (fig. 6.12) (FP 5 of 1984)i: 5K96:5 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)5K96:11 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)5K96:14 Surface5K96:16 Wall (Cont. from FP 8)5K96:17 Surface (=5K97:28, =6K06:28)5K96:18 Surface (=5K97:31, =6K06:33)5K96:19 Surface (=6K06:34)5K96:21 Installation5K96:22 Installation (Cont. from F5K96:28 Surface5K97:10 Wall5K97:13C Ash Layer5K97:13D Ash Layer5K97:15 Pithoi5K97:18 Earth Layer (=6K07:29)5K97:l9 Earth Layer5K97:20 Pithos5K97:21 Surface5K97:22 Ash Layer5K97:24 Surface5K97:25 Surface5K97:26 Debris Layer5K97:27 Wall (Cont. from FP 8)5K97:28 Surface (=5K96:17, = 6K06:28)5K97:29 Surface5K97:31 Surface (=5K96:18, = 6K06:33)5K97:32 Installation5K97:34 Surface5K97:35 Surface6K06:8 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)6K06:13 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)6K06:18 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)6K06:19 Surface6K06:20 Surface6K06:24 Wall (Cont. from FP 9)6K06:27 Surface (=5K96:14)6K06:28 Surface (=5K96:17, =5K97:28)6K06:29 Surface6K06:31 Surface6K06:33 Surface (=5K96:18, =5K97:31)6K06:34 Surface (=5K96:19)6K06:37 Surface6K06:38 Surface6K07:27 Surface6K07:28 Surface6K07:29 Earth Layer (=5K97:18)6K07:32 Wall6K07:35 WallField Phase 8 , distinguished clearly only in Square 5K96, continued with very little architectural change as FP 7 in all four Squares. In Square 5K96 the phase included occupation subsequent to the use of Wall 5K96:24 and prior to the complete abandonment of Wall 5K96:16. Although Wall 5K96:16 appeared to be parallel to Wall 5K96.11 in FP 8 , it was not clear from the remains how this feature functioned in this phase. It may have been a roof support of some kind (perhaps a pillar base); it clearly was too fragmentary to function as a wall enclosing a room paved by the FP-7 surfaces (see the discussion below). A second cluster of stones that appears to have been the ruined continuation of 5K96:16 at the south balk (fig. 6.13) may also have served as a pillar base implying that the room formed by these features was larger than the confines of Square 5K96. Wall 5K96:16 may, in fact, have continued to the south as Wall 5K86:29, a 1984 FP-4 wall (Mitchel 1989).In FP 7, a second series of thin (ca. 0.05-0.10 m) beaten-earth surfaces (5K96:14, 5K96:17, 5K96:18, 5K96:19) sealed against Walls 5K96:5, 5K96:11, and 5K96:16 in Room 3. Because the remains above these surfaces showed no indication of destruction or abandonment of the architectural100FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEv features, but represented continuous occupational buildup, they could only seldom be connected with ; surfaces in other rooms of the complex; however, all four surfaces could be traced south of Wall 5K96:16 and, over FP-8 Wall 5K96:24 into Room 2 west of Wall 5K96:5. Although all the surfaces , attributed to FP 7 sealed against Installation 5K96:22 (the bin) and therefore post-dated its construction, they probably were also in use with it (fig. 6.14).Embedded within Surface 5K96:19 in the southeastern part of Room 3 was a circular ring of earth and small cobbles (Installation5K96:21) with an approximatediameter of 1,50 m (fig. 6.15).Although it was easy to distinguish this pebble ring from thesurrounding surface, its function 'was more difficult to discern. An installation described as "a kind of oven ... formed of pebbles and plaster" is mentioned in relation to the preparation of lime plaster in an EB III building at Numeira (Coogan 1984: 11). No pottery, objects, or other finds were noted with the installation, whereas Surface 5K96:19 yielded over 800 sherds of domestic vessels, bones (46 sheep/goat,' 3 Cattle, and 8 large mammal),' 439 flint pieces, 2 ceramic jar stoppers, and 4 spindle whorls in 143 baskets (ca. 1.30 m3) of earth. ,Th e . succeeding ' surface (5K96:18) also sealed against all major wall features of Room 3 and continued east as - Surface 5K97:31, the lowest occupation layer exposed this season in that Square. Surface 5K97:31 remained linexcavated, but ran up to Wall 5K97:27 (continuing from FP 8), Wall 5K97:10 (replacing Wall 5K97:36 of FP 8), and was cut by Installation 5K97:32, an ash pit. ." The FP-7 occupational buildup in the two southern Squares was represented not only by Surfaces 5K96:19, 5K96:18, arid 5K97:31,V A ■, >A'-;■ ' a „ *H M a BFig. 6.13; Field D: The EB HI domestic complex as viewed from the east.fragmentary Surfaces 5K97:21, 5K97:24,5K97:25, and 5K97:28 directly above the previous surface group; Earth Layer 5K97:18 (a refuse deposit); and Ash Layer 5K97:22. .■ Surfaces 5K97:34 arid 5K97:35 sealed against Wall 5K97:27. Surface 5K97:34 was discolored by burning, and along with,Surface 5K97:35, was . the use layer on which at least two large pithoi (5K97:15) were smashed in place (figs. 6.16 and6.17). The contents of one Of these pithoi, found immediately below the smashed sherds, included7 ---------:-.i-■ 7S . V , ' r ‘‘' v ' T 'but also by subsequent successive t . . '■ .Surfaces 5K96:17 and 5K96:14; */&--' >71 R7- 'Surfaces 5K97:29. 5K97:34. and V-* •, ,5K97:35 on the same stratigraphic level as Surface 5K97:31;v*Fig. 6.14. Field D : Room 2 Of the EB m complex.102FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEFig. 6.15. Field D: Circular ring of stones in the EB III domestic complex.about 4,000 trilobate seeds, probably chick peas (David McCreery, oral communication, August 11, 1987), an identification which is supported by the illustration of carbonized chick peas from Arad (Amiran, 1978: 71, PI. 129:11).Fragmentary Surface 5K97:29 may have been in use at the same time as Surface 5K96:18, although they were very difficult to link together clearly. Typical domestic materials were uncovered in Surface 5K97:29: 1 jar stopper, 214 sherds from domestic vessels, 35 sheep/goatbones, and a spindle whorl in 93 baskets (ca. 0.85 m3) of earth.S u r f a c e 5 K 9 7 : 2 8 was fragmentary, located near the east end of Room 4 and equalled Surface 5K96.T7. The base of a pithos (5K97:20) was sunk into it, sitting on Surface 5K97:30 of FP 8. While this vessel was found broken, it sat upright and probably was reused with Surface 5K97:28. Similar pithoi sunk into the floor are attested in EB III houses at Numeira (Coogan 1984:76).The deep ash and refuse deposits found in southern portions of Square 5K97 (such as Ash Layer 5K97:13C, Ash Layer 5K97:13D and Earth Layer 5K97:18) were difficult to link to the sequence of occupational surfaces in Square 5K96. Earth Layer 5K97:18, immediately above Surface 5K97:33 of FP 8, included in 241 baskets (ca. 2.19 m3) of earth, a heavy concentration of small cobble-sized stones, 653 flints, 1870+ sherds, bones (119 sheep/goat, 1 cattle, and 15 large mammal), 1 ceramic jar stopper, and 1 spindle whorl. Many of these finds were burned suggesting a dump area for domestic refuse representing food preparation and consumption, as well as flint working activities. Evidence for these two basic activities seems consistent throughout these occupation layers. This dump area was continued in FP-6B Earth Layer 5K97:7.The buildup of occupation above Surfaces 5K97:34 and 5K97:35 included fragmentary Surfaces 5K97:21, 5K97:24,5K97:25, and Ash Layer 5K97:22. In the southeast these surfaces were covered by collapsed ceiling or wall material (Debris Layer 5K97:26) marked with reed impressions (fig.6.18), identified in 1984 as phragmites australis (Mitchel 1989). This destruction seems to have smashed the pithoi underneath and brought FP 7 to an end. The ceiling or wall material and the proximity of the pithoi to Wall 5K97:27 argues for a roofed storage area. Unfortunately, no clear wall to the north was uncovered, although aFig. 6.16. Field D : Smashed pithos fragments in the EB in domestic complex.103FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACE. s' v > ;large rock tumble of FP 6B ~K;kt (5K97:17) along the north edge of the collapsed wall/ceiling may represent the remains of a wall parallel to Wall 5K97:27.Although also assigned to FP 6B, the possible pillar base Installation 5K97:23 (see fig. 6.25, below) which rested on Surfaces 5K97:25 and 5K97:21, may have served as the northern edge of the collapsed material. Alternatively, the destroyed ceiling/wall material could have been brought in from elsewhere (perhaps Room 1) to level the area for subsequent surfaces, but the material was spread over a large area and was too coherent and .solid to suggest dumping. In fact, , ceiling/wall Debris Layer 5K97:26 was reused as the makeup for FP-6B features, including plaster Surface 5K97:11, a probable floor in the eastern part of the Square.Evidence for the end of FP 7 was lacking to the west where Surfaces 5K96:17 and 5K96:14 followed Surface 5K96:18 and showed no signs of destruction debris. A westward continuation of Surfaces 5K97:28, 5K97:29, and 5K96:17 yielded typical domestic remains including 5 ceramic jar stoppers, a ceramic gaming piece, over 900 sherds, bones (61 sheep/goat and 23 large mammal), and 219 flint pieces in 257 baskets (ca.2.30 m3) of earth. A similar representation was found in the material of Surface 5K96:14: 970+ sherds, 2 ceramic jar stoppers, 2 ceramic gaming pieces, flints (1 scraper, 3 blades, and 51 other), 5 stone hand pounders, 1 possible stone weight, bones (90 sheep/goat, 3 cattle, 2 donkey, 1 bird, and 19 large mammal) in 310 baskets (ca. 2.80 m3) of earth. This surface was contiguous to the lowest portion of Ash Layer 5K97:13D on the east, an accumulation of burned debris with no distinct pit lining. It would seem, therefore, that it accumulated gradually as the surfaces around it built up, perhaps in an outside Courtyard.Within Room 1 to the north, four thin (ca. 0.10 m) surfaces were identified representing continuous usage and have been assigned to" . -A' V -■J -Tvi-.’r' VFig. 6.17. Field D: More smashed pithos fragments in the EB III domestic complex.FP 7 ,‘but have little stratigraphic connection to the rest of the field (6K06; 19, 6K06:20, 6K06:29, and 6K06:37). The earliest surface (6K06:37) was unexcavated. The next occupational surface (6K06:29) had a few ash pockets, but bones were rare. While small objects were conspicuously absent, 284 sherds and 190 flints were uncovered. Surface 6K06:20 was more typical of domestic use surfaces with 443 sherds of domestic vessels, 149 flint pieces, a mortar, and 88 sheep/goat bones.mmWarn u.■'"5 - -1V- - ' r t ’i ;,■ = Vh “ ■ ■ V ' , . .1V 'Fig. 6.18. Field D : View of Square 5K97, the EB 111 domestic complex.104FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEWhile this room clearly witnessed storage activities at a later period (FP 6A), the finds in these surfaces did not clearly indicate room function distinct from other surfaces already discussed. Rather, they point to the domestic nature of the complex as a whole and the typical remains of food storage, preparation, and consumption.The doorway of Room 1 was in Wall 6K06:13 (see fig. 6.5, above). While it was difficult to see how the stone threshold of Wall 6K06:13 could have been used with Surface 6K06:37 (due to its ca. 0.45 m height above the surface), the threshold was most likely used with higher Surfaces 6K06:29 and 6K06:20. Surface 6K06:19, on the other hand, covered the threshold, although the doorway in Wall 6K06:13 and the whole of Room 1 seems to have continued in use.The latest FP-7 surface inside the room (6K06:19) was the final observed use layer with Walls 6K06:8, 6K06:13, and 6K06:18 in an unruined condition. The distribution of finds seems to follow the pattern discerned throughout Field D for occupation surfaces and included bones (108 sheep/goat and 9 cattle), 1 mollusk shell, over 700 sherds, 2 spindle whorls, 2 loafshaped grinding stones, 2 flint scrapers, 2 flint bladelets, and 101 flint flakes. (The earth volume measurements from which these artifacts were collected were incomplete.)While FP-8 surfaces east of Room 1 remained unexcavated, those of FP 7 were observed in Room 4 (ca. 1.00 x 3.00 m). This was a corridor that approached Room 1 from the east, between Wall 6K06:24 on the north and Wall 5K96:11 on the south. In the earliest use-phase excavated, Surface 5K96:18 sealed against Wall 6K06:24 and the north side of Wall 5K96:11. At the east end of Wall 5K96:11, one wall stone with a socket depression protruded on the north face (see fig. 6.13, above). This feature provided evidence that the area functioned as a room, although there was no evidence for a threshold and the surfaces of Room 3 could be traced around Wall 5K96:11 and into Room 4 without interruption. At the same time, a step in Wall 6K06:13 led up to the threshold into Room 1 (see fig. 6.13, above). A second surface (5K96:17) in the corridor room also sealed against the step in Wall 6K06:13, while the eastern socket was in use. In the final FP-7 subphase, this area was covered with flagstones (Surface 5K96:28) that sealed against Wall 6K06:24 and seem to have been used with Surface 5K96:14. Wall 6K06:24 may have been out of use at this time.Small patches of flagstones were found in Surface 6K07:27. These flagstones were sealed against by Surface 6K07:28, an earthen surface similar to those found in the two southern Squares. This surface yielded finds typical of domestic occupation: 448 sherds, 1 ceramic jar stopper, 43 flint pieces, and bones (60 sheep/goat, 1 gazelle, 1 cattle, and 6 large mammal) in 134- baskets (ca. 1.20 m3) of earth. The isolated flagstones seem to have made up part of the surface.Associated with these flagstones was Wall 6K07:32 which, at the lowest course exposed, had one row of stones laid in a partial apsidal pattern. A similar pattern was noted for possible Wall 6K07:35, but these features have not been excavated fully enough to understand their function. Indeed, when they are excavated in a future season, they may be assigned to FP 8.Earth Layer 6K07:29, underlying Surface 6K07:28, was a continuation of Earth Layer 5K97:18 (a refuse deposit) to the south. It yielded charcoal fragments, small pebbles, 300 flint pieces, pottery, a glass bracelet fragment, and 42 sheep/goat bones. The abundance of charcoal and flint pieces point to a dump area rather than a living surface.Functioning at the same time was a series of earth layers or surfaces located against the face of the bedrock terrace in the northern part of Field D, but separated from the main Square loci either by Wall 6K06:30 of FP 6B to the west or the stones of Surface 6K07:27 and Wall 6K07:32 to the east. These surfaces included 6K06:38 (the earliest) and 6K06:31, both of which sealed against the north side of Wall 6K06:24 as well as against Walls 6K06:13 and 6K06:18.To the west of Wall 5K96:5, several FP-7 surfaces were identified in Square 6K06 which equalled those of Square 5K96. Contemporary with Surface 5K96:19 was Surface 6K06:34, with Surface 5K96:18 was Surface 6K06:33, with Surface 5K96:17 was Surface 6K06:28, and with Surface 5K96:14 was Surface 6K06:27. These surfaces sealed against Installation 5K96:22 (the bin) which may well have been in use with all of these occupational layers. The height of the west wall of the bin was uneven. While the larger stone at the south end protruded through FP-6 surfaces, the bin itself could not have been in use at that time because the northern edge was considerably lower and Surface 5K96:10 of FP 6B covered it. The pottery from the FP-7 surfaces was EB III (figs. 6.19-6.24).105FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEFig. 6.19. Field D : Pottery from FP 7.106FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type sq Locus Pail Rqg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 5K96 19 53 6 7.5YR6/2 _ 7.5YR6/2 L 6A SR MH PA5A H VRPinkish Pinkish 5A SR PA4AGray Gray 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR2 Jar 5K97 25 66 3 7.5YR3/0 10YR4/1 10YR5/2 L 5A SA MH _ W _ . . . VRVery Dark Grayish 4A SADark Gray Brown 3A SRGray 2A SR3 Jar 5K96 17 81 4 2.5YR5/2 _ 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR MH PA4A H . _ VOWeak LightReddish4A SR PA3ARed 3A SR PR3ABrown 2B SR4 Jar 5K96 14 30 6 2.5YRN5/ . 2.5YR5/2 L 6A SR MH PA6A H _ . . VRGray Weak 5A SR PA3ARed 4A SR3A SR2B SR5 Jar 6K06 20 78 6 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR MH PA5A W . . VRLight Light 4A SR PA4AReddish Reddish 3A SR PA3ABrown Brown 2B SR PR3APR2A6 Jar 6K06 19 61 2 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SA MH _ W . . VOReddish Light 5A SRBrown Reddish 4A SABrown 3A SR2A SR7 Jar 5K96 18 37 4 7.5YR6/2 . 7 .SYR 6/4 L 5A SR M FS6A w _ _ . VRPinkish Light 4A SR PA4AGray Brown 3A SR PR3A2B SR8 Jar 6K06 19 61 4 2.5YR4/2 . 5YR6/3 L 6A SR M PA3A w VRWeak Light SARed Reddish 5A SRBrown 4A SR3 A SR9 Jar 6K06 20 75 5 7.5YR7/4 10YR6/1 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A H . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3A10 Jar 5K97 25 66 4 7.5YR3/0 . 5YR7/3 L 5A SA M PA4A W _ _ . VOVery Pink 4A SADark 3A SAGray 2A SR11 Jar 6K07 28 82 8 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR5/4 L 7A A M FS6A W . . VOReddish Reddish 5A; A PA5ABrown Brown 4A A PA4A3A A PR3ASA2A SA-12 Jar 6K06 29 87 1 5YR4/2 . 5YR6/3 L ,5A R H PA5A H _ _ _ VRDark Light A PR3AReddish Reddish 4A AGray Brown 3A A2B SA13 Jar 5K96 14 77 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A A MH PA4A H . . _ UOLight Gray Light SR PA3ARed Red 4A A PR3A3A ASR2B SA14 Jar 5K96 17 43 1 7.5YR6/4 . 7.5YR6/4 L 4A SR M _ H . . _ VRLight Light 3A SRBrown Brown 2C SR15 Jar 5K96 17 35 5 2!5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 6A R H . H . _ VOLight Light 5A SRReddish Reddish 4A SRBrown Brown 3A SR2B SRP 5A SR4A R16 Jar 6K06 27 76 1 5YR7/3 5YR5/1 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR PR3A W URPink Gray Light 5A AReddish 4A ABrown SR3A SR2B SRFig. 6.19, co n tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.107FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg . Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color17 Jar 5K96 19 42 2 5YR4/1 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA7A W VRDark Pink - 5A SA PA6AGray 4A SR PR3A3A SR18 Jar 5K96 18 46 3 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 6A R MH . H . . . VOLight Light 5A RReddish Reddish 4A SRBrown Brown 3A SR2B SR19 Jar 5K96 17 35 4 2.5YRN4/ . 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR MH . H . . _ VODark Light 4A SRGray Reddish 3A SRBrown 2B SRP 5A R4A R3A R20 Jar 5K96 19 53 8 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/6 L 7A SR MH PR3A H _ . . VOPink Reddish 6A SRYellow 5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SRP 5A R4A R21 Jar 5K96 18 37 3 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR7/6 L 6A SR M . W . . • . VRLight Pink Reddish 5A SRReddish Yellow ABrown 4A A3A A2B SA22 Jar 5K97 15 107 2 2.5YR4/2 . 2.5YR4/4 L 6A SR H PA4A W . _ . VRWeak Reddish 5A SR PA3ARed Brown 4A SR3A SR2B SRP 5A R4A R23 Jar 5K97 25 66 5 5YR5/3 . 2.5YR5/4 L 6A SR M PR3A W . _ . VOReddish Reddish 5A SABrown Brown 4A SA3A SA24 Jar 6K06 20 78 1 7.5YR6/2 . 7.5YR6/4 L 7A R MH PA5A W . . . ' . VRPinkish Light 6A SR PA4AGray Brown 5A SR PA3A4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR25 Jar 5K97 29 81 3 7.5YR6/2 . 7 .SYR 6/2 L 6A SR MH PA6A H SM 10YR7/3 - 10YR7/3 - VRPinkish Pinkish SA PA5A Very VeryGray Gray 5A A PA4A Pale Pale4A A Brown Brown3A A2A SA26 Jar 5K96 19 50 9 5YR5/3 . ’ 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SA M PR3A H - _ VRReddish Light 4A SRBrown Reddish 3A SRBrown 2B SR27 Jar 5K97 18 77 2 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR6/4 L 7A SA M FS5A W . _ . VOPinkish Light 6A A PA4AGray Brown 5A A4A SA3A SA2A SR28 Jar 6K06 19 60 1 10YR5/4 . 10R6/6 L 6A SR MH FS7A H . _ _ VOWeak Light 5A SR FS6ARed Red 4A SR FS5A3A SR PA3A2B SRP 5A SR4A SR29 Jar 5K97 29 74 1 2.5YR4/2 . 2.5YR3/2 L 5A SA H . W . . . VRWeak Dusky 4A SARed Red 3A SR2A SRFig. 6.19, con tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-29.108FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACE1 2Fig. 6.20. Field D : Pottery from FP 7 , con tinued .109FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type Sa Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 6K06 19 61 7 7.5YR5/2 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR5/2 L 6A A H PR3A W SM 7.5YR . . URBrown Dark Brown 5A A 6/4Gray 4A A Light3A A BrownSR2A SRP 5A SR2 Jar 5K96 14 75 2 7.5YR7/4 10YR5/1 7.5YR7/4 L 6A R L FS6A W SL 2.5YR . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA6A 5/44A SR PA5A Reddish3A SR PA4A BrownP 7A R6A SR5A SR3 Jar 6K07 27 86 1 2.5YR5/6 7.5YR6/2 5YR5/3 L 6A R MH PA5A H . . . . VRRed Pinkish Reddish SA PA4AGray Brown 5A SA PR6A4A SA PR5A3A SA PR4A2B SA PR3A4 Jar 6K07 28 93 1 7.5YR6/0 . 10YR8/2 L 5A SR M FS6A H SL 7.5YR . _ VOLight White 4A SR 5/6Gray 3A SR Strong2A SR BrownP 5A SR4A . SR5 Jar 6K06 19 60 4 10YR5/3 . 10YR5/6 L 5A R MH _ H . . . . . VOWeak Red 4A SRRed 3A SR2B SRP 5A R4A R6 Jar 5K96 14 77 3 7.5YRN5/ _ 2.5YR6/4 L 5A A MH PA5A H . _ . . UOGray Light SA PA4AReddish 4A A PR3ABrown SR3A ASR2B SA7 Jar 5K97 22 108 1 10YR4/1 . 5YR6/4 L 5A A MH PA5A H _ _ - _ . VR\ Dark Light 4A A PA4AGray Reddish 3A A PR4ABrown 2A SR8 Jar 5K97 18 78 1 2.5YR6/4 . 5YR7/3 L 5A A M FS7A W . . . . VOLight Pink 4A SA PA6AReddish 3A SR PA5ABrown 2A SR PA4APR4A9 Jar 5K96 19 50 5 5YR5/3 . 5YR6/4 L 4A SA ' M PR4A W . 5YR4/2 . 5YR5/3 - VRReddish Light 3A SR PR3A Dark ReddishBrown Reddish 2B SR Reddish BrownBrown P 5A SR Gray4A SR10 Jar 5K97 18 51 4 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SR M FS6A W . _ . 2.5YR6/6 - VO) Light Pink Pink 5A SR PA6A LightRed 4A SR PA5A Red3A SR11 Jar 5K97 26 89 3 5YR4/2 5YR5/4 5YR4/2 L 6A SA MH PA5A H _ . SM 7.5YR6/4 - VRDark Reddish Dark 5A SA PA4A LightReddish Brown Reddish 4A SA PA3A BrownGray Gray 3A SA2A SASR '12 Jar 6K07 29 92 4 7.5YR6/2 _ 7.5YR6/4 L 6A SA M PA4A H . _ . . VRPinkish Light 5A SA PA3AGray Brown 4A SA3A SR2A SR13 Jar 6K07 29 94 1 7.5YR6/4 . 7.5YR6/4 L 5A SA MH PA4A H _ _ . . VRLight Light 4A SA PA3ABrown Brown 3A SA PR4A2B SA PR3AFig. 6.20, co n tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-13.110FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color14 Jar 6K07 29 92 2 10YR5/1 5YR5/3 L 6A A H FS7A H VRGray Reddish 5A A PA6ABrown 4A A PA5A3A A PA4A2A SA PA3APR4APR3A15 Jar 6K07 29 92 1 7.5YR6/2 . 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SA M JH H _ VRPinkish Light 5A SAGray Reddish 4A SABrown 3A SA2A SRP 5A R16 Jar 6K06 20 75 3 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/2 5YR7/3 L 6A SR MH PA5A H . . VRLight Pinkish Pink 5A SR PR4AReddish Gray 4A SR PR3ABrown 3A SR2B SR17 Jar 5K97 18 80 1 5YR6/3 . 5YR6/4 L 6A A M PR5A W _ VRLight Light 5A A PR4AReddish Reddish 4A A PR3ABrown Brown 3A SA PA4A2A SR18 Jar 6K07 28 82 2 5YR6/4 . 10YR4/1 L 6A SR MH PA5A H VRLight Dark 5A A PA4AReddish Gray 4A A PA3ABrown 3A SR PR4A2A SR PR3A19 Jar 5K97 26 99 3 5YR4/2 . 7.5YR5/2 L 5A SA M PA3A W _ VRDark Brown 4A SAReddish 3A SRGray 2A SRP 5A R4A SA20 Jar 5K96 19 50 1 5YR4/1 . 5YR6/3 L 6A SR MH PA4A W . . IT VODark Light 5A SRGray Reddish 4A SRBrown 3A SR2A SR -21 Jar 5K97 29 81 5 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR5/2 L 6A SR M PR6A W SM 5YR6/4 SM Rim: VRReddish Weak 5A A PR4A Light 2.5YR6/6Brown Red 4A A Reddish Light Red3A A Brown 7.5YR6/42A A LightBrown22 Jar ' 5K96 18 49 1 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 7A SR M FS5A W . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR FS4A4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3A -23 Jar 5K97 29 81 2 2.5YR5/4 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR5/4 L 7A SR M PA5A H SM 2.5YR - . VOReddish Pinkish Reddish 6A SA 6/4Brown Gray Brown 5A SA Light4A SR Reddish3A SR Brown24 Jar 6K07 28 83 1 7.5YR7/2 . 2.5YR5/6 L 6A A M FS5A H . . VRPinkish Red 5A A FS4AGray 4A A PA5A3A A PA4A2A SR PA3APR3A25 Jar 6K06 29 86 1 10YR5/1 10YR5/1 10YR6/2 L 6A SA M PA4A W , 10YR4/1 - URGray Gray Light 5A SA DarkBrownish 4A SR GrayGray 3A SR 5YR6/42A SR LightReddishBrown26 Jar 5K97 26 99 2 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SA M PA4A H _ _ . VOLight Light 4A SA PA3AReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown 2A SRFig. 6.20, con tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 14-26.I l lFIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type Sq Locus Riil Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color27 Jar 5K96 17 81 2 7.5YR5/2 7.5YRN4/ L 7A SR H PA4A H VRBrown Dark 6A SR PA3AGray 5A SR PR3A4A SR3A SR2B SR28 Jar 5K97 29 70 4 Bottom: 10YR4/1 5YR5/3 L 6A A M FS5A H SM 5YR6/4 - VR5YR5/3 Dark Reddish 5A A PR3A LightReddish Gray Brown 4A A ReddishBrown 3A SR Brown7.5YR6/2PinkishGray2A R29 Jar 5K97 18 71 1 7.5YR7/2 . 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR M PA5A H _ _ URPinkish Light 5A SR PA4AGray Red 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2AFig. 6.20, continued. Field D: Pottery descriptions for nos. 27-29.112FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACEFig. 6.21. Field D : Pottery from FP 7 , con tinued .i.30 f )------------ "31113*FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACENo Type Sq Locus Pail . Reg Fabric Color__________________________ Non-Plastics_____________ Voids Manu_______Surface Treatment ______ Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pithos 5K96 14 31 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 7A R M PA3A W UOLight Gray Light 6A SRRed Red 5A SR4A SR3A SR2A SR2 Pith os 5K96 14 31 3 7.5YR6/2 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR6/2 L 6A SR M FS5A H SL 10YR7/2 SL ■ 10YR7/2 - URPinkish Gray Pinkish 5A SR Light LightGray Gray 4A SR Gray Gray3A SR2B SR3 Pithos 5K96 14 77 1 7^5YR7/4 7/5YRN6/ 7 5YR7/4 L 6A SR MH PA5A H . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR4 Pithos 5K96 19 42 5 7.5YR6/4 . 7.5YR6/2 L 6A SR M W SM 10YR7/3 SM 10YR7/3 - VOLight Pinkish 5A SR Very VeryBrown Gray 4A SR Pale Pale3A SR Brown Brown5 Pithos 5K96 18 37 2 2.5YR6/6 . 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A W SM 7.5YR - . • VOLight Pink 4A SR PA4A 7/4Red 3A SR Pink2B SR6 Pithos 6K06 19 61 1 7.5YR4/2 . 7.5YR4/2 L 6A SA MH PA3A w SL 10YR7/3 SL 7.5YR5/2 - VRDark Dark 5A SA Very BrownBrown Brown SR Pale4A SR Brown3A SR 10YR6/12A SR Gray7 Pithos 6K06 19 62 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN4/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA3A w SM 2.5YR - ApSh URLight Dark Light 4A SR PR3A N5/ ITRed Gray Red 3A SR Gray2B SRP 4A R8 Pithos 5K97 29 70 2 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR4/0 5YR8/2 L 6A SA MH FS6A w SM 7.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOPink Dark Pinkish 5A SR FS5A 7/4 LightInner: Gray White 4A SR FS4A Pink Red5YR8/2 3A SRPinkish 2B RWhite9 Pithos 6K06 19 61 5 7.5YR5/2 10YR5/1 7.5YR5/2 L 6A SR M w SL 10YR7/2 - URBrown Gray Brown 5A SA Light4A SA Gray3A SA10 Jar 5K97 15 106 1 5YR4/1 5YR4/1 5YR4/2 L 6A A M . w S 5YR6/4 - . VRDark Dark Dark 5A SA LightGray Gray Reddish SR ReddishGray 4A SR Brown3A SR- 2A R11 Jar 5K97 15 104 1 10YR5/1 10YR5/1 10YR5/1 L 6A SA MH PA4A w S . _ URGray Gray Gray 5A SR PA3A4A SR3A R2A RP 7A A12 Jar 5K96 14 31 5 2.5YR6/4 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SR H _ w _ _ . . VOLight Gray Light 4A SRReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown 2B SRP 6A SR5A SR4A SR13 Jar 5K97 18 .75 2 7.5YR6/4 5YR4/1 7.5YR6/4 L 6A A H PR4A w SM 2.5YR - 5YR5/3 - URLight Dark Light SR PR3A 5/4 ReddishBrown Gray Brown 5A A FS4A Reddish Brown4A A Brown3A ASR2A SR14 Jar 6K06 19 60 6 5YR6/4 . 7.5YRN6/ L 5A SR M PA5A w SM 2.5YR - . URLight Gray 4A SR PA4A 5/2Reddish 3A SR PR3A WeakBrown 2B SR PR2A RedFig. 6.21, co n tinued . Field D : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-14.114FIELD D: THE LOWER SOUTHERN TERRACE1 .1720 7 21f191822\ 2324 25 ^ 261 2729p > «30I31} ,mr343338Fig. 7.6. Field E : Pottery from FP 5 (nos. 1-34) and FP 3 (nos. 35-38).160FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMNo Type Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvue Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar E.2 5 19 7 7.5YR7/0 . 7.5YR7/0 L 6A SR M PA5A W . . . 2.5YR6/4 - URLight Light 5A SR PA3A LightGray Gray 4A SR PR3A Reddish3A SR PR2A Brown2B SR2 Jug E.2 5 22 5 2.5YR6/6 10YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 5A R L PR5A W . . . RoN UOLight Light Light 3A R PR4ARed Gray ReddishBrown2A R PR3A3 Jar E.2 18 52 2 5YR7/4 7.5YR7/0 10YR8/3 L 6A SR MH PA4A W . . . . UOPink Light Very Pale 5A SR PR5AGray Brown 4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR4 Jug E.2 5 22 4 5YR6/3 10YR6/1 2.5YR6/4 L 7A A L FS5A W _ _ _ . VRLight Gray Light 5A R FS3AReddish Redddish 3A RBrown Brown5 Jar E.2 5 19 4 2.5YR6/6 5YR8/2 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M . W . _ _ . VOLight Pinkish Light 4A SRRed White Red 3A SR2B SR .6 jug E.2 5 22 2 5YR6/3 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR5/2 L 6A SR L FS5A W . _ . URLight Light Brown 5A R PR3AReddish Gray 3A RBrown 2A R7 Jar E.2 5 19 11 5YR7/4 7.5YR7/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PR4A W _ _ _ _ UOPink Light Pink 5A SR PR3AGray 4A SR3A SR2B SR8 Jar E.2 18 52 4 7.5YRN6/ . 7.5YRN6/ L 5A SR M PA4A W _ _ _ _ URGray Gray 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A9 Jar E.2 18 52 3 5YR7/4 . 7.5YR7/0 L 5A SR M PA4A W . _ . URPink Light 4A SR PA3AGray 3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3A10 Jug E.2 5 22 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 7A SA L FS7A W . _ . IFR UOPink Gray Pink 5A R PR4A4A R3A R11 Jar E.2 5 19 8 5YR7/6 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PR4A W _ _ . . URReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PR3AYellow Yellow 3A SR2B SR12 Jar E.2 5 19 9 5YR7/3 . 7.5YR7/0 L 5A SR M PA4A W SL 5YR7/2 SLR 5YR7/2 - URPink Light 4A SR Pinkish PinkishGray 3A SR Gray Gray2B SR13 Jar E.2 5 19 2 5YR7/6 7.5YR7/0 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PA3A W SM 7.5YR SM 7.5YR7/2 - VOReddish Light Reddish 5A SR 7/2 ' PinkishYellow Gray Yellow 4A SR Pinkish Gray3A SR Gray2B SR14 Jug E.2 5 22 3 10YR5/1 7.5YR6/0 2.5YR6/4 L 6A R L PR5A W . . . URGray Light Light 5A R PR3AGray Reddish 4A RBrown 3A R15 Jar E.2 5 19 6 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M _ W SL 5YR7/3 _ _ URPink Light Pink 5A SR PinkGray 4A SR3A SRV7.5YR5/02B SR16 Jug E.2 17 51 2 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PA6A W _ _ _ _ URPink Gray Pink A PA5A4A SR PA4AA PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2AFig. 7.6, continued. Field E: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.161FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color17 Jug E.2 17 51 3 5YR7/4 ' Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/4PinkL 6A 5ASR M SRPA3APR3AW - - UR4A SR Handle:3A SR FS5A2B SR FS4APA4APA3APR3A18 Jug E.2 5 18 1 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PR3A W ■ - _ _ UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PR2A4A SR3A SR2B SR19 Jug E.2 5 18 7 5YR6/4 5YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 7A SR M PR3A W . . VOLight ' Gray Light 6A SR PR2AReddish Reddish 5A SRBrown Brown A4A SR3A SR2B SR20 Jug E.2 5 18 11 5YR7\4 . 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA5A W SM 10YR8/3 - _ VOPink Pink 5A SR PA3A Very4A SR PA2A Pale3A SR Brown2B SR21 Jug E.2 5 18 8 SYR 6/6 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W . _ . . UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PR4AYellow Yellow 3A SR PR3A2B SR22 Jug E.2 5 18 9 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PR2A W _ . _ UOReddish Gray . Reddish 5A RYellow Yellow SR4A SR3A SR2B SR23 Jug E.2 5 18 4 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 7A SR M PR3A W . UOPink Gray Pink 6A SR PR2A5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SR24 Jug . E.2 5 18 6 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 . 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A W . . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A4A SR3A SR2B SR25 Jug E.2 17 51 1 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A W UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A4A SR PR3A 3A SR PR2A 2B SRHandleL 6A SR FS7A5A SR FS6A4A SR FS5A3A SR FS4A2C SR PA3APR3A26 Jug E.2 5 18 2 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PR4A W SL 2.5YR - . . VOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PR3A 6/64A SR PR2A Light3A SR Red2B SR27 Jug E.2 5 18 3 5YR7/6 5VR6/1 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PR3A W . UOReddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PR2AYellow Yellow 4A SR3A SR2B SR28 Jug E.2 5 19 3 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA3A W SL 7.5YR - URPink Light Pink 4A SR PR3A 7/2Gray 3A SR Pinkish2B SR Gray29 Jug E.2 18 52 1 7.5YR8/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR8/4 L 5A SR M PR3A W _ _ UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR2A3A SR_ ___________________________________________ ____________________ 2B SRFig. 7.6, con tinued . Field E : Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-29.162FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color30 Jug E.2 5 19 1 5YR8/3 5YR8/2 5YR8/3 L 5A SR M PA3A W SM SYR8/2 SM 5YR8/2 - VOPink Pinkish Pink 4A SR PR3A Pinkish PinkishWhite 3A SR White White2B SRP 7A R31 Jug E.2 5 18 5 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA5A W SL 10YR7/4 - . URPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A Very4A SR PR3A Pale3A SR PR2A Brown2B SR32 Jug E.2 5 19 10 5YR7/6 . 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M PA4A w SH 5YR7/3 - . URReddish Gray 4A SR PA3A PinkYellow 3A SR PR3A2B SR Handle:FS4AFS3APR4APR3A33 Krater E.2 5 19 5 5YR7/4 10YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA3A w . _ UOPink Light Pink 4A SRGray 3A SR2B SR34 jug E.2 5 17 1 5YR7/3 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR MH PA3A w _ _ _ UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PR3A4A SR PR2A3A SR2B SR35 Basin E.2 15 38A 1 5YR7/4 2.5YR7/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PR3A w SL 10YR8/2 SL 10YR8/2 - URPink Light Pink 5A SR White WhiteGray 4A SR3A SR2B SR36 Bowl E.2 15 37 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 4A R L . w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOLight Gray Light 3A SR WBM 6/6 WBM LightRed Red 2C SR Light RedRed37 Fish E.2 15 38A 2 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 2D SR L . w SM 10R5/8 SM 10R5/8 - VOplate Pink Pink Red Red38 Cook pot E.2 15 37 2 2.5YR6/8 . 2.5YR6/8 L 4A R L PR3A w . _ VOLight Light 3A RRed Red 2C SRFig. 7.6, continued. Field E: Pottery descriptions for nos. 30-38.Wall E.2:7 sat atop the western edge of Surface E.2:16 and continued south through the balk into Square E .l as Wall E .l :6 (see fig. 7.7). This wall was composed of hard limestone boulders, built in a boulder-and-chink construction, one row wide. In the north, Wall E.2:13 was similar in construction. Unfortunately the walls were broken and a join could not be established. While Wall E.2:13 was founded on the same level as Wall E.2:7 in the west where it broke off, in the east it plunged deeper (at least six courses). Excavation has not yet reached its bottom (fig. 7.9). Its southern, irregular face was the northern limit of the FP-3 foundation Pit E.2:21. This series of walls appears to have ringed the water source at one time, perhaps to protect the structure on the western side. Where the wall deepened in the east, it may have joined the structure of the water system itself.Above Surface E.2:16 (=E.1:13) were earth layers. Debris Layer E.2:17A contained debris high in clay content, probably piled here when the water -source was cleaned, as in FP 5. Mostsherds were from a jar type with a long collared rim. Earth Layers E .l :8 and E. 1:9, above Surface E .l: 13, probably belonged to this phase.Analysis of the pottery in these surfaces and earth layers noted predominantly Early Roman pottery, especially the collared-rim jars mentioned above, which probably functioned as water jars like the grooved-neck jars of FP 5 (note the forms in a secondary deposit in FP 2; fig. 7.10:1-7). However, a few sherds which seemed to be Late Roman suggested that the architecture dated to the Late Roman period, and that when the inhabitants cleaned out the water source, Early Roman debris was included.To the south of these FP-4 remains, a series of colluvial layers (E.l:5, E .l:7, E.L.10, and E.2:12) ran up to the walls. Most likely, the colluvial accumulation resulted from erosion of tell debris. Indeed the FP-4 architecture may have been constructed to keep out eroding debris from entering the immediate water source area. Analysis of the pottery found Late Iron II and Early Persian sherds.163FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMFig. 7.10. Field E: Pottery from FP 2 (nos. 1-11) and from secondary deposits (nos. 12-19).166FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment ‘ Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar E.2 6 29 3 5YR7/6 7.5YR8/2 5YR7/6 L 4A SR L PA5A W . . . VOReddish Pinkish Reddish 3A SR PA4AYellow White Yellow 2B SR PA3APR2A2 Jar E.2 6 29 7 . 7.5YR8/2 7.5YR7/0 7.5YR8/2 L 5A SA L PA4A W _ . URPinkish Light Pinkish 4A SR PA3A 'White Gray White 3A SR PR3A2C SR PR2AP 6A SR3 Jar E.2 6 29 8 10YR8/2 10YR8/2 L 4A SR L PA3A W _ _ UOWhite White 3A SR PR2A2C SR4 Jar E.2 6 29 11 7.5YR7/0 . 7.5YR7/0 L 4A SR L PA6A w SM 10YR8/5 SM 10YR8/3 - URLight Light 3A SR PR3A Very VeryGray Gray 2C SR Pale PaleBrown Brown5 Jar E.2 6 31 1 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR L . w SM 7.5YR SM 7.5YR7/4 - UOPink Gray Pink 3A SR 7/4 Pink2D SR Pink6 Jar E.2 6 31 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M _ w SM 10YR8/3 - UOLight Gray Light 4A A VeryRed Red SR fcle3A SR Brown2B SR7 Jar E.2 6 29 4 7.5YR8/2 . 7.5YR8/2 L 3A SR L PA3A w . . _ VOP in k i s h Pinkish 2D SR PR3AWhite White PR2A8 Jar E.2 6 29 5 7.5YR6/0 . 7.5YR6/0 L 4A SR L FS6A w SM 7.5YR SM 7.5YR8/2 - URGray Gray 3A SR PA5A 8/2 Pinkish2D SR PA3A Pinkish WhitePR3A WhitePR2A9 Jar E.2 6 29 6 5YR7/8 5YR8/3 5YR7/8 L 4A SR L _ w . _ . VOReddish Pink Reddish 3A SRYellow Yellow 2D SR10 Krater E.2 6 31 3 5YR7/4 SYR 6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M . w UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR5A SR3A SR2B SR11 Basin E.2 6 31 4 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M . w . . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR3A SR2B SR12 Jar E.2 6 30 1 2.5YR6/6 _ 2.5YRN6/ L 6A SR M PA5A w . URLight Gray 5A SR PA4ARed 4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SRP 7A R13 Jar E.2 6 29 2 5YR8/2 5YR8/3 SYR 8/2 L 5A SR M PA3A w _ . VRPinkish Pink Pinkish 4A SR PR2AWhite White 3A SR2C SR14 Jar E.2 15 37 3 7.5YR5/2 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR5/2 L 6A SR M PA5A w VRBrown Gray Brown 5A SR PA4A4A SR PA3A* 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A15 Jar E.2 6 29 9 7.5YR8/4 7.5YR8/0 7.5YR8/4 L 5A SR MH PA6A w SM 10YR8/3 - . UOPink White Pink 4A SR PA3A Very3A SR PR3A Pale2C SR Brown16 Jar E.2 6 29 1 . 5YR7/6 SYR 8/2 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PR4A w SM 5YR8/2 - VOReddish Pinkish Reddish 5A SR PR3A PinkishYellow White Yellow 4A SR PR2A White3A SR2B SRP 5A SR4A SR17 , Jar E.2 6 29 10 5YR7/4 7.5YR7/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A w SM 10YR8/3 SMR 10YR8/3 - URPink Light Pink 4A SR PR3A Very VeryGray 3A SR PR2A J^le Pale2B SR Brown BrownFig. 7.10, con tinued . Field E : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-17.167FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMNo Type Sq Locus ftiil Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color18 Bowl E.2 14 27 1 5YR7/3 5YR6/2 L 6A SR M PA4A H IN UOPink Pinkish 5A SR PR3AGray 4A SR3A SR2B SR19 Jug E.2 4 5 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA5A H SR 5YR8/2 - _ UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A Ba Pinkish4A SR PA3A White3A SR PR5A2B SR PR4APR3AFig. 7.10, continued. Field E: Pottery descriptions for nos. 18-19.In Square E.2, a levelling course of cobbles (E.2:3A) was encountered, that did not continue into Square E .l (see fig. 7.12). The resulting construction has been interpreted as foundation courses for the present concrete capping.Above these foundation stones the concrete Cap E. 1:2 (=E.2:2) was laid. This cap was visible before excavation. Its concrete was relatively friable; large chunks had caved in . or been broken by vandals. It was reinforced with 3/8" rebar; however, it had begun to corrode where the rebar had been exposed for a long period of time. Total dimensions of the cap were ca. 4.50 m wide, ca. 5.00 m long, and ca. 1.15 m thick (including the capping foundation stones). It was assumed that this cap was constructed when the Abujaber family closed the structure in the 1930s after the source dried up. Because the topsoil had been used as a road and parking area for the last several decades, it was very compact gravel.Fig. 7.I t . Field E: Square E.2 looking south. Foundation Pit E.2:21 of FP 3 is to the left of the meter stick.ConclusionThe crucial question as to when the spring or well was used may now be partially answered. Of greatest interest were the dump deposits with their ceramic corpora virtually limited to water jars. Other deposits with typical occupational finds such as bones and other artifacts probably were the result of erosional episodes and did not reflect use of the water installation.The presence of significant numbers of Early Bronze water jars would suggest that the installation was in use during that period. On the other hand, the absence of such pottery from the Middle Bronze, Late Bronze, and Iron I periods may indicate disuse (though excavation elsewhere in the area may produce such pottery). The Late Iron II period was well represented. After a gap during the Hellenistic period, there was a significant debris layer with Early Roman pottery from the installation, followed by smaller amounts of Late Roman material. Nothing except erosional debris was present from the Byzantine and Islamic periods.If the above outline holds true in subsequent seasons, it may be suggested that the water table supplying the installation at Tell el- cUmeiri vacillated between episodes of production and those in which it was dry or nearly so. In this light, it is interesting to note that during the Byzantine and Islamic periods occupation in the region moved almost one kilometer away from the water source to Tell el-cUmeiri (North), as if it did not place great dependence on this water source for its hydrological needs. The absence of water would also explain the existence of the large Tell Abujaber from the Byzantine and Islamic periods to the southwest. However, a larger area around the installation needs to be excavated before conclusions are securely reached.168FIELD E: THE WATER SYSTEMFig. 7.12. Field E: Square E.2 looking east. The ca. 0.25 m probe beneath the capping stones through the fill of FP-3 Pit E.2:21 is in the center. The top courses of the structure belong to FP 1.To suggest, as above, that the installation was not used during the Middle Bronze, Late Bronze, and Iron I periods because no dump materials were found from those periods, would not explain why Tell el-cUmeiri remained occupied during these periods of otherwise relatively sparse occupation in Transjordan. Indeed, die major explanation for occupation at this site during these periods is the presence of a strong water source.More difficult to assess was the method by which the water source was used through time. At present, the only secure observation is that in the 1930s the installation was capped by the Abujaber family. Otherwise coherent structures cannot be ascertained from the remains excavated this season. Future excavation should probably excavate the south side of the structure and clean out its interior.REFERENCESBattenfield, J. R., and Herr, L. G.1989 Field C: The Northern Suburb. Pp. 258-281 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri, and Vicinity, and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, Ml: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Franken, H. J., and Abujaber, R. S.1989 Yadoudeh: The History of a Land. Pp. 407-436 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri, and Vicinity, and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Ibach, Jr., R. D.1987 Archaeological Survey o f the Hesban Region. Hesban 5. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology/ Andrews University.Merling, D.1989 Charles Warren’s Explorations between Nacur and Khirbet as-Suq. Pp. 26-29 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-QUmeiri, and Vicinity, and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.169CHAPTER 8Field F: The Eastern ShelfRussanne D. Low University o f Maryland, Munich Campus •IntroductionField F was located on the descent to a broad shelf east of the acropolis (figs. 2 .1, 2 .2 , and2.3). Its parameters were defined by a topographic rise to the west, a sharp downslope to the north and east, and a topographic rise to a wall line, outcropping at the southwestern extent of the site. The strategic importance of Field F, which provided an unobstructed vantage of the valley below to the east and south from the eastern edge of the site, suggested a likely / location for defensive structures. Survey and sherding of the shelf in 1984 provided a balanced pottery assemblage spanning from the Early (Bronze Age to the Late Iron II period (with a small representation of Byzantine pottery). It was hoped that Field F would provide a representative cultural sequence which described the use of Tell el- cUmeiri throughout these periods.The archaeological sediments found in Field F derived from two sources. Colluvial rubble, including architectural fragments from the eastern edge of the acropolis, provided the bulk of the deposits in the western Squares. Sedimentation was rapid, and the hill slopeappears to have not changed significantly since the material was deposited. The eastern Squares on the other hand, received colluvial and loess sediments deriving principally from the topographic rise to the southwest (fig. 8.1). These Squares were characterized by a slower accumulation rate and markedly less rubble and fewer architectural fragments than the rest of the Field.: ‘"V-w•v- -Z •v. : —■-.vM:': -■ -• " V :: ; ; 3. ...r * ... . .r * JI ' ■ .r :<* ~ V : \- -1' Aj --Fig. 8.1. Field F : Pre-excavation.170FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.2. Field F: West and north balk profiles of 7L09 showing slumping.Due to the sparse vegetation and marked slope of the site (in some places as great as 30°), erosion posed a serious problem for preservation of cultural features. To a large extent, what remained of living floors and compacted use surfaces was largely a function of wall remnants retaining the earth in position. Graphic evidence of slumping and erosion can be seen on the west and north balk profiles from Square 7L09 (fig.8.2). The position of these stratigraphic disconformities was immediately downslope of where existing walls stood. Terrace walls and associated agricultural activities during Late Iron II, Early Persian, Byzantine, and probably later time periods, also contributed to slope stability and the preservation of archaeological features beneath the surface. As a result, in the western Squares (where terrace walls were frequently found), the colluvial deposits were thick, and in the eastern Squares (particularly east of the north-south trending wall bisecting the Field), deposits were thin, often in secondary context, and truncated by erosion. Due to these taphonomic biases, it is unlikely that archaeological features later than Late Iron II remain intact downslope from the 1987 excavation.Stratigraphic interpretation on part of this site was greatly c o mp l i c a t e d by e ro s io n a l disconformities, terrace walls bisecting strata resulting in differential deposition rates, and intentional landscaping activities. In part icular, the extrapolatedstratigraphic relationships exhibited between loci in Square 6L98 and corresponding loci in the surrounding Squares often indicated that the loci in Square 6L98 were of greater time depth than the associated ceramic remains suggested. Frequent evidence of bioturbation (for example Hole 6L98:38, a rodent hole), and the presence of many intrusive pits spanning Late Iron II through Byzantine time periods presented many opportunities for locus contamination. Thus the correlation of most archaeological layers in Square 6L98 to loci in other Squares is offered with the disclaimer that these relationships must be considered tentative pending direct stratigraphic connection through subsequent balk removal.The topographic rises to the west and south of Field F were anthropogenic, and the originalFig. 8.3. Field F: Aerial view from the east.1711726L98 7L08 7L09 6L99 6L89FP1FP2FP3FP4FP517911028272A2B51811719W4= 112013315 1812 20W1432W1922 24121 125W613 34116 1352340W464214312936 * 31 = 2641111 4012 030102AW92B7 — • 6W5 = W81314A = 26 = 3014BS16 = SI 5203833S37S24B29212232131S23361353415123381 12A 2A2B 2BW35A6 = 713S5 S1058 SI 224123412A2B6S3945W44FP6 24AS39FP7Fig. 8.4. Field F: Stratigraphic sequence chart of loci.S48A S17 = S19 = S18S22 = S27S24 = S30I 29I S32W31W3FT21W ll = W15FT27S1428S10AS10BW2551651751851952029 = 21 S22130 W9 W5S7FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFworking hypotheses attempted to explain these rises as structures associated with the city wall, perhaps including a guard tower to the west. The strategic position of Field F made it a likely location for a city gate. It would be expected to run perpendicular to the north-south wall traces found on the surface both to the northwest and southwest of Field F.Initially four 6.00 x 6.00 m Squares were placed grid-wise, encompassing an outcropping architectural feature suggestive of a wall. Later, questions associated with a large architectural structure running north-south through the eastern Squares, necessitated the opening of a fifth Square, 2.00 x 6.00 m, on the southeast corner of the excavation (fig. 8.3). While excavations this season provided archaeological evidence of human use in Field F spanning the Iron I to Islamic periods, architectural features (other than terrace walls) were confined to the Late Iron II period. Seven Field Phases (FPs) were identified in Field F during the 1987 excavation season and were associated with occupational periods as follows. Note also fig. 8.4.FP Period Squares Represented7 Iron I 6L99 7L096 E-LIron II 6L89 6L99 7L08 7L095 LIron II 6L89 6L98 6L99 7L094 LIron II 6L98 6L99 7L08 7L093 EPersian 6L98 7L082 Byzantine 6L89 6L98 6L99 7L08 7L091 Ottoman 6L89 6^.98 6L99 7L08 7L09Field Phase 7 (fig. 8.5)Loci: 6L99:216L99:226L99:297L09:257L09:297L09:317L09:32Ash Layer (=6L99:29, = 7L09:29)SurfaceAsh Layer (=6L99:21, = 7L09:29)Earth Layer Ash Layer (=6L99:21, = 6L99:29)WallSurfaceHighly colored, yellow and red mudbrick Wall 7L09:31 was identified in the southwest corner of Square 7L09, and beaten-earth Surface 7L09:32 sealed against the mudbrick structure. However, these features have not been fully excavated so their extent and chronological age has yet to be demonstrated. Loess Earth Layer 7L09:25, directly above the beaten earth-surface, contained pottery which analysis dated as Iron I. This suggested an Iron I date for the surface and mudbrick structure.While no direct stratigraphic connections were^ 0 1 2M -lRL i— '---- 1----- >-----1LGH7L09Fig. 8.5. Field F: Plan of FP 7.possible, the . similarity of the substrate and ceramics demonstrated between Surface 7L09:32 and Surface 6L99:22 (encountered in a probe farther south) suggested contemporaneity. The latter was a beaten-earth surface enriched with fragments of highly colored, heated mudbrick. Analysis of the pottery from this surface also ascribed it to Iron I.173FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.6. Field F : Pottery from FP 7 (nos. 1-12) and FP 6 (nos. 13-29).174FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color__________________________ Non-Plastics________________ Voids M anu______ Surface Treatment_______ Decor FireExt Core . Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jug 7L09 29 87 6 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A R M PA4A W URPink Light Pink 4A SA PA3AGray 3A SR -PR3A2A SR2 Jug 7L09 25 81 2 5YR7/6 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PA5A w _ _ . UOReddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PA4AYellow Yellow 4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A3 Jug 7L09 25 81 3 2.5YR6/0 . 2.5YR5/0 L 5A SR M FS6A w . . VRGray Gray 4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3A4 Jug 7L09 29 87, 5 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA5A w _ . _ UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PA4AYellow Yellow 3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3AP 5A SR4A SR5 Krater 7L09 29 87 1 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SA M JH w SM 5YR5/4 S M 5YR5/4 - URPink Gray Pink 5A SA FS7A Reddish ReddishSR FS6A Brown Brown4A SA PA6ASR PA5A3A SR PA4A2A SR PR4APR3A6 Krater 7L09 29 87 7 7.5YR6/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.SYR 6/4 L 6A SA M PR4A w SM 7.5YR S M 7.5YR6/4 - URLight Gray Light 5A SA PR3A 6/4 LightBrown Brown 4A SR PA3A Light Brown3A SR Brown2A SR7 Krater 7L09 25 81 4 10YR8/3 7.5YR4/0 10YR8/3 L 5 A SA M PA6A w _ URVery Pale Dark Very Pale SR PA5ABrown Gray Brown 4A SA PA4ASR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR8 Bowl 7L09 29 87 3 5YR4/2 5YR5/1 7.5YR5/2 L 5A SA M PR5A w HBH 5YR4/2 HBH 7.5YR5/2 - VRDark Gray Brown SR PR4A Dark BrownReddish 4A SR PR3A ReddishGray 3A SR Gray k2B SR9 Bowl 7L09 25 81 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA7A w . 2.5YR6/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA6A Light4A SR PA5A Red3A SR PA4A2B SR PR5APR4APR3A10 Cook pot. 7L09 29 87 2 5YR3/2 . 5YR4/2 L 5A SR M PR4A w VRDark Dark 4A SRReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Gray 2B SR11 Bowl 7L09 29 87 4 10YR6/2 10YR6/1 10YR6/2 L 5A SR M PA5A w . 7.5YR . 7.5YR4/2 - URLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4A 5/2 BrownBrownish Brownish 3A SR PR3A BrownGray Gray 2A SR12 Krater 7L09 25 81 5 7.5YR6/0 . 7.5YR6/0 L 6A SR M JB w S M 7.5YR . URLight Light 5A SR PA5A 6/2Gray Gray 4A SR PA4A ' Pinkish3A SR PA3A Gray2A SR PR3A13 Pithos 7L08 25 117 7 5YR6/3 2.5YR6/0 SYR 6/3 L 5A SR M PA4A w UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PA3AReddish Reddish 3A SR PR4ABrown Brown 2B SR PR3APR2A14 Pithos 7L08 40 174 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A wVGR UOPink Light Pink 5A SR PA3A N +Gray 4A SR3A SR2B SRFig. 8.6, co n tin u ed . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-14.175FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus ftiil Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color15 Jar 7L08 40 174 3 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR6/0 L 7A R M W . VRGray Gray 5A SR4A SR' 3A SR2B SR16 Jar 7L08 25 116 2 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PA5A W . _ . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR17 Jug 7L09 27 84 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 5YR6/4 L 6A SA M FS7A w . _ . . . URLight Gray. Light 5A SA PA6ARed Reddish 4A SA PA5ABrown 3A SA PA4A2B SR PR4APR3A18 Jug 7L08 25 117 5 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 4A SR M PR3A w . . . . . VOPink Pink 3A SR2D SR19 Jug 7L08 25 117 6 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR L . w SM 10YR7/3 . . . UOPink Gray Light 4A SR VeryReddish 3A SR PaleBrown 2B SR Brown20 Juglet 7L09 24 80 7 5YR7/6 ■ 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M FS5A w . . SLR- 5YR7/2 . URReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR FS4A Bo PinkishYellow Yellow 3A SR FS3A Gray2B SR PA4APR3A21 Juglet 7L09 30 88 2 10YR5/2 . 10YR5/2 L 5A SR M PA4A w SM 7.5YR . 7.5YR6/4 . URGrayish Grayish 4A SR PA3A 5/2 LightBrown Brown 3A SR PR3A Brown Brown2B SR PR2A22 Krater 7L09 24 80 2 7.5YR8/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR8/4 L 6A R M PA4A w . . . . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A23 Krater 7L08 40 176 1 5YR7/4 Rim: 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A w SL 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 Pa: VOPink 10YR6/1 Pink 5A SR PR4A WBR 6/6 WBL Light 2.5YR6/6Light 4A SR PR3A Light Red DarkGray 3A SR Red Gray2B SR24 Krater 7L09 27 84 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 5YR6/4 L 5A R M FS6A w . . . . URLight Gray Light 4A R PA5ARed Reddish 3A SR PA4ABrown 2A SR PR4APR3A25 Krater 7L08 40 172 3 7.5YR7/2 . 7.5YR5/0 L 5A SR M . w WBR 7.5YR _ 10YR5/2 . VOPinkish Gray 4A SR 6/2 GrayishGray 3A SR Pinkish BrownSA Gray2B SR26 Krater 7L08 24 118 j 5YR7/6 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PA4A w WBL 10YR7/3 WBM 2.5YR6/6 . UOReddish Gray Reddish v 5A SR PA3A Very LightYellow Yellow 4A SR PR3A Pale Red3A SR Brown2B SR27 Krater 7L08 25 117 2 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/4 L 4A R M _ w . 2.5YR . . . UOPink Gray Pink SR 6/43A SR Light2C SR ReddishBrown28 Krater 7L08 25 117 1 5YR7/4 . 7.5YR5/0 L 5A SR L PR5A w . 5YR5/3 . . . URPink Gray 4A SR PR4A Reddish3A SR PR3A Brown2A SR29 Basin 7L08 40 171 4 5YR7/3 . 7.5YR6/0 L 6A SR M PR3A w . 10YR7/3 . . . URPink Gray 5A SR Veiy4A SR Pale3A SR Brown2B SRFig. 8.6, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 15-29.176fiFIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF7L082590 7 7 040B907.7339907756L987L09GJ o RL L LGH7906.126L89Fig. 8.7. Field F : Plan of FP 6.177FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFDirectly above these deposits, a lens of powdery charcoal and ash, Ash Layer 7L09:29 (=6L99:21, =6L99:29) ranging from ca. 0.001- 0.020 m deep, covered the surface. The extent and depth of the ash indicated a destructive fire, which may also have been responsible for the coloration of the mudbrick. Examination of the ceramics seems to date the destruction to Iron I (see fig. 8.6:1-12, above).7L09-.187L09:19Surface (=6L89:7,= 6L99:10A, =6L99:16, =7L08:25, =7L08:39, =7L08:40B, =7L09:17, =7L09:19)Surface (=6L89:7,=6L99:10A, =6L99:16, =7L08:25, =7L08:39,= 7L08:40B, =7L09:17,Field Phase 6 (fig. 8.7) 7L09:22= 7L09:18) Surface (=6L99:10B,Loci: 6L89:7 Surface (=6L99:10A, 7L09:24= 7L09:27) Surface (=7L09:28,= 6L99:16, =7L08:25, =7L09:30)=7L08:39, = 7L08:40B, 7L09:27 Surface (=6L99:10B,=7L09:17, =7L09:18, =7L09:22)=7L09:19) 7L09:28 Surface (=7L09:24,6L99:10A Surface (=6L89:7, = 7L09:30)= 6L99:16, =7L08:25, 7L09:30 Surface (=7L09:24,= 7L08:39, =7L08:40B, = 7L09:28)= 7L09:17, =7L09:18,= 7L09:19)6L99:10B Surface (=7L09:22, =7L09:27)6L99:16 Surface (=6L89:7,=6L99:10A, = 7L08:25, = 7L08:39, =7L08:40B, = 7L09:17, =7L09:18, =7L09:19)6L99:17 Plaster Surface 6L99:18 Surface 6L99:19 Surface 6L99:20 Surface 6L99:25 Wall 7L08:24A Ash Layer 7L08:25 Surface (=6L89:7,= 6L99:10A, =6L99:16, = 7L08:39, =7L08:40B, = 7L09:17, = 7L09:18,= 7L09:19)7L08:39 Surface (=6L89:7,= 6L99:10A, =6L99:16, = 7L08:25, =7L08:40B, = 7L09:17, =7L09:18,= 7L09:19)7L08:40A Ash Layer 7L08:40B Surface (=6L89:7,= 6L99:10A, =6L99:16, = 7L08:25, =7L08:39,= 7L08:40B, =7L09:17, = 7L09:18, =7L09:19) 7L08:41 Surface 7L09:14 Ash Layer 7L09:17 Surface (=6L89:7,= 6L99:10A, =6L99:16, = 7L08:25, =7L08:39, =7L08:40B, =7L09:18, =7L09:19)Field Phase 6 was represented by six surfaces, one on top of the other, which for lack of associated architectural changes, have been grouped into one phase.Directly above the destruction layer of FP 7, Wall 6L99:25 was founded, initiating the building stage of FP 6. Made of unhewn and semi-hewn small boulders, and chinked with pebbles, it was oriented at 15°. As only the eastern face of the wall was exposed in a limited area, its length, width, and number of courses have not yet been determined.The first Surface 7L09:24 (=7L09:28,=7L09:30, hereafter: 7L09:24) was beaten-earth and lay directly above the FP-7 destruction layer north of Wall 6L99:25. This surface was likely contemporaneous with the wall, but no direct stratigraphic connection is yet possible. As no architecture has been found directly associated with the surface, its function has not been established. However, a plaster fragment (ca. 0.70 x 0.25 x 0.03 m) was found lying on the surface, possibly from a plastered ceiling or wall. This suggests the floor was once part of a room. The beaten-earth surface extended into unexcavated areas to the north, west and south where associated architectural features may still be present. Artifactual material was sparse, but included an ostracon.Surface 6L99:20, found in a probe to the south, was a reddish, mudbrick-enriched surface, from which Iron Age body sherds were recovered. Although isolated from die other FP-6 features, this surface is reconstructed as being roughly contemporaneous to Surface 7L09:24 as they were both laid on the same basal ash layer of FP 7.The second to fourth surfaces were all found178FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFin the same limited probe as Surface 6L99:20. Surface 6L99:19, grayish brown in color, was above Surface 6L99:20, while the third beaten- earth surface (6L99:18) followed. Above this, plaster Surface 6L99:17 (ca. 0.005-0.010 m thick) was discerned as the fourth surface. Because of the small size of the probe and the fragmentary nature of the plaster, the functions of these surfaces have not yet been determined.Farther north in Square 7L09 (stratigraphically above Surface 7L09:24), the fifth beaten-earth surface was located (7L09:22, =7L09:27)containing several pockets of ash and plaster fragments. Domestic activities were indicated in association with this surface by the presence of basalt mortar and grinder fragments and sherds of cooking pots. A fragment of a ceramic animal figurine, and a ceramic bead were aesthetic remains. In this location there was no sign of the three surfaces exposed above Surface 6L99:20 in Square 6L99 (Surfaces 6L99:17, 6L99:18, and 6L99:19). Instead, Surface 7L09:22 was equivalent to Surface 6L99:10B (immediately above Surface 6L99:17) to the south. Surface 6L99:10B (=7L09:22, =7L09:27) sealed against Wall 6L99:25, suggesting the wall was still in use. Surface 7L08:41, as yet Unexcavated, may have continued this surface to the west.The sixth Surface 6L89:7 (=6L99:10A, = 6L99:16, =7L08:25, =7L08:39, =7L08:40B, =7L09:17, =7L09:18, =7L09:19), also beaten- earth, yielded more occupational debris suggesting domestic activities. A charcoal and ash lens (interpreted as a temporary hearth) was found with a concentration of olive pits and other unidentified seeds. Bone remains were also frequent in this horizon. Artifacts included a mendable Late Iron II bowl, a small hand grinder, a stone spindle whorl, and a metal object. A small, clearly defined area of burned earth, charcoal, and ash was also identified within this surface near the west balk. The presence of several burned cooking pot rims in this matrix suggested use as a second hearth (Ash Layer 7L09:14). Surface 6L99:10A sealed against Wall 6L99:25, suggesting these surfaces may have been occupational floors associated with this earlier structure. Across the upper ca. 0.02 m of this surface were scattered small plaster fragments and lenses of ash. These latter formations were interpreted as destruction debris, likely contemporaneous to more distinct Ash Layer 7L08:40A to the west.Although direct stratigraphic correlation was prevented by the balks, interpretation of beaten- earth Surface 7L08:40B and Earth Layer 7L08:25 (=7L08:39) as being roughly equivalent to thelatest surface in Square 7L09 (Surface 7L09:17) and in Square 6L99 (Surface 6L99:10A) is consistent with the presence of overlying continuous distinct ash layers, equivalent basal elevations, shared characteristics of sediment texture and consistence, and ceramic chronology.No architecture was associated with Surface 7L08:40B, but domestic activities associated with this horizon included the consumption of olives and a variety of animals, as evidenced by paleobotanical and faunal remains. Sheep and/or goat bones dominated the faunal assemblage, which also included cattle and other large mammal remains. Among other artifactual remains, an inscribed seal of red limestone was found in situ on this surface (see Herr, chapter 18, below). Subsequent Ash Layer 7L08:24A blanketed the surface again in what was likely a second destructive fire at the end of the phase.Analysis of the pottery from the two earliest surfaces (6L99:20/7L09:24 and 6L99:19) contained pottery dated to Early Iron II, while the later four surfaces (6L99:18, 6L99:17, 6L99:10B, and 6L89:7) produced Late Iron II sherds (see fig. 8.6:13-29 above, and fig. 8.8). Subsequent excavations will most likely subdivide this phase. Pottery from the Iron I period was also found in significant numbers in the above loci. Because Iron I levels were otherwise not reached this season, a representative sample is included here, although they must be considered secondary (fig.8.9).Field Phase 5 (fig. 8.10)6L89:3 Surface6L89:4 Earth Layer6L89:5 Pier6L89:6 Earth Layer6L89:8 Earth Layer6L98-.39 Surface6L98:44 Wall6L98:45 Earth Layer6L99:8 Pier6L99:9 Pier6L99:11 Wall (=6L99:15, =7L09:3)6L99:14 Surface6L99:15 Wall (=6L99:11, =7L09:3)6L99:23 Pit6L99:24 Earth Layer6L99:27 Trench (=7L09:21)6L99:28 Earth Layer6L99:30 Stone7L09:3 Wall (=6L99:11, =6L99:15)7L09:20 Fill7L09.21 Trench (=6L99:27)179FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFi 28Fig. 8.8. Field F: Pottery from FP 6.32y180FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor Fire'' Ext Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Basin 7L08 40 176 2 5YR7/6 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A W . . . . UOReddish Gray Pink 4A SRYellow 3A SR2B SR2 Basin 7L09 24 80 1 10YR8/2 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M FS6A W SL 5YR8/2 SI 10YR8/2 - u oWhite Gray Pink A PA4A R + Pinkish R+ White4A SR PA3A WhiteA PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A3 Bowl 7L09 17 67 10 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M JB W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR5/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A WBM 5/6 WBM Red3A SR PA3A Red2B SR PR3A ̂4 Bowl 7L09 17 67 9 7.5YR5/2 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR5/2 L 5A R M PA4A w WBL 7.5YR WBM 7.5YRN5/ - URBrown Gray Brown 4A SR PR3A 6/4 Gray3A SR PR2A Light2C SR Brown5 Bowl 7L08 25 116 1 2.5YR6/4 10YR5/1 Rim: L 4A R L . w WBL 5YR6/4 WBL 5YR6/3 - URLight Gray* 5YR7/3 3A R Light LightReddish Pink 2D SR Reddish ReddishBrown Brown Brown6 Bowl 7L08 25 117 3 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w SM 10R5/6 WBM 5YR7/4 - UOLight Gray Pink 4A SR WBH Red PinkReddish 3A SRBrown 2B SR7 Bowl 7L08 25 117 4 5YR7/3 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PA4A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/4 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR4A WBM 6/4 WBM Light3A SR PR3A Light Reddish2B SR PR2A Reddish BrownBrown8 Bowl 7L09 17 67 5 5YR6/6 5YR6/2 5YR6/6 L 5A SR L . w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR5/6 - VOReddish Light Reddish SA WBR 5/6 WBM RedYellow Gray Yellow 4A SR Red3A SR2B SR9 Bowl 7L08 25 118 2 2.5YR6/6 7.5R4/0 10YR7/3 L 5A SR L PA5A w _ _ _ _ URLight Dark Very Pale 4A SR PA3ARed Gray Brown 3A SR PR2A2A SR10 Bowl 7L08 40 172 1 7.5YR7/4 . 7,5YR7/4 L 5A SA M w SL 10YR8/3 _ 7.5YR7/4 - VOPink Pink 4A SR R + Very Pink3A SR Pale2D SR Brown11 Bowl 7L09 17 75 2 5YR7/3 10YR6/1 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PR3A w SM 5YR6/4 SM 10R5/6 - VOPink Gray Pink 5A SR Light WBM RedA Reddish4A SR Brown3A SR2B SR12 Bowl 7L08 40 172 2 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 4A SR M . w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/4 - URPink Pink 3A SR Very Very2D SR Pale PaleBrown Brown13 Bowl 7L09 30 88 1 5YR6/3 7.5YR5/2 5YR6/3 L 5A SR M PA4A w W BW 7.5YR MBH 5YR4/1 - VRLight Brown Light 4A SR PA3A 5/2 DarkReddish Reddish 3A SR PR3A Brown GrayBrown Brown 2B SR PR2AP 5A SR4A SR14 Bowl 7L08 40 174 2 7.5YR6/0 . 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M FS4A w WBH 7.5YR WBH 7.5YR3/0 - VRGray Gray 4A SR R + 4/0 R + Very3A SR Dark Dark2A SR Gray Gray15 Bowl 7L08 40 171 2 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w _ _ UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR3A SR2B SR16 Bowl 7L09 17 67 1 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR7/6 2.5YR6/6 L 4A SR L PR3A w _ . . _ VOLight Reddish Light 3A SR PR2ARed Yellow Red 2C SRFig. 8.8, co n tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.181FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color17 Bowl 7L08 25 116 3 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 4A SA M PR3A W _ . _ UOLight Gray Light 3A SRReddish Reddish 2C SRBrown Brown18 Bowl 7L09 17 67 2 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A R M PR4A W SM 7.5YR _ _ u oReddish Light Pink 4A SR PR3A 7/4Yellow Gray 3A SR Pink2B SR19 Bowl 7L09 17 67 8 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR L PR4A w SM 10R5/6 SM 2.5YR5/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR3A WBL Red WBL Red3A SR2C SR20 Bowl 7L09 28 85 3 5YR7/4 2.5YR4/0 7.5YR7/2 L 4A SR L PA4A w _ _ _• _ u oPink Dark Pinkish 3A SR PA3AGray Gray 2B SR PR3A21 Bowl 7L08 40 171 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A R MH PR3A w . _ . . VOPink Gray Pink 4A RSR3A SR2B SR22 Bowl 7L09 17 67 7 5YR7/6 5YR5/1 5YR7/6 L 4A R L PR4A w _ . SM 2.5YR5/6 - u oReddish Gray Reddish 3A R PR3A WBL RedYellow Yellow 2C SR23 Bowl 7L09 17 75 1 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR5/2 7.5YR6/2 L 4A SR L PA4A w WBL 7.5YR WBL 7.5YR5/2 - VRPinkish Brown Pinkish 3A SR SL 5/2 SL BrownGray Gray 2C SR R + Brown R +24 Bowl 7L08 25 116. 4 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PR3A w . . . ' . u oPink Gray Pink 5A SR PR2A4A SR3A SR2B SR25 Bowl 7L08 40 175 1 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 4A SR M _ w WBL . WBL _ u oPink Gray Pink 3B SR2B SR26 Bowl 7L09 17 67 4 2.5YR5/6 . 2.5YR5/6 L 4A R L _ w WBH 2.5YR WBH 2.5YR5/6 - VORed Red 3A SR 5/6 Red2C SR Red27 Bowl 7L09 24 80 11 2.5YR6/6 5YR8/2 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A w _ _ _ . u oLight Pinkish Light 4A SR PA4ARed White Red 3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3A28 Plate 7L09 17 67 3 5YR6/6 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 6A SR M PR4A w SM 5YR6/1 . URReddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PR3A WBL LightYellow Yellow 4A SR PR2A Gray3 A SR2B SR29 Plate 7L09 17 67 6 7.5YR7/4 . 7:5YR7/4 L 6A R L . PR3A w SL 2.5YR SM 2.5YR5/6 - VRPink Pink 5 A R 5/6 WBH Red4A SR Red3A SR2B SR30 Cook pot 7L09 28 86 5 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M PA5A w _ 5YR5/2 _ 5YR5/2 - URPink Gray Pink 4A SA PA4A Reddish Reddish3A SA PA3A Gray Gray2A SA PR3ASR31 Cook pot 7L09 28 86 6 2.5YR5/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR5/6 L 5A SA M PR5A w . _ _ _ URRed Gray Red 4A SA PR4A3A SA PR3A2A SA32 Cook pot 7L08 40 176 3 5YR4/4 . 5YR4/4 L 6A SR M FS4A w . 5YR5/3 _ 2.5YR6/4 - VRReddish Reddish 5A SR FS3A Reddish LightBrown Brown 4A SR PA3A Brown Reddish3A SR PR3A Brown2A SR____________ PR2AFig. 8.8, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-32.182FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF1 ^ci [13c1T>202 2t18r16210 10 LGHH23/Kg. 8.9; Field F: Pottery from FP 6 (Iron I).183FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Rea Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu' Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar 7L09 30 89 1 5YR5/1 . 5YR5/2 L 6A SA MH PA6A W - SL SL RiN VRGray Reddish 5A SA PA5A R + R +Gray 4A SA PA4A3A SA PA3A2A SA PR3A2 Jug 7L09 28 86 4 5YR6/6 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA6A W SL 7.5YR SL 5YR6/6 . URReddish Gray Reddish SA PA5A 6/2 ReddishYellow Yellow 4A SR PA4A Pinkish Yellow3A SR PA3A Gray2A SR PR4APR3APR2A3 Jug 7L09 24 80 3 5YR8/3 7.5YR7/0 5YR8/3 L 5A SR M FS6A W . - . . . UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PA4AGray A PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SR4 Jug 7L09 24 80 8 7.5YR8/2 5YR8.5/1 7.5YR8/2 L 5A SA M PA4A W . . . . URPinkish Light Pinkish 4A SR PA3AWhite Gray White 3A SR PR3A2B SR5 Krater 7L09 28 85 7 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR5/0 10YR4/1 L 5A SA M PA6A W SL 10YR6/2 SL 10YR4/1 . URPinkish Gray Dark SR PA5A Light DarkGray Gray 4A SR PA4A B ro w n - Gray3A SR PR4A ish2B SR PR3A Gray6 Krater 7L09 28 85 5 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5R6/4 L 5A SR M PA5A W SM 5YR7/4 SM 10YR6/3 . U O .Light Gray Light 4A SR PA4A Pink PaleBrown Brown 3A SR PA3A Brown2B SR PR3A7 Bowl 7L09 24 80 4 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A W . . . . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3APR2A8 Bowl 7L09 24 80 5 2.5YR6/6 7.5Y58/2 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M FS7A W . . . . VRLight Pinkish Light 4A SR PA6ARed White Red 3A SR PA4A2B SR PR3A9 Bowl 7L09 24 80 10 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR MH PA4A W . . URPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3A10 Bowl 7L09 28 85 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PA5A w . . . . UOLight Dark Light 4A SR PA4A «Brown Gray Brown 3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3APR2A11 Bowl 7L09 28 85 2 2.5YR5/4 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA4A w SM 10YR6/3 SM 10YR6/3 . URReddish Gray Light 4A SR PR3A Pale PaleBrown Red 3A SR Brown Brown2B SR12 Bowl 7L09 28 85 4 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR6/2 L 5A SR MH PA6A w _ . . . UOLight Gray Pinkish 4A SR PA5AReddish Gray 3A SR PA4ABrown 2B SR PA3AP 5A SR PR4A4A SR PR3A13 Bowl 7L09 28 85 6 7. SYR 6/2 7.5YR4/0 10YR5/1 L 5A SA M PA5A w HB 5YR6/3 - 10YR4/1 _ URPinkish Dark Gray SR PA4A Light DarkGray Gray 4A SR PA3A Reddish Gray3A SR PR5A Brown2A SR PR4APR3A14 Bowl 7L09 28 86 3 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w . . . . URPink Gray Light 4A SR PA3ABrown 3A SR PR3A2B SR15 Cook pot 7L09 27 84 1 2.5YR5/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR5/6 L 5A SA M PA5A w . • . . . URRed Gray Red SR PA4A4A SA PR4ASR PR3A, 3A SA2A SAFig. 8.9, co n tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-15.184FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color16 Cook pot 7L09 24 80 9 5YR6/2 5YR7/6 5YR6/2 L 5A SR MH PA5A W VRPinkish Reddish Pinkish SA PA4AGray Yellow Gray 4A SR PA3ASA PR3A3A SA PR2A2B SASR17 Cook pot 7L09 24 80 6 2.5YR6/6 10R6/6 2.5YR6/6 . L 5A SA MH PA4A W 2.5YR - 2.5YR6/2 - URLight Reddish Light 4A SA PA3A 6/2 PaleRed Gray Red SR PR4A Pale Red3A SR PR3A Red2B SR18 Cook pot 7L09 24 80 13 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR7/0 7.5YR6/2 L 5A SR MH PA3A W CaH 10YR3/1 - _ VRPinkish Light Pinkish A PR4A VeryGray Gray Gray 4A SR PR3A DarkSA PR2A Gray3A SA2B SASR19 Cook pot 7L09 24 80 12 5YR7/3 5YR7/2 5YR7/3 L 5A SA MH PA7A W . . URPink Pinkish Pink 4A SA PA5AGray SR PR3A3A SA2B SRSA20 Cook pot 7L09 28 86 1 10YR5/2 10YR6/1 10YR6/3 L 5A SR M PA5A W . . VRGrayish Gray Pale 4A SR PA4ABrown Brown 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2AP 4A SR21 Cook pot 7L09 28 86 7 2.5YR6/8 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/8 L 6A R M PA5A W . . _ UOLight Gray Light 5A SR PA4ARed Red 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR4A2A SR PR3APR2A22 Cook pot 7L09 28 86 2 7.5YR4/2 . 5YR5/3 L 5A SA M PA4A W - - _ VRDark Reddish 4A SA PA3ABrown Brown 3A SA PR2A2A SASRP 4A SA23 Cook pot 7L09 30 88 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/6 L 5A R M PA4A W 2.5YR - 2.5YR5/4 - UOLight Gray Reddish 4A SR PA3A 4/2 ReddishRed Yellow 3A SR PR3A Weak Brown2B SR PR2A RedFig. 8.9, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 16-23.The building stage of FP 5 was indicated by the digging of foundation Trench 7L09:21 (=6L99:27) through FP-6 Surfaces 7L09.T7, 7L09:22, and 7L09:24, (as well as Surfaces 6L99;10A and 6L99:10B). The shallow trench (ca. 0.10-0.30 m deep) appeared only on the west side of Wall 6L99:11 (=6L99:15, =7L09:3) where it was only ca. 0.05-0.15 m wide. A wedge-shaped section of dirt had been removed from the slope in order to found the wall on a level earth surface. The semi-hewn stones of the wall were then positioned more-or-less flush with the western edge of the trench, while the eastern side of the wall sat directly on FP-6 Surface 7L09:19 (=6L99:16) which was then an exposure surface.Wall 6L99:11 consisted of two rows of small - to large-sized, semi-hewn boulders with chink- stones. It was ca. 1.03-1.07 m wide, and trended 12° for ca. 9.30 m. At the better preserved northern end, four courses remained. The northernedge of the wall had evidently been robbed or destroyed, for the large boulders making up the body of the wall formed an extremely uneven edge. Here the end of the eastern row had been removed for all but the foundation course. If an east trending wall had originally bonded into it at this point, the pattern of remaining stones could be explained. Stratigraphic relationships indicated that the wall did not continue northward or turn westward, as the beaten-earth surfaces were intact. However, several erosional disconformities were observed east of the wall, so stratigraphic confirmation of this suggestion is not possible.Piers 6L99:8 and 6L99:9 were constructed at right angles (108° and 106° respectively). Pier 6L99:8 was ca. 0.98 m wide and extended ca. 1.98 m from the eastern edge of Wall 6L99:15, ending in a squared-off, finished stub. It appeared to have carefully abutted the wall. Pier 6L99:9 measured ca. 1.23 m long x ca. 1.10 m wide, and bonded with Wall 6L99:15. The construction1856L89FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.11. Field F: Standing stone, jar base, and possible tethering stone in the FP-5 gate area.methods and material of the two piers were similar to that of the wall: two rows of small and medium semi-hewn and unhewn boulders were chinked with cobbles. The fact that both Piers 6L99:8 and 6L99:9 ended in squared stubs (clearly not destroyed) without joining other walls to the east, suggested that they were piers and not wall fragments.Standing next to Wall 6L99:11 was a large, upended, hewn stone (6L99:30), about 0.90 m tall (fig. 8.11). Its founding level has not yet been exposed, but it is presumed to be contemporary with the rest of the architectural features in FP 5. Beaten-earth Surface 6L99:14 was the surface in use with this structure. Next to the standing stone was cobble-lined Pit 6L99:23 which served to support a pithos base, functioning perhaps as a basin (perhaps for ceremonial activities).Immediately north of the standing stone, a medium-sized boulder with a hole ca. 0.07 m in diameter at one end was found resting on Surface 6L99:14. Its purpose was unknown, although its size suggested a possible tethering stone for livestock.Defining the stratigraphic relationship between Square 6L99 and Square 6L89 to the south was complicated by Pier 6L99:9, which bisected the two Squares. Square 6L89 also containedsediments derived from two unique depositional conditions on either side of the pier: the topographic rises to the northwest and the southwest. The thick deposits in Square 6L89 suggested that either greater deposition rates or less erosion took place in this Square than elsewhere.The eastern end of east-west Wall 6L89:5, oriented 110", was probably another pier. Its temporal relationship to the main architectural feature to the north is not yet clear, as all earth layers in this Square sealed against the wall, probably representing debris deposits from the end of the phase (Surface 6L89:3 on both sides of the wall, Earth Layer 6L89:4 on the north side, and Earth Layers 6L89:6 and 6L89:8 on the south side).Artifacts in the earth layers supported an exterior interpretation: several ballistic missiles and a javelin point in Surface 6L89:3 indicated defensive activities took place locally. Surface 6L89:3 may have represented a deposit outside the postulated gate structure. Ceramic gaming pieces in Earth Layer 6L89.8 suggested traditional peace-time public activities that probably took place in gate alcoves. However, the nonparallel orientation of Pier 6L89:5 to the two other piers makes it appear unlikely that it was part of the same structure, unless Wall 6L99:15 angled off to the southwest into unexcavated deposits west of Square 6L89. Such a bend in the wall would be consistent with a gate annex interpretation, and should be tested in subsequent field seasons.The general plan of the wall, piers, standing stone, basin, tethering stone, and surfaces is suggestive of a city gate feature. Its north-south orientation, roughly parallel to both the projected city wall and the contour of the slope, was reminiscent of an exterior city gate annex, such as at Megiddo (Lamon 1939). Note also the Iron Age gate at Tell el-Farcah (North), Stratum VII, which included a standing stone and a nearby basin (Chambon 1984: 155). A large mortar or socket found reused in a FP-2 context may have been a gate socket (see the discussion below).Wall 6L98:44 also may possibly be attributed to FP 5, though stratigraphic connections were lacking. This two row wall extended from the south for ca. 2.30 m into the Square. This season, only the upper course was unearthed, but the meter-wide wall, built of large- and medium-sized boulders and chinkstones, suggested a large structure. The lowermost exposed occupational surface sealing against Wall 6L98:44 was ashy Surface 6L98:39. Below the surface was Earth Layer 6L98:45. Analysis of the pottery from the surfaces and earth layers indicated a date in Late Iron II (fig. 8.12).187FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF 'iNo Type__ Sq Locus Pail Res Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvne Size Shane Density Ext Color [ntiColor1 Pithos 6L98 45 166 3 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 W 2.5YR 2.5YR6/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 6/6 LightLight RedRed i2 Pithos 6L98 45 166 2 5YR6/6 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 _ _ . _ . W 7.5YR _ 2.5YR6/4 Ri UOReddish Gray Reddish 7/4 Light N + ReddishYellow Yellow ReddishYellow Brown3 Pithos 6L99 23 56 2 7.5YR7/4 10YR6/1 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w . . . UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PA3AGray 3B SR PR3A2B SR4 Krater 6L98 45 170 1 5YR7/4 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M PA5A w WBR . . _ URPink Gray SA PA4A i4A SR PR4A )SA PR3A3A SA 12A SR 15 Bowl 6L98 45 166 1 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR4/0 L 4A A M FS4A w WBH 2.5YR WBM 2.5YR3/0 - URDark Gray Dark 3A A PA4A 3/0 VeryGray Gray SA PR4A Very Dark2C SA PR3A Dark GrayPR2A Gray6 Bowl 6L98 45 168 3 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 4A SR L PA4A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VRPink Gray Pink 3A SR PR4A WBM 6/6 WBM Liglit2C SR Light Red< .Fig. 8.12. Field F : Pottery from FP 5 and descriptions for nos. 1-6.188FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color7 Bowl 6L98 45 168 5 5YR4/1 5YR4/1 L 3 A SR L PA3A W WBL WBM VRDark Dark 2D SRGray Gray8 Bowl 6L98 45 168 1 5YR7/6 5VR6/1 5YR7/6 L 6A R M PA4A W SL 2.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 5A R PR3A WBM 6/6 WBL LightYellow Yellow 4A R Light Red3A SR Red2A SR9 Plate 6L98 45 168 2 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 . 5YR7/4 L 4A SR L PA4A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VRPink Gray Pink 3A SR PA3A 6/6 WBH Light2C SR PR3A Light RedRed10 Mortar 6L98 45 168 4 5YR7/3 5YR6/1 5YR7/3 L 5A SA M PA3A w SM 5YR5/2 . . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBL Reddish3A SR Gray2B SR11 Mortar 7L09 20 73 1 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 6A SR M JB w SH 10YR8/2 SH 10YR7/3 - UOLight Gray Light SA PAS A H SL White SL Very PaleReddish Reddish 5A SR PA4A R + R + BrownBrown Brown 4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2A SR12 Cook pot 6L99 23 56 l 5YR7/6 5YR7/1 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M FS6A W . 5YR7/4 _ 5YR7/4 - URReddish Light Reddish 5A SR PA5A Pink PinkYellow Gray Yellow 4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2A SR PR3A13 Lamp 6L98 4 22 1 5YR7/3 - ■ 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M - W - - VOPink Pink SA4A SR 3A SR______________________________ ___________________________________ ______________ 2C SRFig. 8.12, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 7-13.Field Phase 4 7L08:32 Fill7L08:33 Surface (=7L08:34)Loci: 6L98:26 Surface (=6L98:31, 7L08:34 Surface (=7L08:33)= 6L98:36) 7L08:35 Pit6L98:31 Surface (=6L98:26, 7L08:36 Fill= 6L98:36) 7L08:37 Surface (=7L09:38)6L98:36 Surface (=6L98:26, 7L08:38 Earth Layer= 6L98:31) 7L09:3 Wall (=6L99:11, =6L99:15,6L98:41 Surface = 7L09:12) (Cont. from6L98:44 Wall (Cont. from FP 5) FP 5)6L99:4 Surface (=6L99:7) 7L09:5 Surface (=6L99:6,6L99:5B Earth Layer = 6L99:12, =7L09:10)6L99:6 Surface (=6L99:12, 7L09:8 Surface= 7L09:5, =7L09:10) 7L09:9 Ash Layer6L99:7 Surface (=6L99:4) 7L09:10 Surface (=6L99:6,6L99:11 Wall (=6L99:15, =7L09:3, = 6L99:12, =7L09:5)= 7L09:12) (Cont. from 7L09:11 Plaster FragmentFP 5) 7L09:12 Wall (=6L99:11,6L99:12 Surface (=6L99:6, =7L09:5, = 6L99:15, =7L09:3)= 7L09:10) (Cont. from FP 5)6L99:13 Surface 7L09:13 Colluvial Layer6L99:15 Wall (=6L99:11, = 7L09:3, 7L09:15 Fill= 7L09:12) (Cont. from 7L09:16 Colluvial LayerFP 5) 7L09:23 Pit7L08:21 Surface 7L09:38 Surface (=7L08:37)7L08:22 Surface7L08:23 Surface7L08:24B Surface After Wall 7L09:3 (=6L99:11, =6L99:15,7L08:29 Earth Layer =7L09:12) had been truncated at the end of FP 5,7L08:31 Pit beaten-earth Surface 7L09:5 (=7L09:10) was laid189FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFdown north and east of the wall. Subsequently, Colluvial Layers 7L09:13 and 7L09:16 covered it.A northward extension, Wall 7L09:12 (ca. 1.74 m), was added to Wall 7L09:3 at that time. It was built similarly to Wall 7L09:3, with medium and small semi-hewn boulders laid in two rows. However, only the foundation course remained. It abutted the northern end of Wall 7L09:3, and the gaping joint was chinked with large cobbles. The wall was set directly on Earth Layer 7L09:16 and maintained the same orientation (12°) and width as Wall 7L09:3.East of Wall 7L09:3 (=6L99:11, =6L99:15, = 7L09:12) was a beaten-earth fragment, Surface 7L09:5 (=6L99:6, =6L99:12, =7L09:10). It sealed against the wall, and was marked by an erosional disconformity on its eastern side where the surface broke off and moved downslope. A substantial concentration of flat-lying pottery demarcated the original gradient as sloping roughly 22°. Several grinding stones, a stone bowl, a whorl for spinning linen, a loom weight, and a fibula pin were found in this layer.Surface 7L09:10, equivalent to Surface 7L09:5, sealed against Wall 7L09:3 farther north and was distinguished by flat-lying potsherds. The upper portion of this surface corresponded to beaten-earth Surface 6L99:6 (=6L99:12), which sealed against the gate bastion walls, still standing. Surface 6L99:6 contained a large broken pot, a grinding stone, a ballistic missile, as well as a thin ash concentration, which may have represented short-term fire use such as a temporary hearth. Small, flat-lying sherds on the very hard, compact surface indicated extensive human occupation of this area. Surface 6L99:12, the corresponding surface south of Pier 6L99:8 was similar in color, texture, and pottery inclusions. A nearly entire ceramic flask was found on the surface.Beaten-earth Surface 7L09:8 overlying Colluvial Layer 7L09:13 was found to seal against Wall 7L09:3 (=6L99:11, =6L99:15, =7L09:12) on the western side. Domestic activities were implied by the concentration of artifacts, which included two spindle whorls, a stone weight, two basalt grinding stones, and a basalt bowl fragment. A zoomorphic figurine head and a ballistic missile completed the assemblage. The presence of a large, fire-hardened ash concentration, Ash Layer 7L09:9 (ca. 0.40 m deep), in an area with fire-reddened earth (5YR 5/4), was indicative of a hearth with a relatively long period of use. Faunal remains attributed to sheep and/or goat, some of them burned, were also noted.Pit 7L09:23 appeared to have been cut from Surface 7L09:8 into FP-6 Layer 7L09:17 to a depth of ca. 0.40 m. Fill 7L09:15 from the pit, contained ash and organic residues suggesting itfunctioned as a refuse pit. Numerous plaster inclusions implied that Surface 7L09:8 was at one time roofed. Some of the larger pieces were laminated, and seemed to have served a decorative architectural function. One large, flat piece (Plaster Fragment 7L09:11), measuring ca. 0.80 x 0.90 m and found in secondary context, appeared to have fallen from either a ceiling or a wall. The plaster fragments, as well as exposure Surface 6L99:4 (=6L99:7) to the south, represented the destruction/abandonment stage of FP 4.Due to the presence of pits, terrace walls, and erosional disconformities in Square, 6L98 and Square 7L08 to the west, the beaten-earth surfaces with pottery similar to FP 4 east of those Squares, could not be directly correlated to any of the surfaces described above. However, on the basis of firm correlations in FP 3 and FP 5, a series of surfaces were bracketed within FP 4.Architectural activities associated with FP 4 in Square 7L08 were not evident, but beaten-earth Surface 7L08:24B was well defined. It was followed by beaten-earth Surface 7L08:37 (=7L09:38), which contained a copper or bronze pendant, a basalt grinding stone, and iron slag fragments, indicating the inhabitants were smelting ore nearby. Earth Layer 7L08:38 was a small lens of earth within Surface 7L08:37.Above these two well defined beaten-earth surfaces in Square 7L08, a series of laminated exposure surfaces accumulated: Surfaces 7L08:33 (=7L08:34), 7L08:23, 7L08:22, and 7L08:21. They contained few artifacts other than pottery sherds, demonstrating the end of domestic occupation in this area. The surfaces were truncated on the east in a disconformity that was most likely anthropogenic, perhaps from the robbing of a wall. We may thus suggest a north- south wall line running through the middle of Square 7L08.Exposure Surface 7L08:33 (=7L08:34)contained small Pit 7L08:35 measuring ca. 0.35 x 0.45 x 0.13 m, with its Fill 7L08:36. Into Surface 7L08:23, another small pit (7L08:31) was found. It measured ca. 0.46 x 0.13 x 0.06 m. Its fill (7L08:32) was of ashy earth.Similarly, in Square 6L98 activities associated with FP 4 were only hinted in a series of exposure surfaces that sealed against Wall 6L98:44 of FP 5. There was no evidence of beaten-earth surfaces or occupation associated with Wall 6L98:44 during FP 4. The earliest exposure surface (6L98:41) rested on a FP-5 destruction layer (Surface 6L98:39), and was followed by a subsequent exposure Surface 6L98:26 (= 6L9 8:31,= 6L98:36). Metal slag, a whetstone, a loom weight, and grinding stones were found in these surfaces, indicating that both subsistence and190FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFn19i20V21 \n 2324X25 26t27128} 0 = 12930) 131 32 34 TFig. 8.13. Field F : Pottery from FP 4.191FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvt)e Size - Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pithos 7L09 11 64 1 5YR7/3 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/3 L 5A R M JR W . . UOPink Gray Pink 4A R PR4A3A R PR3A2B SR2 Pithos 6L98 36 117 7 5YR7/3 5YR6/1 5YR6/3 L 5A SR M FS6A W _ _ . URPink Gray Light 4A SR FS5AReddish 3A SR PA5ABrown 2B SR PA4APA3APR3APR2A3 Pithos 7L08 21 87 9 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA3A W . _ . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PR3A4A SR3A SR2B SRP 7A SR4 Pithos 7L08 21 85 1 . 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A W . URPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR5 Pithos 7L08 21 123 4 5YR7/3 5YR6/1 5YR7/3 L 7A SR M PA3A W _ _ . ■ URPink Gray Pink 6A SR PR3A5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SR6 Pithos 7L08 21 101 2 7.5YR7/4 10YR6/1 10YR6/1 L 5A R M PA5A W _ _ 5YR7/4 - UOPink Gray Gray SR PA4A Pink4A R PR4ASR PR3A3A R2A R7 Jar 7L08 22 112 1 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 6A R M PA4A W _ _ . URLight Gray Light 5A SR PA3AReddish Reddish 4A SR PR3ABrown Brown 3A SR2B SR8 Jar 7L08 22 112 4 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 6A R M PR3A w _ 10YR6/2 - 7.5YR6/4 - URLight Gray Light 5A R PR2A Light LightReddish Reddish 4A SR Brown- BrownBrown Brown 3B SR ishP 5A R Gray9 Jar 7L08 22 113 5 5YR/7/3 5YR/7/1 5YR/7/3 L 5A SR M PR3A w . . Ri UOPink Light Pink 4A SR N +Gray 3A SR2B SR10 Jar 7L08 21 100 4 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PR3A w . _ . UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SRYellow Yellow 3A SR2B SR11 Jar 7L08 23 91 1 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w SM R - 10YR7/3 - . VRPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA3A N + Very3A SA PR4A Pale2B SR PR3A Brown12 Jar 7L08 22 112 5 5YR7/6 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA4A w _ . UOReddish Light Reddish 4A SR PR3AYellow Gray Yellow 3A SR2B SR13 Jar 7L08 21 88 3 5YR6/6 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 5A R M PR3A w URReddish Gray Reddish 4A SRYellow Yellow 3A SRSA2A SR14 Jar 7L08 21 85 6 5YR6/4 5YR6/1 ' 5YR6/4 L 5A R M PA3A w SL 5YR7/3 SL 5YR7/3 - URLight Gray Light 4A R Pink PinkReddish Reddish 3A RBrown Brown 2B SR15 Jar 6L98 36 162 3 5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR MH PA4A w SM 10YR7/2 - 7.5YR6/2 - UOLight Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A SL Light PinkishReddish 4A SR R + Gray GrayBrown 3A SR2B SRFig. 8.13, co n tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-15.192FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sa Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color16 Jar 6L99 12 35 2 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 10YR7/2 L 5A SR M PA4A W SM 10YR7/2 - URLight Gray Light 4A SR PA3A LightReddish Gray 3A SR PR4A GrayBrown 2B SR PR3APR2A17 Jar 7L08 21 102 5 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 L 4A R L PA6A W SL 5YR7/4 - _ VOReddish Reddish 3A R PR4A PinkYellow Yellow 2C R PR3AP 4A SA18 Jar 7L08 21 123 3 7.5YR5/2 7.5YR5/2 L 5A SR M PA3A W . _ . VRBrown Brown 4A SR PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SR19 Jar 7L08 21 100 2 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A W _ . _ - UOLight Gray Pink 5A SR PR2AReddish 4A SRBrown 3A SR2B SR20 Jar 7L08 22 107 5 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR6/4 L 6A SR M PA4A W . Slip: . URLight Light Light 5A SR PA3A 10YR7/3Brown Gray . Brown 4A SR PR3A Very3A SR PR2A Pale2B SR Brown21 Jar 6L98 36 162 7 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PA5A W . . . URPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A22 Jar 7L08 21 102 6 5YR7/6 . 5YR6/1 L 6A SR L PR5A W . . . UOReddish Gray 5A SA PR4AYellow 4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR23 Jar 6L99 12 34 1 5YR6/6 7.5YR6/0 SYR 6/6 L 5A SR M JH W _ . UOReddish Light Reddish 4A R PR3AYellow Gray Yellow 3A SR2B SR24 Jar 6L99 12 35 1 Outer: 10YR6/1 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PA3A W . . . ■ UO2.5YR6/6 Gray Pink 4A SR PR4ALight 3A SR PR3ARedInner:5YR7/3Pink2B SR PR2A25 Jar 7L08 21 100 6 5YR6/4 5YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 5A SR L PA4A W . . . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PA3AReddish Reddish 3A SR PR2AYellow Brown 2B SR26 . Jar 6L98 36 164 5 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M PA4A W . . . . URPink Gray Gray 4A SR PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SR27 Jug 7L09 11 64 . 3 7.5YR8/4 7.5YR7/0 7.5YR8/4 L 5A SR M PA4A W . . . ■ . UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PA3AGray 3A SR2B SR28 Jug 7L09 11 64 . 4 5YR7/4 7.5YR7/0 L 5A SR M PA6A w . _ _ URPink Light 4A SR PA4AGray 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A29 Jug 6L98 36 117 4 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w SL 7.5YR - . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PA3A 7/2Reddish Reddish 3A SR PR3A PinkishBrown Brown 2B SR PR2A Gray30 Jug 6L98 36 162 1 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR M PA3A w SL 5YR7/4 - 5YR5/3 - UOLight Gray Light 5A SR PR3A Pink ReddishReddish Reddish 4A SR BrownBrown Brown 3A SR2B SRP 5A SRFig. 8.13, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 16-30.193FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type ___ Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color31 Jug 6L98 26 131 j Outer: 2.5YR5/0 Outer: L 7A . A L FS6A W VO2.5YR6/6 Gray 5YR7/4 6A SR PR5ALight Pink 5A R PR3ARed Inner: 3A RInner: 5YR7/35YR7/3 PinkPink32 Jug 7L08 37 156 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2 5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W . . . . u oLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4ARed Red 3A SR PA3A2A SR PR4AP 5A R PR3APR2A33 Jug 7L08 23 115 8 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/3 ; L 5A SR M FS5A w SM 10YR7/2 - 5YR6/3 - u oPink Light Pink 4A SR PA4A Light LightGray 3A SR PR3A Gray Reddish2B SR Brown34 Jug 6L98 36 162 4 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR7/2 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w _ . . _ VOPink Pinkish Pink 4A SRGray 3A SR2C SR35 Jug . 7L08 21 123 5 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA5A w SMR • 10YR7/3 - . u oPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A Ba + Very4A SR PR3A Pale3A SR Brown2B SRP 7A SR36 Jug 6L99 12 34 1 5YR7/6 5YR5/1 5YR5/1 L 7A SAA MH FS6A w SLSH 5YR6/1 - 5YR5/1 - RReddish Gray Gray 6A SRC Ba Gray GrayYellow 5A4A3A2B37 Krater 7L08 21 87 7 5YR6/4 _ 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M FS6A w . WBL . URLight Gray 4A SR PA4AReddish 3A SR PR3ABrown 2B SR38 Krater 7L08 21 102 7 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 4A R L PA4A w UOPink Gray Pink 3A R PR3A2C R39 Krater 7L08 23 115 10 5YR7/4 . 2.5YR4/0 L 5A SR M PA6A w . 5YR6/4 - . UOPink Dark 4A SR PA5A LightGray A PR4A Reddish3A SR Brown2B SR40 Krater 7L08 22 113 11 5YR8/3 . 2.5YR/6/0 L 6A R M PA4A w WBL 2.5YR SBL 5YR/7/3 - UOPink Gray 5A SR PA3A R + 6/4 R + Pink4A SR PR3A Light3A SR Red2B SRFig. 8.13, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 31-40.194FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.14. Field F : Pottery from FP 4, con tinued .195FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Krater 7L08 22 106 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M PR4A w - 10YR6/2 - URPink Gray 4A SR Light3A SR Brownish2B SR Gray2 Krater 7L08 22 107 1 Rim: 7.5YR4/0 L 5A SR M PA4A W WB WBL - UR7.5YR4/0 Dark 4A SR PR3A MRDark Gray 3A SRGray 2B SR5YR6/4LightReddishBrown3 Krater 7L08 23 115 2 Rim:7.SYR 6/0 Gray 5YR7/4 Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5A4A3A2BSRSRRSRSRM PR3A W WBR Rim: 7.5YR 5/2 Brown 2.5YR 6/4 Light Reddish BrownWBL Top:7.5YR6/2PinkishGrayBottom:7.5YR4/0DarkGrayUR4 Krater 7L08 23 151 1 5YR6/4 - 715YR4/0 L 6A SR M PA5A W WBR 5YR6/4 WBL 2.5YR3/0 - URLight Dark 5A SR PA4A Light VeryReddish Gray 4A SR PA3A Reddish DarkBrown R PR4A Brown Gray3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A5 Krater 7L08 22 106 3 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A W . _ _ _ UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR4AGray 3A SR PR3A2A SR6 Krater 6L98 41 139 1 5YR6/4 . 10YR5/1 L 5A R M PA4A W _ _ . . URLight Gray SR PA3AReddish 4A R PR4ABrown SR PR3A3A SR2B SR7 Krater 7L08 22 113 10 5YR/7/3 . 7.5YR/7/0 L 5A SR M PA3A W . .... . . URPink Gray 4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2AP 7A R8 Krater 6L98 36 164 1 5YR7/4 . 2.5YR4/0 L 5A SR M PA5A W . 10YR7/3 WBL 7.5YR5/0 - URPink Dark 4A SR PA4A Very GrayGray 3A SR PA3A Pale2A SR Brown9 Krater 7L08 21 100 8 5YR7/4 . 5YR6/1 L 5A SR M PR3A W WBL 5YR6/6 . _ URPink Gray 4A SR f R Reddish3A SR Yellow2B SR10 Krater 7L08 22 106 2 5YR7/4 10YR7/3 7.5YR7/4 L 7A SR M PA3A W . . 7. SYR6/2 IFR VOPink Very Pale Pink 6A SR PR3A PinkishBrown 5A SR Gray4A SR3A SR. 2A SR11 Krater 7L08 21 123 6 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR MH PA4A w _ . URPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A4A SR PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SR12 Krater 7L08 21 102 3 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A w WBM . SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A WBH Light3A SR PR3A Red2B SR13 Krater 7L08 21 85 5 5YR7/3 5YR6/1 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M FS5A w _ . . RiN UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3A14 Krater 7L08 21 87 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R M PA4A w . . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR3ARed Red 3A SR2B SRFig. 8.14, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-14.196FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids • Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color15 Krater . 6L98 36 118 3 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M W WBH 2.5YR WBM 2.5YR6/6 - URPink Gray 4A SR 6/6 Light3C SR Light Red2B SR Red16 Krater 6L98 41 139 6 5YR7/3 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PA6A W WBH 2.5YR 7.5YR6/4 - URPink Gray Pink 5A R PA5A 6/4 LightSR PA4A Light Brown4A R PR4A ReddishSR PR3A Brown3A SR PA3A2B SR PR2A17 Krater 7L09 11 64 6 5YR7/4 5YR8/2 5YR/7/4 L 4A SR M PR4A w . . VOPink Pinkish Pink 3A SR PR3AWhite 2C SR PR2A18 Krater 7L09 22 77 2 5YR7/3 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M PA4A w . . URPink Gray 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2AFig. 8.14, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 15-18.197FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.15. Field F : Pottery from FP 4, con tinued .198FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe So Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int ColorKrater 6L98 36 164 2 7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YR7/2PinkishGray7.5YR7/4PinkKrater 7L08 23 115 11 5YR7/4Pink- 7.5YR6/0GrayL 5A SR M - W SL 7.5YR SM 7.5YR8/4 -4A SR R + 8/4 SL Pink3A SR Pink R +2C SRL 5A SR M PA6A. W SM 10YR8/2- _4A SR PA5A White3A SR PA4A2B SR PA3APR3A3 Krater 6L98 41 139 4 10YR6/1 - 7.5YR5/0 L 5A R M FS5A W 7.5YR _Gray Gray SR PA4A 7/4. 4A R PA3A PinkSR PR4A3A R PR3ASR2B SR4 Krater 7L08 21 87 12 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA7A W WBM 5YR6/4 WBM 5YR5/4 -Pink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A Light Reddish4A SR PR3A Reddish Brown3A SR PR2A Brown2B SR5 Basin 7L08 23 151 10 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR4/1 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SA M PA5A W ..Pink Dark Pink 5A SR PA4AGray 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A6 Basin 6L98 41 139 8 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 5A R M PA5A W WBL - SL _Light Gray Light SR PA4A SL R +Reddish Reddish 4A R PA3A R +Brown Brown SR PR3A3A SR PR2A2A SR7 Bowl 7L08 37 156 3 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W SH 2.5YR SH 2.5YR6/6 -Reddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PR4A WBM 6/6 WBM LightYellow Yellow 3A SR PR3A Light Red2A SR Red8 Bowl 6L98 26 131 5 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR7/4 L 3A R VL PR3A . WB 2.5YR SM 5YR6/4 -Pink Dark Pink 5/6 LightGray Red ReddishBrown9 Bowl 7L08 23 151 7 5YR6/4 2.5Y5/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR MH PR3A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 Int: &Light Gray Light 4A SR PR2A WBM 6/6 WBM Light Ext:Reddish Reddish 3A SR Light Red GBBrown Brown 2B SR Red10 Bowl 7L08 23 115 4 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 4A SR M FS5A w SMR Top: SM Rim: Int:Pink Gray Pink 3A SR PA3A 2.5YR WBL 7.5YR5/2 GB2C SR PR3A 4/0 BrownDark 2.5YR5/4Gray ReddishBrown11 Bowl 7L08 23 115 6 5YR7/3 10YR6/1 5YR6/2 L 6A SR M PR3A w WBM 5YR5/2 WBM 10YR4/1 -Pink Light Pinkish. 5A SR PR2A Reddish DarkGray Gray 4A SR Gray Gray2B SR12 Bowl 7L08 22 113 7 5YR7/3 5YR8/2 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PR3A wPink Pinkish Pink 4A SRWhite 3A SR2B SR13 Bowl 7L08 22 113 2 5YR7/3 5YR7/1 5YR7/3 L 5A SR MH . wPink Light Pink 4A SRGray 3A SR2B SR14 Bowl 7L08 22 107 4 5YR7/4 10YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M _ w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 GBPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBM 6/6 WBM Light3A SR Light Red2B SR Red15 Bowl 7L08 22 113 1 5YR8/3 . 5YR8/3 L 6A SR M PR4A w SM 5YR6/6 SM 5YR6/6 -Pink Pink 5A SR WBM Reddish WBM Reddish4A SR Yellow Yellow3A SR2B SRFig. 8.15, co n tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-15.URUOuoVOUOuoURURVOURUOVO199FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus' Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color16 Bowl 7L08 21 123 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR L PA3A W WBL 5YR6/4 SM 2.5YR6/4 - VOPink Light Pink 4A SR Light WBL LightGray 3A SR Reddish Reddish2C SR Brown Brown17 Bowl 7L08 21 100 5 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PR3A W WBM 5YR6/6 WBH 5YR6/6 - VOReddish Reddish 4A SR Reddish ReddishYellow Yellow 3A SR Yellow Yellow2C SR18 Bowl :7L08 21 123 2 . 5YR7/6 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M PR3A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 Int: URReddish Gray 4A R PR2A WBL 6/6 WBL Light GBYellow 3A SR Light Red2B SR Red19 Bowl 7L08 21 100 1 5YR8/3 5YR8/3 L 5A SR L PR3A w SLR 5YR5/1 SM 2.5YR6/6 - VOPink Pink 4A SR Gray WBM Light3A SR ' Red2C SR20 Bowl 7L08 21 87 4 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M ■ FS7A w WBL 5YR6/4 WBM 5YR6/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR3A Light Reddish3A SR PR2A Reddish Yellow2B SR Brown21 Bowl 6L99 12 35 3 7. SYR 6/2 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR4A w SMR Rim: SM 2.5YR6/6 Ext: UOPinkish Dark Pink 4A SR PR2A WBM 5YR4/1 WBL Light GBGray Gray 3A SR Dark Red2B SR GrayP 5A SR 7.5YR7/4Pink22 Bowl 6L98 36 117 6 5YR6/3 5YR6/1 . 5YR6/3 L 4A R M PA4A w WBL 5YR5/3 WBM 5YR5/3 - URLight Gray Light 3A SR PA3A Reddish ReddishReddish Reddish 2C SR PR3A Brown BrownBrown Brown23 Bowl 7L08 23 152 6 5YR7/4 SYR 6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA L PR3A w SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - URPink Gray Pink 3A SR WBM 6/6 WBM Light2C SR Light RedRed24 Bowl 7L08 21 88 8 2.5YR6/8 . 2.5YRN5/ L 5A SR M PA4A w . . UOLight Gray 4A SRRed 3A SR2B SR25 Bowl 7L08 21 85 3 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M . w . WBL 2.5YR WBL 2.5YR6/6 - VOPink Pink 4A SR 6/6 Light3A SR Light Red2B SR RedFig. 8.15, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 16-25.200FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.16. Field F : Pottery from FP 4, con tinued .)t201FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus ftiil Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int : Color .1 Bowl 7L08 22 112 8 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/2 L 6A SR M PA3A w s URPink Gray Pinkish 5A SR PR3AGray 4A SR3A SR2A SR2 Bowl 7L08 21 103 „1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YRN6/ L 4A SR M PA3A W WBL - WBL - UOLight Gray Light 3A SR R RRed Red 2C SR3 Bowl 7L09 8 43 2 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 4A R L FS6A W WBL 10YR5/3 WBM 7.5YR6/4 - URReddish Gray Reddish 3A R PA3A Brown LightYellow Yellow 2C R PR3A Brown4 Bowl 6L98 36 162 6 7.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 3A SR L PA4A w SL Top: WBM 2.5YR6/6 RiN URLight Gray Pink 2D SR / PA3A WBM 5YR5/3 LightBrown PR2A . Reddish RedBrownBottom:5YR7/4Pink5 Bowl 7L08 21 102 2 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 3A SR L PR3A w W BM - WBL 2.5YR6/6 - VOPink Light Pink 2D SR LightGray Red6 Bowl 7L08 23 115 0 Outer: 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PR3A w WBM 2. SYR WBM 5YR7/3 - UO5YR6/4 Gray Pink SA 6/4 PinkLight 4A SR LightReddish SA ReddishBrown 3A SR BrownInner: 2B SR5YR7/3Pink7 Bowl 6L98 41 139 7 10YR6/1 . 2.5YR5/0 L 6A SR M FS6A w WBR 10YR6/3 WBM 7.5YR4/0 - URGray Gray 5A SR PA5A Pale Dark4A R PA4A Brown GraySR PA3A3A SR PR3A2A SRP 6A SRS Bowl 6L98 36 118 2 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M . w 2.5YR WBH - URPink Gray Pink 4A R 6/83A SR Light2B SR Red9 Bowl 6L98 36 117 5 5YR6/6 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M . w WBL 5YR7/4 _ , UOReddish Gray 4A SR R PinkYellow 3A SR, 2B SR10 Bowl 7L08 21 85 2 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w WBL 5YR6/4 WBM 5YR6/4 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR3A Light R Light3A SR Reddish Reddish2B SR Brown Brown11 Bowl 6L98 36 162 2 5YR7/3 Rim: 5YR7/3 L 6A SA M PR4A w WBL 5YR7/3 WBM 5YR7/6 - VOPink 2.5YR6/0 Pink 5A SR PR3A Pink ReddishGray 4A SR ' Yellow3A SR2B SR12 Bowl 6L99 12 35 5 5YR7/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A R M PA3A w WBL - WBL - UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PR3A4A R PR2ASR A3A SR 2B SR13 Bowl 7L08 21 86 1 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A W WBL 5YR6/3 WBL 5YR6/3 - URPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR3A Light Light3A SR PR2A Reddish Reddish2B SR Brown Brown14 Bowl 6L98 36 164 4 5YR8/2 2.5YR6/0 5YR8/2 L 4A SR L PA6A W . 10YR6/1 WBL 10YR6/2 - URPinkish Gray Pinkish 3A SR PA4A Gray LightWhite White 2C SR PR4A BrownishPR3A Gray15 Bowl 7L08 23 115 5 7.5YR7/4 10YR6/1 7.5YR7/4 L 4A SR M • _• w WBL 2.5YR WBL 2.5YR6/6 - VOPink Gray Pink 3A SR 6/6 Light2C SR Light RedRed16 Bowl 7L08 34 154 2 7.5YR6/4 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR6/4 L 4A SA L . w WBL . WBM URLight Gray Light 3A SABrown Brown 2C SRFig. 8.16, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.202FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type____ §s_ Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shawi Density F.xt Color Int Color17 Bowl 6L99 4 30 1 2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YRN5/Gray5YR7/6ReddishYellowL 5A 4A • 3A 2BSRSRSRSRM PA5APA4APA3AW - - - UO18 Bowl 7L08 21 88 9 5YR4/1DarkGray5YR4/1DarkGrayL 4A3A2 bSASASASRL PR3A W WBL 5YR3/1VeryDarkGrayWBM 5YR3/1 Very Dark Gray'VR19 Bowl . 7L08 23 152 1 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/1LightGray-5YR7/4PinkL 5A4A3A2BSASRSRSRM PR5APR4APR3Aw UR20 Bowl 6L98 36 117 2 5YR7/4Pink5YR6/1Gray5YR7/5PinkL 3A2DSRSRL'w * ■ WBM 5YR6/3 Light Reddish. Brown■ UO21 Bowl 7L08 22 113 8 5YR/7/4Pink5YR/7/1LightGray5YR/7/4PinkL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRM PR3A w SM 5YR3/1 WBH Very Dark GraySM 5YR3/1 WBH Very Dark GraySL R +UO22 Bow] 7L09 11 64 8 7.5YR7/4Pink7.5YRN5/GrayL 6A5A4A3A2BRSRSRSRSRM PA4APA3APR5APR4APR3Aw WBR UO23 Bowl 7L08 21 88 2 2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YRN6/Gray2. SYR 6/6LightRedL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRMH FS6APR4Aw SMWBL2.5Y R6/SM 2.5YR6/6 6 WBM Light Light Red Red■ VO24 Bowl 7L08 22 107 3 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/4PinkL 4A3A2DSRSRSRL PR3APR2Aw SMWBH2.5Y R6/SM 2.5YR6/6 6 WBH Light Light Red Red■ UO25 Bowl 6L98 26 131 2 2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR7/3Pink2.5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 6A5A4A3AARRRL FS4A w SM R +10R5/6RedSM 10R5/6 R + Red■ UO26 Bowl 7L08 23 115 7 5YR7/4Pink7.5YR5/0Gray5YR7/4PinkL 6A4A3A2CSRSRSRSRL PR4APR2Aw SM 2.5Y R6/SM 2.5YR6/6 WBM 6 WBL Light Light Red Red■ UO27 Bowl 6L99 12 36 1 7.5YRN5/Gray7.5YRN5/GrayL 6A5A4A3A2ARSRSASASAL PA5APA4Aw - WBL WBL - VR28 Bowl 6L99 12 34 2 7.5YR4/0DarkGray7.5YR4/0DarkGrayL 3A2DSRSRL w W B L 7.5Y R R 4/0 Dark: GrayWBL 7.5YR4/0 R Dark Gray■ VR29 Bowl 7L08 37 156 2 5YR7/4Pink5YR6/1Gray5YR7/4PinkL 6A5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRSRM FS7APA6APA5APR4APR3Aw WBM WBM 5YR7/4 PinkUO30 Bowl 7L08 23 115 3 5YR7/3Pink10YR6/1Gray5YR7/4PinkL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRM PA4APA3APR3Aw SL 7.5YR7/2PinkishGraySL 7.5YR6/2 Pinkish Gray■ UR31 . Bowl 6L99 12 35 6 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown7.5YR6/0Gray5YR6/3LightReddish'BrownL 6A5A4A3A2ASRSRSRSASRSRMH FS5APA4APR3Aw W BM - GB UR32 Bowl 7L08 21 86 4 2.5YR6/6LightRed2.5YRN6/Gray2.5YR6/6LightRedL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRiM PA4APA3Aw WBL 2.5YR6/6LightRedWBL 2.5YR6/6 Light Red* UO33 Bowl 7L09 5 30 1 5YR7/6ReddishYellow5YR5/1Gray5YR7/6ReddishYellowL 5A4A3A2ASASRSRSRM PA6APA5APA4APA4APR4APR3Aw UOFig. 8.16, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-33:203FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color34 Bowl 7L08 22 113 6 5YR/7/4 7.5YR/7/0 5YR/7/4 L 5A SR M PA3A W WBL 2.5YR WBM 2.5YR6/6 SL UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR2A 6/6 Light R +Gray 3A SR Light Red2B SR Red35 Bowl 7L09 11 64 5 7.5YR7/0 . 7.5YR5/2 . L 5A SR M PA4A W _ _ . URLight Brown 4A SR PR2AGray 3A SR2B SR36 Bowl 7L08 23 151 4 5YR7/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A w . . . UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SRFig. 8.16, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 34-36.204FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.17. Field F : Pottery from FP 4, con tinued .205FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNon-Plastics Voids Manu_______Surface Treatment_______ Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color1 Bowl 7L08 21 121 1 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA6A W 10YR5/1 . 2.5YR6/4 - URPinkish Light Pink 4A SR PA4A Gray LightGray Gray 3A SR PR4A Reddish .2B SR PR3A Brown2 Bowl 7U)8 21 88 7 . 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M . W SM 5YR5/3 SM 2.5YR6/6 - URPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBL Reddish WBM Light3A SR Brown Red2A SRR3 Bowl 7L08 21 88 1 5YR6/6 5YR6/1 5YR6/6 L 6A SR M PR5A W SL 5YR7/3 . 2.5YR6/6 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PR4A Pink LightYellow Yellow 4A SR PR3A RedR PA4A3A SR2A SR4 Bowl 7L08 21 87 3 5YR7/3 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR L PR3A W WBL _ WBL 5YR5/1 - u oPink Gray 4A R Gray3A SR2B SR5 Bowl 7L08 21 87 1 5YR7/2 5YR6/1 5YR5/2 L 5A SR M PA3A W . . . URPinkish Gray Reddish 4A SR PR3AGray Gray 3A SR PR2A2C SR6 Bowl 6L98 36 118 1 5YR7/3 5YR5/1 5YR7/3 L 4A SR L . w SL 2.5YR WBH 7.5YR7/4 - URPink Gray Pink 3A - SR WBM 4/2 Pink2D SR WeakRed7 Bowl 6L98 36 117 1 5YR7/3 . 5YR7/3 L 4A SR L . w SM 2.5YR WBM 2.5YR6/4 - VRPink Pink 3A SR 6/6 Light2C SR Light ReddishRed Brown8 Bowl. 6L98 35 117 3 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA3A w . _ . . URPink Gray Pink 4A • SR3A SR2C SR9 Bowl 6L98 26 131 4 Outer: 2.5YR5/0 Outer: L 5A R VL FS3A w SM 2.5YR . _ UO2.5YR6/6 Gray 2.5YR6/6 3A R PR3A R + 6/6Light Light LightRed Red RedInner: Inner:5YR7/3 5YR7/3Pink Pink10 Mortar 6L99 4 30 2 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PR3A w . 2.5YR . 2.5YR6/6 - URPink Gray Pink 5A A 6/6 LightSR Light Red4A SR Red3A SR2A SR■ 11 Mortar ' 6L99 12 35 7 Outer: 2.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w . . . . UO2.5YR6/6 Gray Pink 4A SR PR3ALight 3A SRRedInner:5YR7/4Pink2B SR12 Mortar 7L09 13 57 1 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 6A SR MH PA3A w SH 2.5YR SH 5YR4/1 - URLight Gray Light 5A SR PR3A WBM 4/0 DarkReddish Reddish 4A SR PR2A Dark GrayBrown Brown 3A SR Gray2B SR13 Mortar 7L08 22 113 3 5YR/7/3 5YR/7/1 5YR/7/3 L 5A SR MH PR3A w SM 2.5YR SM 5YR6/6 Int: UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR2A 6/6 WBM Reddish GBGray 3A SR Light Yellow Ri2B SR Gray N +14 Plate 6L98 36 164 3 7.5YR7/4 10YR7/2 7.5YR7/4 L 5A R M PR4A w SL 7.5YR SM 2.5YR6/8 Ext: UOPink Light Pink 4A R R + 3/0 WBH Light GBGray 3A R Very SLR RedSR Dark2A R GraySR15 Plate 7L08 23 152 4 5YR7/6 5YR7/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA3A w SL 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VOReddish Light Reddish 4A SR PR3A 6/6 WBM LightYellow Gray Yellow 3A SR Light Red2B SR RedFig. 8.17, co n tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-15.206FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Typei Size Shapie Density Ext Color Int Color16 Cup 7L09 8 43 1 7.5YR6/2 7.5YRN5/ 7.5YR6/2 L 5A SR H PA4A W VRPinkish Gray Pinkish 4A SR PA3AGray Gray 3A SR PR3A2B SR17 Cup 7L08 21 100 7 5YR6/4 5YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 5A R M PR3A W _ UOLight Gray Light 4A RReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown 2B SRIS Cook pot 6L98 36 117 8 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M JH W VRPink Pink 4A SR FS7A3B SR FS6A2B SR PA5APA4APR3A19 Cook pot 6L99 12 35 8 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR4/0 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M JH W UOLight Dark Light 4A SR PA3ARed Gray Red 3A SR PR3AHandle: Handle: Handle: 2B SR Handle:5YR6/3 2.5YR4/0 5YR6/4 FS4ALight Dark Light PA4AReddish Gray Reddish PA3ABrown Brown PR4APR3A20 Cook pot 7L08 21 102 1 7.5YR7/4 ' 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 4A SR M JH W . VOPink Gray 3A SR(handleonly)2C SR21 Cook pot 7L08 23 91 2 2.5YR5/8 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR5/8 L 5A SA M FS6A W . UORed Gray Red 4A SA FS5A3A SA FS4A2A SR PA5APA4APA3AFS3A22 Cook pot 7L08 21 88 5 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W VOLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4ARed Red 3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3A23 Cook pot 7L08 21 101 4 2.5YR4/0 . 2.5YR4/0 L 6A SR M JH HB URDark Dark 5A SA FS5AGray Gray 4A SA FS4A3A SR PA5A2A SR PA4AP 6A SR PR3A24 Cook pot 7L08 21 86 2 2.5YR6/6 . 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR M W ' VOLight Light 5A SRRed Red 4A SR3A SR2B SR25 Cook pot 7L08 21 100 3 5YR6/4 . 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M FS5A w VRLight Light SA FS4AReddish Reddish 4A SRBrown Brown 3A SR2B SR26 Cook pot 7L09 22 77 1 5YR6/4 : 5YR5/1 5YR5/4 L 4A SA M PR2A w URLight Gray Reddish 3A SAReddish BrOwn 2B SABrown SR27 Cook pot 6L98 41 139 5 2.5YR5/4 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/4 L 6A A M PA4A w VRReddish Light Reddish 5A SR PA3ABrown Reddish Brown 4A SR PR4ABrown 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A28 Krater 7L08 23 115 1 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M. PA4A w SL 2.5YR 2.5YR6/6 IT UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR2A 6/6 Light3A SR Light Red2C SR Red29 Lamp 7L08 23 151 3 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M JB w UOLight Gray Reddish 4A SR PA7AReddish Int.Base: Yellow 3A SR PA4ABrown 10YR3/1 2B SR PR4AVery Dark GrayPR3A30 Lamp 7L08 21 86 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA3A w VOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR3ARed Red 3A SR2B SR*ig. 5 . 1 / , co n tin u ed . Field h: Pottery descriptions tor nos. 16-30.207FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFtechnological activity may have occurred in the immediate vicinity. The presence of iron slag in both Surface 7L08:37 and Surface 6L98:36, a relatively rare type of cultural debris on this site, provided a tenuous stratigraphic link between these two Squares. These exposure surfaces represented the abandonment stage of FP 4. Analysis of the pottery from FP-4 surfaces and earth layers attributed the phase to Late Iron II (figs. 8.13-8.17).Field Phase 3 (fig. 8.18)Loci: 6L98:4 Wall6L98:6 Stone Line6L98:8 Earth Layer (=6L98:18)6L98:11 Surface (=6L98:15, =6L98:17)6L98:12 Surface (=6L98:20)6L98:13 Fill6L98:14 Wall (=6L98:19)6L98:15 Surface (=6L98:11, = 6L98:17)6L98:16 Pit6L98:17 Surface (=6L98:11, =6L98:15)6L98:18 Earth Layer (=6L98:8)6L98:19 Wall (=6L98:14)6L98:20 Surface (=6L98:12)6L98:21 Pit6L98:22 Fill6L98:23 Surface6L98:24 Fill6L98:25 Pit6L98:29 Pit6L98:30 Fill6L98:32 Midden Layer6L98:33 Pit6L98:34 Fill6L98:35 Pit6L98:40 Earth Layer6L98:42 Fill6L98:43 Pit6L98:46 WallField Phase 3 represented a major shift in human utilization in Field F. This is evidenced by the abandonment of defensive and domestic structures and the subsequent use of the hill slope for agricultural activities. These events are indicated by several terrace walls built in episodes, and limited to Square 6L98.The building stage of FP 3 was initiated by the construction of hemispherical terrace Wall 6L98:14 (=6L98:19, hereafter: 6L98:14) which arched through Square 6L98 from south-to-north. Above exposure Surface 6L98:26 of FP 4 was large, irregularly-shaped Midden Layer 6L98:32.LGHFig. 8.18. Field F: Plan of FP 3.This was apparently laid to prepare ground for Wall 6L98:14, and extended from beneath the wall to the east balk, ca. 3.25 x 2.70 m in size and ca. 0.81 m deep. This organic, bone, and pottery-rich layer was so large, it was suggestive of a dump or landfill, and may have represented human landscaping activity. Lenses of moderately hard earth within the normally very loose deposit confirmed this suggestion.Sealing against Wall 6L98.T4 on the west were exposure Surface 6L98:20 and its subsurface debris. Subsequently, another exposure surface with underlying debris (Surface 6L98:11, =6L98:15, =6L98:17, hereafter: 6L98:11), was deposited in the same area and also ran up to Wall 6L98:14. Scattered on the surface were found a nearly entire ceramic lamp, several grinding stones and a spindle whorl. These layers seem to have made up the earth retained by terrace Wall 6L98:14. Cut into exposure Surface 6L98:15 west of terrace Wall 6L98:14 was shallow, linear Pit 6L98:33 which ran east-west. It was ca. 1.52 x 0.49 x 0.05 m, and may have been a small water channel, perhaps a natural feature on this terraced exposure surface. If so, it would suggest relatively light use of the area. Pit 6L98:33 contained Fill 6L98:30.East of Wall 6L98:14 was irregularly-shaped Pit 6L98:29 filled with large quantities of bones and pottery. Identification of the faunal remains in208FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF26Fig. 8.19. Field F : Pottery from FP 3.209FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sa Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Tvoe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Pithoe 6L98 40 149 2 Rim: 2.5YR5/0 7.5YR5/0 L 5A SR M PA6A W SL 10YR7/3 - 7.5YR6/4 - UR5YR7/4 Gray Gray 4A SR PA5A Very LightPink 3A SR PA4A Pale Brown5YR7/3 2B SR PR4A Brown• Pink PR3A2 Pithos 6L98 40 149 4 5YR6/3 . 5YR5/1 L 6A SR M JR W . 10YR7/3 - 5YR5/3 - URLight Gray 5A SR PA4A Very ReddishReddish 4A SR PA3A Pale BrownBrown 3A SR PR3A Brown2A SR3 Jar 6L98 40 149 11 5YR7/4 . 2.5Y6/0 L 5A A M PR5A W . . GN + URPink , Gray R PR4A4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR4 Jar 6L98 29 154 2 5Y7/3 . 10YR7/2 L 6A SR H PA3A W SM 2.5YR - 10YR7/3 - VOPale Light 5A SR PR3A 6/2 VeryYellow Gray 4A SR PR2A Light Pale3A SR Brown- Brown2B SR ishGray5 Jar 6L98 29 152 1 5Y4/2 2.5Y6/2 2.5Y7/4 L 5A SA MH PR3A W . . . UROlive Light Pale 4A SR PR2AGray Brownish Yellow 3A SRGray 2B SR6 ■ Jar 6L98 15 113 4 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 6A SA M . FS7A W . . • RiN UOPink Gray Pink 5A R PR5A4A R PR3A3A R7 Jar 6L98 29 157 7 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 . L 5A SR M PA5A w . . . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR8 Jar 6L98 29 142 2 5YR7/6 5YR5/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SA M PA5A w _ . _ UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SA PA4AYellow Yellow 3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3A9 Jar 6L98 4 145 4 5YR7/6 5YR5/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA5A w . 2.5YR - 5YR7/4 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PA4A 6/6 PinkYellow Yellow 3A SR PA3A Light2B SR PR3A RedP 5A R10 Jar 6L98 28 155 5 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PA3A w SL 10YR7/2 - . URLight Gray Light 4A SR PR3A LightReddish Reddish 3A SR GrayBrown Brown 2B SR11 Jar 6L98 34 109 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA4A w SM 2.5YR - . URLight Light Reddish 4A SR PR3A 5/2Red Gray Yellow 3A SR Grayish2B SR Brown12 Jar 6L98 42 133 3 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M PA4A w UOPink Gray Pink 4A SA PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR13 Jar 6L98 42 133 4 5YR7/4 _ 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M PA3A w . . . VRPink Pink 4A SA3A SR2B SR14 Jug 6L98 29 127 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M w . . _ VOLight Gray Light 4A SRRed Red R3A SR2B SR15 Jug 6L98 4 146 5 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR6/2 L 4A SR L PA5A w WBL 7.5YR WBM 7 5YR6/2 - URPink Gray Pinkish 3A SR PA4A 6/2 PinkishGray 2C SR PR3A Pinkish GrayGray16 Jug 6L98 12 64 1 SYR 6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w WBL 5YR7/3 - RiN UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR4A N PinkReddish Reddish 3A SR PR3ABrown Brown 2B SR PR2AFig. 8.19, co n tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.210FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo TYPe___ Sq Locus Pail Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color17 Jug 6L98 42 133 2 2.5YR6/6 . 2.5YRN6/ L 5A SR M PA3A W UOLight Gray 4A SR PR3ARed 3A SR2B SR18 Basin 6L98 40 151 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN4/ 5YR7/6 L 5A SA M FS7A w SL 10YR8/3 SL 10YR8/3 - u oLight Dark Reddish 4A SA PA6A R + Very R + VeryRed Gray Yellow 3A SR PA5A Pale Pale2B SR PA4APA3APR4APR3ABrown Brown19 Decanter 6L98 29 158 1 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/10 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA3A w . . RiN + R UOLight Gray Reddish 4A SR PR3AReddish Yellow 3A SRBrown 2B SR20 Basin 6L98 40 149 5 2.5YR6/4 7.5YR4/0 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR M PA5A w SH S 1 i p : SH Slip: R + - u oLight Dark Light 5A SR PA4A SL R + SL 10YR8/3Reddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PR4A R + 10YR8/3R + VeryBrown Brown 3A SR PR3A Very Pale2B SR PR2A PaleBrownBrown21 Basin 6L98 29 140 6 5YR7/4 10YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA4A w SM 10YR8/3 SM 10YR8/3 - VOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR4A Very Very3A SR PR3A Pale PaleA PR2A Brown Brown2A SR22 Basin 6L98 28 155 4 5YR7/6 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A R M PA5A w . . 2.5YR6/4 - u oReddish Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A LightYellow 4A SR PA3A Reddish3A SR PR4A Brown2C SR PR3APR2A23 Basin 6L98 29 .140 7 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M FS5A w . . u oPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2B SR PR4APR3A24 Basin 6L98 29 127 1 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w SM 10YR7/3 - u oPink Gray . Pink 4A SR Very3A SR Pale2B SR Brown25 Krater 6L98 4 146 2 10YR5/2 . 2.5YR4/0 L 6A SR M JH w _ _ URGrayish Dark ' 5A SR PA5ABrown Gray SA PA4A4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2B SR Handle:FS4AFS3A26 Krater 6L98 29 140 5 5YR6/6 . 7.5YR4/0 L 6A SR M FS6A w . 10YR7/3 - u oReddish Dark 5A SR PA5A VeryYellow Gray 4A SR PA4A Pale3A SR PR4A Brown2B SR PR3APR2AFig. 8.19, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-26.211FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFFig. 8.20. Field F : Pottery from FP 3, con tinued .212FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color___________________________Non-Plastics________________ Voids Manu_______Surface Treatment Decor Fire________________________________________ Ext________ Core_______ Int___________ Type Size Shape Density__________________ Ext Color Int Color__________________1 Kiater 6L98 42 134 3 10YR5/2 - 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M PA6A W . . _ . . URGrayish Gray R PA5ABrown 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A2 Krater 6L98 42 133 1 5YR7/4 . 5YR5/1 L 4A R L Handle: W W BM - _ _ _ UOPink Gray 3A R PA5A R2C R PA4APA3A*3 Krater 6L98 28 155 1 7.5YR7/4 . 7.5YR4/0 L 5A SR M PA6A W W B L R im : WBL 2.5YR4/0 UOPink Dark 4A SR PA5A R 5YR7/4 DarkGray R PA4A Pink Gray3A SR PA3A 2.5YR2B SR PR5A 6/6PR3A LightRed4 Krater 6L98 28 155 2 5YR6/4 . 2.5YR5/0 L 5A SR M PA5A W . _ SL 10YR6/2 . UOLight Gray 4A SR PA4A LightReddish 3A SR PA3A BrownishBrown 2B SR PR5APR4APR3APR2AGray5 Krater 6L98 40 151 2 5YR7/3 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M PA6A W . 2.5YR _ _ _ UR• Pink Gray 4A SR PA5A 6/63A SR PA4A Light2B SR PA3APR3ARed6 Krater 6L98 29 154 6 5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M FS7A W _ . . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR JRReddish Reddish 3A SR PA4ABrown Brown 2B SR PA3APR3A7 Krater 6L98 40 149 9 7.5YR7/2 . 7.5YR5/0 L 5A A M PA4A W _ . . . RiN UOPinkish Gray R PR3AGray SR4A SR3A SR2A SR8 Krater 6L98 15 113 5 Outer: 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 6A A L PR6A W . _ 2.5YR6/6 RiR UO2.5YR6/6 Gray Pink 5A R PR3A LightLight 4A R RedRedInner:5YR7/3Pink3A R9 Krater 6L98 29 141 1 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PR4A W SM 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/6 Pa: UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PR3A Pink Reddish 5YR4/1Yellow Yellow SA Yellow Dark3A SR Gray2A SR 2.5YR4/4ReddishBrown10YR8/2White10 Krater 6L98 29 153 3 10YR5/3 10YR6/1 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M FS7A W . _ URBrown Gray Pink 4A SR PA6A3A SR PA3A2B SR PR3A11 Krater 6L98 29 153 5 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M . W SM 2.5YR VOPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBL 6/6‘ 3A SR Light2C SR Red12 Krater 6L98 29 157 3 7.5YR7/4 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR7/4 L 4A SR L PA6A w URPink Gray Pink 3A SR PA5A2C SR PA4APR4APR3A13 Krater 6L98 42 133 7 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w WBH 5YR7/4 WBH 5YR7/4 RiR UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR2A R Pink Pink3B SR2B SR14 Krater 6L98 29 156 2 5YR7/4 . 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A w . 2.5YR . 10R4/3 RiR VOPink Pink 4A . SR PA4A 6/4 Weak3A SR PR4A Light Red2B SR PR3A ReddishBrownFig. 8.20, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-14.213FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe So Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color15 Krater 6L98 4 145 5 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W WBH 5YR6/4 WBL 2.5YR6/6 - UOReddish . Gray Reddish 4A SR PA4A R Light LightYellow Yellow 3A SR PA3A Reddish Red2B SR PR3A Brown16 Krater 6L98 29 159 1 5YR7/6 5YR5/1 5YR7/6 L 4A SR M PA5A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 3A SR PA4A WBM 6/6 WBM LightYellow Yellow 2D SR PR4A Light RedPR3A Red17 Krater 6L98 15 113 2 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 6A A L FS4A W _ . UOPink Gray Pink 5A A PR3A3A R2A R18 Krater 6L98 40 149 6 7.5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA5A W 7.5YR 7.5YR6/2 - URLight Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A 6/2 PinkishBrown SA PA3A Pinkish Gray4A SR PR3A GraySA3A SR;_______________________________________ _̂________________________________________ 2A SR ___________________________ .Fig. 8.20, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 15-18.214FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF30Fig. 8 .2 L Field F : Pottery from FP 3, con tinued .32215FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type1 Bowl2 Bowl3 Bowl4 Bowl5 Bowl6 Bowl7 Bowl8 BowlSq Locus Pali Reg Fabric Color__________________________ Non-Plastics________________ Voids Manu_______Surface Treatment_______ Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color6L98 23 68 3 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR L PR5A W WBL - . _ u oPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2C SR6L98 23 99 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 3A SR L _ W SL 5YR6/6 SL 5YR6/6 - VOPink Pink 2D SR WBM Reddish WBM ReddishYellow Yellow6L98 15 113 3 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR6/4 L 6A A L PR6A W WB 2.5YR SM 2.5YR4/4 - VRLight Gray Light 4A R FS4A R + 4/4 R + ReddishBrown Brown 3A R PR3A Reddish BrownBrown Rim:2.5YR3/2DuskyRed6L98 29 154 5 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR5A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR3A WBL 6/4 WBM Light3A SR PR2A Light Red2B SR Reddish 5YR4/1Brown DarkGray6L98 23 68 2 5YR7/3 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - u oPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A WBM 6/6 WBM Light3A SR PA3A Light Red2B SR PR3A Red6L98 29 152 3 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - u oPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBM 6/6 WBL Light3A SR Light Red2C SR Red6L98 23 68 1 5YR7/6 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M PA5A S SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - u oReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PA4A WBM 6/6 WBM LightYellow Yellow 3A SR PA3A Light Red2B SR PR4A RedPR3APR2A6L98 29 140 3 5YR7/3 7. SYR 6/0 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PA5A W SMR Rim: SM Rim: GB u oPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A WBM 10YR4/1 WBM 10YR4/13A SR PA3A Dark Dark2C SR PR3A Gray GrayMiddle: 5YR6/62.5YR Reddish6/6 YellowLightRedBottom:5YR7/3Pink9 Bowl 6L98 29 141 2 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PA4A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VOReddish Reddish 5A SR PR3A WBM 6/6 WBM LightYellow Yellow 4A SR PR2A Light Red3A SR Red2B SR10 Bowl 6L98 29 140 8 2.5YR4/0 . 2.5YR4/0 L 4A SR M PA4A W WBM 2.5YR WBM 2.5YR4/0 - VRDark Dark 3A SR PR3A 4/0 DarkGray Gray 2C SR PR2A Dark GrayGray11 Bowl 6L98 29 153 8 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR2A w . WBL 5YR7/4 RiN UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR Pink3A SR2B SRP 5A SR12 Bowl 6L98 28 155 6 7.5YR7/4 _ 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M PA4A w WBL 2.5YR WBL 2.5YR6/4 Int: UOPink Gray 4A SR PR4A 6/6 Light GB3A SR PR3A Light Reddish2C SR PR2A Red Brown13 Bowl 6L98 40 149 10 5YR7/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 3A SR L PA5A w SM 2.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 Pa: u oPink Gray Pink 2D SR PA4A WBM 6/6 WBM Light 10YR3/1PA3A Light Red VeryPR3A Red DarkGray10YR8/2WhiteRiN14 Bowl 6L98 34 110 1 5YR8/3 5YR7/1 5YR8/1 L 4A SR L . w SM 2.5YR WBL - u oPink Light White 3A SR WBM 6/6Gray 2D SR LightRedFig. 8.21, con tinued . Field F : Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-14216FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail ReR Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manni Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shapit Density Ext Color Int Color15 Bowl 6L98 29 140 2 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR6/4 L 4A SR M PA5A W WBL - WBL - - URLight Light Light 3A SR PA4ABrown Gray Brown 2C SR PA3APR3APR2A16 Bowl 6L98 28 155 7 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA4A W WBM 5YR7/4 WBM 5YR7/4 - UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA3A Pink Pink4A SR PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SR17 Bowl 6L98 40 149 3 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA4A w WBL 2.5YR WBL 2.5YR6/6 ITN VOLight Pink Light 4A SR PR4A 6/6 LightRed Red 3A SR PR3A Light Red2B SR RedP 6A SR4A SR18 Bowl 6L98 29 . 153 7 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR5/0 Outer: L 4A SR M . w WBL Top: WBL 2.5YR6/6 Ri UOLight Gray 2.5YR6/4 R 2.5YR Light N +Reddish Light 3A SR 6/6 RedBrown Reddish RBrown 2C SRRRed19 Bowl 6L98 29 127 4 5YR7/6 5YR7/2 5YR7/6 L 5A SR M w WBM - WBM 10R6/6 - VOReddish Pinkish Reddish 4A SRYellow Gray Yellow 3A SR Red2C SR20 Bowl 6L98 34 110 5 7.5YR6/0 - 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR L PR3A w WBL 7.5YR WBM 7.5YR3/0 - VRGray Gray 4A SR 3/0 Very3A SR Very Dark2B SR Dark GrayGray21 Bowl 6L98 4 145 2 5YR7/4 - 5YR7/4 L 5A SR L PR4A w WBL 2.5YR WBM 5YR7/6 - VOPink Pink 4A SR PR3A 6/6 Reddish3A SR Light Yellow2B SR Red22 Bowl 6L98 12 64 2 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SA M PR3A w SM R-7.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 GB UOLight Gray Light 4A SR Ca 4/0 R + LightReddish Reddish 3A SR SL Dark De- RedBrowna Brown 2C SR R + Gray sign 5YR4/1De- DarkBase Base sign GrayCenter: Cen-2.5YR6/6 terLight C o o kRed potware:L 6A SR H5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SR23 Bowl 6L98 42. 133 10 10R4/1 - 10R4/1 L 5A SA L PA3A w 10R4/1 WBM 10R3/1 - VRDark Dark 4A SR Dark DarkReddish Reddish 3A SA Reddish ReddishGray Gray 2A SR Gray Gray24 Bowl 6L98 29 152 2 10YR7/3 2.5YR7/0 10YR7/3 L 5A SA M PA3A w SM 10YR5/3 SM 7.5YR5/2 - URVery Light Very 3A SR PR3A WBM Brown WBM BrownPale Gray Pale 2D SR PR2ABrown Brown25 Bowl 6L98 29 142 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA4A w UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR4ARed Red 3A SR2B SR26 Bowl 6L98 29 143 1 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A R M PR4A w UOPink . Gray Pink 4A R PR3A3A SR PR2A2B SR27 Bowl 6L98 29 152 5 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 6A R L PA6A w UOLight Gray Light 5A R PA5AReddish Reddish 4A R PA4ABrown Brown 3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3APR2AFig. 8.21, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 15-27.217FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color28 Bowl 6L98 29 157 5 2.5YR5/2 5YR7/1 2.5YR5/2 L 6A A L FS7A W WBM 5YR4/2 WBM 2.5YR4/2 - URWeak Light Weak 5A A PA6A Dark WeakRed Gray Red 4A SR PA5A Reddish Red3A SR PR4A Gray 5YR4/22B SR PR4A DarkReddishGray29 Bowl 6L98 42 133 9 5YR7/3 _ 5YR7/3 L 4A SA M . W WBL - WBL 5YR7/4 - VOPink Pink 3A SA Pink2D SRSA30 Bowl 6L98 4 145 1 5YR6/6 5YR6/1 5YR6/6 L 6A SR M FS7A H SM 5YR5/2 SM 5YR5/2 - UOReddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PA5A Reddish SL ReddishYellow Yellow 4A SR PA4A Gray R + Gray3A SR PA3A2A SR PR3A31 Bowl 6L98 4 145 3 5YR7/4 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A W 5YR6/4 WBH 5YR6/4 - VRPink Gray Pink 4A SR PR4A Light Light3A SR PR3A Reddish Reddish2B SR Brown BrownP 6A R32 Bowl 6L98 28 : 155 3 5YR7/4 10YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR MH PA5A W SL 2.5YR SM 5YR4/1 - UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR PA4A WBM 6/6 WBM Dark4A SR PA3A Light Gray3A SR PR4A Red*2B SR PR3APR2AFig. 8.2l, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 28-32.218FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF23Fig. 8.22. Field F : Pottery from FP 3, con tinued .219FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Plate 6L98 40 151 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA5A W . 5YR7/6 SH 2.5YR6/8 . UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PA4A Reddish WBM LightGray 3A SR PR3A Yellow Red2B SR2 Plate 6L98 42 133 6 5YR6/3 5YR6/1 5YR6/3 L 4A SR M PR3A W SLW 5YR4/2 SL 5YR4/2 - URLight Gray Light 3A SR BLR Dark WBL DarkReddish Reddish 2C SR Reddish ReddishBrown Brown P 4A SA Gray Gray3 Mortar 6L98 29 158 2 7.5YR7/2 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 7A SR M PA5A w WBM 5YR6/3 SM 2.5YR6/6 - URPinkish Gray Pink 6A SR PA4A Light WB LightGray 5A SR PR3A Reddish Red4A SR Brown3A SR2B SR4 Mortar 6L98 29 157 4 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SA M PR7A w WBL . WBM . . UOLight Gray Light 5A SA PA6ARed Red SR PA5A4A SR PR5A3A SR PR4A2A SR PR3A5 Mortar 6L98 29 152 4 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR MH PA5A w SMW 5YR4/2 SMW 5YR4/1 . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR PA4A BR Dark BM Dark3A SR PA3A Reddish Gray2B SR PR4A GrayPR3A6 Cup 6L98 34 110 2 7.5YR8/4 7.5YR7/0 7.5YR8/3 L 4A SR L PA3A w . . . . . . UOPink Light Pink 3A SRGray 2C SR7 Cook pot 6L98 29 153 1 5YR6/2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/6 L 4A SR M PR3A w . 2.5YR - 2.5YR6/4 VRPinkish Light Light 3A SR 5/6 LightGray Red Red 2C SR Red ReddishBrown8 Cook pot 6L98 29 142 5 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PA5A w _ 2.5YR . 2.5YR6/4 . URPink Gray Pink 5A SA PA4A 6/4 Light4A SA PR4A Light Reddish3A SA PR3A Reddish Brown2B SR Brown9 Cook pot 6L98 29 159 4 5YR4/2 5YR6/1 5YR4/2 L 7A SR M FS6A w . . . _ . URDark Gray Dark 6A SR PA4BReddish Reddish 3A SR PA3AGray Gray10 Cook pot 6L98 29 156 1 5YR6/4 . 5YR6/4 L 7A SR M FS5A w . . . . . . VRLight Light 6A SA FS4AReddish Reddish 5A SA FS3ABrown Brown 4A SR PA4A3A SR PA3A2A SR PR3A■n Cook pot 6L98 29 156 3 7.5YR7/2 _ 7.5YR7/2 L 7A SA M FS5A w . 5YR6/4 _ 5YR6/3 RiN URPinkish Pinkish 5A A PA5A Light LightGray Gray 4A A PA4A Reddish ReddishSA PR4A Brown Brown3A SR PR3A2A SR12 Cook pot 6L98 42 134 2 5YR6/6 5YR4/1 5YR6/3 L 6A R MH FS5A w _ 10R4/1 . . . URReddish Dark Light 5A SR FS4A DarkYellow Gray Reddish 4B SR PA3A ReddishBrown 3A SR PR3A Gray2A SR13 Cook pot 6L98 29 140 1 5YR5/3 . 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR MH FS5A w . 2.5YR . . . VRReddish Light 5A SR FS4A 3/2Brown Reddish SA FS3A DuskyBrown 4A SR PA4A RedSA PR3A3A SR2A SR14 Cook pot 6L98 29 142 1 5YR6/3 . 5YR4/2 L 5A SR M FS6A w . . . . . VRLight Dark SA PA5AReddish Reddish 4A SR PA4ABrown Gray SA PR4A3A SR PR3A2A SRFig. 8.22, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-14.*220FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Tvoe Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color15 Lamp 6L98 23 81 1 2.5YR6/6 10YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 6A SRB M FS7B W . RLight Gray Reddish 5A RB FS6BRed Yellow 4A5YR7/6 . 3BReddishYellow2B16 Lamp 6L98 15 113 1 10YR7/2 10YR7/2 10YR7/2 L 5A AA M _ W . . . RLight Light ligh t 4A SABGray Gray Gray 3A SRA(from cut in mid of2Cbowl)17 Lamp003'C 29 144 1 7.5YR7/4 _ 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SRC M FS7A w _ 7 ,SYR . 7.5YR7/4 . RPink Pink 4A RA FS6A 7/4 Pink3B FS5B Pink2A18 Mini 6L98 29 157 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M FS7A w . _ _ . . UOBowl Light Gray Light 4A SR PA4ARed Red 3A SR PR3A2B SR19 Bowl 6L98 42 134 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/2 L 5A SR M PA3A w . . SM 10R5/6 . URPink Gray Pinkish 4A SR PR3A RedGray 3A SR PR2A2B SR20 Bowl 6L98 29 154 1 Outer: 7.5YR7/4 2.5YR6/4 L 6A SR M FS5A w . . _ . UO2.5YR5/4 Pink Light 5A SR PA5AReddish Reddish 4A SR PA4ABrown Brown 3A SR PR4AInner: 2B SR PR3A10YR5/1GrayPR2A21 Basin 6L98 40 149 1 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SA M JB w SM 7.5YR SM 10YR7/3 GB + UOPink Gray Pink 5A SA PA4A 8/4 VeryBase: 4A SR PA3A Pink Pale10R6/6 3A SR PR3A BrownLight 2B SRRed P 7A SR22 Bowl 6L98 29 153 4 2.5YR6/6 10YR5/1 Outer: L 5A SA M PR3A H . . SL 2.5YR5/6 T UOLight Gray 2.5YR6/6 R Red InnerRed Light 4A SR BaseRed 3A SRInner:5YR7/3Pink2B SR23 Bowl 6L98 29 159 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W . . _ _ IT UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4A InnerRed Red 3A SR PR3A Base2B SRFig. 8.22, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 15-23.this fill suggested sheep and/or goats were the primary source of animal protein, but pig and cattle, as well as other large mammals also contributed to the diet. This pit was dug on the lower terrace level, east of the terrace wall. Cut into Pit 6L98:29 was yet another pit (6L98:42) along with its fill (6L98:43). Analysis of the pottery from the earth layers, midden layer, and pits suggested an Early Persian date (figs. 8.19- 8.22) .Over this organic pit matrix another unsubstantial wall (6L98:46), three courses high and one row wide, extended east from Wall 6L98:14 for ca. 1.80 m. Made of large boulders and chinkstones, it was oriented parallel to the existing slope at 82° and may have buttressed a weak spot in the arch of Wall 6L98:14. This Wall 6L98:46 and surface represented the second subphase of terracing activity. Running up to the wallwere Earth Layers 6L98:8 (=6L98:18) and 6L98:40 containing Early Persian pottery (see again, figs. 8.19-8.22).A third sub-phase began when exposure Surface 6L98:11, discussed above, provided part of the foundation level for east-west terrace Wall 6L98:4 to the west of Wall 6L98:14. Wall 6L98:4 rested on the upper courses of Wall 6L98.14 where they crossed, and its eastern end abutted the western end of Wall 6L98:46. The combination of Wall 6L98:4 and Wall 6L98:46 made a single wall ca. 5.00 m long.The construction of this wall was followed by an episode during which several irregularly-shaped pits were excavated into exposure Surface 6L98:23 in the northeast quadrant of the Square (Pits 6L98:35 and 6L98:16). Pit 6L98:35 was located in the northwest quadrant of the Square. Its fill (6L98:34) contained many sherds of a large221FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFceramic vessel, evidence that most likely, a storage vessel was broken nearby.One meter to the south, Pit 6L98:16 was demarcated by a ring of stones. Its fill (6L98:13) contained large pieces of pottery from a single vessel, a spindle whorl, and other domestic debris. Taken together, the density of cultural remains in these pits suggested that the terraced area was used for dumping activity, probably near domestic structures. The area may have been immediately outside the contemporary settlement. If the settlement was limited to the acropolis to the west at this time, as cumulative evidence seems to suggest, the dump would have been located downwind from habitation. Pottery from the exposure surfaces and pit fills was dated to Early Persian (see again, figs. 8.19-8.22).Above these pits a single row of stones (6L98:6), the fourth sub-phase, was laid. The wall was too unsubstantial to reflect significant structural activity, and it may not have been a terrace wall.Yet more pits (6L98:21 and 6L98:25) were dug in the northeastern quadrant, partially cutting into earlier pits. The fills in Pits 6L98:21 and 6L98:25 (Fill 6L98:22 and 6L98:24 respectively) were characteristic of domestic refuse, containing a high concentration of bone and pottery. Fill 6L98:24 also included a smelting cup, a likely indicator that metallurgy was practiced locally. A polished stone macehead, spindle whorl for flax, and several fragments of stone tools were among the other artifactual debris. Pottery analysis again suggested an Early Persian date (see again, figs. 8.19-8.22).Field Phase 2 (fig. 8.23)Loci: 6L89:2B6L98:2B6L98:36L98:46L98:56L98:76L98:276L98:286L98:46Colluvial Layer (=6L98:2B, = 6L98:3, =6L99:2B,= 7L08:2B, =7L09:2B) Colluvial Layer (=6L98:3, =6L89:2B, =6L99:2B, =7L08:2B, =7L09:2B) Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2B, = 6L98:2B, =6L99:2B, =7L08:2B, =7L09:2B) Wall (=6L98:46, =6L99:3, =7L09:3, =7L09:12) (Cont. from FP 3) Surface (=7L08:7)Surface (=7L08:15,= 7L08:16)PitFillWall (=6L98:4, =6L99:3, =7L09:3, =7L09:12) (Cont. from FP 3)6L99:2B Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2B, = 6L98:2B, =6L98:3,= 7L08:2B, =7L09:2B)6L99:3 Wall (=6L98:4, =6L98:46, = 7L09:3, =7L09:12)6L99:5A Colluvial Layer7L08:2B Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2B, =6L98:2B, = 6L98:3, =6L99:2B, =7L09:2B)7L08:5 Wall (=7L08:8)7L08:6 Surface7L08:7 Surface (=6L98:5)7L08:8 Wall (=7L08:5)7L08:9 Stone Line ■7L08:13 Surface7L08:14A Rubble (=7L08:26, =7L08:30)7L08:14B Colluvial Layer (=7L08:7, =7L09:6)7L08:15 Surface (=6L98:7, =7L08:16)7L08:16 Surface (=6L98:7, =7L08:15)7L08:17 Pit7L08:18 Earth Layer7L08:19 Earth Layer7L08:20 Earth Layer7L08:26 Rubble (=7L08:14A, =7L08:30)7L08:30 Rubble (=7L08:14A, =7L08:26)7L09:2B Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2B, = 6L98:2B, =6L98:3,= 6L99:2B, =7L08:2B)7L09:3 Wall (=6L98:4, =6L98:46,- =6L99:3, !=7L09:12) (Cont. from FP 5)7L09:4 Wall7L09:6 Colluvial Layer (=7L08:14B, =7L09:7)7L09:7 Colluvial Layer (=7L08:14B, = 7L09:6)7L09:12 Wall (=6L98:4, =6L98:46,= 6L99:3, =7L09:3) (Cont. from FP 4)In the northwest quadrant of Square 7L09, the initial event of FP 2 was represented by terrace Wall 7L09:4 constructed on FP-4 Surface 7L09:8. Terrace Wall 7L09:4 was a rather ill-defined structure due to the presence of extensive colluvial rubble around it. Because the terrace wall extended into the west and north balks, its extent could not be determined. It was made of semi- hewn, small boulders, was one row wide, and between two and four courses high, and was oriented roughly perpendicularly to the slope at 25". Colluvial Layers 7L09:6 (=7L08:14B,222FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF7L086L98GJ 0 1 2 M -1RL I . l___LGHFig. 8.23. Field F: Plan of FP 2.7L096L99223FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELF13/\ /4'1~75\ /6 l ^~7 \ /Si/ £9I101 1 Ai12 ■ 1 \^ J^ 1n ?314. . . V ^)5/160- i / r ai°LG H ^ t7Fig. 8.24. Field F : Pottery from FP 2.224FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jug 7L08 2 24 1 5YR7/4Pink•- 5YR7/4PinkL 3B2CSRSRL PA3APR3AW SM SL R +10YR8/3 • Very Pale Brown5YR7/4 - . Pink 10YR8/3 SLRVO2 Jug 7L08 2 17 2 2.5YR5/8Red2.5YR5/8RedL 5A4A3A2CSRSRSRSRM PA4APR3AW SL R +2.5YR - 5/2 Weak Red2.5YR5/2 -WeakRedVO3 Basin 7L08 2 9 4 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR7/3PinkL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRH PA3APR3AW' ' 'VO4 Basin 7L08 2 8 11 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR7/4PinkL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRM FS7APA4APA3APR3AW SH 10YR8/2 SH White10YR8/3 - Very Pale BrownVO5 Basin 7L08 2 8 2 5YR7/3Pink5YR7/3PinkL 5A4A3A2BASRSRSRSRM W VO6 Basin 7LOS 2 10 3 5YR6/4LightReddishBrown5YR6/1Gray5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 6A5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRSRM W SLRBat7.5YR6/4 -LightBrownu o7 Basin 7L08 2 10 1 2.5YR6/6LightRed5YR7/4PinkLL5A4A3A2B5ASRASRSRSRSRM PR3A w u o8 Basin 7L08 2 8 5 5YR8/3Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR8/3PinkL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRM PA3A w SM 7.5YR -8/2PinkishWhite' 'VO9 Basin 7L08 2 8 4 5YR8/3Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR8/3PinkL 6A5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRSRM PR3A w u o10 Basin 7L08 2 8 9 5YR7/6ReddishYellow7YR7/0LightGray5YR7/6ReddishYellowL 6A5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRSRM PR3APR2Aw SH 10YR8/2 SH White10YR8/2 - Whiteu o11 Basin 7L08 2 9 2 5YR7/3Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR7/3PinkL 6A5A4A3A2B7ASRSRSRSRSRSRM PA5APA4APR3Aw SLR SM R +u o12 . Basin 7L08 2 8 6 7.5YR8/2PinkishWhite7.5YR7/0LightGray7.5YR8/2PinkishWhiteL 6A5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRSRM PR3APR2Aw SH 10YR8/2 SH White10YR8/2 - WhiteUR13 Basin 7L08 2 8 8 5YR7/3Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR7/3PinkL 5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRM PA4APA3APR5APR3Aw SH 10YR8/2 SHR White Ba10YR8/2 - Whiteuo14 Basin 7L08 2 16 3 10YR4/1DarkGray7.5YR5/0Gray10YR4/1DarkGrayL 6A5A4A3A2ASRRRRRMH FS7AFS6AFS5AFS4APR4Aw VR15 Basin 7L08 2 8 3 5YR7/4Pink5YR7/1LightGray5YR7/4PinkL 7A6A5A4A3A2BSRSRSRSRSRSRM FS7AFS6APA4APA3APR3Aw uoFig. 8.24, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-15.225FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq L o c u s Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor v FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color16 Basin 7L08 2 10 5 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 6A SR M H UOLight Gray LightRfed5A SRRed 4A SR3A SR2B SR17 Basin 7L08 2 13 3 10YR5/1 7.5YRN7/ 7.5YR5/2 L 7A SA M JH W SM 10YR5/1 SM 7.5YR5/2 - URGray lig h t Brown 6A R PR4A Gray BrownGray 5A SR PR3A4A SR 3A SR 2A___ SRFig. 8.24, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos. 16-17.i*226FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFExt________ Core _____ Int____________Type Size Shape Density__________________ Ext Color Int Color1 Basin 7L08 2 10 4 5YR6/4 5YR6/1 L 5A SR M PA4A W . _ VRLight Gray 4A SR PA3AReddish 3A SR PR3ABrown 2B SR2 Basin 7L08 2 8 7 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR4A W ' . . UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR3AGray 3A SR2A SR3 Basin 7L08 2 8 12 2.5YR6/6 5YR7/1 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA4A W . _ UOLight Light Light 4A SR PA3ARed Gray Red 3A SR PR3A2B SR4 Krater 7L08 2 9 3 5YR/7/3 5YR/7/1 5YR/7/3 L 5A SR MH PA3A W _ . . . UOPink Light Pink 4A SR PR3AGray 3A SR2B SR5 Bowl 7L08 2 13 1 2.5YR6/8 . 2.5YR6/8 L 3A SR L PR2A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/8 - VOLight Light 2D SR 6/8 LightRed Red Light RedRed6 Bowl 7L08 2 16 1 5YR6/6 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 5A R M PR4A W _ IF UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A RYellow Yellow 3A R2A R7 Bowl 7L08 2 13 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W _ . URLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4ARed Red 3A SR PR4A2B SR PR3AP 5A SR4A SRFig. 8.25. Field F: Pottery from FP 2 and pottery descriptions for nos. 1-7.227FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFNo Type Sq Locus Pail Req Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color8 Bowl 7L08 2 18 1 2.5YR5/6 5YR6/6 2.5YR5/6 L 4A R VL PR4A W SM 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VORed Reddish Red 3A R R + 6/6 R + LightYellow Light RedRed9 Bowl 7L08 2 16 2 5YR7/4 5YR6/4 5YR6/4 L 4A R L PR3A W . 2.5YR . . VOPink Light Light 3A R PR2A 5/6Reddish Reddish 2A R RedBrown Brown10 Cook pot 7L08 2 17 1 5YR7/6 _ 5YR7/6 L 3A R L . w . 5YR5/3 . _ VOReddish Reddish 2D R ReddishYellow Yellow SR Brown11 Cook pot 7L08 2 10 2 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 L 3A SR L PR2A w SM 5YR5/3 SM 5YR5/3 - VOReddish Reddish 2D SR Reddish ReddishYellow Yellow P 4A SR Brown Brown12 Cook pot 7L08 16 60 .3 2.5YR6/6 5YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 4A SR MH FS4A w _ _ _ _ URLight Gray Light 3A SR PA4ARed Reddish 2A SR PR4ABrown PR3A13 Roof 7L08 2 8 10 5YR7/3 . 5YR7/3 L 6A SR M PR3A w SH 10YR8/2 SH 10YR8/2 - VOtile Pink Pink 5A SR White White4A SR3A SR2B SR14 Roof 7L08 2 9 1 5YR7/3 . 5YR7/3 L 6A SR MH PR3A w . . . . VOtile Pink Pink 5A SR4A SR3A SR2B SR15 Roof 7L08 2 8 1 5YR7/3 5YR7/1 5YR7/3 L 6A SR MH PA5A w _ . . . UOtile Pink, Light Pink 5A SR PA4AGray 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A_______________________________2B SR__________________Fig. 8.25, continued. Field F: Pottery descriptions for nos; 8-15.=7L09:7) and 7L09:2B surrounded the wall on both sides, containing fragments of plaster and a large number of stone, metal, and glass artifacts. Analysis of the pottery suggested a Byzantine date (figs. 8.24-8.25). There were no signs of Early Persian layers in this sector.In the northwestern area of the Field a series of FP-4 beaten-earth surfaces (7L08:21, 7L08:22, 7L08:23, 7L08:33, 7L08:34, and 7L08:37) ended abruptly in a nearly vertical stratigraphic disconformity (fig. 8.26), probably a robber trench. Loose-rubble Earth Layer 7L08:20 filled the space, and its top seems to have functioned as an exposure surface. The tremendous amount of pottery found in Earth Layer 7L08:20 suggested7L08Fig. 8.26. Field F. North balk of 7L08.that human agencies rather than colluvial depositional processes filled the trench. The absence of organic materials, however, contradicted its use as a dump or garbage pit, and made it more likely that the fill represented purposeful land contouring for FP 2 in this sector. Pottery analysis again suggested a Byzantine date (see again, figs. 8.24-8.25).The stones for the robbed wall may have been used to construct major terrace Wall 6L99:3, a second sub-phase of terracing in FP 2, built on exposure Surface 6L99:7 (=6L99:4) of FP 4. It consisted of a crude, hemispherical arrangement of three freestanding boulders which connected Wall 7L09:3 and Wall 7L09:12 (continued from earlier phases) to terrace Walls 6L98:4 and 6L98:46 (reused from earlier sub-phases), turning these walls into a single agricultural terrace wall. The resulting terrace contained Colluvial 1 Layer 6L99:5A. Again, the pottery was dated to the Byzantine period (see again, figs. 8.24-8.25).Capping the western part of Earth Layer 7L08:20 was beaten-earth Surface 7L08:15 (=6L98:7, =7L08:16). No architecture was found associated with this surface. A plaster installation, measuring ca. 0.75 x 0.80 m, was found resting on the surface. It provided a lining for Pit 7L08:17, which was filled with an organic matrix228FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFincluding many small fragments of bone and charcoal. The pit was shallow, measuring about 0 .1 0 m at its maximum depth.Cutting through Surface 6L98:7 was a cylindrical pit ca. 0.97 m deep and ca. 0.72 m in diameter (Pit 6L98:27 with Fill 6L98:28). Later, Earth Layers 7L08:14B, 7L08:18, and 7L08:19 covered the eastern portion of Earth Layer 7L08:20. Above these layers was a deposit of rubble (Rubble 7L08:14A , = 7L08:26,= 7L08:30), perhaps used as fill.A subsequent episode of deposition (exposure Surface 7L08:13) buried cultural Surface 7L08:16. Upon exposure Surface 7L08:13, Wall 7L08:5 (=7L08:8, hereafter: 7L08:5) was founded in the western part of the Square. The wall was made of small semi-hewn boulders, and ran out of the west balk for ca. 2.50 m, appeared to have been two rows wide, and was preserved one course high. Associated surfaces, both to the east (Surface 7L08:7, =6L98:5) and to the west (Surface 7L08:6), appeared to have been exposure surfaces, suggesting that Wall 7L08:5 functioned as a terrace wall to retain agricultural earth from moving downslope. However the artifacts recovered from exposure Surface 7L08:7 included a basalt bowl and a large mortar, suggesting domestic occupation in the vicinity. Analysis of the pottery from all these layers indicated a Byzantine date (see again, figs. 8.24-8.25).Colluvial Layer 6L99:2B (=6L89:2B,=6L98:2B, =6L98:3, =7L08:2B, =7L09:2B) covered these sediments. Near the bottom of Colluvial Layer 6L99:2B, a large mortar was found upside down in secondary context. Its opening measured ca. 0.30 m in diameter, and it was ca. 0.17 m deep. Given the shallow deposits, extensive downslope movement of earlier deposits, and the suggestive cultural context, it is possible that this large mortar may have been used originally as a door post socket in the hypothesized gate structure of FP 4. Within Colluvial Layer 7L08:2B, a stone line (7L08:9) seems to have been set. It was too unsubstantial to suggest a structural function.Field Phase 1 (fig. 8.27)6L98:37 Fill 6L98:38 Hole 6L99:1 Topsoil6L99:2A Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2A, = 6L98:2A, =7L08:2A, =7L09:2A)7L08:1 Topsoil-7L08:2A Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2A, =6L98:2A, =6L99:2A, =7L09:2A)7L08:3 Burial Cyst 7L08:4 Fill 7L08:10 Burial Cyst 7L08:11 Fill 7L08.T2 Burial Cyst 7L08:27 Fill 7L08:28 Fill 7L09:1 Topsoil7L09:2A Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2A, = 6L98:2A, =6L99:2A, = 7L08:2A)7L08GJ 0 1 2 M lRL i . 1----. 1LGHLoci: 6L89:1 Topsoil6L89:2A Colluvial Layer (=6L98:2A, =6L99:2A, =7L08:2A, =7L09:2A)6L98:1 Topsoil6L98:2A Colluvial Layer (=6L89:2A, = 6L99:2A, =7L08:2A, = 7L09:2A)6L98:9 Fill 6L98:10 PitFig. 8.27. Field F: Plan of FP 1.Field Phase 1 was represented by the upper portions of Locus 2 found in all Squares. Composed primarily of colluvial rubble, these deposits were the products of erosion taking place after the Byzantine agricultural fields of FP 2 had been abandoned.These deposits contained several human burials. Burial Cyst 7L08:10 consisted of a pit229FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFV*■ ’ K k r ' '' J rtw ];■ , V V v - V /nl J,.. V,. . . 4V I , V t ((■ ■® >1 Y':■lFig. 8.28; Field F: Burial of adult male.lined with upended, flat, unhewn small boulders oriented at 49”. It was ca. 1.60 m long and ca. 0.78-0.82 m wide. In the cyst fill (7L08:27 and* v - sJr.* . * " V- >Fig. 8.29. Field F: Spearpoint in pelvic cavity of adult male burial.7L08:28) was the fully articulated skeletal remains of a young adult male (fig. 8.28). The skeleton was fiilly extended, arms laid across the chest, and the head turned on the right side, facing south. The osteological remains were in a good state of preservation and exhibited no pathology. The apparent cause of death was injury resulting ! from an iron spearpoint found in situ in the pelvic cavity (fig. 8.29).An infant burial cyst (7L08:12) was positioned directly north of the adult burial. In the fill (7L08:11) were the partially articulated remains of a child, estimated to be between . 18 months and 4 years at the time,of death, based on tooth eruption data (Brothwell 1972). The child’s head was laid on its right side, facing south. The shallow grave was then covered by capstones which had originally covered the adult burial and were slightly displaced northward to enclose the child’s grave as well. Evidently little time passed between the two episodes of burial, and some kin relationship between the two may be postulated.A third burial was recorded in small (ca. 0.50 x 0.25 x 0.25 m) Burial Cyst 7L08:3, lined with stones. Contained within the loose fill (7L08:4) were the disarticulated remains of an infant aged less than 18 months. It was apparent that the grave had been disturbed by agricultural activity subsequent to the burial episode. Otherdisturbances included considerable bioturbation, such as Hole 6L98:38, attributed to rodent activity, and its Fill 6L98:37, which disturbed / materials up to ca. 2.00 m deep. Possibly related to the burial pits was small Pit 6L98:10 which, however, contained no bones. It was cut from the top of Layer 6L98:2A and contained Fill 6L98:9.Locus 2 in all Squares was covered by a thin, weakly developed A soil horizon (Locus 1). Containing artifactual debris from modern times, it marked the abandonment stage of FP 1.ProspectusThe research strategy for future excavation seasons should include bringing the western Squares into phase with the postulated FP-5 gate . structure identified in the eastern Squares, and expanding north and west to better understand domestic activities associated with ' the Byzantine and Early Persian activities responsible. for the terrace walls seen in FP 3 and FP 2. A test probe (ca. 1.00 x 1.00 m) defined230FIELD F: THE EASTERN SHELFa series of highly organic occupational horizons found stratigraphically beneath the FP-5 gate. Pottery in these strata indicated that Field F has the potential to produce a record of continuous use at Tell el-cUmeiri dating back to the Early Bronze Age, which will provide another focus of research in subsequent seasons of excavation. In fact, the remains on the eastern shelf itself (to the east ofField F) probably contained few Late Iron II structures, judging from the probe. Excavation farther east may thus provide access to undisturbed Early Iron II, Iron I and Late Bronze remains, all of which were strongly represented in the random surface survey conducted in 1984 (Herr 1989).REFERENCESBrothwell, D. R. in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell1982 Digging Up Bones. London: Trustees of the British el-: Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds.Museum. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: AndrewsUniversity/Institute o f Archaeology.Chambon, A.1985 Tell el-Farcah I. Paris. Lamon, R. S., and Shipton, G. M.1939 Megiddo I. Chicago: University of Chicago Oriental Herr, L. G. Institute Publications.1989 The Random Surface Survey. Pp. 216-232231CHAPTER 9Pottery Typology and ChronologyLarry G. Herr Canadian Union College(with Notes by Nancy Lapp and Jane C. Waldbaum)IntroductionOver 1500 pieces of pottery are published in this volume, appearing phase-by-phase in the field reports. This chapter refers to the pottery figures published there. This large quantity of pottery made it impossible to study all of it in detail. The greatest portion of this chapter includes a discussion of the Early Bronze III pottery from Fields C, D, and E, and then gives a few general observations on the pottery from other periods (see Herr 1989 for a more detailed discussion of ' the Late Iron II/Early Persian corpus). Also included in this chapter are two "notes," the first by Nancy Lapp regarding an EB III seal impression, and the second by Jane C. Waldbaum reporting on two Attic sherds.We are also presenting the discussion in a new format with tables and notes. The parallels listed here represent only a portion of the total found, but are sufficient to indicate geographical and chronological distribution.Early Bronze IIIOnly small groups of EB III pottery came from Fields C (die Northern Suburb) and E (the Water System). In Field C the earth layers and surfaces above bedrock were shallow and did not produce large quantities (fig. 3.5:1-6), while in Field E, a few EB III water jars were foundmixed with later pottery (fig. 7.10:12-17,19).On the other hand, a series of surfaces from five phases of occupation in Field D (the Lower Southern Terrace) all produced EB III pottery. No surface was more than about 0.05-0.07 m thick, suggesting that each was used only a short time before being replaced. The corpus of pottery published here shows virtually no development from the earliest Field Phase (FP), FP 9, to the latest, FP 6A, confirming rapid deposition.While several forms are well known throughout Palestine in EB III, such as large pithoi with flaring rims and rope molding around the neck, others seem to be most frequent on the Transjordanian plateau, such as painted cups and small bowls. Yet others seem to have no parallels. Early Bronze III was thus a ,period of interregional trade in pottery, but it was also a time of localization in certain forms.Pithoi with Flaring Rims. A frequent vessel type at Tell el-cUmeiri and elsewhere in EB II-III, was a pithos with a flaring rim thickened on the exterior and, frequently, rope molding at the base of the neck. They were usually made of a light- red ware and the exterior could be coated with a white wash. It has been suggested that the form was used to store dry goods (see London, chapter 21 below) and indeed, about four thousand chick peas were found in one example from Field D.232POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYThere was a great variety of rim forms which have been tentatively grouped as follows:Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsSlightlytriangular6.21:11 D7 E B II-III (Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 4 0 : 1 ; H a z o r : Yadin 1961: pi. 154:15; Qashish: B e n -To r, Portu- gali, & Avissar 1981: fig. 16:11)Triangular 5.5:2; C8; EB II-III (A i: Cal-6.21:3-4,8 D7 laway 40:19, 6A, 1972: figs. 37:17- 18; 57:3-5; 1980: f i g s . 1 1 1 : 3 1 ; 124:3; 131:32,35; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 61:12,20; Yarmut: B e n -T o r 1975: figs. 7:5-6; 10:7- 9)Flanged 6.21:6 D7 EB II-III (A i: Callaway 1980: fig. 132: 2- 3; A ra d : Amiran 1978: pi. 17: 4; J er i cho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 61:11)EB II-III (A i: Callaway 40:18, 20: 1 9 8 0 : f i g s . 111:32; 131:29,40; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 40:3,5; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 3:6; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 61:21, 25; Yarmut: Ben- To r 1975: fig. 7:21,23)Shallow,rounded6.21:1,7,12D7 EB II-IIIShallow, 6.7:2; D9,7 EB II-III (A i: Caltriangular 6.21:2 laway 1980: figs. 1 1 1 : 2 9 , 3 6 ;1 3 1 : 2 4 , 2 8 , 3 7 ; 147: 16; A r a d : Amiran 1978: pi. 41:16; Tell Beit Mirsim: Dever & Richard 1977: fig. 2:12; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 3:1,2; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 61:14-15)Ridged 6.11:16,19;6.21:5D8,7 E B II-III (A i: Callaway 1972: fig. 1 1 1 : 3 6 ; He s i : Petrie 1891: pi. 5 : 2 2 ; Je r ic h o : Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 62:1-3)Holemouth Jars. It should come as no surprise that the holemouth jar, in its many rim varieties, was the most frequently attested form.Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsSimple;rounded16.11:3;6.19:2,5-11;6.31:2;6.40:2D8,7,6B,6AUbiquitous in EB I-IIISimple; round top, square bottom6.11:4;6.19:1D8,7 E B I-IIISimple; square top, round bottom26.11:1;6.20:5-66.31:10D8,7 E B I-IIISimple;pointed36.19:28-29;6.20:1D7 E B I-III (Wadi Arab: Hanbury- Tenison 1984, fig. 7 : 1 3 ; Jer i cho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 65:5; A i : C a l l a w a y 1980: fig. 134:5; A r a d : A m i r a n 1978: pi. 49:29)Squared4 6.11:5,7,9;6.20:14-21;6.31:9,12-13,20-24;6.40:4-7D8,7,6B,6AEB I-IIISquared;bulged5.5:1; 6.7:1;6.20:9,13;6.31:16C8; D9, 7,6BInfrequent in EB I-mSquared;thickened,in-curving6.19:22 D7 NoneBent; down5 6.11:14;6.40:8D 8,6A EB I-IIIBent; up 6.20:8;6.32:26.40:17D7,6B,D6BE B II-III; also E B IV (Ader: Cleveland 1960: fig. 14:4)Tongued6 6.31:5;6.32:1D6B E B III (A i: Callaway 1980: fig. 114:5; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 65:1)Grooved7 6.20:27-29; D7,6B EB I-III6.31:26-27Long 6.11:15, D8,7,18; 6.21:9 6A233POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYInterior thickened; wide, rounded6.19:12-19;6.31:14;6.40:3D7,6B,6AEB I-IIIInteriorthickened;triangular6.20:23-26 D7 EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 136:10; Arad: Amiran 1978: pis. 20:5; 48:22; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 4:2)Interiorthickened;ridged6.11:11-12;6.19:25-27;6.40:9-10,12-14D8,7,6AEB II-IIIInterior thickened; short, pointed6.19:24;6.31:12D7,6B EB II-III (Arad: Amiran 1978: pis. 19:5; 48:4; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 66:26)'One form (Field D, fig. 6.19:11) had an exterior groove below the rim.Varieties included one with an exterior groove below the rim (Field D, fig. 6.20:6) and another with a high, vestigial wavy ledge handle (Field D, fig. 6.31:10).’The example in Field D, fig. 6.19:29, had a circular depression on the exterior below the rim.‘Exterior plastic decorative features could be placed below the rim: knobs (Field D, fig. 6.11:5), high knob-like ledge handles (Field D, figs. 6.20:21; 6.31:9, 22-23), and high vestigial wavy ledge handles (Field D, fig. 6.20:15). Two types of incised decoration below the rim included vertical lines (Field D, fig. 31:21, 24) and a row of reed impressions (Field D, fig. 6.20:20).’One rim had a square tip (Field D, fig. 6.40:8), while another had a shallow exterior groove near the rim (Field D, fig. 6.11:14).‘Most tongued rims were cooking pots. Another form with incised circles was probably not the original rim (Field D, fig. 6.32:1). After the rim and neck broke, the pot was smoothed into its present shape.’One variety had an exterior knob below the rim (Field D, fig. 6.20:28).Necked Jars. Rims from necked jars occurred in so many varieties and on such a large range of jar sizes and rim diameters that we have grouped them into broadly defined forms only. Parallels for many of the forms were extremely frequent in the literature, occurring at almost every site where EB II-III remains have been found.Rim Forms Fig. Refs; Phases ParallelsWide-mouthed, 6.11:20; D8,7, Ubiquitous in EBflaring1 6.21:16-19,22,29;6.22:3-5;6.32:10-12,15-16,24,25;6.40:23-276B,6A II-IIINarrow- 6.7:3; D9,7 Ubiquitous in EBmouthed,vertical6.22:14 II-III234Narrowmouthed,flaring26.11:17;6.21:10,14,20,24,28;6.22:1-2,6-13,15-16;6.32:13-14,20-21,26-27;6.40:21-22D8,7,6B,6AUbiquitous in EB II-IIINarrow- mouthed, strongly flaring36.32:28 D6B Glueck 1945: pi. 153:15Sloping neck, everted6.21:30 D7 Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 62:31-32; Jordan Valley: Contenson 1960: fig. 14:10Short-necked,everted6.21:13,15,31;6.32:7-8D7,6B A i: C a l l a w a y 1980: fig. 90:29; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 15:28; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 59:30; 60:16- 18Simple, out- cornered46.11:23;6.21:23,25-27;6.32:17-19;6.41:3;7.10:12-17D8,7, 6B.6A E misc.Ubiquitous in EB II-IIIThick, everted 6.32:9 D6B A i: C a l l a w a y1980: fig. 111:24'These could also have been amphoriskoi. One form included impressed spiral circles below the rim (Field D, fig. 6.40:27). Some rims had very small thickened tips (Field D, figs. 6.11:21; 6.21:21; 6.32:22-23).’These could also have been jugs or amphoriskoi. A wide group of forms is included here.’This example had an exterior red slip, horizontally burnished.*rhis form was extremely frequent among the Early Bronze pottery at the water source (Field E), and thus was most likely a water jar. The vessel in Field D, fig. 6.41:3, had a steeper shouiderand may be closer to EB IV.Jar Bases.Base Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsFlat' 6.24:9;6.41:28D7,6A Ubiquitous'These samples exemplify a very common base form.Jugs.Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsUpright,pointed16.22:20;6.32:33;7.10:19D7,6B E misc.EB IV (Beth Shan: Oren 1973; fig. 19:7,17-18; Jebel Qacaqir: Gitin 1975: fig. 4:25; Qedesh: Tadmor 1978: fig. 7:7- 432)POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYVertical neck, 7.22:21 out-turnedVertical neck,2 6.11:24 strongly evertedFlaring3 6.32:30-31Narrow-mouthed 6.41:4Narrow-necked, 6.11:25;6.32:29,32D7 EB II-III (Jericho:Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 25:22; Bab edh-Dhrac : Rast & Schaub 1981: fig. 19:1-5)D8 EB IV (Megiddo:Guy & Engberg 1938: pi. 15:1-2,6- 9 ; Q e d e s h : Tadmor 1978: fig. 8)D6B EB II-III (Ai:Callaway 1980: f i g s . 8 7 : 1 8 ; 147:13; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 26; Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 10:12; Farcah: Vaux & Steve 1947: fig. 7:29-30; 1948: fig. 8:2,11; Jericho: Kenyon1960: figs. 25:11; 34:4; 60)D6A NoneD8,6B EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 111:11; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. flaring 14:24; Bab edh-Dhrac: Rast & Schaub 1981: fig. 19:6; Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: p i . 1 0 :1 3 ,2 2 ; Gezer: Dever, et al. 1974: pi. 8:24; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 35:2-4,6)Jug Bases.Base Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsSmall, flat1 6.34:13; D6B.6A Ubiquitous in EB6.41:6 II-IIISlight ring 6.22:23;6.24:11D7 Ubiquitous in EB II-IIIDisk 6.24:12 D7 Many in EB II-IIIKnob 6.41:26 D6A EB III (Ai: Cal-laway 1980: fig. 1 1 1 :8 -9 ; Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 10:22)1 Small, flat bases belonged to piriform jugs.Juglets. Early Bronze juglets fell into the dipper juglet category. A few of the small jugs discussed above might be considered juglets.Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsUpright,pointed16.22:25;6.32:38-40D7,6B EB I-IV (Jericho: K enyon 1960: figs. 12-13; 37:38; 52:9; Kenyon & Holland 983: fig. 67:10)Flaring, short 6.32:37 D6B EB II-III (Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 2 5 : 3 5 , 4 0 - 4 3 ; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 87 :1 1 ,1 5 ; Kh. Kerak: Mazar, et al. 1975: fig. 6:9)Wide, out-turned2 6.22:27 D7 EB IV (Mirz- baneh: Lapp 1966: figs. 12:3; 13:12)Squat, widemouthed46.22:19,22 D7 Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 10:12Wide-mouthed, 6.22:17; D7,6A EB III (Beth Shan:out-turned3 6.41:5 Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 10:11)Wide-mouthed, angular out-turn66.22:18 D7 Megiddo: Guy & Engberg 1938: pi. 6 :1 6 ; F a rc ah: Vaux 1952: fig. 10:24'These may have been teapots or amphoriskoi. One form had a pinched rim (Field E, fig. 7.10:19). No examples with handles were found.This type may have been a teapot.’These could have been amphoriskoi."This may have been a juglet.’This may have been the antecedent of EB IV cooking vessels.This vessel was heavily burnished on an exterior slip. It may also have been a bowl.Narrow- 6.32:34-35 D6B EB III (Tell Beitmouthed, Mirsim: Albrightout-turned 1933: pi. 1:10;Jericho: Kenyon1960: figs. 37; 46; 52; 60; Arqubedh-Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 5:154; Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 10:6; Qashish: Ben-Tor, Portugali & Avissar 1981: fig. 17:14)'One example had a handle stump on the shoulder; it probably rose slightly above the rim (Field D, fig. 6.32:39).‘Our form may be antecedent to EB IV bottles.235POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYJuglet Bases.Base Forms Fig. Refs.Flat1 6.22:24;6.24:10;6.41:27Round, painted2 6.22:26Phases ParallelsD7,6A EB III (Ai: Callaway 1972: fig. 64 :6 ; Je richo : Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 87:2- 3,11; Qashish: Ben-Tor, Portugali & Avissar 1981: fig. 17 :13 ,15; Yarmut: Ben-Tor 1975: fig. 8:21)D7 EB II-III (Bab edh- Dhrac : Rast & Schaub 1981: fig. 19 : 9 , 11; Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 5:7; Jeri cho: Ke nyon1960: figs. 25:17, 29-30; 37:22,25;Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 87:14,35)‘Juglets with flat bases displayed vertical burnishing, often on a reddish brown slip.2At first glance, the painted pattern appears typical of EB IB assemblages at Jericho, Ai, and elsewhere. Indeed, an almost identical juglet from Arqub edh-Dhahr was dated to EB I (Parr 1956: fig. 16:197). However, other indisputable EB III pots appear in the same deposit at Arqub edh-Dhahr. A careful examination of the decoration shows that our form differs from EB I patterns by omitting the horizontal lines which frame the vertical and slanting lines.Deep Bowls.Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsHemispherical 6.22:40; D7,6A EB II-III (Ai: Cal-body, simple' 6.41:10-11 laway 1980: fig. 1 2 5 : 3 1 , 3 5 , 3 9 ; A r a d : Ami ran1978: pi. 13:22, 36; Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:63; Tell Be i t M i r s i m : Dever & Richard1977: fig. 1:9; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 1:23; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 54:13, 15; 82:7,30,36)Pointed, 6.22:43out-turnedHemispherical 6.11:26; body, in-turned3 6.23:3,6;6.33:2090' in-turned4 6.11:28;6.22:28-29,31,34,36Slightly- 6.22:32-33in-turnedHammer5 6.22:35,37;6.33:19fig. 14:88; Mazar: Yassine 1988: fig. 6 .1:2,3; Hazor: Yadin 1961: pi. 154:11; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 54:4D7 EB II-III (Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1983: fig. 89:10)D8,7,6B EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 126:20; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 22:60)D8,7 EB II-III (Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 23:18,20; Gezer: D ever, et al. 1974: pi. 5:21; A i: Ca l l a wa y1980: figs. 108:8- 12; 111:3; 129:21; 130:18; Bab edh- Dhrac : Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 3:2-4,23; Hesi: Fargo 1979: figs. 1:8,11 [spouted]; 6:8; Yarmut: Ben- Tor 1975: figs. 6:8,12; 7:1)D7 EB II-IV (Ai: Callaway 1972: fig. 4 5 : 6 ; H a z o r : Yadin 1961: pi. 154:10; Jericho:1 Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 57:1; Bab edh-Dhrac: Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 5:55,59)D7,6B EB II-IV (Ai: Callaway 1980: figs. 110:21,26; 111:4, 5;127:4,14; Arqub edh-Dhahr: Parr1956: fig. 14:118; Bab edh-Dhrac : Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 5:81; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 69:6)Flaring body, 6.41:8-9 D6A EB II-III (Ai: Cal-simple laway 1980: fig.1 2 3 : 5 ; A r a d :Amiran 1978: pi.13:20)Pointed2 6.33:7-11; D6B,6A Numeira: Rast &6.41:12 Schaub 1974: fig.3:67; Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956:Carinated body, 6.11:22 D8 None flaring*‘On the exterior, fig. 6.22:40 was solidly burnished on top of a rust-colored slip; on the interior was heavy horizontal burnishing. Figure 6.41:11 had a decorative band of carbon on the rim, as if it were a lamp; however, the band is too even and continuous to be mere wick stain.2Bowls and cups with rims thinned to a point were very frequent. The sidewall was also thickened on the exterior, making the upper wall appear to bend in, while the interior formed a gentle236POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYcurve. Burnishing occurred on several examples and one form had holes near the rim made before firing (Field D, fig. 6.33:9). Parallels are more frequent in Transjordan than Cis-Jordan.’Figure 6.11:26 had exterior combing with red slip, while fig. 6.23:6 displayed interior and exterior horizontal burnishing on top of a red slip. Figure 6.33:20 was larger than the other bowls.4One example carried a small spout at the rim (Field D, fig. 6.22:36). Most parallels come from EB IH levels, but in Transjordan, they seem to stretch into EB IV (Bab edh-Dhrac : Johnston & Schaub 1978: figs. 4:54; 5:74; Ader: Cleveland 1960: fig. 15:19).’One vessel had a spout below the rim (Field D, fig. 6.33:19).'This form may have been a jar.Shallow Bowls.Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsSimple' 6.23:1-2; D7,6B, Ubiquitous in EB6.33:4,22;6.41:136A II-IIICarinated body, 6.23:7; D7.6A EB II-III (Ai: Cal-upright simple 6.41:15 laway 1972: fig. 35:16,23; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 13:32; Arqub edh-Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:70; Bab edh-Dhrac : Rast & Schaub 1981: fig. 20:7; Jer icho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 50:14- 15)Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 8:23; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 1 :15; Jer icho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 56)Hammer 6.33:18 D6B Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 56Everted 6.22:38 D7 NoneSquared, grooved on top6.11:27 D8 None'One example was made of very thick ware (Field D, fig. 6.33:22) and had very few parallels (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 125:27; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 22:5, 10).’These bowls were always decorated, either with an internal and exterior slip (Field D, figs. 6.22:30; 6.33:14, 17) or with combing (Field D, fig. 6.23:4).Small Bowls. The Early Bronze deposits at Tell el-cUmeiri were replete with small bowls and cups, many of which were painted with vertical and slanting lines in a pattern slightly different than EB IB examples. The bowls discussed here have a diameter of 10 cm and larger. Smaller varieties have been classified as cups.Rim Forms Fig. Refs. Phases ParallelsSlightly- 6.11:29carinated,simpleCarinated body, 6.41:14 flaring, pointed90 ‘ in-turned2 6.22:30;6.23:4;6.33:14,17D8 EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 108:14; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 22:58; Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:4; Bab edh-Dhrac : Rast & Schaub 1981: fig. 20:7; Jer icho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 51:7)D6A EB III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 1 2 5 : 2 5 ; Be t h Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 8:16; Farcah: Vaux & Steve 1947: fig. 6:2; 1948: fig.8 :5,6; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 56)D7,6B EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 109:12; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 23; Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:15; Bab edh-Dhrac : Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 3:11, 12; Beth Shan:Simple 6.33:6,23 D6B Painted, EB III(Arqub edh-Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:8,36,44; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 1:9). Unpainted, EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 125:4-6,8-12; Gezer: Dever, et al. 1974: pi. 6:29; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 53:25,29)Simple, upright 6.22:39 D7 EB II-III (Arqubedh-Dhahr: Parr 1956: figs. 13:38; 14:87,89,93; Ai: Callaway 1972: fig. 56:2; Jericho: Kenyon 1960: fig. 57:15)Upright, 6.11:30 D8 EB II-III (Arad:squared' Amiran 1978: pi.13:15; Gibeon: Pritchard 1963: fig. 6:6)Slightly-closed 6.23:5 D7 Arad: Ami ran1978: pi. 7:7Slightly-closed, 6.22:44-45; D7,6B Painted, EB IIIpointed2 6.33:2-3,5,12 (Arqub edh-Dhahr:Parr 1956: fig.237POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY13:8,28,35,37,41- 43,66). Unpainted, EB Il-III (Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 54:3; 1983: figs. 13:7, 22; 78:10; 116:1- 3; Transjordan: Glueck 1945: pis. 119:16; 149:17)Thickened, 6.23:8 D7 Nonepointed5‘There was a white slip on the top of the rim.T he painted pattern is similar to EB IB patterns. However, it is different enough to suggest it was a pattern typical to EB III Transjordan.’This was made of very crude ware and was probably not made by a professional potter. It may have been a jar or cooking pot.Platters. Platters were not frequent at Tell el- cUmeiri and those which did occur were forms with very few parallels. The unusually high number of unique forms may suggest that local families made their own platters on the spot.Plates.Rim Forms Fig. Refs. Phases ParallelsSimple 6.11:32; D8,7,6A EB II-III (Ai: Cal-6.23:10; laway 1980: figs.6.41:16 108:10; 125:1-3,7-8 , 1 2 ; A r a d : Amiran 1978: pi. 13:4-5,13,16,19; 22 ; J e r i c h o : Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 58:79; 65:36)Cups. We have defined cups as small bowls, often hemispherical, less than 10.0 cm in diameter. They were a major part of the Early Bronze assemblage at Tell el- Umeiri and were found in virtually every earth locus. Many were painted in the same range of patterns observable on small bowls. Indeed, die small bowls may have been simply large cups. No carbon was found on any of the rims from these vessels.Rim Forms Fie. Refs. Phases Parallels Rim forms Fie. Refs. PhasesThickened,up-turned16.41:17 D6A Ubiquitous in EB II-III Simple, upright1 6.23:12,20; D7,6A 6.41:19Up-turned 6.23:9 D7 EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 109:27; Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 52:12; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 50:17; 54:28)Small, up-turned 6.33:16 D6B (Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 49:1; 1983: figs. 15:6,10; 16:1; 19:10)Deep, in-turned2 6.33:15 D6B Ubiquitous in EB II-IIISimple, with lug handle26.22:42; D7,6B 6.33:1Shallow,up-tumed56.11:31 D8 NoneThick4 5.5:6 C8 NoneTriangular5 6.7:4 D9 None'This typical EB II-ffl platter form included interior diagonal burnishing. Although ubiquitous at EB III sites in Cis-Jordan, they were not frequent at Tell el-cUmeiri.2Deep platters with in-turned rims are normally ubiquitous at Cis-Jordanian sites, but were rare at Tell el-cUmeiri.This form seems to have had loop handles for a base. ‘Non-professional potters may have made this.This was crudely made, probably by a non-professional.6.23:11,13; D7,6B6.33:24,26,28,31-34ParallelsUnpainted, EB II- III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 125:5; Arad: Ami ran1978: pi. 13:26- 27; Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956: f i g . 1 4 : 8 - 9 ; Jericho: Kenyon1960: fig. 33:8; Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 54:8, 83:3). Painted, EB III (Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:44)Painted, (Abu Thawwab: Gillet& Gillet 1983: fig. 4:15). Unpainted, (Ai: Mar que t - Krause 1949: pi. 79:22; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1983: fig. 109:4)Painted, EB III (Arqub edh-Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 13:27-28,35,37, 41,43); Unpainted (Arqub edh-Dhahr: Parr 1956: figs. 1 3 : 4 5 , 5 6 , 6 4 ; 14:94-95; Gezer: D ever, et al. 1974: pi. 5:30; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1983: fig.238POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY13:22-23); EB IV (Gitin 1975: fig. 4:13; Tiwal esh-Sharqi : Holms 1983: fig. 16:3-4)Pointed, with 6.22:41; D7,6B EB III (Arqublug handle 6.33:13,29 edh-Dhahr: Parr1956: fig. 14:108, 114)Thickened body 6.23:14-15, D7,6B Painted, EB III18-19; (Arqub edh-Dhahr:6.33:25 Parr 1956: fig. 1 3 : 3 6 , 4 2 , 6 6 ) ; Unpainted, (Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 80:4; 1983: fig. 13:7)Thickened body, 6.23:16; D7,6B, Beit Sahur: Hen-with loop handle 6.33:30;6.41:186A nessy 1966: fig. 1; F a r t ah: Vaux1952: fig. 10:3; Lachish: Tufnell1958: pi. 57:66Carinated4 6.23:17; D7,6B Painted (Arqub6.33:36 edh-Dhahr: Parr1956: fig. 13:31- 32,47); Unpainted (Jericho: Kenyon 1960: fig. 44:13; Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 84:2). EB IV (Husn: Harding & Isserlin 1953: fig. 1:5)In-tumed 6.33:35 D6B NoneHolemouth, 6.41:7 D6A Jericho: Kenyon &with loop handle Holland 1982: fig. 55:26Thick5 6.23:22 D7 NoneDeep6 6.32:41 D6B EB II-III (Num- eira: Rast &Schaub 1974: fig. 3 : 7 5 ; A r a d : Amiran 1978: pi. 9:3; Arqub edh- Dhahr: Parr 1956: fig. 14:126)Deep, straight 6.23:23 D7 EB IV (Tiwal esh-flaring sidewall Sharqi : Holms 1983: figs. 18:11; 22:18)‘One form was painted (Field D, fig. 6.23:20). The bodies in this form tend to comer toward the base.2 Although we have drawn only one handle, it is possible that two may have been present.These were very typical of our assemblage. Most were unpainted (Field D, figs. 6.23:11,13; 6.33:24,26,28,31,32,34), while one displayed the typical painted pattern (Field D, fig. 6.33:33). One example was burnished on both sides (Field D, fig. 6.23:11). Note the pushed-up base on the same vessel, a feature typical of EB III(Callaway 1980: fig. 127:2, 5-6).4EB IV cups may have descended from this form.This has been classified as a cup for lack of a better term. Its exceptionally thick ware and crude manufacture suggest it was locally made.This form has been classified by others as a small jar.Lamps. Lamps were determined by the presence of carbon smudges on the rims of small bowls. Because the carbon on a few vessels was so straight and even, however, it may have been used as a decorative element, as well. At Arad, Amiran calls them "lamp-bowls," many of which had carbon on the rim (1978: pis. 22; 52). Because almost any type of small bowl could have been used as a lamp, we have grouped them only in broad classifications. Not very many vessels used as lamps were painted.Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsSmall1 6.24:2,5;6.34:1-10;6.41:24-25D7,6B, Many 6ALarge2 6.24:1,3-4, 6-7; 6.34: 11-12D7,6b Many‘Only one was painted (Field D, fig. 6.34:10).*The vessel in fig. 6.34:11 had a small lug handle on the body. One much larger bowl with a characteristic in-tumed rim had carbon on the rim, but here it may have been decorative (Field D, fig. 6.34:12).Cooking Pots. Rims on Early Bronze cooking pots were similar to those on holemouth jars. However, when there was a tongue protruding from the lower rim, we noted strong carbon stains on the exterior of the vessel, suggesting that it was the rim of a cooking pot. The tongue may have held a lid, perhaps made of wood so it could be handled when hot. When other holemouth forms had strong traces of carbon on the body, they were also classified as cooking pots.Rim Forms Fig. Refs. Phases ParallelsTongued 6.23:24-26,29-30;6.33:42D7,6B EB III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 136:4; Bab edh- Dhrac : Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 3:8; Farcah: Vaux 1951: fig. 1:9; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 4:15)Slightly-tongued 6.7:5-8; D9,8, EB III (Ai: Cal-6.12:3-5; 7,6B, la way 1980: figs.6.23:28;6.33:40-16.41:216A 114:7; 135:21; Bab edh-Drahc: Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 3:21; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 4:5)239POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYThick-tongued 6.23:31,37;6.33:37D7,6B EB III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 112:1,15; Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 65:1; 68:31; 69:13)Down-sloping’ 6.7:9;6.12:1-2;6.23:32-35;6.33:38-39,6.41:20D9,8,7,6B6AEB III (Ai: Callaway 1980: figs. 113:6,8; 134:13; Beth Shan: Fitzgerald 1935: pi. 9 : 8 ; J e r i c h o : Kenyon & Holland 1982: figs. 65:4; 66:21,25; Qashish: Ben-Tor, Portugali & Avissar 1981: fig. 13:9)Interior-thickened26.12:6;6.23:36,39-40;6.33:43-46D8,7,6BA i: Ca l l a wa y 1980: fig. 94:27Squared,grooved6.23:27 D7 EB IV (Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1983: fig. 105:16)Simple3 6.23:38;6.41:22-23D7,6A Arad: Ami ran 1978: pis. 18; 45Handle Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsLedge 6.24:14-15;6.34:14,16-17;6.41:29D7,6B,6AUbiquitousLoop, flat 6.24:16;6.34:15D7,6B UbiquitousBody Sherds.Type Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsCombing, solid, patterned6.41:31 D6A EB III, manyCombing, band 6.41:30 D6A ManySeal impression 6.24:17 D7 None; see note by N. Lapp (below).Conclusion. Virtually all the Early Bronze pottery is at home in the EB II-III period. On the basis of a few advanced forms, we can be more specific and suggest that the pottery from all 1987 Early Bronze phases dates toward the end of EB III. (A few sherds from earlier deposits may have been included in our assemblage, however.)‘The down-sloping rim suggests a tongue.?The bodies of these vessels had carbon stains on the exterior wall, suggesting they were used as cooking pots. A few forms suggest a tongue.'These rim sherds had carbon on the exterior body suggesting the vessels may have been used as cooking pots.Teapots. Only a few indisputable teapots were in the Tell el-cUmeiri assemblage this season.Rim Forms Fig, Refs.Vertical, simple 6.32:5Everted1 6.24:8,13Phases ParallelsD6B EB II (Arad: Amiran 1978: pi. 42:10). EB II-III (Jericho: Kenyon & Holland 1982: fig. 58:30). EB IV (Bab edh-Dhrac: Johnston & Schaub 1978: fig. 5:72)D7 EB II-III (Ai: Callaway 1980: fig. 90 : 25; Gezer : Dever, et al. 1974: pi. 10:25; Hesi: Fargo 1979: fig. 1:1; Yarmut: Ben-Tor 1975: fig. 6:16)Middle Bronze IIMiddle Bronze II surfaces and walls were found solely in Field C on the northern slope.Forms Fie. Refs Phases ParallelsJars, profiled 5.5:7-8; 5.12:1-3C6,5 MB IIB-CJugs, flaring everted5.5:21;5.12:4-7C6,5 MB IIB-CJuglets, Tell el- Yahudiyeh’5.5:22 C6 MB IIB-CBowls, platter2 5.5:9;5.12:10-12C6,5 MB IIB-CBowls,carinated3C5:10-16;5.12:13-17,22-23C6,5 MB IIB-CCooking pots 5.5:17-18;5.12:19C6,5 MB IIB-CCooking pots, triangular5.5:19-20 C6 MB IIB-CCooking pots, flat-bottomed5.12:20,35 C5 MB IIB-C’Note the potter’s mark on Field D, fig. 6.24:13.Handles. The handles published here are intended to be only a representative sample.’The punctures were white-filled.’This included small and large forms.’Carinated bowls were usually covered with a thick cream slip and often were painted with bands of straight or wavy brown lines, typical of chocolate-on-white ware.240POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYThe Middle Bronze pottery probably dates to the MB IIC period, judging by several late features, such as the triangular cooking pot rims and the chocolate-on-white sherds. But they are different than the LB IA pottery from Umm ed- Dananir (McGovern, personal communication).Late Bronze AgeOnly a corner of Field C produced Late Bronze pottery. It was in close association with Early Iron I deposits and a firm separation between the two could not be established (Field C, fig. 5.12:25-34).Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsJars 5.12:25-27 C5 Late BronzeBowls, platter 5.12:28 C5 Late BronzeBowls, carinated 5.12:29 C5 Late BronzeCooking pots 5.12:31-34 C5 Late BronzeThe carinated bowl seems to be at the end of its tradition, while the jar illustrated in fig. 5.12:25 is very similar to Early Iron I forms. The deposit thus probably dates to the close of the Late Bronze Age. A biconical jar was discovered in an Iron I layer (Field B, fig. 4.9:31). It may have been curated (London, personal communication).Iron IIron I deposits were found in Field A west of the basement structures of the houses (FP 5). Field B contained Iron I debris in the rampart (FP 6). In Field F, the lowest surfaces (FP 7) were Iron I and in FP 6, dated by the latest pottery to the Late Iron II period, there was, nonetheless, a significant number of Iron I sherds.Forms Fie. Refs. Phases ParallelsPithoi, collar-rim 4.7:4-8,10;8.9:1B6; F6 Iron IJars, small 3.4:1 A5 Iron IJugs, offset rim 3.4:2; 4.7:11; 8.6:1-3A5; B6 A7- Iron IJugs,triangular rim4.7:12-13;8.6:4;8.9:2-3B6;F7,6Iron IJugs, simple, everted rim4.7:14-16;8.9:4B6; F6 Iron IJugs, misc. 3.4:3; 4.7: 17-19A5; B6 Iron IPilgrim flask 3.4:4 A5 Iron IKraters,hammer-rim4.7:20-21;8.6:6;8.9:5,20-21B6;F7,6Iron IKraters, everted rim8.6:5,7; 8.9:6,8F7,6 Iron IBowls, cyma 4.7:22-23,25;8.9:12B6; F6 Iron IBowls, in-turned rim4.7:24,27; 8.6:9; 8.9: 9-11,13B6;F7,6Iron IBowls, hammer rim4.7:26 B6 Iron IBowls, holemouth 4.7:28 B6 Iron ICooking pots, flanged rim4.7:29,31-33; 8.6:10; 8.9: 15-19,22-23B6;F7,6Iron ICooking pots, misc.3.4:5-7; 4.7:30A5; B6 probably (?) Iron ILamp 4.7:34 B6 Iron ICup & Saucer 4.9:5 B5 Iron IMost of this pottery ̂ came from secondary deposits, but the forms seem to date well within the Iron I period.Late Iron II/Early PersianBecause most of the 1984 pottery publication (Herr, 1989) was dedicated to this period, we will not discuss it in detail.Field A. The illustrated sherds came from surfaces and fill layers (figs. 3.12-15 [FP 3B], 19-20 [FP 2]; 3.29:14-20 [unstratified]). The latest phase (fig. 3.29:1-13 [FP 1]) included pottery from Late Iron II/Early Persian (nos. 1-2,4-5,7-12), Hellenistic (nos. 3,6), and Mamluk/Ottoman (no. 13).Of special note are chevron impressions on the exterior of a krater (fig. 3.12:34); frequent knobs and bars on kraters and bowls (figs. 3.12:24, 31- 32; 3.13:28; 3.14:3-4,20,22); a unique hand-made pot, probably not made by a professional potter (fig. 3.12:22); a body sherd from an Attic vessel found beneath the floor of the latest citadel (fig. 3.15:31); a mortarium, rare in Transjordan (figs. 3.20:11; 3.21:4); a rhyton (fig. 3.20:19); and a very large, heavy, lamp-like vessel (fig. 3.20:16). The vast majority of the pottery is typical of the Late Iron II Ammonite corpus now well known from the Transjordanian plateau and the southern Jordan Valley.241POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYField B. Excavations in Field B also produced Late Iron II/Early Persian pottery in its repairs to the rampart and the nearby domestic rooms (Field B, fig. 4.9:1-4,6-30 [FPs 5, 4, 2, 1]). Note the Attic body sherd (fig. 4.9:30).Field E. At the water source many Late Iron II/Early Persian water jugs were found, of which a small sampling is illustrated (Field E, fig. 7.6:1- 32 [FP 5). Note the form with a basket handle (fig. 7.6:34).Field F. Great quantities of Late Iron II/Early Persian pottery were produced in the pits and surfaces of Field F (figs. 8.6:13-29; 8.8 [FP 6]; 8.12 [FP 5]; 8.13-17 [FP 4]; 8.19-22 [FP 3]). Interesting forms included a tri-pod mortar (fig. 8.12:11); a multi-ridged krater base (fig. 8.17:28); and bowl bases with interior impressed chevrons (fig. 8.22:22-23), possibly kraters (London, personal communication; see also Zertal 1989).Conclusion. Persian sherds occurred side-by- side with others from Late Iron II. We must conclude that the Late Iron II Ammonite corpus lasted well into the Persian period, probably into the fifth century.Hellenistic and RomanHellenistic and Roman pottery did not appear on the tell except in topsoil deposits. However, the water source in Field E was still in use, probably by inhabitants from Tell el-cUmeiri (East). Hellenistic pottery was rare, but see the fish plate from FP 3 in Field E (fig. 7.6:37). More frequent were Early Roman water jugs and jars from FP 2 (Field E, fig. 7.10:1-9).ByzantineIn Field F, Byzantine remains were excavated from what may have been an agricultural complex (FP 2). Especially frequent were basins, usually with in-turned rims and often with handles placed diagonally on the upper body (Field F, figs. 8.24:3-17; 8.25:1-3). It may be suggested that the basins were used for wine making (the survey results indicate strong vine cultivation during the Byzantine period).Survey PotteryThe survey pottery reflected primarily the later periods, because most sherds from earlier periods were not well preserved. Most significant was Site 23 with its Late Iron II/Early Persian and Hellenistic pottery (survey pottery figs. 12.120: lb- 29; 12.121; 12.122:1-20). Hellenistic examples included large jars probably used to store agricultural goods (fig. 12.120:20-29); an Aegeanjar (fig. 12.121:4); and a closed lamp (fig. 12.122:16) which seems to be earlier than most Hellenistic closed lamps. The lentoid vessel in fig. 12.122:15 has a sparkly turquoise glaze and may be Fatimid.Other sites included Byzantine pottery (Sites 3 [fig. 12.120:1-7], 56 [fig. 3:21-22], 88 [fig. 12.123:16-22]), Ayyubid/Mamluk pottery (Site 16 [fig. 12.120:8-12], Site 57 [fig. 12.122:24-31]), and a modern black clay pidgeon or skeet with orange paint, here published upside down (Site 102 [fig. 12.123:27]).Note: EB III Seal Impression (Nancy Lapp)A sherd with a fragmentary impression from a cylinder seal, was found in Field D, FP 7, Locus 5K97-25 (EB III; fig. 6.24:17). The sherd measured ca. 6.0 x 4.5 cm with the partial motif only ca. 5.1 x 2.1 cm. The sherd had little or no curvature so it was impressed near the widest part of the large handmade vessel. The ware was light red (2.5YR6/6) on the outside with a roughly finished pinkish gray interior (5YR6/2), without any slip or burnish.The fragmentary geometric motif consists of a border groove, parts of triangles and perhaps a rhomboid with one horizontal line (barely visible in fig. 9.1) between a circle or spiral motif. The end triangle on the fragment may be a repetition of the motif and indicate the beginning of another roll of the seal.This design seems quite similar to impressions from Beth Yerah and Tel Dan published in Ben- Tor’s corpus (1978). The Tell el-cUmeiri motif is unique in that there is only one horizontal line in the rhomboid as compared to many (Ben-Tor 1978: 47). A border groove was also missing from all the previously published motifs of this type (Idem. 48). Like the Tell el-cUmeiri sherd, the corpus motifs belong to EB III (Idem. 89).A number of circle or spiral motif impressions are among the collection from the Dead Sea Expedition sites, Bab edh-Dhrac and Numeira, but these are not in combination with the rhomboid. The Dead Sea impressions and comparative material may point to an earlier origin for the circle/spiral motif (Lapp 1989: 5) than EB III. The large collection of impressions from the Dead Sea plain has indicated that the practice of impressing cylinder seals on vessels can no longer be considered a northern trait (Ben-Tor 1978: 102). The Tell el-cUmeiri impression further indicates the widespread practice, and it adds to the growing corpus (cf. Lapp 1989: 11). Its unique features, such as a border groove on this type of geometric impression, illustrates that our knowledge of motifs as well as their geographical242POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYFig. 9.1. Seal impression U5K97.66.1 from Tell el-TJmeiri.spread may be expected to grow as more Early Bronze material is excavated.Note: Two Attic Sherds (Jane C. Waldbaum)An Attic Red Figure sherd from Field B, FP 1, Locus 7K80:3 (cf. fig. 4.9:30) is a body sherd from a thin-walled, open vessel, probably a cup. The maximum preserved dimensions are about 1.7 cm high and 3.1 cm wide with a thickness of ca. 0.3 cm. Its fine fabric is reddish yellow (5YR6/6) with fine micaceous inclusions visible on thesu rface o f the reserved area. The preserved decoration consists of part of a reserved palmette with open petals, surrounded by a tendril, which was probably located near the handle. Outside the tendril in one corner is a small fragment of another pattern , possibly drapery from a missing figure. Not enough is preserved to indicate chronology, beyond a general timeframe of the fifth century B.C. T h i s k i n d o f decoration may be found from the late sixth through the fifth centuries, but in southern Italy it can last well into the fourth.Another Attic sherd from Field A, FP 3B, Locus 7K61:28 (cf. fig. 3.15:31) is a handle stump from a cup or kylix. The handle was originally diagonal to the bowl. The maximum preserved height of the sherd is ca. 2.2 cm and its thickness at the root is ca. 1.2 cm. Its very fine fabric is reddish yellow (5YR7/6) with occasional fine micaceous inclusions. The handle was painted black and the reserved zone around the handle root carries faint traces of more black paint. There is so little preserved that any attempt at a more narrow dating than the fifth century is not possible, and even that is open to question.REFERENCESAlbright, W. F. Beit-Arieh, I.1933 The Excavation o f Tell Beit Mirsim in Palestine la. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 13. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.1981Ben-Tor, A. 1975An Early Bronze Age II Site near Sheikh cAwad in Southern Sinai. Tel Aviv 8: 95-127.Excavations at Tel Yarmouth 1970. Qedem 1.Amiran, R. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew1978 Early Arad I. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. University.Beck, P. 1978 Cylinder Seals o f Third-Millennium Palestine.1985 An Early Bronze Age "Family" of Bowls from Tel Aphek. Tel Aviv 12: 17-28.Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research.243POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGYBen-Tor, A.; Portugali, Y; and Avissar, M.1981 The First Two Seasons of Excavations at Tel Qashish. Israel Exploration Journal 31: 137-164.Callaway, J. A.1972 The Early Bronze Age Sanctuary at Ai (et-Tell). London: Bernard Quaritch.1980 The Early Bronze Age Citadel and Lower City at Ai (et-Tell). Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research.Cleveland, R. L.1960 The Pottery from Ader. Annual o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 34-35: 88-97.Contenson, H. de1960 Three Soundings in the Jordan Valley. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 4: 12-98.Dever, W. G., et al.1974 Gezer II: Report o f the 1967-70 Seasons in Fields I & II. Annual of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology II. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College- Jewish Institute of Religion.Dever, W. G. and Richard, S.1977 A Reevaluation of Tell Beit Mirsim Stratum J.Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 226: 1-14.Holms, S. W.1983 Excavations in the Early Bronze Age Cemetery of Tiwal esh-Sharqi: A Preliminary Report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities o f Jordan 29: 115-130.Johnston, R. H. and Schaub, R. T.1978 Selected Pottery from Bab edh-Dhrac , 1975. Pp. 33- 49 in Preliminary Excavation Reports: Bab edh- Dhrac, Sardis, Meiron, Tell el-Hesi, Carthage (Punic), ed. D. N. Freedman. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 43. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research.Kenyon, K. M.1960 Jericho I. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.Kenyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A.1982 Jericho IV. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.1983 Jericho V. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.Lapp,N.1989 Cylinder Seals and Impressions of the Third Millennium B.C. from the Dead Sea Plain. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 273: 1- 15.Eitan, A.1969 Excavations at the Foot of Tel Rosh Hacayin. Atiqot (Hebrew Series) 5: 49-68.Fargo, V. M.1979 Early Bronze Age Pottery at Tell el-Hesi. Bulletin of the American Schools o f Oriental Research 236: 23- 40.Fitzgerald, G. M.1935 The Earliest Pottery at Beth Shan. Museum Journal 24: 5-22.Gillet, E. and Gillet, C.1983 Jebel Abu Thawwab, Jordan. Levant 15: 187-191.Lapp, P. W.1966 The Dhahr Mirzbaneh Tombs. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.Marquet-Krause, J.1949 Les fouilles de cAy (Et Tell) 1932-1935. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.Mazar, B.; Amiran, R.; and Haas, N.1973 An Early Bronze Age II Tomb at Beit-Yerah (Kinneret). Eretz Israel 11: 176-193.Oren, E. D.1973 The Northern Cemetery at Beth Shan. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Gitin, S.1975 Middle Bronze I "Domestic" Pottery at Jebel Qacaqir. Eretz Israel 12: 46*-62*.Parr, P. J. j .1956 A Cave at Arqub el Dhahr. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 3: 61-73.Glueck, N.1945 Explorations in Eastern Palestine IV. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 25-28. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.Guy, P. L. O. and Engberg, R. M.1938 Megiddo Tombs. Chicago: University of Chicago.Hanbury-Tenison, J. W.1984 Wadi Arab Survey 1983. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 28: 385-423.Petrie, W. F.1891 Tell el-Hesy. London: Palestine Exploration Fund.[Pritchard, J. B.1963 The Bronze Age Cemetery at Gibeon. Philadelphia: The University Museum.Rast, W. E. and Schaub,R. T.1974 Survey of the Southeastern Plain of the Dead Sea.Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 19: 5-54.Harding, G. L. and Isserlin, B. S. J.1953 An Early Bronze Age Cave at El Husn. Palestine Exploration Fund Annual 6: 1-13.Hennessy, J. B.1966 An Early Bronze Age Tomb Group from Beit-Sahur.Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 11: 19-40.Herr, L. G.1989 The Pottery. Pp. 299-354 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.1981 The Southeastern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report o f the 1977 Season. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 46. Cambridge, MA: American Schools of Oriental Research.Tadmor, M,1978 A Cult Cave of the Middle Bronze Age I near Qedesh. Israel Exploration Journal 28: 1-30.Tufnell, O.1958 Lachish IV: The Bronze Age. London: Oxford University.Vaux, R. de1951 La troisieme campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Nap louse. Revue biblique 58: 393-430.244POTTERY TYPOLOGY AND CHRONOLOGY1952 La quatrieme campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Naplouse. Revue biblique 59: 551-583.Yadin, Y.1961 Hazor III-TV (Plates). Jerusalem: Hebrew University.Vaux, R. de and Steve, A. M.1947 La Premiere campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Naplouse. Revue biblique 54: 394-433.1948 La seconde campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Farcah, pres Naplouse. Revue biblique 55: 544-580.Yassine, Kh.1988 Archaeology o f Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman: Department of Archaeology, University of Jordan.Zertal, A.1989 The Wedge-shaped Decorated Bowl and the Origin of the Samaritans. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 276:77-84.245CHAPTER 10The ObjectsElizabeth E. Platt University o f Dubuque Theological SeminaryIntroductionDuring the 1987 season, 914 objects were classified using registry numbers 601 to 1515 (all registration numbers in the text refer to this series). Functional categories included thefollowing: food preparation (loaf-shaped grinders, querns, handgrinders, grinders, mortars, pestles, whetstones, millstones, stone bowls, and a m anger); m ilitary activities (ballistic missiles/slingstones, arrowheads, a javelin point, a spearpoint, a sword blade, and maceheads); metal tools; coins; gaming pieces; stone weights; miscellaneous stone objects; worked bone; ceramic pieces; figurine fragments; cosmetic tools(mortars, palettes, and rods); and jewelry (fibulae,rings, an earring, bangles, beads, buttons, seals, and pendants). Included in the registered numbers, but not in this report, were objects used in textile manufacture. Dorothy Irvin will discuss the spindle whorls, spindles, needles, spatulae, and loom weights in a report to be published later.The registration numbers mentioned in the text include the sequential registration numberfollowed by a slash and the full locus identification number (a capital letter for the Field, the four-digit Square number followed by a colon, and the Locus number).Food PreparationLoaf-shaped grinders. Outstanding among thestone objects for food preparation were 140 "loafshaped" millstones for grinding grain by hand. They Were found virtually in all excavation areas and were an indication of domestic use. A few whole examples were found, but most were fragments, often broken in half. The large majority were of basalt, fine grained or vesicular, though a few were made of limestone.The typical size of a complete millstone was ca. 26.50 cm long by ca. 13.00 cm wide. The two ends were rounded, making an elongated oval shape. The underside (where the grinding took place) was flat, while die back rose in a gentle curve, so two hands could grip it efficiently. Khair Yassine of the University of Jordan has commented that every major site in Jordan has them, but few are catalogued, drawn, or kept (personal conversation, 5 February 1989).The top view of a complete millstone (as a user would see it) is shown in fig. 10.1 (no. 1118/A 7K60:12), while fig. 10.2 (no. 767/F 6L99:2) shows a typical fragment. Both of these are fine-grained basalt. A fragment of more vesicular basalt (no. I l l ID 6K07:2), illustrated in fig. 10.3, shows the flat grinding side worn from use. An especially large example, which geologist D. Schnurrenberger called "dolomite with worm traces from fossils" (personal communication, 25 July 1987), is pictured in fig. 10.4 (no. 1225/A 7K60.16), and the example in fig. 10.5 (no.246THE OBJECTSFig. 10.2. Millstone fragment no. 767/F 6L99:2. Fig. 10.5. Limestone millstone fragment no. 1120/A 7K60:12.Fig. 10.3. Vesicular basalt millstone no. 777/D 6K07:2.1120/A 7K60:12) is a limestone fragment. The fragment in fig. 10.6 (no. 890/A 7K61:9) appears to be from a millstone slightly longer than usual.Domestic occupation is reflected by other objects from the same locus as this last millstone fragment (Field A, 7K61:9), including two handgrinders (nos. 940 and 1423), a pestle (no. 958), two grinders (no. 956 and no. 1420), a figurine fragment (no. 924), and three metal fragments (no. 1386). The earth layer in which they were found was located in Room 11 of the Field A structure and contained pottery dating toFig. 10.6. Millstone fragment no. 890/A 7K61:9.the Late Iron II and Early Persian periods (see Lawlor, chapter 3, above). Also in the same layer were five ballistic missiles; their number and location near the city perimeter suggested military activity.Querns. Often found in the same loci as loafshaped grinders, querns (lower hand millstones) were made of basalt with both surfaces flat as in fig. 10.7 (no. 961/A 7K70:9). Fifty-fourfragments were identified as querns.Handgrinders. Sixty-eight basalt objects were designated "handgrinders." These objects typically247THE OBJECTSIFig. 10.7. Quern no. 961/A 7K70:9.measured between 5.00 and 7.00 cm at their largest extent, had one flat surface, and were shaped to be held comfortably in one hand. Two examples are illustrated in fig. 10.8 (no. 829/A 7K71:1) and fig. 10.9 (no. 984/A 7K60:1).Fig. 10.8. Handgrinder no. 829/A 7K71:1.B i i i i i r v t iFig. 10.9. Handgrinder no. 984/A 7K60:1.Grinders. Twenty-four stone objects or fragments were designated "grinders," and were typically made of basalt. See fig. 10.10 (no. 679/A 7K60:1) for an example.Fig. 10.10. Grinder no. 679/A 7K60:1.Mortars. Fifty-eight whole and fragmentary mortars were found, mostly made of limestone. The following mortars display the types and sizes: no. 772/F 7L09:2, ca. 27.50 cm (fig. 10.11); no. 944/B 7K80:3, ca. 16.00 cm (fig. 10.12); no. 965/B 7K80:3, ca. 16.00 cm (fig. 10.13); no. 1232/D 5K97:17, ca. 20.00 cm (fig. 10.14). Some, especially no. 1232, may have been used for door sockets. Compare the example, ca. 8.00 cm in diameter, from Megiddo Str. I, pi. 107:7, No. M3260 (Lamon and Shipton, 1939).Fig. 10.11. Mortar no. 772/A 7L09:2, ca. 27.50 cm.Fig. 10.12. Mortar fragment no. 944/B 7K80:3, ca. 16.00 cm.248THE OBJECTSFig. 10.13. Mortar no. 965/B 7K80:3, ca. 16.00 cm.Fig. 10.14. Mortar no. 1232/D 5K97:17, ca. 20.00 cm. Possibly reused for a door socket.Pestles. Pestles, generally smaller than handgrinders, were used with mortars in the preparation of cosmetics and medical products, as well as other small compounds. They could be held with the fingers and thumb around the curved back so the flat side could be used for grinding. Sixty-eight whole and fragmentary examples were found, mostly of basalt. Sizes ranged from large versions, measuring ca. 8.10 cm from "dome" to flat surface (figs. 10.15 and 10.16 [both no. 914/B 7K81:10]), to small ones measuring only ca. 3.14 cm (figs. 10.17 and 10.18 [both no. 1211/B 7K80:3]).Fig. 10.15. Large pestle no. 914/B 7K81:10, ca. 8.10 cm high (side view).Fig. 10.16. Large pestle no. 914/B 7K81:10, ca. 8.10 cm high (end view).Fig. 10.17. Small pestle no. 1211/B 7K80:3, ca. 3.14 cm high (side view).[5 cmFig. 10.18. Small pestle no. 1211/B 7K80:3, ca. 3.14 cm high (top view).Whetstones. Fourteen examples of sandstone whetstones were found. They were used for sharpening metal implements. For example, see no. 830/A 7K60:2 as shown in figs. 10.19 and 10.20.Millstones. Basalt millstone fragments included no. 891/B 7K80:3 (ca. 30.00 cm long, including a handle), no. 1087/B 7K80:3, no. 1244/Farm 4:1, and no. 1260/Farm 34,2:6.249THE OBJECTSiFig. 10.19. Whetstone no. 830/A 7K60:2 (top view).Fig. 10.20. Whetstone no. 830/A 7K60:2 (side view).Stone Bowls. Twenty-one basalt fragments were from stone bowls, some copying pottery forms. Note particularly fig. 10.21 (no. 964/F 6L98:1), a rim, and fig. 10.22 (no. 1265/A 7K71:1), a ring base.Fig. 10.21. Stone bowl rim fragment no. 964/F 6L98:1.Manger. Manger fragment no. 642/D 5K96:7 was made of slightly sulfiirous limestone. It was ca. 15.00 cm long (fig. 10.23).iFig. 10.22. Stone bowl ring base fragment no. 1265/A 7K71:1.Fig. 10.23. Manger fragment no. 642/D 5K96:7, ca. 15.00 cm long.Military ActivitiesBallistic missiles/slingstones. Eighty-nine whole, chipped, or fragmented ballistic missiles (slingstones), many of which were made from chert nodules found in limestone, were registered from all Fields, especially Field A. They can be found in virtually every Jordanian excavation particularly from the Late Bronze period on. Although primarily a military weapon, many contend that they were also used as "pounder" tools. Khair Yassine cautions that this was probably a minor use, because chert is brittle and breaks under pressure (personal communication, 5 February 1989).A typical example of a ballistic missile (diameter measuring ca. 6.16 cm) is shown in fig.10.24 (no. 761/F 7L09:2). The photo shows the limestone outer layer and the chipped chert area. With its noticeable flat side (facing away from the camera), some may suggest this points to its secondary use as a pounder.Arrowheads. The best known military weapon of antiquity is the bronze or iron arrowhead. Of the eight items found in 1987, four were made of250THE OBJECTSFig. 10.24. Ballistic missile no. 761/F 7L09:2, ca. 6.16 cm in diameter. «r•IMfoil Esfel 1 I I 1 l IFig. 10.27. Bronze javelin point with rivets no. 801/A 7K61:9.bronze and trilobate in form (no. 934/A 7K70:10; no. 989/Farm. 1:7; no. 1074/F 6L98:3 [figs.10.25 and 10.26]; and no. 1354/F 7L08:14). One arrowhead was bronze, but flat in shape (no. 709/B 7J88:1), and two were iron (no. 1294/B 7K81:20 and no. 1345/B 7K80:29).Spearpoint. The iron spearpoint, no. 1276/F 7L08.28, was from the pelvic cavity of a male skeleton, age ca. 35 years. It came from an Ottoman cyst burial and probably was the cause of death (see Low, chapter 8, above; esp. figs. 8.28- 29). It measured ca. 5.60 cm in length.Sword blade. A small bronze sword blade or dagger fragment (no. 802/A 7K70:2) shown in fig. 10.28 had a central rib.Fig. 10.25. Bronze trilobate arrowhead no. 1074/F 61.98:3 (side view).Fig. 10.26. Bronze trilobate arrowhead no. 1074/F 6L98:3 (end view).Javelin points. Both examples of javelin points were large, bronze arrowheads (no. 1368/F 6L89:2; no. 801/A 7K61:9 [fig. 10.27]). The latter had rivets.Fig. 10.2$. Bronze sword blade or dagger fragment no. 802/A 7K70:2 with central rib.Maceheads. Two basalt maceheads were found (no. 790/Farm. 3:5 [fig. 10.29] and no. 1025/B 7J86:3). A third example, no. 1372/F 6L98:23, was made of a creamy-white stone elegantly chipped at its smaller end, and may have been a ceremonial macehead (figs. 10.30 and 10.31). Although our example comes from an Early Persian context an Early Bronze alabaster macehead from Jericho is similar (Kenyon 1960: fig. 66:4). Here, the hole was bored from the narrow base to die rounded head. Note also the fine white limestone examples from LB II Gezer (Dever et al. 1974: pi. 39:5 and 8).251THE OBJECTSi[5 ciiiFig. 10.29. Basalt macehead fragment no. 790/Farm. 3.5.L ........ _ .......... - ....Fig. 10.32. Iron nail no. 633/Farm. 3:1.Fig. 10.30. Elegantly-chipped macehead no. 1372/F 6L98:23 (side view).Fig. 10.31. Elegantly-chipped macehead no. 1372/F 6L98:23 (top view).Metal ToolsNails. Two iron nails found at Rujm Selim are pictured in fig. 10.32 (no. 633/Farm. 3:1) and fig. 10.33 (no. 1197/Farm. 2:5), while a bronze head fragment came from topsoil on the tell (no. 702/F 6L99:1). Parallels apparently come from the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine periods (cf. Tel Hesban).Other tools. A variety of additional metal tools were recovered. A modern bronze knife (no.Fig. 10.33. Iron nail no. 1197/Farm. 2:5.686/F 7L09:2) was found in topsoil. A small bronze weight or bullet was found in Field B (no. 705/B 7J86:2). A small bronze wire loop came from Field B (no. 1272/B 7J86:3). The regional survey collected one tent pole (no. 1511/Sur. 16). There were twenty-nine metal fragments which could not be identified; one seemed to be iron slag (no. 1472/Farm. 2:6).CoinsThe six bronze coins from this season are listed here, but will be treated in detail elsewhere (no. 794/Farm. 1:11; no. 1050/F 6L98:3; no. 923/Farm. 1:3; no. 1077/F 6L98:3; no. 988/F 7L08:8; and no. 1271/Farm. 3:15). The last was minted under Ptolemy II Philadelphus (see Miller, chapter 20, below).Gaming PiecesEleven gaming pieces varied in size between ca. 1.0 cm and 4.0 cm. Some were polished ovoid pebbles, some had a flat side, and some were coin-shaped. They were of pottery, sandstone, hematite, and other stone. These pieces were numbered as follows: no. 624/A 7K61:1, no.252THE OBJECTS704/A 7K70:2, no. 838/Farm. 3:4, no. 986/B 7K80:3, no. 1007/F 7L08:2, no. 1158/B 7K80:3, no. 1163/B 7J86:3, no. 1196/D 6K07:16, no. 1200/F 7L08/23, and no. 1258/Farm. 3:15. Note the drilled depressions on no. 631/F 7L09:1 (fig. 10.34) which appear on two sides. Three smaller (ca. 1.00 cm), but similar spherical objects (no. 687/A 7K71:1, no. 696/A 7K71:1, and no. 782/B 7K81:5) were probably from rattles.Fig. 10.34. Drilled gaming piece no. 631/F 7L09:1.Stone WeightsTwenty-four stone weights could be divided into two types: a flat variety shaped like a donut, and a more spherical one. The central feature was a perforation for a rope tie. A flat weight made of limestone (no. 1340/F 6L98:36) is shown in fig. 10.35; in fig. 10.36 is pictured an example of a weight made from a well-polished, semi-precious, reddish-black stone (no. 1202/A 7K60:16); a third example (not illustrated) may have been a macehead (no. 1506/D 5K96:14).Fig. 10.35. Flat limestone weight no. 1340/F 6L98:36.Of special note is the sandstone weight in fig. 10.37 (no. 1147/B 7K80:3). It was oblong, ca.12.00 cm long, and had a groove carved around it lengthwise, probably for a rope.Fig. 10.36. Well-polished stone weight no. 1202/A 7L60:16.Fig. 10.37. Sandstone weight no. 1147/B 7K80:3.Miscellaneous Stone ObjectsMiscellaneous stone objects included a limestone piece used as pumice (no. 731/F 7L08:2); a corner fragment of a sandstone box (no. 800/A 7K70:7); a possible jar stopper with a back "rib" (no. 939/A 7K60:2); a cannonball (no. 972/Survey); a fine basalt triangular stone shaped like a pestle (no. 976/Farm. 1:1); a flat, circular stone, ca. 9.50 cm in diameter (no. 980/D 5K97:8); a modern marble vase fragment (no. 1069/Sur. 11); a sawed stone fragment (no. 1154/A 7K71:6); a trianguloid false weight (no. 1160/A 7K71:6); a sandstone stopper (no. 1330/D 6K07:27); and a limestone fragment with an incised cross (no. 1339/D 6K06:32 [fig. 10.38]). Sixteen worked-stone fragments were also registered.Worked BoneOne fragment of an etched bone was found (no. 775/F 7L08:2). A carved bone finial fragment (no. 1484/A 7K60:7) had rings and cross-hatchings (figs. 10.39 and 10.40). Objects similar in size and with the same cross-hatched panel and rings, but with the addition of a panel253THE OBJECTSFig. 10.38. Limestone fragment with incised cross no. 1339/D 6K06:32.[33 E53 P ES~I CDFig. 10.39. Carved bone finial fragment no. 1484/A 7K60:7 (side view).r8Fig. 10.40. Carved bone finial fragment no. 1484/A 7K60:7 (end view).with diagonal lines, were found in Early Bronze strata at Ai (Marquet-Krause 1949: pi. 78:2350, pi. 54:2350; Callaway 1972: 315 and fig. 72:5, where it is called a "fashioned handle"). A similar form, again called a handle, was also found at Lachish (Tufnell 1953: pi. 63:14, no. 6382).A bone pin fragment ca. 2.66 cm long (no. 1274/D 6K07:24) resembled the head of a pin with ribbing. A bone circle (no. 695/A 7K71:1), could have been used as a bead (fig. 10.41). AlsoFig. 10.41. Bone circle no. 695/A 7K71:1, possible bead.recovered was an antler worked to be used as an awl (no. 1457/D 5K97:34).Ceramic PiecesThe following list of ceramic objects includes those made of reused potsherds as well as those made originally as objects. A sieve fragment (no. 604/F 6L99:1) was ca. 5.00 x 4:00 cm. A possible toy wheel (no. 713/B 7K81:2) was made from a reused Late Bronze pottery pedestal base (fig. 10.42). It measured ca. 5.25 cm in diameter by ca. 2.80 cm thick, but it should be noted that one of the breaks was fresh.Fig. 10.42. Possible toy wheel no. 713/B 7K81:2, from a reused pottery base.Other objects included a possible toy cartwheel fragment (no. 755/F 6L99:2), ca. 8.25 cm in diameter; a flue fragment (no. 781/B 7K81:5), ca. 7.10 cm long; a fresco fragment (no. 992/F 7L08:8), ca. 5.20 cm long; two plaque fragments: no. 993/F 7L08:5, ca. 8.45 cm wide, and no. 1203/F 6L98:23, ca. 4.13 cm wide (possibly depicting human legs); a perforated weight (no. 1293/A-7K60:17), 6.50 cm long; a floor tile (no. 1352/Farm. 3:19), ca. 5.36 x 4.70 cm; two worn and illegible ostraca: no. 1357/F 7L08:28 (fig. 10.43) and no. 1461/F 6L98:29 (not illustrated); a254THE OBJECTSFig. 10.43. Illegible ostracon no. 1357/F 7L08:28.perforated fragment (no. 1452/F 7L08), ca. 1.90 cm in diameter; and a blue, Iron Age glass fragment with yellow and white stripes (no. 1051/B 7K80:3), ca. 2.00 cm wide.*Figurine FragmentsCeramic figurine fragments came from every field of excavation and numbered thirty-one pieces. They included both human and zoomorphic types. Because a more detailed study is being prepared, we present here only a list of the registration numbers: nos. 601, 602, 606, 607, 608, 634, 683, 698, 780, 783, 832, 835, 859, 924, 1031, 1034, 1052, 1068, 1170, 1178, 1181, 1205, 1216, 1233, 1253, 1256, 1287, 1342, 1344, 1376, and 1485.Cosmetic ToolsMortars. A fragment from a limestone cosmetic mortar (no. 759/F 7L09:2) was ca.10.50 cm in diameter, while a complete example (no. 789/D 5K96:2) was ca. 13.50 cm in diameter.Cosmetic palettes. A fragment of a cosmetic palette made of a creamy stone, carried incised decoration (no. 701/F 6L98:1 [fig. 10.44]) similar to a Late Iron II/Early Persian limestone palette from Tell el-Mazar with an incised ring-and-dot guilloche plus other geometric designs (Yassine 1984: fig. 56:180). Other parallels. come from Megiddo in Stratum I (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pi. 108:1, No. M2048), Stratum III (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pi. 109:13, No. M4980; pi. 111:29, No. M4833) and Samaria Period V (Kenyon 1957: fig. 116:1). Most parallels seem to date between 700 and 500 B.C. Other palettes included a basalt fragment (no. 1183/A 7K70:7 [fig. 10.45)); two limestone fragments: no. 1320/B 7K80:3 (ca. 9.00 cm in diameter), and no.Fig. 10.44. Cosmetic palette fragment no. 701/F 6L98:1.Fig. 10.45. Basalt palette fragment no. 1183/A 7K70:7.Fig. 10.46. Limestone palette no. 1403/F 6L98:29.1504/D 6K06:8 (ca. 7.50 cm in diameter); a ceramic fragment (no. 1347/F 6L99:1), ca. 7.00 cm wide; and a complete limestone example (no. 1403/F 6L98:29 [fig. 10.46]), ca. 11.00 cm in diameter.Metal rods. Metal cosmetic applicatorscomprised two bronze fragments: no. 776/F 7L09.-33 (fig. 10:47) and no. 1219/A 7K60:9, and an iron kohl stick' fragment (no. 791/Farm. 1:11).255THE OBJECTSFig. 10.47. Bronze cosmetic applicator fragment no. 776/F 7L09:33.JewelryFibulae. Bronze fibulae were relatively frequent finds. The fragment shown in figs. 10.48 and 10.49 (no. 651/A 7K60:1) measured ca. 6.30 cm across the bow at the ends of the arms (where the pin would be). It belongs to Stronach’s Type III4 "triangular fibulae with grooved rings on each arm," typically found at Syro-Palestinian sites from 800 B.C. to the first century A.D. (Stronach 1959), with most examples dated between the seventh and fourth centuries B.C.Fig. 10.48. Bronze fibula fragment no. 651/A 7K60:1 (side view).Fig. 10.49. Bronze fibula fragment no. 651/A 7K60:1 (edge view).A second fragment, no. 741/F 6L99:2 (fig. 10:50), also belonged to Type III4, but it was much larger, measuring ca. 9.12 cm across the bow at the ends of the arms. A similar example was found in an Ammonite Tomb containing materials from the eighth to the fourth centuries B.C. located near the Amra Forum Hotel (Hadidi 1987: fig. 5:1). A parallel with pin intact, was unearthed at Tell el-Mazar (Yassine 1984: fig. 55:155), while yet another was found in the 1984 season at Tell el-cUmeiri (Platt 1989: 357, no. 73). Other fibulae included a possible pin fragment (no. 792/Farm. 1:11), and three pins with springs: no. 990/F 6L99:4 (fig. 10.51), no. 1257/Farm. 3:15 (fig. 10.52), and no. 1508/E 2:181.Fig. 10.50. Bronze fibula fragment no. 741/A 6L99:2, ca. 9.12 cm across the bow at arms’ ends.Fig. 10.51. Fibula pin with spring no. 990/F 6L99:4.Rings. The two basic types of bronze finger rings, those with two ends (sometimes tapering) and those with no ends (closed), are present in many periods in Palestine. A small example with two ends from Rujm Selim is shown in fig. 10.53 (no. 841/Farm. 1:1). One with no ends (no. 1475/ Farm. 2:8) also came from Rujm Selim (fig. 10.54). Other bronze rings included one with a bezel (no. 653/A 7K71:1 [figs. 10.55 and 10.56]) and no. 797/A 7K71:1 (fig. 10.57). Two bone.256THE OBJECTSFig. 10.52. Fibula pin with spring no. 1257/Farm. 3:15.Fig. 10.53. Bronze finger ring with two ends no. 841/Farm. 1:1.5 cmFig. 10.54. Bronze ring with no ends no. 1475/Farm. 2:8.Fig. 10.55. Bronze ring with bezel no. 653/A 7K71:1 (side view).Fig. 10.56. Bronze ring with bezel no. 653/A 7K71:1 (top view).Fig. 10.57. Bronze ring no. 797/A 7K71:1.5 cmFig. 10.58. Bone ring fragment no. 1081/A 7K71:9 (side view).Fig. 10.59. Bone fragment no. 1081/A 7K71:9 (end view).257THE OBJECTSring fragments included nos. 1081/A 7K71:9 (figs. 10.58 and 10.59) and 1275/Farm. 2:14. Tell el- Mazar produced comparable examples from Late Iron II/Early Persian tombs (Yassine 1984: fig. 55:136-152).Earring. The lone earring from this season (no. 1076/A 7K71:6) was a complete bronze lunate ca. 2.49 cm long and a wire width of ca 0.22 cm (fig. 10.60). The lunate was a very popular earring over a long period of time. Parallels from recent finds include two EB IV examples from Beth Shan (Oren 1973: 220, Tomb 66 A-C and Tomb 7, No. 891), and two Iron I items from Izbet Sartah (Finklestein 1986: 136 and fig. 39:6, registration no. 30040; and p. 189 and pi. 11.3:6). A silver example comes from a Late Iron II/Early Persian child’s tomb at Tell el- Mazar (Yassine 1984: fig. 55:130, Grave 34).Fig. 10.60. Bronze lunate earring no. 1076/A 7K71:6.Bangles. There were six glass bangles: one in black with twisted striations (no. 684/E 1:1 [figs. 10.61 and 10.62]); another had a triangular cross section and was made of green, orange, yellow, and black in a striped chevron pattern (no. 736/A 7K60:2 [figs. 10.63, 10.64, and 10.65]); a third had a black base and a green spot (no. 1063/E 2:4 [fig. 10.66]); a fourth had dark, twisted rod striations (no. 1185/Farm. 3:1 [figs. 10.67 and 10.68]); a fifth had a dark, twisted rod and light stripes (no. 1377/D 6K07:29 [figs. 10.69 and 10.70]); the sixth was plain black (no. 1459/Farm. 4:2). Such bangles are typical of the Roman and Islamic periods. One bronze fragment is shown in figs. 10.71 and 10.72 (no. 626/A 7K70:1). All seven bangle fragments had cross-section diameters of ca. 0.85 cm.Beads. The beads were of clay, bone, glass, amber, and semi-precious stones (notably carnelian). Their shapes were classified in Beck’s categories (Beck 1927). The only clay bead (no. 1217/B 7J86:3) was globular in shape and ca.2.00 cm in diameter with a perforation ca. 2.00 cm long (figs. 10.73 and 10.74). Two bone beadsRg. 10.61. Glass bangle no. 684/E 1:1 (upper right), with black, twisted striations.& •Fig. 10.62. Glass bangle no. 684/E 1:1 (right; end view).Fig. 10.63. Glass bangle no. 736/A 7K60:2, with striped, chevron pattern (top view).Fig. 10.64. Glass bangle no. 736/A 7K60:2 (end view).258THE OBJECTSFig. 10.65. Glass bangle no. 736/A 7K60:2 (bottom view). Fig. 10.69. Glass bangle no. 1377/D 6K07:29 (top view).Fig. 10.67. Glass bangle no. 1185/Farm. 3:1 (side and end views).Fig. 10.68. Glass bangle no. 1185/Farm. 3:1 (angled end view).Fig. 10.71. Bronze bangle fragment no. 626/A 7K70:1 (top view).Fig. 10.72. Bronze bangle no. 626/A 7K70:1 (edge view).259THE OBJECTSFig. 10.73. Clay bead no. 1217/B 7J86:3 (end view).Fig. 10.74. Clay bead no. 1217/B 7J86:3 (side view).Fig. 10.75. Bone bead no. 933/A 7K61:10 (top view).Fig. 10.76. Bone bead no. 933/A 7K61:10 (edge view).were disk-shaped: the first was ca. 0.81 cm in diameter with a perforation ca. 0.15 cm indiameter (no. 933/A 7K61:10 [figs. 10.75 and 10.76]) and the second was ca. 0.74 cm indiameter with a perforation ca. 0.20 cm indiameter (no. 1249/B 7J86:3 [figs. 10.77 and 10.78]). One glass bead was globular in shape and ca. 0.55 cm in diameter with a perforation ca. 0.48 cm long (no. 610/F 6L98:1). One globular amber (yellowish) bead was ca. 1.16 cm indiameter with a perforation ca. 0.82 cm long (no. 798/B 7K81:5 [fig. 10.79]). Carnelian beads included one that was disk-shaped and ca. 0.55 cm in diameter with a perforation ca. 0.24 cm long (no. 611/A 7K70:1 [figs. 10.80 and 10.81]). Another carnelian bead was biconical and poorly made with a diameter of ca. 0.79 cm and a perforation ca. 0.44 cm long (no. 654/D 5K96:1 [figs. 10.82 and 10.83]). A third carnelian bead was globular, ca. 1.00 cm in diameter with a perforation ca. 0.64 cm long (no. 842/A 7K61:9 [fig. 10.84]). A globular white quartz bead was ca. 1.00 cm in diameter with a perforation ca. 0.50 cm long (no. 840/C 8L82:20 [fig. 10.85]). Finally, a spacer bead of unidentified gray stone with incised marks was ca. 2.49 cm long with a perforation ca. 0.99 cm long (no. 613/A 7K61:1 [figs. 10.86 and 10.87]).Fig. 10.77. Bone bead no. 1249/B 7J86:3 (top view).Fig. 10.78. Bone bead no. 1249/B 7J86:3 (edge view).Fig. 10.79. Globular amber bead no. 798/B 7K81:5.260THE OBJECTS! mFig. 10.80. Carnelian bead no. 611/A 7K70:1 (top view). Fig. 10.84. Carnelian bead no. 842/A 7K61:9 (top view).Fig. 10.81. Carnelian bead no. 611/A 7K70:1 (edge view). Fig. 10.85. White quartz bead no. 840/B 8L82:20 (top view).Fig. 10.82. Carnelian bead no. 654/D 5K96:1 (top view).Fig. 10.83. Carnelian bead no. 654/D 5K96:1 (side view).Fig. 10.86. Gray stone spacer bead no. 613/A 7K61.1 (side view).Fig. 10.87. Gray stone spacer bead no. 613/A 7K61:1 (end view).261THE OBJECTSFig. 10.88. Metal button no. 810/Farm 1:1.Parallels can be found at Beth Shemesh (carnelian, Grant 1929: 79, Tomb 2), Early Bronze Arad (carnelian, Amiran 1978: pis. 68:4, 69:6, Photo 118:10b), Persian Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pi. 90:1, 4, 9, etc.), Iron Age Lachish (Tufnell 1953: pis. 66, 67), and Late Iron II/Early Persian Tell el-Mazar (Yassine 1984: 111-131 and figs. 10-14).Buttons. Metal buttons included a fragment (no. 1191 A. 7K70:3) and one with a single hole (no. 810/Farm. 1:1 [fig. 10.88]). Both ceramic buttons had two holes (no. 825/D 6K07:5 [fig. 10.89] and no. 1342/B 7J86:4). The latter had a diameter of ca. 3.50 cm. Similar buttons were found at Gezer in the Northwest House (Dever et al. 1974: pi. 60:6, no. 1001, Str. 5 C/B) and at Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939: pi. 102:17, no. 932). They could also be toys (Van Beek 1989). A green glass button with a single hole was found by the survey in a robbed tomb east of the site (no. 1486/TS.006 [fig. 10.90]).Fig. 10.89. Ceramic button fragment no. 825/D 6K07:5.Scaraboids. Four scaraboids contained no decoration: the first was made of perforated faience (no. 652/A 7K71:7 [figs. 10.91 and 10.92]), the second was made of a purple stone with a perforation ca. 1.94 cm long (no. 740/F 6L98:2), the third was made of highly polishedFig. 10.90. Green glass button fragment no. 1486/TS.006.iFig. 10.91. Faience scaraboid no. 652/A 7K71:7 (end view).Fig. 10.92. Faience scaraboid no. 652/A 7K71:7 (side view).262THE OBJECTS5 cmFig. 10.93. Black chert scaraboid no. 918/Farm. 1:1 (top view). Fig. 10.96. Ceramic stamp seal no. 1359/B 7K80:3 (side view).5 cmFig. 10.94. Black chert scaraboid no. 918/Farm. 1:11 (end view). Fig. 10.97. Ceramic stamp seal no. 1359/B 7K80:3 (bottom view).Fig. 10.95. Cream-colored chert scaraboid no. 1078/B 7J86:3.black chert (no. 918/Farm. 1:11 [figs. 10.93 and10.94] ), and the fourth was of cream-colored chert with no perforation (no. 1078/B 7J86:3 [fig.10.95] ). A fifth scaraboid made of red limestone (no. 1509/F 7L08:39), contained an inscription reading "Belonging to Shimcaz" (see Herr, chapter 18, below).Seals. Ceramic stamp seals included one that was ca. 2.16 cm tall, ca. 1.50 cm in diameter at the base, incised in three registers, and chipped along the perforation (no. 650/F 6L99:1). A second was a perforated pendant with an incisedFig. 10.98. Sandstone stamp seal no. 1075/B 7J86:3 (side view).Fig. 10.99. Sandstone stamp seal no. 1075/B 7J86:3 (bottom view).263THE OBJECTSFig. 10.100. Sandstone stamp seal no. 1079/B 7J80:3 (side view).Fig. 10.102. Partially complete cylinder seal no. 1223/B 7K81:4 (side view).Fig. 10.103. Partially complete cylinder seal no. 1223/B 7K81:4 (end view).geometric design (no. 1359/B 7K80:3 [figs. 10.96 and 10.97]). Perforated sandstone stamp seals included one that was ca. 2.36 cm tall (no. 929/B 7K80:3), and two with incised designs: no. 1075/B 7J86:3 (figs. 10.98 and 10.99) and no. 1079/B 7K80:3 (figs. 10.100 and 10.101). A partially complete, perforated cylinder seal may have been discarded before a design could be engraved (no. 1223/B 7K81:4 [figs. 10.102 and10.103]).Fig. 10.104. Bronze pendant or weight no. 931/B 7K09:8.Fig. 10.105. Ceramic pendant no. 1162/B 7K81:5.Pendants. One bronze pendant or weight with a perforation in the top was ca. 2.64 cm tall (no. 931/F 7L09:8 [fig. 10.104]). Five other pendants were ceramic and all had holes near the top: the first was ca. 3.22 cm tall (no. 932/C 8L82:23), the second was ca. .3.00 cm tall (no. 991/A 7L61:11), the third was ca. 5.70 cm tall (no. 1002/D 6L07:4), the fourth was ca. 2.00 cm tall and had smooth edges (no. 1162/B 7K81:5 [fig. 10.105]), and the fifth was diamond shaped and stood ca. 3.71 cm tall (no. 1169/F 6L98:2).AcknowledgementsThe writer is pleased to acknowledge the many. insights of Khair Yassine generously provided while this paper was being written.264THE OBJECTSREFERENCESAmiran, R.1978 Early Arad, Vol. 1, First-Fifth Seasons o f Excavations, 1962-1966. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.Beck, H. C.1927 Classification and Nomenclature of Beads and Pendants. Pp. 1-76 in Archaeologica or Miscellaneous Tracts Relating to Antiquity, Vol. 27. London: Society of Antiquaries.1960 Excavations at Jericho, Vol. I, Tombs excavated in 1952-4. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.Lamon, R. S., and Shipton, G. M.1939 Megiddo I, Seasons o f 1925-34, Strata 1-TV. Chicago: University of Chicago.Marquet-Krause, J.1949 Les Fouilles de zAy (et-Tell). Paris: Librairie Orientalist Paul Geuthner.Callaway, J. A., and Ellinger, W. W.1972 The Early Bronze Age Sanctuary at Ai (et-Tell), No. 1. London: Bernard Quaritch.Dever, W. G., et al.1974 Gezer II: Report o f the 1967-70 Seasons in Fields I & II. Annual of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology II. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College -- Jewish Institute of Religion.Oren, E.1973 The Northern Cemetery o f Beth Shan. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Platt, E. E.1989 cUmeiri Objects. Pp. 355-366 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c XJmeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. B errien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Finklestein, I.1986 cIzbet Sartah: an Early Iron Age Site near Rosh Hacayin, Israel. BAR International Series 299. Oxford: Oxford University.Grant, E.1929 Beth Shemesh (Palestine). Haverford, PA: Biblical and Kindred Studies.Hadidi, A.1987 An Ammonite Tomb at Amman. Levant 19: 101-109.Stronach, D.1959 The Development of the Fibula in the Near East. Iraq 21: 181-206.Tufnell, O.1953 Lachish III, Tell ed-Duweir, The Iron Age, Plates. London: Oxford University.Van Beek, G. W.1989 The Buzz: A Simple Toy from Antiquity. Bulletin of the American Schools o f Oriental Research 275 : 53- 58.Kenyon, K. M.1957 The Objects from Samaria. London: Palestine Exploration Fund.Yassine, K.1984 Tell el-Mazar I, Cemetery A. Amman: University of Jordan.265CHAPTER 11An Introduction to the 1987 Tell e l-cUmeiri Hinterland Surveys and Excavations0ystein S. LaBianca Andrews UniversityIntroductionThe Madaba Plains Project Hinterland Survey was organized in 1984 by the directors of the Madaba Plains Project in cooperation with the Department of Antiquities of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Since the objectives of the 1987 season grew directly out of die first season of fieldwork in 1984, a brief review of that season’s objectives and accomplishments is in order.Recapitulation of the 1984 SeasonThe objectives of the. survey in 1984 were to test and refine the sedentarization-nomadization hypothesis which represented the end product of anthropological investigations at Hesban and vicinity (LaBianca 1984; 1989; 1990). In brief, this hypothesis states that since the beginnings of sedentary life on the Madaba Plains, there have been periods when the momentum of social change has been in the direction of adopting more sedentary ways, and conversely, there have been periods when this momentum has been in the direction of adopting more nomadic ways. Over the long term, this has resulted in an oscillating pattern of human occupation in the project area.Survey research in the Madaba Plains Project area provided an opportunity to examine thishypothesis using a methodology explicitly concerned with the study of such long-term changes, namely the food system methodology. This methodology calls for intense scrutiny of tells and their agricultural hinterlands to locate finds which can provide clues to changes over time in environmental, settlement, landuse, operational and dietary conditions. ("Operational conditions" are defined as facilities which are used for sheltering people and animals, for processing or storing food, for collecting and storing water, for marketing and transporting agricultural inputs and outputs, and so on.)The work of the survey in 1984 was carried out by four separate teams, each with a specific assignment, but all helping each other whenever and wherever it was called for. One team, headed by Randall W. Younker (then associated with the University of Arizona), focused on investigations of present and past environmental conditions through studying successional changes in various plant communities within the project area. A second team, headed by Robert G. Boling (McCormick Theological Seminary), concentrated on locating sites such as ruins of farmsteads, villages and towns, which could provide information about ancient settlement conditions.A third team, headed by Jon A. Cole (Walla266AN INTRODUCTION TO THE 1987 HINTERLAND SURVEYS AND EXCAVATIONSWalla College), initiated a survey of forty randomly selected 200 x 200 m squares to record topographical features of the land, how the land is being presently utilized; and to note the occurrence within each square of any cupholes, cisterns, reservoirs, diversion dams, terraces, winepresses, threshing floors, roads, etc., which could provide clues to changes over time in operational and landuse conditions. Finally, a fourth team, headed by the author, was concerned with gathering ethnoarchaeological information pertinent to understanding how sedentarization and nomadization happens on the local level today.Among the highlights of the first season’s finds were the following: First, when the occupational history of the fifty-five new sites which the survey recorded were ascertained with the aid of pottery readings, it was found to be almost identical to that recorded by the Hesban survey. In other words, using an independent set of data, the "on-again/off-again" pattern of occupation which had been documented for the Hesban region was replicated in the Madaba Plains Project area.Second, of the fifty-five new sites discovered, thirty-two were judged to be ruins of farmsteads. These tended to be located on slopes overlooking fertile agricultural valleys. Most of them were dated to the Iron and Roman/Byzantine periods. A few had sherds from the Ayyubid/Mamluk period. The most outstanding feature of these sites was the presence of what appeared to be the ruins of small towers, perhaps agricultural watchtowers. In some instances, these were associated with the remains of rectangular buildings, perimeter walls, cisterns, winepresses, caves and/or tombs.Third, of the fifty-five new sites, twelve were judged to be the remains of sections of Roman roads. In most cases these consisted of curbstones or road markers. At least one of these roads passed by Tell el-cUmeiri.Fourth, of the fifty-five new sites, fifteen were tombs or portions of cemeteries. One of these cemeteries was located on the northern slope of Tell el-cUmeiri (East). Its tombs were from the Roman and Byzantine periods.Fifth, in the wadi which runs past Tell el- cUmeiri on the west a series of terraces were noted. These terraces were supplied with water from retention dams located further up the wadi. Many other such terraces and retention dams were noted in other locations throughout the project area. Although sherds were few and badly worn, those which could be identified with any certainty came from the Iron II and Roman-Byzantine periods.Sixth, among the many serendipitous finds resulting from the random square survey was aPalaeolithic site (Site 53) which produced a large quantity of Acheulian handaxes (LPL) and Lavalloise-Mousterian tools (MPL). A variety of Neolithic and Chalcolithic artifacts were also found. According to Gary Rollefson, who visited the site, this may be the oldest and most impressive Palaeolithic site in Jordan.The 1987 SeasonThe second season of fieldwork by the Tell el- cUmeiri Hinterland Survey was completed between June 18 and August 6, 1987. As in 1984, there were several different teams working simultaneously. The specific objectives of each of these were more focused in 1987, however. Thus, the discovery in 1984 of thirty-two sites judged to be the remains of ancient "farmsteads" led to the organization in 1987 of two teams with the objective of studying those sites.The permanent site survey, headed by Randall W. Younker (now of Andrews University), was organized specifically in order to search for more of these farmsteads and to attempt a classification of them. A hinterland excavation team, headed by Lorita E. Hubbard (then of Andrews University), was organized with the specific objective of excavating one of these farmsteads. Also supervised by Younker was Howard P. Krug (then of Andrews University), whose assignment was to inventory the Roman cemetery at Tell el-cUmeiri (East).Research on environmental and landuse conditions were also continued in 1987, this time under the umbrella of the landuse survey team. It was headed by Jon A. Cole in collaboration with Gary L. Christopherson (University of Arizona) and Douglas W. Schnurrenberger (University of Maryland, Munich Campus). While continuing to carry out the random square survey begun in 1984, for several reasons this team concentrated its inquiries in the Wadi el-Bisharat which is located about 2.00 km to the west of Tell el- cUmeiri. The Wadi el-Bisharat was relatively undisturbed by modern settlement activity. Also, it contained an unusual concentration of clearly visible ancient terraces, retention dams, embankments, winepresses, water tanks, and ruins of agricultural installations and settlements.While the establishment of functional hinterland excavation teams, as well as permanent settlement and landuse surveys represented progress toward implementing research on how the hinterland was exploited during the more heavily occupied centuries, very little progress had thus far been made in coming to grips with the lightly occupied settlement interludes which came between these centuries. In other words, we were267AN INTRODUCTION TO THE 1987 HINTERLAND SURVEYS AND EXCAVATIONSdoing better at tracing sedentarization than nomadization. It was in order to remedy this situation, that the seasonal settlement survey was initiated during the 1987 season. This team, headed by the author, had as its initial objective the analysis of settlement and landuse strategies within the project area during the lightly occupied Ottoman centuries. His principal collaborators were Dorothy Irvin (Durham, N.C.) and Nazmiyeh Rida (Department of Antiquities, Jordan).The results of the 1987 field season include the following. First, the permanent site survey succeeded in differentiating between five different types of sites: kilns, field shelters, small agricultural complexes, large agricultural complexes, and forts. It also succeeded in completing an inventory of the tombs in the cemetery in Tell el-cUmeiri (East). Chapter 12 (Randall W. Younker) provides brief descriptions of all new sites identified during the 1987 season. Chapter 13 (also by Younker), chapter 14 (Gary L. Christopherson), and chapter 16 (Howard P. Krug) represent separate reports dealing specifically with the agricultural complexes, the kilns, and the necropolis respectively.Second, excavations which shed additional light on the occupation in this region during the Hellenistic period were conducted at Rujm Selim (Site 34) by the hinterland excavation team. A full report of those excavations will follow in subsequent Madaba Plains Project publications.Third, to the forty random squares studied in 1984, the landuse survey team added another twenty. This increases further the statistical database from which estimates of changes inlanduse and operational facilities can be calculated within the project area. From their fieldwork in Wadi el-Bisharat, the landuse survey was able to identify many of the key features of the high intensity food production regime which prevailed in the project area during Roman/Byzantine times. The geophysical aspects of this inquiry are presented in chapter 17 (Douglas W. Schnurrenberger). The results of the random square survey will be presented in a forthcoming Madaba Plains Project report.Fourth, as reported by the author in chapter 15, the major accomplishment of the seasonal site survey was the discovery of several clusters of caves which had been occupied by inhabitants of the project area during the Ottoman period. The most impressive of these is the one on Tell el - cUmeiri (North). Through interviews with villagers from el-Buneiyat el Janubiyah, this team learned that these clusters of caves actually belonged to a type of village about which very little is known in the anthropological or historical writings about Jordan, namely the seasonally occupied "cave village."Future ProspectsAt least two more seasons will be needed to complete the work of the hinterland survey. In particular, more needs to be done to consolidate the gains of these first two seasons. This will involve more indepth studies of the various types of farmsteads and seasonal settlements in their temporal and environmental context. More emphasis on limited excavations at some of these hinterland sites will also be necessary.REFERENCESLaBianca, 0 . S.1984 O bjective, P rocedures and Findings of Ethnoarchaeological Research in the Vicinity of Hesban in Jordan. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities Jordan 28:269-482.1989 Introduction to the el-cUmeiri Hinterland Survey.Pp. 23-29 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.1990 Sedentarization and Nomadization: Food System Cycles at Hesban and Vicinity in Transjordan. Hesban 1. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology/Andrews University.268CHAPTER 12The Judgment SurveyRandall W. Younker Andrews UniversityIntroductionIn this chapter we present a descriptive summary of the sites studied in the judgment survey. For a discussion of objectives and procedures see chapter 11. For pottery plates and descriptions see figs 12:120-123, below; the analysis is presented in chapter 9, above. Further analysis of various features described here is provided in chapters 13 and 14. The map in fig. 12.2 identifies the location of the sites which were surveyed during the 1987 season.by Gary L. Christopherson [see chapter 14 of this volume]), terraces, a rectilinear structure of uncertain purpose, bedrock cupholes, and approximately six stone piles. Several agricultural embankments and dams were noted on the floor of the wadi. A collapsed dolmen was also noted on the northern slope to the west of the two kilns.Judgment Survey SitesSite 56. Wadi el-Bisharat. 1418.2323. Examined June 19, 1987. Pottery: seven sherds, two diagnostic (Byzantine); fig. 12. 122:21-22 .This site was actually composed of a number of features scattered on the northern slope of Wadi el- Bisharat (fig. 12.1). Note that this wadi is also (mistakenly) known as the Wadi Lipshara (Geraty et al. 1990a; 1990b). Wadi el-Bisharat is parallel to, and north of, Wadi el- Hajal. These features included two kilns (one of which was excavated Fig. 12.1. Site 56: General view.269THE JUDGMENT SURVEY229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 2401 km 1:50,00010 m interval contoursFig. 12.2. 1987 Tell el-cUmeiri survey Sites 56-115 (within a ca. 5.00 km radius of the tell).270THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 57. Hesban Site 142 (Al-Fadl). 1412.2321. Examined June 26, and July 17, 1987. Pottery: 54 sherds, 34 diagnostic (Ayyubid/ Mamluk dominant; Byzantine); fig. 12.122:23-31.This site, situated on a high hill (with an elevation of 928 m), overlooks Wadi el-Bisharat to the north and the broad Wadi el-Hajal to the south. The site is actually a large tell with major walls running around its perimeter. There are some straight stretches of wall extending over 100 m in length. In addition to pottery and architectural evidence indicating occupation during theByzantine and Ayyubid/Mamluk periods, numerous features indicate that there has been occasional occupation of the tell in recent times. Features include a limekiln on the southeastern spur as well as two large herding stations on the northwest shoulder. One herding station (fig.12.3) consisted of well constructed rectangular pens of field stones and included well maintained cave systems (fig. 12.4). Other features that were noted include winepresses, cisterns, a pavement, and various architectural elements (figs. 12.5-6).Fig. 12.3. Site 57: Rectilinear pen of field stones.Site 58. Unnamed. 1416.2319. Examined June 26, 1987. Pottery: no data.Site 58 is situated on the northern bank of a small tributary that feeds into the Wadi el-Bisharat from a southwest direction. Sites 70 and 89 can be seen across the Wadi el-Bisharat ca. 200-300 m to the northeast. The major features of Site 58 include terraces, an agricultural embankment, a cistern, and a cave.Site 59. Unnamed. 1444.2369. Examined July 1 and 21, 1987. Pottery: Byzantine.Straddling a shallow secondary wadi this site appears to have served an agricultural purpose. An earthen embankment, whose purpose was clearly to aid in water control and prevent soil erosion, separates an upper field from several lower ones. Further down slope is a winepress surrounded by six cupholes. Between the winepress and the embankment is a cave with a soot-blackened ceiling; the cave was possibly used seasonally. Near the cave are quarry marks and a recent hearth. Just north of the cave a significant sherd scatter was found, predominately or completely post-iron Age sherds with Byzantine dominant. Near the crest of the hill, about 150 m northeast of the cave is a rock-cut installation, ca. 3.70 m square (fig. 12.7) with a niche cut into the southeast corner. It is possibly a reservoir. What appears ;j to be a cistern has been cut into the rock near the southwest corner of the reservoir. A roadway, defined by curb stones, passes near theFig. 12.4. Site 57: Cave entrance.271THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.5. Site 57: Broken lintel.installation’s southeast corner and continues due south until it meets another roadway which passes over the embankment (fig. 12.8).Further south, another installation, measuring ca. 5.00 m square, was cut into the bedrockFig. 12.6. Site 57: Well-hewn wall stones (note the upper stone positioned to support an arch).although it did not appear that it could hold liquids (water or wine). Additional cisterns and some tombs are located to the west of the major features of this site (fig. 12.9).Fig. 12.7. Site 59: A square installation cut into bedrock.272THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.8. Site 59: Roadway with curb stones.Site 60. Unnamed. 1423.2391. Examined July 3, 1987. Pottery: 72 sherds, 9 diagnostic (1 Modern bod.; Byzantine dominant; Late Roman; Early Roman; a few Iron bods.).Intensive quarrying over the last fifteen years has greatly disturbed the major features of this site. Nevertheless, numerous cisterns and caves dot the area, many of them collapsed or cut by quarrying. Although the site is relatively flat, there is a slightly elevated area upon which the remains of a rectilinear structure can be seen. On the southeast edge of the site a well preserved winepress was found. Along the northern edge runs the possible line of an ancient road, near which a stone watering trough was located (fig. 12.10).tINslope\winepress 1.70 m •J75 mo3 tombs.40 m cupholesWAD1150 misherd-iiiiiiiii::::: scatter:::::: :::::::::::::n::: hearths □bedrock ^quarryOO ^ caveo o c c g o o c QnNslopereservoir 3.20 m® cisternfcurblineFig. 12.9. Site 59: Sketch-map of the site.273THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.10. Site 60: The stone watering trough.Site 61. Unnamed. 1428.2391. Examined July 3, 1987. Pottery: 20 sherds, 1 diagnostic(probable Byzantine bods.; Early Roman; a few Iron bods.).The major feature of this site consisted of a well built wall line, possibly a field wall (fig. 12.12). Measuring about 1.00-1.50 m thick, the wall continues for several hundred meters, apparently following the contours of the terrain. On the southern side of the wall are a number of cisterns (fig. 12.11) and a stone watering trough. Quarry marks could be seen on the north side.Fig. 12.11. Site 61: Rock-cut cisterns. Fig. 12.12. Site 61: Well-built wall-line.274THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 62. Unnamed. 1422.2317. Examined June 26, 1987. Pottery: no data.The major features of this site included gullied earth embankments, terraces, and a herding station (the latter was most likely of recent vintage).Site 63. Unnamed. 1430.2349. Examined July 3, 1987. Pottery: no data.On the eastern hill’s crest are some rectangular shaft tombs. Near the modern road, which passes close to the site, are a few cisterns, some still in use, and across the wadi a cut stone has been reused in an embankment.tagricultural fieldsSite 64. Unnamed. 1397.2379. Examined July 7, 1987. Pottery: 12 sherds, 2 diagnostic (Late Roman; Iron II).This site is situated on a gentle slope of exposed bedrock (fig. 12.13). It consists of two wall lines, some quarry marks and a cuphole. The walls are ephemeral, but definitely meet at a right angle. The north wall is approximately 7.00 m in length and the western wall about 1 0 .0 0 m long. The area enclosed by the walls is exposed bedrock with a cuphole toward its edge. On the border of the site are quarry marks. The site is presently surrounded by a wheat field in which half of a "doughnufi'-shaped basalt object was found, perhaps part of a millstone.Kg. 12.13. Site 64: Sketch-map of the site.also several caves in the area, two of which have had their openings enlarged and dressed. Cisterns were also found in the area. Near two of them small rectangular recesses have been cut into the bedrock, complete with drain holes. These were apparently used as water troughs at some time (fig. 12.14).Site 65. Unnamed. 1404.2351. Examined July 7, 1987. Pottery: 130 sherds, 40 diagnostic (Modern dominant; a few Byzantine; Iron bods.).Located in a pine forest, this site is presently used by locals as an unofficial park and campground. Large portions of the site consist of exposed bedrock with much evidence of quarrying. There are Fig. 12.14. Site 65: Cisterns possibly reused as water troughs.275THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 66. Unnamed. 1405.2356.Examined July 13, 1987. Pottery: rr' i none.This site is located about 200 m northwest of a hill (elevation ca.888 m), about 30 m above the wadi floor (figs. 12.15-16). Its principal feature is a winepress which is about 3.20 x 3.70 m and 0.10 m deep. It drains into a round basin or cuphole ca. 0.75 m wide and 0.40 m deep. This round basin, in turn, drains into a large square basin, ca.2.20 x 1.20 m. Numerous smaller cupholes (some square, others round) and grooves were cut into and next to the winepress. These may have been used to support various beams, etc., connected with the operation of the press.About 0.20 m to the north of the press is the opening to a cave which could have functioned as wine cellar (fig. 12.17). The style of the winepress suggests it could have been used in Roman/Byzantine times. Evidence of quarrying could be seen about 2 .0 0 m to the northeast of the installation. No pottery was found at the site.Fig. 12,15. Site 66: General view of the site.Site 67. Nacur intersection. 1449.2311. Examined July 9, 1987. Pottery: j no data.Located northeast of the intersection of the main road in Nacur, this site is an apsidal pit (fig.12.18). There are stones placed around the rim ofFig. 12.16. Site 66: Sketch-map of the site.276THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.17. Site 66: Entrance to the cave (possibly a wine cellar).tINFig. 12.18. Site 67: Sketch-map of the site.the depression suggesting that the pit was more than a hole dug in the ground,- although its function is not readily apparent.Site 68. Unnamed. 1437.2329. Examined July 9, 1987. Pottery: 25 sherds, no diagnostic (Byzantine bods.; Early Roman bods.; Iron II bods.).A line of stones running along the natural contours of a hill roughly paralleling the new airport highway appears to be the curb of a (possibly ancient) road (fig. 12.19). This site corresponds to a road marked on the 1/25,000 contour map. The stones are visible at this location for about 75 m (fig. 12.20). There are some possible cobble stones scattered about, but none were seen in situ.Fig. 12.19. Site 68: Line of stones (possible ancient road).277THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.20. Site 68: Sketch-map of the site.Site 69. Unnamed. 1405.2352. Examined on July 15, 1987.Pottery: one EarlyPersian; Late Iron II bods.; fig. 12.123:1-5.L o c a t ed down slope, southeast from a hill (elevation ca. 876 m) and across from Site 6 6 (seen to the east), this site consists of a l a r g e r e c t i l i n e a r structure (ca. 15.00 x30.00 m) which may have originally been a building, but whose foundation stones now serve as an agricultural terrace (fig. 1 2 .2 1 ). Wall foundations are preserved on the east, north, and west sides. The south wall is totally absent (if it ever existed). There is evidence for extensive quarrying on both sides of the iwadi to the north, especial ly on the southern side.Fig. 12.21. Site 69: General view of the site.278THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 70. Unnamed. 1419.2320. Examined June 26, 1987. Pottery: 7 sherds, 1 diagnostic (Byzantine; Iron bods.); fig. 12.123:6.A circular installation (about5.00 m internal diameter) was found at this site (figs. 12.22-23). It was the second of its kind found during the 1987 season (see Site 56 above). Excavation that was conducted subsequent to the initial survey revealed almost 0.70 m of slag in the bottom of this structure indicating that it originally served as a kiln (fig. 12.24). The installation is built of small field stones cemented together. On the west side is a corbelled passageway more than3.00 m in length (fig. 12.25).Fig. 12.22. Site 70: The circular installation prior to excavation.Fig. 12.23. Site 70: Sketch of the installation.279THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.24. Site 70: The circular installation after excavation.'■C*'1Site 71. Unnamed. 1423.2363. Examined July 21, 1987. Pottery: no data.This site (fig. 12.26) which overlooks the Wadi Hinu, is located 300-400 m down slope from and to the northeast of Sites 19 and 38 (see Boling 1989: 131, 155). The main feature is a small rectilinear structure measuring about 2.50 x3.00 m (fig. 12.27). Foundation stones for the structure are relatively large (ca. 0.80 x 1 .0 0 x 0.50 m). About 5.00 m west of the structure begins an embankment which runs down slope for some distance. It could be a buried field wall. A cuphole appears in bedrock ca. 2 .0 0 m from the southeast------- corner of the structure. The sizeand location of this structure suggests that it could have functioned as an agricultural "field tower" or "watchtower”. If contemporary, it could have functioned in conjunction with Site 38 and/or Site 19. No pottery was found at this site, although Roman-Byzantine bods., along with Iron I and II sherds were found just up slope at Site 19.v:\'tIN WADIHINU0t>embankment/ field wall o0tower 2.5 moooo3.0 m O o O OOO O O o° o/slope/ cupholeFig. 12.26. Site 71: General view of the site.Fig. 12.25. Site 70: The corbelled passageway.280THE JUDGMENT SURVEYj1iSite 72. Unnamed. 1383.2344. Examined July 9, 1987. Pottery: 1 Byzantine rim; Byzantine bods.; Roman/Byzantine bods.; Roman bods.; Iron bods.A water channel (probably modern) is the dominant feature of this site (fig. 12.28), located just south of the Bisharat family home. From near the crest of the ridge, it runs to the rich agricultural fields below. Nearby are two cisterns, presently used by shepherds to water their flocks. Associated with the lower cistern are two water diversion walls which direct the flow into the cistern. Both cisterns have modern cement caps on them. About 100 m southeast of the cisterns is the curbline of a road (fig. 12.29). Further east are several embankments used to control runoff in the small wadi (fig. 12.30).Fig. 12.28. Site 72: This (probably) modem water channel dominates the site.281THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 73. Unnamed. 1381.2338. Examined July 9, 1987. Pottery: 50 sherds, 2 diagnostic (Umayyad; Late Byzantine; a few Iron bods.; (Early Bronze dominant). |Located on a hilltop just south of the Bisharat family home, the dominant features of this site are the tombs. At least 40 of them are visible, several of which appear to be Early Bronze shaft tombs (fig. 12.31). Indeed, most of the pottery was Early Bronze and included a holemouth rim. Also evident on this site are many cisterns (fig. 12.32), the majority of which are no longer in use, having either filled with debris or collapsed. South of this hilltop are several wall lines, apparently field walls.Fig. 12.29. Site 72: This curbline for a road continues about 100 m.Fig. 12.32. Site 73: A cistern.Fig. 12.30. Site 72: This is one of several embankments used to control runoff.Fig. 12.31. Site 73: A tomb entrance.Site 74. Unnamed. 1400.2355. Examined July 14|* 1987. Pottery: Byzantine dominant; Roman; Iron II; Early Bronze; fig. 12.123:7-9.This site (fig. 12.33a) is located about. 1.5 km northwest of Yadudah on the southernmost shelf of a hill (elevation ca. 888 ; m). Its central feature is a rectilinear structure approximately 5.30' x 4.10 m (fig. 12.34), Nearby on the south side are two caves (possibly cisterns),'as well as six bedrock cupholes. A field wall (fig. 12i33) and terraces are located to the| west and north respectively. A smaller (ca. 3.00 x5.00 m) rectilinear structure (possibly a field to|ver) can be seen to the west (fig. 12|.35). Near it is a bedrock winepress (fig. 12.36). The combination of features indicate that this was an agricultural complex.282THE JUDGMENT SURVEYsmall\ slope rectilinear structure00a4 field a walloTINFig. 12.33a. Site 74: General sketch-map of the site.Fig. 12.33. Site 74: The field wall west of the large structure.terraces /hillsummit /(888 m)largerectilinearstructure/field 9 wall v8§00terrace d0slope ° i 6 0283THE JUDGMENT SURVEY284THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 75. Unnamed. 1403.2356. Examined July 13, 1987. Pottery: none.This site (fig. 12.37), located 200-300 m down slope from Site 55 (hill elevation ca. 888 m) and up slope to the northeast of Site 74, consists of a small rectilinear structure measuring ca. 4.80 x 3.50 m (fig. 12.38). The two corner stones on the west each have a cuphole in the center of the top surface (ca. 0.05 m wide and 0.04 m deep). The edges of the cupholes are sharp, not worn, suggesting they served some purpose other than grinding—perhaps for holding wooden posts (fig. 12.39). If so, the site could have served as a field shelter, either a tent or a lean-to. The site commands an excellent view to the west. One field wall can be seen down slope to the west; another is up slope and to the north.SOft0Ooatower 4.8 m 8fOOQOC?0 0 O3.5 mQ Q0 O080«- slope8Fig. 12.39. Site 75: A sharp-edged cuphole.Fig. 12.37. Site 75: General sketch-map of the site.Site 76. Unnamed. 1407.2356. Examined July 14, 1987. Pottery: none.Located on a low, southern- projecting, bedrock ridge, this site is another winepress installation (fig. 12.40). The central feature is a square depression measuring ca. 4.60 x 4.30 m. Numerous cupholes and basins have been cut into the bedrock around the central depression, most of them connected by various channels (figs. 12.41- 43). At least two different periods of use can be surmised from the way the features have been cut.Fig. 12.38. Site 75: The small rectilinear structure.285THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 1 2 .4 1 . Site 76: The central depression with surrounding installations.THE JUDGMENT SURVEY;,J'Vi.?•:Fig. 12.42. Site 76: The south comer of the central depression.Fig. 12.43. Site 76: Circular pits in the northeast of the site. Site 77. Unnamed. 1412.2354. Examined July 14, 1987. Pottery: none.Presently located in the middle of a pine forest, this site appears to be another field tower. The remains consist of the foundation stones of a small, almost square structure measuring about 3.00 x3.30 m (fig. 12.44). Terracing is evident on slopes to the northwest and west. Quarry marks can also be seen a short distant to the west and southwest. The forest floor is heavily covered with pine needles; no pottery was found.Fig. 12.44. Site 77: Foundation stones of a small structure.287THE JUDGMENT SURVEY^ 20 m vat and cuphole13 m060*0I ft>000 °op11 m^000000tINcistem/cave 10-15 m -»Fig. 12.45. Site 78: General sketch-map of the site.Site 78. Unnamed. 1411.2357. Examined July 14, 1987. Pottery: 71 sherds, 1 diagnostic(Byzantine bods.; Roman/Byzantine. bods.; Iron bods.); fig. 12.123:10.Located on top of a hill (elevation ca. 899 m), the most obvious feature at this site is a limekiln, the internal diameter of which is ca. 4.30 m (fig. 12.45). The kiln (fig. 12.46) appears to have been dug into earlier archaeological remains, judgingfrom the unusually large number of sherds which were visible on the surface (most kilns were devoid of sherds). Other features included a large collapsed cistern (possible cave) located 10-15 m east of the kiln, and a rectilinear structure (ca.13.00 x 11.00 m) about 20 m northwest of the kiln. Twenty meters to the west of the rectilinear structure is a small, square vat and a square cuphole.288THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.47. Site 79: View to the north, the kiln abutted against a bedrock outcropping.Site 79. Unnamed. 1413.2353. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: Byzantine and Iron bods.This site, located just beyond a junction on the right side of a dirt road between two hills (elevations ca. 888 and 899 m, respectively), is also dominated by a kiln measuring about 6.40 m internal diameter (figs. 12.47-48). The slopes to the east and south show signs of ancient terraces.Fig. 12.4S. Site 79: View to the south from atop the bedrock outcropping, overlooking the kiln.289THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 80. Unnamed. 1409.2354. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: none.Another kiln site is located on the northeast side of the central fork of a triple-forked wadi system. The internal diameter of the kiln is ca. 3.70 m (fig. 12.49). Some slag was found near its walls. Evidence for terracing can be seen across the wadi to the west.Fig. 12.49. Site 80: A view into the kiln from the bedrock above.Site 81. Unnamed. 1409.2352. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: none.The only feature at this site is a rectilinear depression (ca. 4.70 x 5.60 m) cut into bedrock (fig. 12.50). The average depth is about 0.60 m. Two, one-meter niches were cut into the south face of the installation and a circular opening (plugged cistern) was cut into the rock between them. Two small steps have been cut into the southeast corner. The site looks quite similar to Sites 59 and 91. The original function of the feature is uncertain; it may have served as a winepress. Most recently it has been reused as a fire pit or hearth.Fig. 12.50. Site 81: The rectilinear depression with surrounding installations.290THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 82. Unnamed. 1411.2352. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: 2 sherds, no diagnostics (Byzantine bods.).This kiln (fig. 12.51), the internal diameter of which is ca.3.00 m, overlooks a cultivated wadi to the south. Pieces of slag were found around the edge of the installation. Evidence for quarrying could be seen across the road to the west. A bedrock cuphole (ca. 0.40 x 0.30 m) appears about 2.50 m south of the quarried area.JL_J ___ _i f i ________Fig. 12.51. Site 82: The kiln.slope \squarestructurepossiblewinepress \ J»//ItfrWADI/Fig. 12.52. Site 83: General sketch-map of the site.bedrockdepression^sN cuphole/i° o o O o ’ o a a291THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 83. Unnamed. 1408.2364. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: Iron II and Iron bods.; fig. 12.123:11.Located on the south side of a dirt road on an eastward projecting spur from a hill (elevation ca. 899 m), this site includes a number of features typical of a small agricultural complex (fig. 12.52). The central feature consists of the foundation course of a square structure, ca. 4.50 x 4.50 m (fig. 12.53). Other nearby features include a possible bedrock winepress, a large collapsed cistern whose opening has since been widened (fig. 12.54), cupholes, and a terrace wall near fields which are presently under cultivation.Site 84. Unnamed. 1384.2341. Examined July' 9, 1987. Pottery: probable Byzantine bods.;probable Early Bronze bods. |This site, located at the base of an electrical tower southeast of the Bisharat [family home, is another good example of an agricultural complex.The central feature is a square 8.00 x 8.00 m. The foundationstructure, about stones are quitelarge. At least three winepresses, two of which are associated with cupholes, were cut into thebedrock nearby. Evidence terraces can also be seen.for quarrying andSite 85. Unnamed. 1382.2319.. Examined July14 diagnostic (a dominant); fig.14, 1987. Pottery: 150 sherds, few Byzantine; Late Iron II 12.123:12-15.Another agricultural complex (fig. 12.55) is located on the crest of the ridge [just south of the blacktop road beyond Umm el-Basatin (Umm el- Hanafish). The central feature is a square structure (ca. 6 .0 0 x 6 .0 0 m) of which sej/eral courses still remain (fig. 12.56). Along the northeast crest of the ridge is a wall line which continues for about 500 m. Winepresses associated] with numerous cupholes (fig. 12.57), were located about 50 m east, and about 100 m southeast, of the square structure. A cave (possible cis(ern) and quarry marks (fig. 12.58) are also located nearby. A basalt grinder and lithic blades were found at the site. i .292THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.56. Site 85: Tumbled courses of the main structure.293THE JUDGMENT SURVEYSite 86. Unnamed. 1387.2320. Examined July 14, 1987. Pottery: one sherd, no diagnostic (Iron bod.).The sole feature of this site is an earthen embankment (fig. 12.59), an important agricultural feature being studied by the landuse survey team.Fig. 12.59. Site 86: Earthen embankment and wall line.294THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.60. Site 87: A boulder-strewn channel.Site 87. Unnamed. 1393.2323. Examined July 14, 1987. Pottery: no data.This site was also studied by the landuse survey team and includes an agricultural embankment (figs. 12.60-61). Determining the age of these embankments is quite difficult. It is possible that many were originally constructed in antiquity and continue to be used by the current farmers in the region.295i * '■»«THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.62. Site 88: General sketch-map of the site.Site 88. Unnamed. 1399.2324. Examined July 31, meters to the southeast is a smaller circular 1987. Pottery: a few Byzantine; Late Roman; Iron structure, constructed of smaller stones. Its I; fig. 12.123:16-22. location suggests it may have served as aThis site, located on the end of a ridge and watchtower.offering a clear view of three wadis below, consists of two round structures (fig. 12.62). The western-most structure is composed of large boulders (ca. 0.80 x 0.60 m), two rows wideand, in places, two courses high (fig. 12.63). It is Site 89. No site,constructed similarly to the kilns described elsewhere; however, no slag was found. FourFig. 12.63. Site 88; Large boulders, two courses high of the larger structure.296THE JUDGMENT SURVEYtINslopei0fieldwall 0i4/rectilinear«3° O C 3 o< 3 0tterraces(ancient and modem)cx,depressionSite 90. Unnamed. 1412.2366. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: none.This site, overlooking a wadi to the south, could possibly be classified as a small agricultural complex (fig. 12.64). The central architectural remains consist of the foundation of a rectilinear structure measuring about 3.00 x 4.00 m (fig. 12.65). A large installation, which was cut into the bedrock just to the east, may be a winepress (fig. 12.66). Cupholes of various shapes and sizes have been cut into the bedrock nearby. A large opening in the rock may be a plugged up cistern. Up the slope are terraces and a field wall.Fig. 12.65. Site 90: Foundation courses of the rectilinear structure.297THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.66. Site 90: The large installation cut into bedrock.Site 91. Unnamed. 1408.2356. Examined July 15, 1987. Pottery: none.This si te (fig. 12.67), located , about 300 m northwest of Site 6 6 , appears to be another winepress installation (fig. 1 2 .6 8 ); but may be a reservoir (see Sites 59 and 81 for comparison). A large cistern has been cut into one s ide of the installation (fig. 12.69). Cupholes have also been cut into the rock at various spots.tFig. 12.67. Site 91: General sketch-map of the site.298THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.68. Site 91: The square bedrock installation.Site 92. Unnamed. 1413.2362. Examined July 21, 1987. Pottery: 11 sherds, no diagnostic (Byzantine/Roman bods.; Iron bods.; undetermined bods.).This site (fig. 12.70), located at a junction of wadis, served both industrial and agricultural purposes at different times. The central feature is a circular kiln the internal diameter of which is about 5.20 m (fig. 12.71). About 30 m to the southwest is a large (ca. 5.20 x 4.50 m) square installation cut into bedrock. Several smaller basins and cupholes have also been cut into the rock nearby. There are also at least two caves in the immediate vicinity. The site overlooks cultivated wadis to the north, east and south. Remnants of a field wall appear along the edge of the wadi to the east of the site. o ' ©t cave /N30 m4.5 mwinepress5.2 m ® ® bedrockV cavesN square vatfieldwallobedrockdepression/cupholes\ •• •Fig. 12.70. Site 92: General sketch-map of the site.299THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.71. Site 92: The circular kiln.Site 93. Unnamed. 1415.2363. Examined July 21, 1987. Pottery: 16 sherds, no diagnostic(Roman/Byzantine bods.; Iron bods.; undetermined bods.); fig. 12.123:23-25.This site (fig. 12.72) is located about 75 m northwest of an ancient road (Site 94). A rectangular hole quarried out of bedrock is its central feature (fig. 12.73). The hole measures approximately 3.40 m x 3.80 m x 0.80 m deep. Two hewn stones are lined up. on its southern side, the largest one is a cube, ca. 1.50 m. Two cupholes (one round and one square) have been cut into the bedrock about 7.00 m west of the large hole (fig. 12.74). A line of stones (possibly a field wall) runs in an east-west direction about15.00 m to the north.field wall tI c» o o rsTHE JUDGMENT SURVEY322THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Tvoe Sq L o c u s Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int ____ I m s ____ Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jug US3 2 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/4 L 4A SR L PR4A W VRLight Light 3A SR PR3ABrown Brown 2C SR2 Basin US3 - 3 1 5YR7/6 5YR7/1 5YR7/6 L 6A R M FS6A H . . . . UOReddish Light Reddish 5A SR PR7AYellow Gray Yellow 4A SR PA6A3A SA PA5A2B SR PA4APA3APR3A3 Bowl US3 T5 4 1 5YR7/3 5YR7/3 L 4A R VL FS3A W _ . . . . . VOPink Pink 3A R4 Bowl US3 - 2 1 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR6/2 7.5YR6/4 L 3A R VL PR3A W SM 7.5YR SM 7.5YR6/4 - VOLight Pinkish Light R + 6/4 R + LightBrown Gray Brown Light BrownBrown5 Bowl US3 2 1 2 7.5YR6/4 . 7.5YR6/4 L 4A SR L PR4A w . . . . VRLight Ught 3A SR PR3ABrown Brown 2C SR- 6 Bowl US3 6 4 1 2.5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/4 L 3A SR M PR3A w SLR 10R5/6 v SM 10R5/6 - VOLight Light 2D SR Red RedReddish ReddishBrown Brown7 Bowl US3 - 2 2 5YR6/6 5YR6/6 5YR6/6 L 4A R VL PR3A w SM 5YR6/6 _ VOReddish Reddish Reddish 3A R R + ReddishYellow Yellow Yellow 2A R Yellow8 Bowl US16 - . 1 4 2. SYR 6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SA MH FS6A w . . SL * UOLight Gray Light SR FS5A R +Red Red 4A SA PA5ASR PA4A3A SR PA3A2A SR PR3A9 Plate US16 - 1 1 2.5YR6/8 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/8 L 5A SA M PA4A w _ . . . UOLight Gray Light 4A SA PA3ARed Red SR PR4A3A SR PR3A2A SR10 Bowl US16 - 1 2 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 L 4A SR L PR4A w SL 2.5YR SM 2.5YR6/6 - VOReddish Reddish 3A SR PR3A 6/6 LightYellow Yellow 2C R Light RedRed11 Lid US16 - 1 3 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 L 4A SR L PR3A w . . . VOReddish Reddish 3A SRYellow Yellow 2C SR12 Body US16 - 1 5 5YR8/4 . 5YR8/4 L 4A SR L PR3A w GM Green GM Green IT • VOPink Pink 3A SR Glaze Glaze2C SR13 Jug US18 - 1 2 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 4 A SR M PA5A HB _ 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/6 - VOPink Pink 3A SR Han- Reddish Reddish2C SR die Yellow Yellow14 Bowl US18 - 1 3 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 4A R L . W . 7.5YR . 7.5YR7/6 - VOPink Pink 3A SR 7/6 Reddish2C SR Reddish YellowYellow15 Lid US18 - 1 1 5YR7/6 5YR7/6 L 4A SR L FS5A W . . • . . VOReddish Reddish 3A SR PR4AYellow Yellow 2C SR PR3A16 Pith os US23 - 1 40 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w . . . . UO.Light Gray Light 4A SRReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown 2B SR17 Pithos ' US23 - 1 41 7.5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 7.5YR6/4 L 6A R M PR4A w . . . UOLight Gray Light 5A SR PR3A.Brown Brown 4A SR3A SR' 2B SR18 Jar US23 - 1 ' 16 10YR4/1 10YR5/1; L 7A SR H PA7A w . 5YR4/2 SM 5YR5/4 - URDark Gray 6A SR PA5A Dari: ReddishGray 5A SR PA4A Reddish Brown4A SR PR4A Gray3A SR- PR3A2B SRFig. 12.120, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-18323THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color19 Jar US23 - 1 5YR7/8 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/8 L 5A SR M PA4A W UOReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PA3AYellow Yellow 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A20 Jar US23 - 1 44 2.5YR6/6 10YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 6A A M PA5A W _ _ _ ■ UOLight Gray Light SR PA4ARed Reddish 5A SR PA3ABrown 4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR21 Jar US23 - 1 21 5YR6/4 . 10YR5/1 L 5A SR M PA5A w . / . . UOLight Gray 4A SR PA4AReddish 3A SR PR4ABrown 2B SR PR3A22 Jar US23 - ' 1 4 2.5YR6/6 10YR6/2 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA3A w . . _ , UOLight Light Light 4A SR PR3ARed • Brownish Red 3A SRGray 2B SR23 Jar US23 - 2 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR5/0 7.5YR7/4 L 6A R M FS6A w SM 2.5YR - . . UOLight Gray Pink 5A R FS5A R + 6/6Red 4A R PR4A LightInner: . 3A R PR3A Red5YR7/6ReddishYellow2A R24 Jar US23 - 2 2 10YR6/3 2.5YR4/0 10YR6/3 L 6A SA L FS6A w SM 7.5YR SM 10YR6/3 URPale Dark Pale 5A R FS5A R + 7/4 R + PaleBrown Gray Brown 4A R PR4A Pink Brown2A R PR3A25 Jar US23 - 1 35 Outer: 2.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 L 6A SA M PA3A w . . 5YR7/6 _ UO2.5YR6/4 Gray Pink 5A SR PR3A ReddishLight 4A SR YellowReddish 3A SRBrownInner:5YR7/3Pink2B SR26 Jar US23 - 1 36 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/0 5YR6/3 L 6A SR MH PA5A w SL 5YR6/4 - 5YR6/6 URLight Gray Light 5A SR PA4A Light ReddishRed Reddish 4A SR PR4A Reddish YellowBrown 3 A SR PR3A Brown2B SR PR2A27 Jar US23 - 1 38 5YR7/3 7.5YR4/0 5YR7/3 L 5A SR M PA4A w . _ _ UOPink Dark Pink 4A SR PA3AGray 3A SR PR3A2B SR28 Jar US23 - 1 32 2.5YR6/6 10YR6/1 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR MH PR3A w . . _ . UOLight. Gray Light 4A SR PR2ARed Red 3A SR2B SR29 Jar US23 - 18 1 5YR6/4 7.5YR5/0 SYR 6/4. L 6A SR L FS5A w _ _ . UOLight Gray Light 5A R FS4AReddish Reddish 4A R PR3ABrown Brown 3A RFig. 12.120, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 19-29.324THE JUDGMENT SURVEYFig. 12.121. Survey pottery from Site 23 (continued).325THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int ____ TVPe Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jar US23 - 1 31 5YR6/4 . 2.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PR3A W . . . . UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR2AReddish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown 2B SR2 Jug US23 - 18 4 2.5YR5/4 2.5YR5/0 5YR6/4 L 7A R M PR7A HP _ . . . URReddish Gray Light 6A R PR6ABrown Reddish 5A R FC5ABrown 4A R FS4A3A R3 Jar US23 - 6 1 5YR5/4 10YR5/1 5YR5/3 L 6A R M PR4A W _ „ _ IFR URReddish Gray Reddish 5A R PR3ABrown Brown 4A R3A R4 Amphora US23 - 10 2 7.5YR7/6 . 7.5YR7/6 L 3A SA L PA3A H SM 7.5YR _ . VOReddish Reddish 2D SA PR2A 7/4Yellow . Yellow Pink5 Jug US23 - 9 4 5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 . L 4A R L PR4A W SM 5YR6/4 SM 5YR6/4 - URLight Gray Light 3A R PR3A R + Light R + LightReddish Reddish Reddish ReddishBrown Brown • Brown Brown6 Jug US23 - 10 1 2.5YR6/8 7.5YR6/0 2.5YR6/8 L 6A SR L PA4A W SM 5YR5/4 _ . UOLight Light Light 5A SR PR3A ReddishRed Gray . Red 4A R PR2A Brown3A R2B R7 Jug US23 - 4 1 2.5YR6/6 7.5YR6/2 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R VL PR3A w . _ . . VO_ Light Pinkish Light 3A RRed Gray Red8 Jug US23 - 1 20 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 5A SR MH . w . . . UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR3A SR2B SR9 Juglet US23 - 16 2 5YR7/4 . 5YR6/1 5YR7/4 L 7A SR H PA3A H _ . . _ . URPink. Gray Pink 6A SR5A SR SA4A SR 3A SR 2B SR10 Juglet US23 - 1 27 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 4A SA M PR3A W SM 5YR8/2 . VOPink . Pink 3A SR Pinkish2C SR White11 Basin US23 - 16 1 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PA4A H SL 7.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 ITR URReddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PA3A 4/2 LightYellow Yellow 4A SR PR3A Dark Red3A SR Brown2B SR. 12 Basin US23 - 16 3 7.5YR4/2 7.5YRN6/ 7.5YR4/2 L 5A SR M PA4A H . . . _ VRDark Gray Dark 4A SR PA3ABrown Brown 3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A13 Krater US23 - 1 1 5YR7/6 5YR7/1 5YR7/6 L 6A R M PR4A W . 10YR8/3 . 10YR8/3 - UOReddish Light Reddish 5A SR PR3A Very VeryYellow Gray Yellow 4A SR Pale Pale3A SR Brown Brown2B SR14 Krater US23 - 1 43 5YR7/4 . 7.5YR4/0 L 6A SR M PR3A W . _ _ . UOPink Dark 5A SRGray 4A SR3A SR2B SR15 Krater US23 - 1 25 5YR6/4 5YR5/1 SYR 6/4 L 4A SR MH PR3A w , . . UOLight Gray Light 3A SR PR2AReddish Reddish 2C SRBrown Brown16 Bowl US23 - 1 11 5YR6/4 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w WBL SYR 6/6 SL 5YR6/6 - UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR2A Reddish WBM ReddishReddish Reddish 3A . SR Yellow YellowBrown Brown 2B SRFig. 12.121, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.326THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sq Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color17 Bowl US23 - 1 23 5YR7/3 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/3 'L 5A SR M W SM 5YR6/4 SM 5YR6/4 UOPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBL Light WBM Light3A SR Reddish Reddish2C SR Brown Brown18 Bowl US23 - 1 19 7.5YR6/0 . 7.5YR6/2 L 6A SR M PA4A W WBR 7.5YR WBL 7.5YR6/2 GB UOGray Pinkish 5A SR PA3A 5/0 PinkishGray 4A SR PR4A Gray Gray3A SR PR3A2B SR PR2A19 Bowl US23 - 1 29 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/0 7.5YR6/4 L 5A SR MH PA3A w SM 2.5YR WBL . ' Int: UOLight Gray Light 4A SR PR3A WBL 5/4 GBReddish Brown 3A SR ReddishBrown 2B SR Brown20 Bowl US23 - 1 5 5YR7/4 7.5YR5/0 5YR7/4 L 6A SR M PR3A w WBM 2.5YR WBH 2.5YR6/6 UOPink Gray Pink 5A SR 6/6 Light4A SR Light Red3A SR Red2B SR21 Bowl US23 - 1 24 5YR7/3 5YR5/1 5YR7/3 L 5A A M _ w SM 10R5/6 SM 10R5/6 . VOPink Gray Pink 4A SR WBL Red WBL Red3A SR2B SR6S SR22 Bowl US23 - 1 7 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR4/0 7.5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PR3A w 2.5YR . 2.5YR6/6 UOPink Dade Pink 4A SR 6/6 LightGray 3A SR Light Red2B SR Red23 Bowl US23 - 5 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A w SM 7.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 _ URLight Gray Light 4A SR PA4A 5/2 LightRed Red 3A SR PA3A Brown Red2B SR PR3A24 Bowl US23 1 33 5YR7/3 7.5YR5/0 Outer: L 6A SR MH PR3A w . . UOPink Gray 2.5YR6/6 5A . SRLight 4A SRRed 3A SRInner: 2B SR5YR7/3PinkFig. 12.121, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-24.327THE JUDGMENT SURVEY328THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sa Locus Pail ReK Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shaoe Density Ext Color Int Color1 Bowl US23 - 18 3 5YR6/1Gray5YR6/1LightGray5YR7/3PinkL 5A SR VL 3A RFS4A W - SM 7.5YR7/4 - PinkVR2 Bowl US23 - 9 2 5YR6/6ReddishYellow5YR6/6ReddishYellow5YR6/4LightReddishBrownL 31 R VL PR2A W SL R + De- signRim:2.5YR5/2WeakSL R +10R5/6 - RedVORed10R5/8Red3 Bowl US23 - 9 3 7.5YR7/4 10YR7/1 7.5YR7/4 L 5A R L PR4A W Rim: VRPink Light Pink 4A R PR3A 7.5YRGray 3A R PR2A 4/22A R Dark .Brown7.5YR6/4LightBrown4 Bowl US23 - 18 2 5YR6/4 10YR6/1 5YR6/4 L 6A R L FC5A HP . 2.5YR - 2.5YR6/6 - VOLight Light Light 4A R FS3A 6/6 LightReddish Gray Reddish 3A R Light RedBrown Brown 2A R Red5 Bowl US23 - 1 10 NO DATA - - - - - - - - - - -6 Fish plate US23 - 1 18 7.5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 7.5YR7/4 L 3A SR L PR3A W WBM 7.5YR WBM 7.5YR7/4 - URPink Gray Pink 2D SR 7/4 PinkPink7 Cook pot US23 - 1 17 5YR4/1 2.5YR4/4 5YR4/1 L 4A SR MH PR3A W _ 2.5YR - 2.5YR6/6 - VRDark Reddish Dark 3A SR 6/6 LightGray Brown Gray 2B SR Light RedRed8 Cook pot US23 - 1 14 5YR6/4 10YR5/1 5YR6/4 L 4A SR M FS4A w . 10YR4/1 - 10YR4/1 - URLight Gray Light 3B SR FS3A Dark DarkReddish Reddish 2B SR PA4A Gray GrayBrown Brown PR3A9 Cook pot US23 - 1 9 5YR7/4 10YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M PA3A w . 2.5YR - 2.5YR6/4 - URPink Light Pink 4A SR PR3A 6/4 LightGray 3A SR Handle: Light ReddishHandle: 2B SR JH Reddish Brown2.5YR4/0 FS4A BrownDark FS3AGray PA3A10 Cook pot US23 - 1 8 2.5YR6/3 10YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 4A SR MH . JH w _ _ _ UOLight Light Reddish 3B SR FS5AReddish Gray Yellow 2B SR FS4ABrown PA4APA3APR2A11 Cook pot US23 - 3 . 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/2 2.5YR6/6 L 5A R VL FS5A w SM 2.5YR - . VRLight Pale Light 3A R FS3A R + 4/4Red Red Red 2A R ReddishBrown12 Cook pot US23 - 2 3 2.5YR5/6 7.5YR5/0 2.5YR5/6 L 4A R L PR4A w SM Rim: 2.5YR5/4 - VRRed Gray Red 3A R R + 5YR4/3 ReddishReddish BrownBrown5YR5/3ReddishBrown13 Cook pot US23 - 1 26 2.5YR4/4 10YR5/2 2.5YR4/4 L 4A SR M PR3A w _ _ VRReddish Grayish Reddish 3A SRBrown Brown Brown 2C SR14 Cook pot US23 - 1 12 5YR5/3 . 5YR5/3 L 3A SR M PR3A w _ _ ■ VRReddish Reddish 2C SRBrown Brown15 Flask US23 - 12 1 2.5Y8/4 2.5Y8/4 L 4A SR L PA5A w GH metallic GM m e ta l l i c - UOPale Pale 3A SR PA4A c r e a m c r e a mYellow Yellow 2C SR PA3A blue bluePR3APR2A16 Lamp US23 - 20 1 2.5YR5/4 . 2.5YR5/4 L 5A SR MH PA3A HB SM 7.5YR - . URReddish Reddish 4A SR PR3A 6/4Brown Brown 3A SR Light2B SR BrownFig. 12.122, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-16.329THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sq L o c u s Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shane Density Ext Color Int Color17 Bowl US23 - 1 30 5YR7/4 7.5YR6/0 L 5A SR M W UOPink Gray 4A SR3A SR2B SR18 Bowl US23 - 1 42 5YR7/6 7.5YR6/0 5YR6/4 L 5A SR M PR5A W SM 2.5YR WBM 5YR6/4 Int: u oReddish Dark Light 4A SR PR3A 6/6 Light GBYellow Gray Reddish 3A SR Light ReddishBrown 2B SR Red Brown19 Bowl US23 - 1 3 5YR7/4 10YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M JB W - _ ■ ■ _ _ VOPink Gray Pink 4A SR3A SR2B SR.20 Jug US23 - 1 39 5YR7/6 . 7.5YR6/0 L 4A SR M PR3A W . . . . u oReddish Gray 3A SRYellow 2C SR21 Pithos US56 - 1 2 5YR7/4 5YR5/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SR MH . W _ _ . . URPink Gray Pink 4A SR -3B SA2B SA22 Bowl US56 - 1 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 4A SR L . W _ . _ . VOPink Pink 3D SR23 Pithos US57 - 2 1 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/6 L 5A SA M PR3A W . _ _ RiN UOLight Gray Light 4A SRRed Red 3B SR2B SR24 Jug . US57 - 1 5 5YR5/2 . 5YR6/3 L 6A R M PA4A W WB _ SM Pa VRReddish Light 5A SR PR4A N + WB 2.5YR3/4Gray Reddish 4A SR PR3A R + DarkBrown 3A SR Reddish2C SR Brown2.5YR3/2DuskyRed10YR8/1WhiteInterior:5YR3/1VeryDarkGray25 Bowl US57 - 1 2 2.5YR6/6 . 10YR7/4 L 4A SA M PA4A W SM . . . Pa UOLight Very 3A SR PR4A 10R3/1Red Pale 2C SR PR3A DarkBrown ReddishGray26 Bowl US57 - 1 4 2.5YR6/6 . 2.5YR6/6 L 4A SR M PA4A W _ SL 5YR7/4 Pa VOLight Light 3A SR PA3A Pink 10R3/2Red Red 2C SR PR4A DuskyP 4A SR PR3A Red2.5YR3/0VeryDarkGray5YR8/1White27 Bowl US57 - 2 2 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 4A R L PA5A W HBM 2.5YR SL 2.5YR6/6 Pa VOPink Pink 3A R PA4A SL 6/6 Light 10R3/22D R PA3A Light Red DuskyRed Red.28 Krater US57 - 1 6 5YR7/4 2.5YR6/8 5YR7/4 L 5A SR M FS7A W SL 2.5Y8/4 SL 2.5Y8/4 . VOPink Light Pink 4A R PA6A R + Bale PaleRed 3A SR PA5A Yellow Yellow2B SR PR3A29 Jug US57 - 1 1 . 2.5YR6/8 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M JB FS5A W . _ . Pa VOLight Light Pink 4A SR PA4A 2.5YR3/2Red Gray 3A SR PR3A Dusky2B SR RedFig. 12.122, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 17-29.330THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Tvt>e So Locus Pail Re? Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor Fire' Ext Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color30 Jug US57 - 2 '3 2.5YR6/8 -LightRed2.5Y7/6 L 5A SR M PA4AYellow 4A SR PA3A3A SR PR3A2B SRW SM - SM - Pa VOSL exterior:10R3/1 Dark Reddish Gray 2.5YR3/0 Very Dark Gray Interior: 2.5YR3/0 Very Dark Gray31 Jar US57 - 1 3 2.5YR6/4 2.5YR6/8 2.5YR6/4 L 5A SA M PA4ALight Light Light 3A SR PR3AReddish Red Reddish 2C SRBrown BrownFig. 12.122, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 30-31.IM VO331THE JUDGMENT SURVEY63tlI41091112^ * 131514^ 7 “19w22Fig. 12.123. Survey pottery from Sites 69, 70, 74, 78, 83, 85, 88, 93, 101, and 102.332THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sq Locus Pail Ree Fabric Color Non-Plastics Voids Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int ____ liE £ ____ Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color1 Jug US69 - 1 3 5YR7/6 5YR7/1 5YR7/6 L 4A SR M PA4A W _ UOReddish Light Reddish 3A SR PA3AYellow Gray Yellow 2C SR2 Krater US69 - 1 5 7.5YR6/4 . 7.5YRN5/ L 5A SR M PA5A W SM 7.5YR - 7.5YRN5/ - UOLight Gray 4A SR PA4A 7/4 GrayBrown 3A SR PR4A Pink2A SR PR3A3 Krater US69 - 1 2 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M PR3A W _ VRPink Pink 4A SA3A SR 2B SR4 Bowl US69 - 1 4 2.5YR6/8 2.5YRN6/ 2.5YR6/8 L 4A R M FS7A W WB7 . WB . UOLight Gray Light 3A R PA5ARed Red 2C R PA4APA3A5 Bowl US69 - 1 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 5A SA M _ W _ _ _ VRPink Light Pink 4A SAGray SR3A SR2A SR6 Bowl US70 - 1 1 2.5YRN6/ . 2.5YRN6/ L 5A SR L PA4A W _ . WB 2.5YR6/8 RiR URGray Gray 4A R PA3A Light2D R Red7. Krater US74 - 2 1 5YR6/8 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 5A SR M PA5A W SL . SL . VRReddish Gray Reddish 4A SR PA4A R + R +Yellow Yellow 3 A SR PR5A2A SR PR4APR3A8 Krater US74 - 1 2 5YR6/6 . 5YR5/1 5YR6/6 L 5A SA M PA5A W _ _ _ _ UOReddish Gray Reddish SR PR4AYellow Yellow 4A SR PR3A3A SR2B SR9 Krater US74 - 1 1 5YR7/3 . 5YR7/3 L 4A SR M PR3A W _ 7.5YR _ 7.5YR7/6 - VOPink Pink 3B SR 7/6 Reddish2B SR Reddish YellowYellow10 Bowl US78 - 1 1 5YR6/2 . 5YR6/2 L 4A SA M _ W . 7.5YR _ 7.5YR6/4 - URPinkish Pinkish 3A SR 6/4 LightGray Gray 2C SR Light BrownBrown11 Lid US83 - 1 1 5YR6/4 . 5YR6/4 L 6A SR MH _ W _ . _ _ URLight Light 5A SRReddish Reddish 4A SRBrown Brown 3A SA2B SA12 Jar US85 - 1 3 5YR7/6 . 5YR5/1 L 5A R M PR3A W _ _ _ . URReddish Gray SAYellow 4A SR3A SR2B SR13 Jug US85 - 1 1 5YR7/4 . 5YR7/4 L 4A SR L _ W _ . VOPink Pink 3A SR2C SR14 Bowl US85 - 1 2 5YR7/4 5YR7/1 5YR7/4 L 4A SR M PA3A W _ _ _ VRPink Light Pink 3A SR PR2AGray 2C SRP 6A SR15 Krater US85 - 1 4 5YR6/4 . 5YR5/1 L 5A SR M PA4A W . _ . UOLight Gray 4A SR PR4AReddish 3A SR PR3ABrown 2B SR16 Jug US88 - 2 2 5YR7/6 . 5YR7/4 L 2D SR L PA4A W . _ . 2.5YR6/6 - VOReddish Pink PA3A LightYellow Red17 Jug US88 - 3 2 2.5YR6/6 2.5YR6/2 2i5YR6/6 L 4A SR L . W _ . _ _ UOLight Pale Light 3A SRRed Red Red 2C SR18 Jug US88 - 2 1 2.5YR6/6 . 5YR7/4 L 5A R M PR3A W SL 7.5YR . 2.5YR6/6 - VOLight Pink 3A SR 8/4 LightRed 2C SR Pink RedFig. 12.123, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 1-18.333THE JUDGMENT SURVEYNo Type Sa Locus Pail Reg Fabric Color Non-Plastics Void* Manu Surface Treatment Decor FireExt Core Int Type Size Shape Density Ext Color Int Color19 Jugiet US88 - 3 1 5YR7/4 5YR7/4 L 4A SR L W VOPink Pink 3A SR2C SR20 Bowl US88 - 1 1 5YR7/6 5YR6/1 5YR7/6 L 6A SR M PA5A w _ _ . . UR ■Reddish Gray Reddish 5A SR PA4AYellow Yellow * 4A SR PA3A3B SR PR3A2B SR21 Cook pot US88 - 1 2 5YR6/4 * 5YR6/4 L 4A SR M PA5A w . 2.5YR . 2.5YR6/6 - URLight Light 3B SR PA4A 6/6 . LightReddish Reddish 2B SR PA3A lig h t RedBrown Brown PR2A Red22 Jug US88 - 3 3 2.5YR6/6 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/6 L 4A SR L PA7A w _ _ . . UOLight Gray Light 3A SRRed Red 2C SR23 Jug US93 - 1 2 2.5YR6/8 . 2.5YR6/8 L 5A SA M PA4A w _ _ _ UOLight Light 4A SA PA3ARed Red 3A SR PR3A2B SR24 Jar US93 - 1 1 2.5YR6/8 2.5YRN5/ 2.5YR6/8 L 6A SR M PA6A w SM 7.5YR SL 7.5YR5/2 - URLight Gray Light 5A SA PA5A 4/2 BrownRed Red 4A SR PA4A Brown3A SR PA3A2A SR PR3A25 Krater US93 - 1 3 2.5YR6/8 2.5YRN6/ 5YR6/6 L 5A SA M FS6A w . SL . SL UOLight Gray Reddish 4A SR PA5ARed Yellow 3B SR PA4A2B SR PA3APR3A26 Cook pot US - 1 1 5YR7/3 _ 5YR7/3 L 3A SR L FS6A w SL 7.5YR _ 7.5YR7/6 - VO101 Pink Pink 2D SR RB + 5/2 ReddishBrown Yellow27 Skeet US - 1 2 7.5YRN2/ . 7.5YRN2/ L 3A SA L _ w . . . Pa VR102 Black Black 2C SA brightorangeFig. 12.123, continued. Pottery descriptions for nos. 19-27.REFERENCESBoling, R. G.1989 Site Survey in the el-cUmeiri Region. Pp. 98-188 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Geraty, et al.1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-144.1988 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan.1989 Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.1990a 'Madaba Plains Project: The 1987 Season at Tell el- cUmeiri and Vicinity. Annual o f the Department of Antiquities o f Jordan 33: 145-176.1990b Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1987 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 26: 59-88.Ibach, Jr., R. D.1987 Archaeological Survey o f the Hesban Region: Catalogue o f Sites and Characteristics o f Periods. Hesban 5. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology/Andrews University.Lugenbeal, E. N. and Sauer, 1. A.1972 Pottery from Heshbon. Andrews University Seminary Studies 10: 21-69.334CHAPTER 13Architectural Remains from the Hinterland SurveyRandall W. Younker Andrews UniversityIntroductionIn our preliminary report for the 1984 season we noted the appearance of a number of round or rectangular structures within the survey region, often constructed with "megalithic" foundations. We suggested that these structures might be "farmsteads" (Geraty, et al. 1986:123). Further work during the 1987 season has enabled lis to refine our classification into five basic categories, only two of which are still classified as farmsteads. The categories are kilns, field shelters, small agricultural complexes (farmsteads), large agricultural complexes or "estates," and forts.In addition to this more refined classification scheme, further sherding and excavation indicate that more sites were occupied in the Persian and Hellenistic periods than had been thought, although it still seems clear that many of the sites were initially occupied in the early and later portions of the Iron II period (the period when the biblical Ammonites occupied the region). The one important exception was a large number of round stone structures that were originally thought to be round "towers" but which more careful examination and excavation determined were limekilns, probably of rather recent date. In the following sections the major categories of sites studied by the judgmental survey team are discussed in more detail.Kilns. Virtually all of the structures mentionedabove (farmsteads, field shelters, and forts) were rectangular in shape. However, as noted in our preliminary report for the 1984 season, a large number of the structures that the survey recorded were circular in shape (Geraty, et al. 1986:123). Additional examination in 1987 led us to the realization that there was remarkable uniformity in size (ca. 5.00 m in diameter) and method and components of construction (small field stones) of virtually all the circular structures. Initially, we thought that these structures represented variant forms of either farmsteads or field shelters. However, the thick walls (ca. 1.00 m), the lack of any obvious entrance, and the discovery of plaster on the interior walls of the structures led us to suspect they served some other function.Excavation of one of the structures uncovered a large amount of ceramic slag inside, supporting the hypothesis that they were originallyconstructed as kilns. (Note Christopherson’s fuller report in chapter 14, esp. fig. 14.4.)Determining the original time of construction for the kilns was more difficult, however. Dating the kilns on internal evidence proved to be virtually impossible because of the paucity of pottery sherds. R. Abujaber, whose family owns much of the land around the Tell el- Umeiri region, believed that his family may have built many of the kilns during the last century for the production of cement. While this was undoubtedly335ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEYthe case for some of the kilns, a quick check of findings from other surveys indicate that these structures may be ubiquitous throughout both Cis- and Transjordan. For example, the work of Applebaum, Dar and Zafrai (1978) in Samaria has revealed a large number of kilns throughout that region very similar to ours. They also found the kilns difficult to date, but the little evidence they were able to accumulate suggests that different kilns could have been constructed at a number of different times from the Roman period until the last century.It appears possible that some of the kilns may have been constructed in conjunction with various road projects that have been undertaken in the region from time to time since the Roman period. Reasons for suggesting this include the fact that many of the kilns were located immediately adjacent to ancient roads that criss-cross the region. Paving stones from many of these roads were set in place with cement, a product that could have been produced in the kilns.Field shelters. A few small, square or rectangular, rather isolated stone structures were observed in the fields away from the larger agricultural "complexes" or "estates." These isolated structures, varying in size from about3.00 m2 to 5.00 nr, did not appear much different from those of the small farmstead buildings (compare below), except that they appear to have generally been constructed of a single course of smaller "fieldstones" and were associated only with field walls and/or terraces.Fig. 13.1. Site 75: Plan of a field shelter.One of these small sites (Site 75) was of particular interest (fig. 13.1; see also figs. 12.37- 39, above). It was located at the top of the western slope of a large hill where it overlooked several ancient terraces immediately down slope and larger fields in the broad wadi at the bottom. The central feature of the site was a ca. 3.50 m x 4.85 m structure consisting of a single course of stones. The two large corner stones at the northwest and southwest corners had distinctive holes in their centers ca. 0.05 m wide and ca. 0.04 m deep. The tops of the holes are too sharp at the edges to have been used as common grinding cupholes for food preparation (see fig. 12.39, above). Rather, we believe they were intended to serve as postholes to support a light superstructure. A lean-to built on those foundation stones would have been ideal for overlooking the ancient terraces and agricultural fields immediately down slope.In support of this suggestion, the survey team noted that structures of similar design are still used by local farmers today (both in the fields where the farmers watch over their crops, and along roads where produce is sold). Rocks may help support the posts of the superstructure or simply outline the "boundary" of the shelter.Similar single-coursed stone foundations are sometimes constructed by the bedouin when they pitch their tents. The "foundation" does not necessarily support the tent, but rather serves to provide a low wall or boundary. When the bedouin move the tent they leave the stone "foundation" behind (Bienkowski 1985: 157).While these tents primarily serve as dwellings and not agricultural field shelters, they do illustrate how stone foundations can be used in temporary structures.Biblical data also point to the existence of more ephemeral field shelters in the countryside. Specifically, biblical texts indicate that there were basically three kinds of field structures all of which were intended to provide shelter for families, farmers or watchmen while they cared for the crops at critical times of the year. These included the sukkah, the milunah, and the migdal or stone "tower" (see Borowski 1987:106, and below). Of these three structures the first two, the sukkah and the milunah, may roughly correspond to what we would describe as "field shelters."As Borowski points out (1987:106), the sukkah and milunah were more temporary structures, perhaps a lean-to or tent of perishable vegetation, and would not be expected to leave much for the archaeological record. While exact information on how these structures were constructed is lacking in the biblical sources, the archaeological remains suggest that they were336ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEYprobably constructed in a similar fashion as those structures seen today: a simple rectangular foundation of a single course of small "field stones" intended to support a light, temporary superstructure of wood, vegetation, skins, or cloth.Preliminary sherding indicates that the majority of these sites were utilized during the Iron II through Byzantine periods with the Iron II, Roman, and Byzantine periods most heavily represented.Small agricultural complexes (farmsteads). Besides the small outlying field shelters, the judgmental survey team located a number of larger structures which were distinguished by both megalithic foundation courses and multiple coursed walls (fig. 13.2; see also figs. 12.33-36). These structures were also associated with numerous agricultural features such as perimeter, field, and terrace walls, bedrock winepresses, millstones, caves (sometimes used as storage cellars for wine, etc.), and a wide variety of cupholes cut into the bedrock (most probably used for preparing different kinds of food).N)Fig. 13,2. Site 74: Plan of a small agricultural complex.Although we have already suggested that some of the megalithic structures found in 1984 should be described as agricultural towers or fortified farmsteads (Geraty, et al. 1986: 123-124), the discovery of distinctive agricultural features in association with these structures has added further support to this suggestion. This understanding wasreflected in our preliminary reports for the 1987 season where we divided these structures into two categories: "small" and ’’large" agricultural complexes (Geraty, et al. 1990: 65-70). The smaller sites had central "towers" or buildings ranging in size from approximately 3.00 m x3.00 m to about 4.00 m x 5.00 m; the larger agricultural complexes ranged in size from about6.00 m x 6.00 m to ca. 15.00 m x 16.00 m and larger.Since surface sherding indicated that many of the smaller structures were initially built during the Iron II period (eighth to sixth centuries B.C., although most were reused in the Roman and Byzantine periods), it is reasonable to compare them with the biblical migdalim ("towers") specifically noted for being scattered throughout the countryside (e.g. 2 Chr 26:10; 27:4). Survey sites which generally match this description include Sites 60, 71, 74, 77, 83, 88, 90, 101, 102, 106, 109 (see chapter 12 for a fuller description of each of these sites).While the field shelters (sukkah and melunah) were rather poorly constructed and temporary, the migdal was a more substantial permanent stone structure, fairly ubiquitous throughout the countryside and therefore more likely to leave an obvious mark in the archaeological record.An excellent description of such an agricultural migdal (watchtower) is found in Isaiah 5:1-7. It is interesting to note that this biblical passage describes several agricultural features typical of what our survey team found at these sites, such as stone piles from field clearings, winepresses, enclosure walls, as well as the tower, or migdal, itself.It should be noted at this point that biblical usage suggests that migdalim can actually be divided into two classes: those built by the state and those built by private individuals. While both types would have provided the same basic function (observing the surrounding region) there were important differences as well. Privately owned migdalim would have generally been restricted to providing an observation post, shelter, and perhaps a seasonal or permanent residency for those individuals responsible for caring for and protecting agricultural fields.Although state-owned migdalim could have provided a similar service for state-owned agricultural fields (e.g., 2 Chr 26:10), they also apparently functioned as components of a general communication network that could double as a military "early warning" system for the defense of the country. A. Mazar has reported many such structures throughout the Judaean hills (Mazar 1982a; 1982b). However, these state-run migdalim should not be regarded simply as "forts" (i.e.,337ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEYfortified structures that house military garrisons). The latter should probably be identified with the biblical biraniyot (see Mazar 1982b: 106; and below). The primary functions of the migdalim were observation and communication.Few, if any, of the migdalim found in the immediate area around Tell el-cUmeiri could be classified as state-run military or signal towers. In general, they were not built on high hill tops and did not command strategic views of the surrounding region, at least not militarily strategic views. Good examples of state-run migdalim in central Transjordan would probably include the rujum malfufah. These are very large, round towers (often called "Ammonite towers") which seem to be concentrated around ancient Amman (fig. 13.3).By contrast, the smaller structures around Tell el-cUmeiri were generally located on spurs of hills overlooking agricultural fields and vineyards, often in association with terraces and field walls. In short, they, appear to be smaller (albeit frequently of megalithic construction) privately- built agricultural watchtowers and/or farmsteads. Their permanent stone construction would suggest that the fields they watched were intended for long term use associated with intensive agricultural production. Their repeated use is supported by the ceramic evidence, which indicates activity in the Late Iron II, Early Persian, Late Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine periods.Large agricultural complexes (estates). A number of larger agricultural complexes, which dated to the same periods, were also identified. They range in size from about 9.00 x 9.00 m to roughly 15.00 X 16.00 m and larger (those on the larger end of the scale m ight be more appropriately called "estates").A good example of one of these, Rujm Selim (Site 34), was excavated in the 1987 season (fig..13.4). The central structure, which consisted of a "megalithic" foundation, measured ca. 9.00 x9.50 m. Features associated with the building included two cisterns, numerous cupholes, two bedrock winepresses, a large vat, a perimeter wall, and several quarries. All of these are typical of an agricultural complex. Other sites which fall into this category include Sites 10, 18, 19, 22, 23, 31, 35,37, 38, 43, 45, 47, 78, 84, 85,100, and 102 (see Boling 1989 and c h a p t e r 12, a b o v e , f o r descriptions).Excellent parallels for these agricultural complexes have been reported in the hill country around Jerusalem at sites such] as Hurvat cEn- Tutt, Khirbet er-Ras, and Ein Yalu (Edelstein and Gat 1980-81; 1982). Khirbet er-Ras, for example, included terraces, a perimeter j(enclosure) wall, water cisterns, a winepress, cave, an interfield road, and an out-building, all surrounding a large, (ca. 14.70 x 9.80 m) "four-room" house.The only real differences between the "farm units" reported around Jerusalem and the agricultural ''farmsteads" near Tell el-cUmeiri and Amman are the masonry and plan of construction of the dominant building on| the site. Near Jerusalem, as noted, the central building was constructed according to the "jfour-room" house plan using pillars, etc., while Ithe rooms of the central Transjordanian buildings are divided differently and are of "megalithic" construction with the stones roughly shaped.] While four-room structures do occasionally occur in this region (see, for example, chapter 3; Ibrahim 1975: 72- 73), they don’t seem to be as! ubiquitous as in western Palestine, and are restricted to tell sites.Although we initially thought that the larger ancient megalithic buildings around Amman were primarily intended to serve as military "towers" or "forts," it now appears that] this method of construction was used in antiquity for a large variety of structures. This construction method was probably dictated, at least in part, by the nature of the stone that is predominate in the area, a possibility already noted by Glueck in his earlier survey of the region (1939:167]). Specifically, the hard, glassy flint or chert that is fairly abundanti ~Jj r p ti .tttr %■ g . ]^;Fig. 13.3. A rujm maljuf: a round "Ammonite Tower."338ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEY0aCPFig. 13.4. Site 34: Plan of Rujm Selim, a large agricultural complex.around Amman is more difficult to cut into smaller squared off blocks than regular limestone. The builders were apparently satisfied to use the larger rough blocks that were initially hewed out of the quarry. As Banning (1985:6) has noted, "It would in fact require less labor to break large blocks of chert from the thick outcropping strata and to stack them, undressed, in walls, than to attempt to hew smaller blocks...." In the Wadi al- Hasa region, Banning continues, "naturalweathering of the (rock) beds has often begun the ‘stockpiling’ of such large blocks," making them "the most easily available raw material for construction of these isolated buildings" {ibid.).It indeed would take less labor to hew out larger, rougher stones; but that type of construction also may have been preferred in central Transjordan because masonry skills were not as well developed among the population. A similar situation appears to have existed for the Iron Age Cis-Jordanian kingdoms, of Israel and Judah. As has been often noted, Solomon was forced to hire Phoenicians for his royal building projects because his own masons lacked the skills necessary for the quality of work he desired. Imported Phoenician masons apparently continued to be employed down into the times of the Divided Monarchy, as archaeological evidence from both Israel and Judah would suggest, although the skill of the local masons undoubtedly improved during this time.Similarly, the peoples of the central Transjordanian plateau may have lacked the financial resources to import and/or train highly skilled masons in the earlier periods of then- region’s history and may have had to settle for what the local workers could provide, especially in the rural areas. Thus, rather than indicating the function of the building (i.e., tower, etc.), the megalithic construction may simply reflect what was locally available both in terms of local raw materials as well as skilled workers and financial resources.It should also be pointed out that there are many different sizes and shapes of central Transjordanian buildings that employ megalithic construction. For example, the rujum malfufah, the qasrs, as well as the wide variety of farmsteads, etc. (described above), all display megalithic construction. This, too, supports the idea that the size of the building stones reflect, not so much the function of the structure, as simply the general method of construction that was used throughout ancient central Transjordan.Apart from the size of the actual stones used in construction and the internal configurations, the overall size and dimensions of the central Transjordanian buildings are virtually the same as those of the Jerusalem "farm" buildings. Initially, the large size of some of the buildings argued that they could not be simple "private" buildings, but339ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEYAfc.SSmFig. 13.5. Plan of El-Dreijat.JlSTm-340ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEYrather must have served some sort of "administrative" capacity. However, the average central Transjordanian building was somewhat smaller than the Judahite farm building at Khirbet er-Ras (e.g., Rujm Selim which was only about9.00 x 9.50 m). Further, the fact that the central Transjordanian buildings have the same conglomeration of agricultural features adds more support to the idea that the central building itself is the counterpart to the Cis-Jordanian farmhouse.Forts. At least one site located within the area of our regional survey could possibly be classified as a fort in the sense of the Hebrew biraniyot. Presently known as el-Dreijat ("the stairs"), and first identified by Fohrer as Site D (1961: 60), it was later described by the Hesban Survey as Site 135 (Ibach 1987: 28-29). The site was not assigned a number by our survey team. It is located on the summit of a high hill approximately 2.80 km southwest of Tell el-cUmeiri, coordinates 2328.1398 (fig. 13.5).El-Dreijat is strategically located on a high ridge: being in an ideal position to have guarded the southern and southwestern approaches to Tell el-cUmeiri. It also visually communicated with other important sites such as Tell Jawa (South) to the east. Its size was more than adequate to house a military garrison. Indeed, el-Dreijat is actually larger than Qasr es-Sar, another well-known "Ammonite fortress," which measures only ca.20.0 x 20.0 m, although el-Dreijat’s poor state of preservation makes it seem less imposing (Glueck 1939:153). On the other hand, el-Dreijat is smaller than some of the other "Ammonite Fortresses" such as Qasr Khilda (A) which measures ca. 45.0 x 34.0 m (Glueck 1939:164, 165; Yassine 1989:18).Although the site was not initially documented in 1987, a later visit by one of our teams did a more thorough preliminary investigation of the site in preparation for excavation in 1989. The best preserved wall of the structure is on the west side. The wall extends for about 26.85 m along the ridge in a north-south direction and appears to have served as an exterior wall. On the northernside, the east-west exterior wall extends for about 21.10 m. The east-west exterior wall on the south side measured about 22.57 m. The north-south exterior wall on the east side could not be measured accurately because of its poor preservation.All of the exterior walls are built of the typical massive unhewn chert boulders (ranging from about 1.10-2.00 m in diameter) so common in the region. Two major east-west interior walls are joined to the western exterior wall. The southern-most interior wall is about 7.80 m north of the southern exterior wall and the northernmost interior wall is about 5.15 m south of the northern exterior wall. These two interior walls appear to have at one time extended across and joined the north-south wall on the eastern side. It is possible that major interior walls such as these were needed to support a second story. The interior is divided into several rooms of varying size, undoubtedly serving different purposes such as storage, food preparation and living.Caves and a large cistern were located nearby, although field walls, winepresses, and other features generally associated with the farmhouses appeared to be missing. The 132 sherds collected by the Ibach survey were exclusively Iron I and II, although Fohrer reported Roman, Byzantine and modern as well (Ibach 1987: 29; Fohrer 1961: 60). Based on the data described above it would seem that this building was originally intended to serve a military purpose and, therefore, should be classified as a genuine "Ammonite tower" (although I would prefer the term "fort"). On the other hand, it is quite possible that this structure ceased to serve this function in later times as political conditions changed.In my view, neither the migdalim nor the biraniyot were really intended to defend the land from any large scale invasion per se. Any large army would simply overwhelm or bypass these small forts and towers (as the Assyrians, etc., indeed did). Rather, they were intended to protect border lands and newly acquired territories from smaller raiding parties (e.g., Judg 6:2, 3; 2 Chr 26:10).341ARCHITECTURAL REMAINS FROM THE HINTERLAND SURVEYREFERENCESApplebaum, S.; Dar, S.; and Zafrai, Z.1978 The Towers of Samaria. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 110: 91-100.Glueck, N.1937 Exploration in the Land of Ammon. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 69: 19.Banning, E. B.1985 "Towers" on the Transjordanian Plateau. A paper presented at the ASOR meetings, November 1985, Anaheim, California.Bienkowski, P.1985 Beduin Architecture in Petra. World Archaeology 17.2: 149-160.Boling, R. G.1989 Site Survey in the el-cUmeiri Region. Pp. 98-188 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, el al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Borowski, O.1987 Agriculture in Iron Age Israel. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.Domemann, R.1983 The Archaeology o f the Transjordan. Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Museum.Edelstein, E. and Gat, Y.1980-81 Terraces Around Jerusalem. Israel — Land and Nature. 6.2: 72-78.1982 Ancient Jerusalem’s Rural Food Basket. Biblical Archaeology Review. 8.4: 46-54.1951 Explorations in Eastern Palestine TV. Annual o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 25-28.1970 The Other Side o f the Jordan. Cambridge: American Schools of Oriental Research.Hentschke, R.1960 Ammonitische Grenzfestungen sudwestlich von3ammon. Zeitschrijt des Deutscken Palastina-Vereins 76: 103-123.Ibach, Jr., R. D.1987 Archaeolgical Survey o f the Hesban Region:Catalogue o f Sites and Characterization o f Periods. Hesban 5. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology/Andrews University.Ibrahim, M.1975 Third Season of Excavations at Sahab, 1975(Preliminary Report). Annual o f the Department of Antiquities o f Jordan 20: 69-82.Landes, G. M.1961 The Material Culture of the Ammonites. The Biblical Archaeologist 24.3: 66-86.MacDonald, B.; Rollefson, G. O.; and Roller, D. W.1982 The Wadi el Hasa Survey 1981: A Preliminary Report. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities Of Jordan 26: 117-131.Fohrer, G.1961 Eisenzeitliche Anlagen im Raume sudlich von nacur und die sudwestgrenze von Ammon. Zeitschrijt des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins TT: 56-71.Geraty, L. T., et al.1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-144.1990 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1987 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 26: 59-88.Mayerson, P.1962 The Ancient Agricultural Regime at Nessana and the Central Negeb. Pp. 249-257 in Excavations at Nessana, Vol. 1, ed. H. D. Colt. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.1985 Wine and Vineyards of Byzantine Gaza. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 257: 75- 80.Mazar. A.1981 Giloh: An Early Israelite Settlement Site NearJerusalem. Israel Exploration Journal 31: 1-36.1982a Three Israelite Sites in the Hills of Judah andEphraim. The Biblical Archaeologist 45.3: 167-178.Gese, H.1958 Ammonitische Grenzfestungen zwischen wadi essir und nacir. Zeitschrijt des Deutschen Palastina- Vereins 74: 55-64.de Geus, C. H. J.1975 The Importance of Archaeological Research into Palestinian Agricultural Terraces with an Excursus on the Hebrew Word gbi. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 107: 65-74.1982b Iron Age Fortresses in the Judean Hills. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 114: 87-109.Ron, Z.1966 Agricultural Terraces in the Judean Mountains. Israel Exploration Journal 16: 33-49, 111-122.Yassine, K.1989 Archaeology o f Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman,Jordan: University of Jordan.342CHAPTER 14Limekilns from the Regional SurveyGary L. Christopherson University o f ArizonaIntroductionGiven the importance of lime plasters in both the ancient and modern societies of Syria-Palestine it is not surprising that the 1987 Regional Survey discovered a number of limekilns. It is surprising, however, that what must have been an almost ubiquitous feature of ancient material culture is little known in archeological literature. It appears likely that many kilns have gone unrecognized and/or been mislabeled. Even our own survey initially failed to recognize these structures as kilns, giving them instead tentative, but more "exciting," titles such as "towers" (Boling 1989) or, in keeping with the survey’s emphasis on food systems, "silos," "reservoirs," or "specialized vegetable production units."As the survey continued to encounter kilns on a regular basis, their importance to the economy of the region became increasingly clear and an attempt was made to answer questions concerning their construction, function, and date by conducting a small excavation at Site 70. This paper is an analysis of survey and excavation data collected during the 1987 season and reaches two fundamental conclusions: first, the majority of these kilns should be dated to the Roman/ Byzantine period; second, the manufacture of quick lime was an integral component of the rural economic base in the region. This discussion will begin with a brief look at limekiln technology, followed by a report of the kilns in the Tell el-cUmeiri region, and conclude with questions regarding their temporal and economic contexts.Limekiln TechnologyA product of limestone, lime plaster is a pliable material which can be molded and shaped, but, which when cured, approaches its original hardness while retaining its molded shape. Three simple steps accomplish these transformations: 1) The limestone is heated to ca. 900° C, causing its decomposition into components of calcium carbonate and calcium oxide [CaC03(s) CaO(s) + C02(g)], or quicklime; 2) The quicklime is hydrated and the resultant mixture is combined with a temper such as sand to produce an adhesive paste which can be molded and smoothed as needed; 3) Following the loss of plasticity through natural evaporation, hardening of the material occurs over a period of time as it reacts with atmospheric carbon dioxide to reform its original chemical composition of CaC03 (Gourdin and Kingery 1975: 135-138). The obvious advantages of this product in the construction of buildings, cisterns, roads, etc., have served to make lime plasters important from the Pre-pottery Neolithic period until today.The first of these steps is the most difficult, though it is relatively simple to overcome through the use of non-complex shaft kilns. The modern343LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYshaft kiln is one in which both fuel and ore are in direct contact with one another. A natural draft system provides enough heat for burning lime, but not for smelting metals. In design, they are circular, often partly below and partly above the natural surface, with a greater depth than width (Forbes 1966: 76).This description of the modern shaft kiln would serve equally well for the kilns of antiquity. Cato, in his discussion of Roman farming methods, instructs his readers to dig their limekilns twenty feet deep and ten feet in diameter. If it was not possible to dig the kiln this deep, a wall of small stones and clay mortar was to be added above the surface. The kilns were to have either a single or a double draft and a pit for the capture of ashes (Cato XXXVIII: 1-3).Although Cato does not mention the type of fuel used in these kilns, it was likely wood. This is suggested by the placement of his discussion of kilns immediately after his section on the annual tasks of pruning and wood cutting. The wood and the raw limestone were placed in the kiln in alternating layers and the initial fire built in the kiln’s draft (Hareuveni 1984: 78). As this fire spread through the kiln, temperatures reached a level sufficient to decompose the limestone. This simple kiln design is found, generally with some modification, throughout the area of the Roman world (Neuburger 1930: 407), includingTransjordan, and is still used today in certain parts of what was once the Roman Empire. The author has seen such a functioning kiln near Bethlehem, which differs little from this description in Cato. Other examples of modern kilns are mentioned in the literature, see especially Neuberger (1930: 407) and Wulf (1966: 125-127).Although the technology involved in the production of lime plasters is relatively simple, the expense in raw materials and manpower is great. In order to produce 1.00 ton of lime plaster, 1.50 to 2.00 tons of limestone and 2.00 tons of wood are necessary (William Kingery 1988, personal communication). Add to this the manpower involved in building the kiln, collecting the tons of limestone and fuel, firing of the kiln, removing the burned lime, mixing the lime with water and temper, and finally using the plaster in construction. It is obvious that the lime plaster industry was a very labor/energy intensive operation and its product would have been expensive. In fact, the amount of labor involved makes it likely that lime plaster was in some respects a luxury item, especially during the earliest periods of its use. Further, the production of plaster for even a moderately sized Roman/Byzantine city in the Levant would represent a substantial industry. Consider forexample the site of neolithic Yiftahel, where it is estimated that as much as seven tons of quicklime were used in the construction of a single house (William Kingery 1988, personal communication). This represents a minimum of 10.50 tons of limestone, 14.00 tons of wood, and countless man-hours to supply plaster for a single structure.Kilns in the Tell el-cUmeiri Survey RegionThe survey included sites within a 5.00 km radius of Tell el-cUmeiri (see fig. 12.1, above). During the 1987 season, the survey team identified 26 limekilns: 18 newly discovered kilns were found at Sites 56, 57, 70, 71, 78, 79, 80, 82, 88, 92, 97, 98, 99, 100, 112, 113, 114, and 115, while circular structures from the 1984 survey were revisited and re-identified as kilns at Sites 8 (2 kilns), 13, 15, 18, 41, 48, 50. Additionally, the descriptions and photographs of three circular structures from the 1984 survey (Sites 40, 45, and 46) indicate that these are most likely limekilns. However, because they were not revisited during the 1987 season they are not included. For additional data on the sites considered below, see Boling (1989) for sites numbered 1-55, and chapter 12 (above) for sites between 56-115.Geographically, the survey region varies from steep slopes to flat plains, and from forests of Aleppo pine to eroded hillsides to fertile agricultural land. Ancient sites range from urban centers to agricultural complexes. Throughout this varied environment, limekilns were found. The majority were located on the slopes at the end of natural and man-made terraces (e.g., Sites 8, 13, 18, 57); others were situated on the edge of agricultural fields at the base of the slopes (eg. 15, 70, 80, 82); and one was found in a field presently under cultivation (Site 112). The most obvious connection these kilns had with each other was their location within clearly agricultural contexts. Only the kiln at Site 57, in the context of an ancient urban center, might be considered an exception.Although the survey identified three distinctive kiln types (below), all three corresponded to the basic design characteristics of shaft kilns discussed above. Composed of both sub- and supraterranean elements, their circular shape was distinctive enough that they were easily identified in aerial photographs. Surface examination generally revealed a small mound, the central depression of which was partially filled with the collapsed upper courses of the kiln’s superstructure. This was ordinarily composed of large cobbles and small boulders, although in some cases larger boulders were used in the foundation courses. In the better344LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYpreserved kilns, remains of mortar or cement were often found in patches. In the western quadrant of the kiln, a corbelled passageway running beneath the wall was often visible. This passageway likely served to catch the predominant westerly winds, thus acting as a natural draft. Ceramic slag was almost always found on the surface, in and around the kilns.Fuel for the kilns of the Tell el-cUmeiri region likely came from two sources. In spite of the fact that wood was a relatively valuable resource, it seems likely that it was used as fuel, because many of the kilns were placed on slopes which were obviously terraced in antiquity and where wood from pruning would have been available. An alternate source of fuel was the locally abundant shrub Sarcopoterium spinosum, a low thorny bush common to the area. The burning of this bush creates sufficient heat to decompose limestone and its use for this purpose has been observed in Palestine (Hareuveni 1984: 78; Dar 1986: 211). Although this rapidly burning shrub creates a hot fire, it is constantly in need of replenishment. A single firing of a small kiln requires from 700 to 100 bundles of this bush and 5000 to 7000 bundles are necessary to produce two tons of quicklime (Dar 1986: 211). Although this shrub is abundant in the area, the tremendous amount of labor involved in its collection make it likely that wood was used whenever possible.As mentioned above, the survey detected three basic types of kilns in the survey area, referred to here as Types 1, 2 and 3. (Kilns from Sites 40, 45, 46, 100, and 115 have not been assigned to any type, because they have either been significantly damaged by later c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s or insufficiently investigated).Type 1 Kilns. Type 1 was the most common kiln type with fourteen examples found at Sites 8 (two examples), 13, 15, 18, 41, 48,71, 82, 88, 92, 99, 112, and 113. It corresponded best to the description of shaft kilns given above. Surface examination revealed a simple circular wall of stones around a central, rubble-filled depression ca.1.00-1.50 m deep (fig. 14.1).The interior dimensions were remarkably regular with most having an interior diameter of either4.00 m or 5.00 m with a range of about 3.80 meters at Site 82 to about 6.30 m at Site 8. Only this latter is clearly outside the norm for kilns of this region. The width ofthe walls was difficult to determine with precision because accumulated debris masked their faces. In general, though, they ranged between ca. 1.50-3.00 m with the majority ca. 2.00-2.50 m thick.Four of these kilns, Sites 8, 15, 82, and 99, have clearly visible passageways in their western quadrants. These passageways cut into the topsoil, sloped toward bedrock, cut through the kiln wall, and were covered with corbel stones as they passed through the wall. Most notable of these was Site 8 whose passageway was ca. 1.00 m wide and ca. 3.00 m long. The corbel stones for this passage measured ca. 1.00 x 0.40 x 0.40 m. Although passageways such as this were not always visible, the presence of corbel stones in the rubble and depressions in the western quadrants of the kiln walls indicated that they were likely present.Type 2 Kilns. Eight Type 2 kilns were recorded by the survey. Located at Sites 50, 56, 70, 78, 79, 80, 97, and 114, they differ from Type 1 kilns in that they were dug into a hillside next to one of the many limestone outcrops in the region. Their superstructure was constructed of a stone wall which curved to meet the outcrop, creating a semi-circular kiln whose back wall was formed by bedrock (fig. 14.2).The preservation of Type 2 kilns was superior to those of Type 1 and patches of mortar or cement on the inner face of the kiln wall were sometimes visible. Their exposed depth averaged just under 2.00 m with no kiln less than 1.50 m deep. Additionally, the dimensions were even more regular than those of Type 1. The thickness of their walls lay between 2.20-2.75 m. Four ofFig. 14.1. A Type 1 kiln at Survey Site 71.345LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYinside of the kiln and broken only- *AV > >; ' ■ < * r,K *y - & * * * * ■ * i JV:.* „-v • • ■ < -siFig. 14.2. A Type 2 kiln at Survey Sits 56.the eight kilns (Sites 50, 70, 78, and 79) had inside diameters of ca. 5.00 m, while the remaining varied from 4.00-4.50 m. Finally, the walls of each of these kilns had clear depressions in the western quadrant, and in four of them (Sites 56, 70, 78, 80) the tops of corbel stones could be seen leading into the depressions.The different construction method and enhanced state of preservation suggests that the origins of Type 2 kilns maty have been later than those of Type 1 kilns, but at present there is insufficient data to support this assertion. Indeed, it is just as likely that the differences reflect whether or not a bedrock outcrop was available at construction. ,Type 3 Kilns. Two remaining kilns, those at Sites 57 and 98, have been labeled Type 3. They closely resemble Type 1 kilns, but the use of concrete in their construction has resulted in their outstanding state of preservation.The two examples are located on the north slope of the Wadi el- Hajal, approximately 0.50 km apart.Like those of Type 1, they did not utilize bedrock in their construction.Their substructures w ere. sunk in flat areas on natural terraces, with the remains of their cemented interiors rising only slightly above the natural surface. This cement was in an excellent state of preservation, continuing around thewhere the corbelled passageway entered. iBeing the leafst overgrown, the kiln at Site 57 (fig. 14,3; see also figs. 12.3-4, above) was most accessible for examination. Atop this kiln a single line of stones rested on the surface following the curve of the substructure. Behind this line of stones was a pile of broken cobbles, j presumably the remains of raw material intended for burning in the kiln. The corbelled passageway at Site 57 was among the best preserved of all kiln sites. This passageway was home to a jackal,' who I kept it partially cleared of debris. A cursory examination revealed corbel stones resting atop the sides of the passage as it sloped downward toward the kiln’s interior.The amount of debris in the Type 3 kilns was minimal, consisting mainly of [ wall collapse ca.1.50 m deep at Site 57 and ca. 2.00 m deep at Site 98. The interiors of these [ kilns were almost perfectly round, with interior diameters of about4.30 m and 4.90 m, and walls) about 2.40 m Mid2.50 m thick. The excellent state of preservation and the minimal debris associated with them, strongly suggests that they we!re later than both Type 1 and Type 2 kilns.Fig. 14.3. A Type 3 kiln at Survey Site 57.LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYExcavation of Site 70During the 1987 Season, the survey conducted a short excavation of the limekiln at Site 70, under the supervision of the writer. The site (map coordinates 1419.2320) sits at the base of the northern slope of Wadi el-Bisharat just above agricultural fields. The ephemeral remains of ancient terraces line the slope above the kiln. To the south, across the Wadi and atop the ridge, is a large, predominantly Roman/Byzantine tell, Site 57. Flanked by ancient agricultural sites on the east (Site 56) and west (Site 58), Site 70 is located in an area which suggests extensive farming activity in antiquity, most notably during the Byzantine period.The kiln itself (see figs. 12.22-23, above) was composed of a wall between 2.25-2.75 m thick. The uncut field stones of the wall ranged in size from large cobbles to small boulders. The wall was built against a bedrock outcrop, creating a semi-circular structure. Traces of a concrete or plaster lining were visible at places on the interior, while earth obscured its exterior face. An opening through the wall faced toward the southwest, catching the winds which travel down the wadi. The inside diameter was 5.00 m and its exposed depth varied between 1.50-2.50 m. Rubble partially filled the structure, from which ironically (because of its possible use as a fuel for the kiln) grew the dwarf shrub vegetation common to the region, Sarcopoterium spinosum. Beneath the overhang of the bedrock outcrop the remains of a jackal were found. (These structures seem to be favorites of the local jackals, as we encountered more than one while visiting kilns.)Pottery was sparse with seven sherds collected from the surface, only one of which, a rim sherd from a Byzantine jar, was diagnostic.Excavation Description. Site 70 was excavated for three reasons: 1) it was a typical kiln, 2) it was near a major tell (Site 57), and 3) it was relatively well preserved. The primary objectives were to establish the function of the structure, to understand its construction, and to place it in a temporal context. Probe 1 was situated outside the structure and was designed to clear debris from the outer face of the wall and the passageway. Probe 2 was inside the structure, directly opposite Probe 1 (see fig. 12.22, above).Phase 4 (Pre-kiln deposits). Excavation outside the kiln wall in Probe 1 reached terra rossa virgin soil (Locus 1.6). In Probe 2, a layer of virgin soil 0.75 m thick was also noted beneath the stones of the kiln wall. The builders apparently did not deem it necessary to found the wall on bedrock.Phase 3 (Kiln construction). Probe 1 revealed the outer face of the main wall, the southern half of the passageway, and a short buttressing wall (fig. 14.4). The main wall (Locus 1.2) was composed of undressed field stones ranging in size from large cobbles to medium boulders with chinkstones filling the inter-spaces. The stones were dry-laid, with no evidence of mortar and founded directly on the surface of Phase 4 virgin soil.Cutting through the wall was the corbelled passageway, measuring ca. 1.00 m wide and ca. 0.70 m high, and following a down-sloping trajectory toward the kiln’s interior. The length of this passage could not be determined, since it disappeared into the balk and, mysteriously, did not reappear in Probe 2 where it was expected to enter the kiln interior.The passageway was constructed of large, rough-hewn, rectangular-shaped corbel stones ca.1.25 m x 0.30 m x 0.30 m in size. They were supported by stones which lined the sides of the passageway ranging in size from small-to-medium boulders. These stones were unhewn, but seemed to have been chosen especially for their flatness. They were stacked so their flat sides became theFig. 14.4. Probe 1 at Survey Site 70, showing the outer face of the kiln wall and the corbelled passageway.347LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYexposed surface of the passageway with the corbel stones resting on top of them.Flanking the passageway to the south, and at right angles to the main kiln wall were two courses of a buttressing wall (Locus 1.4), ca. 1.25 m long. This short wall likely supported the kiln’s main wall and helped keep the draft clear of debris. Behind the wall and sealed against it was a compact fill (Locus 1.8) that was likely deposited when the substructure of the kiln was dug. It probably functioned to support the lower courses of the kiln’s superstructure.Probe 2 revealed the inner face of the kiln wall (fig. 14.5). Consistent with the findings in Probe 1, there was no evidence of a foundation trench. Its founding course was between 0.30-0.50 m wider than the superstructure. The materials and methods of construction were identical to those encountered in Probe 1. The only differences in the appearance of the wall face were the presence of an earth inclusion, an animal burrow (likely the work of jackals), and an ashy gray tint to the stones. The earth inclusion was reddish in color (10YR5/6) and, along with the gray tinted stones, suggested high temperatures associated with the use of the structure. As withFig. 14.5. Probe 2 at Survey Site 70, showing the inner face of the kiln wall and a mini-probe through ceramic slag to bedrock.Probe 1, Probe 2 did not reveal any mortar or facing material, although a mortar or concrete facing was evident elsewhere in the kiln’s interior.Phase 2 (Kiln use). A microthin layer of ash (10YR6/1) was bonded to the bedrock surface inside the kiln. When it was removed by scraping, a portion of bedrock also was removed. The two could not be separated. Above this, a thin layer of terra rossa (Locus 2.8), as much as 0.03 m thick in places, probably found its way to the bedrock surface during loading of the kiln. Above the terra rossa was a layer (Locus 2.4) made up entirely of ceramic slag 0.70 m thick and completely filling the bottom of Probe 2. Although 15 small (ca. 0.07 m diameter) plaster fragments and a few small pieces of charcoal were taken from the slag, no pottery or datable artifacts were recovered from this phase.Outside the kiln, there was little evidence for Phase 2. Ceramic slag became more common as the probe neared virgin soil, but there was no sign of a use surface in Probe 1. Between the compact earth of Locus 1.8 and the fill layer above it was a chunk of plaster the size of a large cobble, indicating that Locus 1.8 was exposed during this phase. As was the case inside the kiln, no pottery, bones, charcoal, or other artifacts were recovered from this phase in Probe 1.Phase 1 (Post-Hln deposits). Inside the kiln, a compact fill of boulders and cobbles was found mixed with earth (Locus 2.3). Tip lines sloping toward the center of the kiln suggested that the fill was primarily debris from the collapse of the superstructure. Ceramic slag increased toward the bottom of this layer, but no pottery or ash, and only a few small pieces of charcoal were found. Above this, a thin (ca. 0.10 m thick), loose layer of pebbles and cobbles filled the central depression and included a few fragments of ceramic slag and four body sherds, none of which could be used for chronological purposes.In Probe 1, the post-kiln deposits were divided into four loci. Locus 1.5 was approximately 0.25 m thick and composed of fairly compact earth. It lay directly in front of the passageway and north of the buttressing wall, but contained no pottery or other artifacts. Above this, Fill 1.3 contained more stones and extended over the remains of the buttressing wall of Phase 3. The stones of this fill were primarily boulders and cobbles similar in size and dressing to the wall stones and undoubtedly represent the collapse of this wall. Three body sherds of undeterminable date were found in Locus 1.3. Above this was a very loose topsoil (Locus 1.1) ca. 0.05 m thick: Ceramic slag was found in each of these three loci, and increased in quantity as the probe deepened.348LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYThe final post-kiln locus from Probe 1 (Locus1.7) was within the passageway which cut through the main kiln wall. Apparently utilized by jackals, the passageway was only partially filled by debris (ca. 0.55-0.45 m deep), leaving an approximately 0.15-0.25 m space at the top which could be followed for ca. 1.10 m along the passageway. (The passageway certainly continued, but because it was completely filled with debris after the jackal’s den gave out, it was impossible to determine its exact length.)Within the debris of Locus 1.7, an ash inclusion ca. 0.05 m thick and ca. 0.40 m long was discovered about 0.25 m above virgin terra rossa. Its position in post-kiln debris makes it unlikely that this ash was connected with the firing of the kiln. Rather, it seems to have been the remains either of a campfire, or of a smoke fire to force a jackal or some other animal out of the den.Interpretation. Excavation of the kiln at Site 70 accomplished the first and second of our three primary objectives (establishing function and method of construction), but failed with regard to the third (establishing a date for the structure).The structure was clearly a simple shaft kiln, intended to be partially above and below ground level. It seems likely that the wall and its simple draft were constructed initially (Phase 3). Following this, the interior was cleared to bedrock, following the line of the interior face of the kiln wall. This would explain the presence of the terra rossa soil beneath the wall, but not in the kiln center. The fact that the corbelled passageway, so clear in Probe 1, did not appear in Probe 2 indicates that the draft system was more complex than anticipated, perhaps turning or splitting into smaller drafts. Such complexity may explain the earth inclusions in the face of the inner wall.The discovery of a solid layer of ceramic slag and the presence of lime plaster clearly establish that the structure functioned as a limekiln. The slag was formed by the action of the heat generated by the kiln on the clay-like terra rossa soil of the area (William Kingery 1988, personal communication). The huge quantity of slag in the kiln at Site 70 indicated that substantial amounts of soil were placed in the kiln along with the limestone and fuel. This may mean that uncleaned field stones were the primary source of raw material used in the kiln, since stones either quarried or robbed from existing structures would likely be less contaminated with soil. If true, this use of fieldstones suggests a close relationship between agriculture and the burning of lime.Chronological questions remain unanswered by the excavation of the kiln at Site 70. Potteryremains were almost non-existent, with only seven sherds discovered in the excavation, one of which was diagnostic (Byzantine). Non-ceramic factors also point to a date for the structure during the Byzantine period, but are based on related architectural features (below) and not on excavated data.Temporal Context of Kilns in the Tell el-cUmeiri RegionAssigning a date to these kilns is highly problematic, even impossible in many cases. While the evidence seems to suggest the Roman and Byzantine periods, it is far from certain. The greatest problem was the limited amount of pottery associated with the kilns. Not only was the pottery excavated at Site 70 inconsequential, but surface collection at other kiln sites has yielded ceramic data of limited significance.At 11 kiln sites, an average of less than 10 sherds (virtually all non-diagnostic) were found at each site. Although this figure averaged somewhat higher at other sites, the overall picture was similar. The average number of sherds for all sites was slightly less than 50 (with an average of 9 diagnostics), but these figures were skewed, because the overwhelming majority (600 sherds) came from only 2 sites: Sites 8 and 45.Of the pottery which was collected, Roman readings were most frequent, followed closely by Byzantine, with Iron II a distant third. However, because the ceramic evidence was so limited, that evidence alone cannot be used to establish dates for the kilns. Corroboratory evidence must be sought. Support for a post-Hellenistic date is provided by comparing similar kilns from other sites in Palestine. Stratified kilns at the sites of Lachish, Samaria, Gibeon, Ramat Rahel, and Hesban are known. Similar in style to the kilns of the Tell el-cUmeiri survey, they are given dates ranging from the Roman to the Arab periods.Tufnell described the kiln at Lachish as containing "sherds of mixed periods, chiefly Roman" (1953: 179), but did not ascribe a firm date to it. Crowfoot, in his description of the Roman Augusteum atop the mound of Samaria, indicated that many of the fine marbles and limestones of this temple found their way into a large, nearby limekiln, which he dated to the Byzantine period. However, he did not provide evidence for this date (Crowfoot, Kenyon and Sukenik 1942: 139).The kiln at Gibeon was located within the Iron Age winery complex. It was a small kiln, ca. 3.00 m in diameter, with an opening to the northwest which was flanked, as was our kiln at Site 70, by buttress walls radiating outward from the main349LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYkiln wall. Pritchard dated this structure to the Byzantine period, based on "quantities of Byzantine sherds" (Pritchard 1964: 11) and a coin of Heraclius (A.D. 610-641) minted inConstantinople (Pritchard 1964: 23, 61).Aharoni described Kiln 336 at Ramat Rahel similarly to our limekilns, with an "opening on the north side, no pavement, and . . . covered with thick layers of soot" (Aharoni 1964: 15). He called it a late structure, but was not more specific. It is clear, however, that it must have been later than the Byzantine room through which it cut. At Hesban, Kiln B.l:10 was lined with stones creating a circular structure with an interior diameter of approximately 2.75 m (Lugenbeal and Sauer 1972: 25 and fig. 2). It contained only Early Byzantine pottery, leading Sauer to date it early in the fifth century (Sauer 1973: 46).Kilns have also been discovered in non- stratified contexts, most notably in Dar’s survey of the Samaria region where more than 75 kilns were recorded (Dar 1986: 209). He described one such kiln as follows: "Its over-all diameter is 4.00 m. The stone revetment walls are built to a thickness of over 1.70 m. The remainder of the diameter consists of earth tipped round the exterior periphery. The kiln’s visible depth is approximately 1.07 m., but its real depth seems to have been 2.00-2.5 m." (Dar 1986: 210). Although smaller than kilns from the Tell el- cUmeiri region, and apparently without a passageway to provide draft, Dar’s description closely fits that of our Type 1 kilns, indicating continuity of technology on both sides of the Rift Valley.Dar also encountered similar problems in dating his kilns, concluding that dates can be assigned only in those cases where the kiln can be associated with architectural features of known date (Dar 1986: 210). He offered a kiln at Jebel Carson as an example. This kiln was associated with a tower and other features at an agricultural site from the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods, leading him to conclude that "the limekiln (also) belonged to the farm assemblage as a whole" (Dar 1986: 210).As with Dar’s survey, establishing dates for the Tell el-cUmeiri kilns based on related architectural features may hold some promise. The kiln at Site 56 has potential in this regard. Here, terraces, embankments, stone piles, a rectilinear structure, and the ceramic assemblage were typical of an agricultural complex of the Byzantine period. That these features remain at least partially intact, not having been utilized as raw materials for burning in the kiln, suggests that the kiln was contemporary to the other features of the agricultural complex dated to the Byzantine period.Several nearby kilns, including the excavated kiln at Site 70, have similar contexts. Further, an examination of the spatial organization of these kilns establishes their relationship to a large tell in the area, Site 57. This tell, on a hill to the west of Tell el-cUmeiri and between Wadi el-Hajal and Wadi el-Bisharat, was apparently a Roman/ Byzantine city (based on surface pottery). Within a 1.00 km radius of this site, the survey recorded eleven kilns, one of which was on the tell. The fact that ten of these kilns were located around the city, in agricultural contexts rather than within the city, which would have provided a rich source of raw materials once it was abandoned, suggests that these kilns were contemporaneous with the city. Given the obvious need for lime adhesives, especially plaster, in the construction and maintenance of the Roman/Byzantine city, it is entirely plausible that these kilns were part of a quicklime industry associated with the city’s rural farms.The exception to this was a single Type 3 kiln found within the boundaries of Site 57 itself, and is certainly later than the city, because it is unlikely that a lime-burning operation would be found within a living city, far from its sources of raw materials. It most likely used the ruins of the city as its source of raw materials. Thus, the kiln can be dated no earlier than the Arab period, and may in fact have been much later.Throughout the remainder of the survey area, the picture is much the same. Kilns are found most frequently in Roman/Byzantine agricultural contexts. As already noted, the most common pottery types collected at kiln sites are Roman and Byzantine. Further, the majority of kilns recorded to date seem to cluster around important sites from the Roman and Byzantines periods. These sites include Site 57 (discussed above), Tell el- cUmeiri (East), and the Via Nova to the east of Tell el-cUmeiri. Additionally, the most common features associated with kilns are, in order: terraces, rectilinear structures, and field or perimeter walls. Each of these features are considered to be indicative of agricultural complexes.In the final analysis, a date for the kilns during the long era of urban intensification known as the Roman and Byzantine periods remains uncertain, but creates fewer obstacles than other periods. Indeed, at this point it is the period which best accounts for all evidence provided by the ceramic data, parallel stratified kilns, related archaeological assemblages, and spatial patterns. In spite of this, three specific cautions must be sounded. First, limekiln technology has changed little over the millennia and kilns of the recent past appear similar to those of the350LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYRoman/Byzantine period. Second, it must be remembered that at this point there is little direct evidence which specifically connects these kilns to this date. And third, the survey region was most heavily populated during the Roman and Byzantine periods and, therefore the pottery from those periods naturally outstrips all others, even in agricultural fields where no site originally existed. Under the circumstances, a Roman/Byzantine date for the kilns of the Tell el-cUmeiri region is proposed tentatively.It is the opinion of the writer that while a significant number of these kilns are indeed Roman/Byzantine, a number of them were likely later. It is known that the Abujaber family, historically a leading economic force in the area and owner of much of the land in the survey region, operated a lime burning industry earlier this century (Raouf Abujaber 1987, personal communication). It is likely that some of the kilns discovered in the Tell el-cUmeiri region belonged to this operation. At this point it , is impossible to determine which ones these were, although the kiln at Site 57, given its remarkable state of preservation and its location in the midst of a large Roman/Byzantine city, is an excellent candidate.Limekilns as a Component of an Agricultural Economic BaseMore certain than chronology is thecomplementary relationship between theproduction of lime and the basic agricultural economy of the region. Although the modern world draws a sharp distinction between rural/agricultural and urban/industrial economies, these distinctions seem to have been much less important during antiquity. There is much evidence pointing to a coupling of the quicklime industry with agricultural pursuits during the Roman and Byzantine periods. Cato’s instructions for the construction and operation of limekilns indicates that these structures were an integral component of the Roman farm. Further, his insertion of these instructions following his section on the annual tasks of pruning and firewood cutting Suggests the complementary relationship between the burning of lime and pursuits more commonly thought of as agricultural. The kilns discovered in the Tell el-cUmeiri region support this reading of Cato. All kilns, with die exception of Site 57, were clearly located in agricultural contexts, closely associated with field cultivation, either at the end of ancient terraces or on the edges of the fields in the wadi bottoms. This placement near the preferred fuel sources facilitated the collection of the tremendousamounts of fuel necessary for the firing of the kiln, as well as making the collection of raw materials easier. Agricultural fields in the region of Tell el-cUmeiri are rocky, and routine agricultural practices uncover quantities of field stones. Since it is desirable for cultivation purposes to remove these stones, it appears likely that, as they were removed, they were collected and later burned in kilns constructed by the landowner specifically for this purpose. This scenario is further supported by the large amount of slag found in the excavation of Site 70. The abundance of this by-product of lime manufacturing processes suggests that the raw materials used in these kilns consisted primarily of field stones dug out of the clay-like terra rossa soil.Finally, if it is true that there was a close relationship between the burning of lime and agricultural life, it can be suggested that the burning of limestone was an important component of the farm-based economy of the region. This conclusion is drawn from the labor/energy intensive nature of quicklime production. The great expenditure of time and energy necessary to produce even one ton of quicklime made it an industry that was undertaken because there were significant economic advantages to its production. These advantages would have increased as demand for the product grew during periods of urban expansion. This, perhaps, explains the number of kilns surrounding Site 57. With the establishment of this city, the demand for lime adhesives undoubtedly increased and the attendant economic advantages would have quickly become apparent to those who controlled die land and thereby the raw materials necessary for the production of quicklime. Additionally, economic advantages would have reached beyond the landowners to the laborers. Not dependent on a seasonal schedule, lime could be burnt during times when strictly agricultural pursuits were at a standstill. Thus, limekilns would not only produce off-season income for the landowner, but also provide offseason employment for laborers.ConclusionThe large number of limekilns recorded by the 1987 Tell el-cUmeiri Regional Survey indicates that the production of quicklime was an important industry in the area. These kilns can be divided into three types, but as yet it is not clear if the differences between these types were indicative of temporal distinctions or merely stylistic variations. The excavation of the kiln at Site 70 established both the method of construction and the function of the kiln, but failed to provide evidence for its351LIMEKILNS FROM THE REGIONAL SURVEYtemporal context. In fact, the temporal context for all kilns remains open to question. Ceramic evidence, related architectural features, and spatial patterning of the kilns suggest a date during theRoman-Byzantine periods, but serious questions leave this date open to debate. More positive is the relationship between these kilns and the rural economic base of the region.REFERENCESAharoni, Y.1964 Excavations at Ramat Rachel: Seasons 1961 and 1962. Roma: Centre Di Studi Semitici.Boling, R. G.1989 Site Survey in the el-cUmeiri Region. Pp. 98-188 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Cato1933 De Agri Cultur. Translated by Ernest Brehaut. New York: Columbia University.Geraty, L. T. and LaBianca, 0 . S.1985 The Local Environment and Human Food Procuring Strategies in Jordan: The Case of Tell Hesban and its Surrounding Region. Pp. 323-330 in Studies in the History and Archaeology o f Jordan, Vol. 2, ed. A. Hadidi. Amman, Jordan: Department of Antiquities.Gourdin, W. H. and Kingery, W. D.1975 The Beginnings of Pyrotechnology: Neolithic and Egyptian Lime Plaster. Journal o f Field Archaeology 2: 133-150.Hareuveni, N.1984 Tree and Shrub in Our Biblical Heritage. Translated and adapted by H. Frenkley. Kiryat Ono, Israel: Neot Kedumim.Chevallier, R.1976 Roman Roads. Translated by N. H. Field. London: B. T. Batsford.Lugenbeal, E. N. and Sauer, J. A.1972 Seventh-Sixth Century B.C. Pottery from Area B at Heshbon. Andrews University Seminary Studies X: 21-69.Crowfoot, J. W.; Kenyon, K.; and Sukenik, E. L.1942 The Buildings at Samaria. London: Palestine Exploration Fund.Dar, S.1986 Landscape and Pattern: An Archaeological Survey of Samaria. Oxford: Biblical Archaeology Review International Series.Forbes, R. J.1966 Studies in Ancient Technology, Vol. VI. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Geraty, L. T., et al.1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American School o f Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-144.Neuberger, A.1930 The Technical Arts and Sciences o f the Ancients.Translated by Henry L. Brose. New York: Barnes and Noble.Pritchard, J. B.1964 Winery, Defenses, and Soundings at Gibeon.Philadelphia: The University Museum.Sauer, J. A.1973 Heshbon 1971: Area B. Andrews University Seminary Studies XI: 35-71.Tufnell, O., et al.1953 Lachish III. London: Oxford University.Wulf, H. E.1966 The Traditional Crafts o f Persia. Cambridge,Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology.352CHAPTER 15A Note on Seasonally Occupied Cave Villages0ystein S. LaBianca Andrews UniversityOne of the explicit goals of the hinterland survey during the 1987 season was to search for material remains of nomadic inhabitants of the project area during the past. What had given urgency to this quest was the encounter in the archaeological survey data of periods during which farmsteads, villages and towns in the vicinity of both Tell Hesban and Tell el-cUmeiri had been deserted (cf. Boling 1989;Ibach 1987; LaBianca 1990). Rather than continuing to treat these periods of desertion as if they were beyond our reach, a deliberate effort was called for which would attack our ignorance of these periods head on. To this end, the seasonal site survey was organized and carried out under the leadership of the author. The following account is offered as a brief preliminary report on the findings of this survey.During the first week of this survey, several fruitless attempts were made to try to locate the remains of ancient tent sites. In the course of searching for these, the team came across what initially appeared to be two herding stations located inside the ruins of a largesite (Site 57). Upon entering these, our team discovered that inside each herding station entrances could be found leading into underground caves, all of which showed clear evidence of use as residences for humans (fig. 15.1). While caves of various types exist in many locations throughout the project area, the entrances to these particular ones appeared more elaborate and,Fig. 15.1. Entrance to the Site 57 cave-residence.353A NOTE ON SEASONALLY OCCUPIED CAVE VILLAGESFig. 15.2. General view of Tell el-cUmeiri (North).hence, the entire complex 'to which they belonged was judged to be worthy of further study.After photographing these two herding stations, and preparing sketches of the inside floor plan of each cave complex, certain of their characteristic features were noted. These included the presence of one or more firepits, black soot on the ceiling, walls dividing the space into separate activity areas, a wall with a doorway to the outside, along with discarded shoes, clothing, tins, and other objects.Several weeks later, the discovery of a cluster of more than three dozen caves at Tell el-cUmeiri (North) containing signs of having been occupied by humans helped to narrow the focus of the seasonal survey (figs. 15.2- 3). During the rest of the season, the survey focussed its energies on finding out as much as possible about residential uses of caves by people in this region. To this end, the author and Dorothy Irvin began conducting interviews with local residents in the immediately adjacent village of el-Buneiyat in order to find out what they knew about the large number of recently- discovered caves.By means of these interviews we found that Tell el-cUmeiri (North) had been the "ancestral village" of the modern inhabitants of el-Buneiyat. According to accounts offered by several of theolder villagers, the caves at Tell el- cUmeiri (North) had been occupied on a seasonal basis by their parents, and likewise by their grandparents and their great grandparents.Local residents would settle into their caves during the fall when the rains came and would stay there until the rains subsided in early spring. Then they would move into their tents again. During the winter months, their primary occupation was growing grain on the slopes below the mound. During the summer months, following the wheat harvest, they would migrate with their animals to more distant pastures, only to return in the fall again to their "seasonal cave village."In support of the idea that the occupied caves of Tell el-cUmeiri (North) did indeed compose a village, not merely a random cluster of caves, several points might be considered. First, theplace where the caves were clustered bore a name like any other village. Second, a cemetery was there, which was used exclusively by theinhabitants of the caves. Third, the occupants of the place had a common water source and a common threshing ground. It thus resembled villages made of stone and mortar, except that the people lived in subterranean shelters.Some of these seasonally occupied dwellings on Tell el-cUmeiri (North) were natural cavesFig. 15.3. Herding station on Tell el-TJmeiri (North).354A NOTE ON SEASONALLY OCCUPIED CAVE VILLAGESmodified by their occupants, others were large cisterns (probably dating to the Roman and Byzantine periods) later converted for residential use.The possibility that such cave villages existed in other locations throughout the project area is one aspect of the Regional Survey which will be investigated with greater intensity during the nextseason of fieldwork. Particularly urgent are interviews with older Jordanians who remember living in caves earlier in the present century. We are optimistic that the study of residential uses of caves will yield significant insight into periods in Jordan’s history when villages and towns of stone and mortar were abandoned.REFERENCESBoling, R. G.1989 Site Survey in the el-cUmeiri Region. Pp. 98-188 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, Mi: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Ibach, Jr., R. D.1987 Archaeological Survey o f the Hesban Region:Catalogue o f Sites and Characterization o f Periods. Hesban 5. Berrien Springs, Mi: Institute of Archaeology/Andrews University.LaBianca, 0 . S.1990 Sedenterization and Nomadization: Food System Cycles at Tell Hesban and Vicinity. Hesban 1. Berrien Springs, Mi: Institute of Archaeology/ Andrews University.355CHAPTER 16The Necropolis at Tell e l-cUmeiri (East)Howard P. Krug Rochester, NYIntroductionBecause the 1984 regional survey located many ancient necropolii with opened tombs, a small team headed by the author was asked to map and study them in 1987. Pottery was collected from the surface in and around the tombs. It was originally expected that several necropoli could be studied in this way. However, in Necropolis A on the hill immediately northeast of Tell el-cUmeiri (East), 64tombs demanded our attention for the complete the season. The following report is a classification of the 51 tombs that can be identified by architectural features as dating from the Roman and Byzantine periods. This report organizes the tombs into chronological types, briefly describes their significant features (drawing on one or two examples from each type), suggests probable dates, and lists sites with parallels. A working typology chart summarizes the results (fig. 16.1).Necropolis A was divided into six, 50 x 50 m squares, into which the tombs were plotted (fig.16.2). Each tomb was identified with a code, including the letter designation of the necropolis, the number of the square, and the number of the tomb within the square (prefixed by the letter "T"). Map symbols representing the tomb type are explained in fig. 16.1. The location of each tomb was plotted from the center of its entrance.TypologyIn developing a working typology for classifying the tombs from our survey, this report adopts a modified typology from Waterhouse (1973: 113-14). Type I is characterized by a roughly square chamber tomb with rectangular loculi and burial niches (Hebrew: kokkim) cut into the sides of the chamber. A second category designated Type II features a: shaft grave cut horizontally into the hillside, ending in a single loculus or chamber. Type III tombs are chamber tombs with adjoining arcosolia. While some of the arcosolia contained sunken trough graves, others contained simple ledges. Type IV tombs are chamber tombs comprising a combination of both arcosolia and loculi. Lastly, Type V was recorded in two sub-types both with rectangular shaft graves. The first sub-type contained only a rectangular shaft grave, while the second sub-type also contained one or two recesses at the base, similar in architecture to the arcosolia of the chamber tombs. Some graves had loculi at the ends of the base.Type I. Chamber tombs with radiating loculi compose our first tomb ; category. Their construction has been most commonly dated to the Early Roman period, with usage into the Early Byzantine period (Waterhouse 1973: 115; Davis 1978: 137-41). Tomb A6:T17: (fig. 16.3) was356THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Tomb Type I (Common during Hellenistic and Roman periods) Chamber tomb with radiating loculi. Keyed as ■ in fig. 16.2.A2:T6 11 loculi with 1 recessed niche; tear bottle fragmentA3 :T4 7 loculi with badly collapsed roof in main chamberA5:T11 12 loculi with 1 recessed niche; lamp nicheA5:T12 11 loculi with blocking stones in chamberA6:T12 14 loculi (1 incomplete); 1 lamp niche between loculi 1and 2A6:T14 3 loculi on one side of chamber with a fourth uncompletedA6:T17 13 loculi; 1 lamp niche; Late Roman to Byzantine pottery;loculi blocking stones observed in chamberTomb Type II (Common during Early Roman and Byzantine periods) Horizontal shaft with loculus. Keyed as ♦ in fig. 16.2.A3:T1 Horizontal shaft tombA3 :T2 Horizontal shaft tombTomb Type III (Common during the Early Byzantine period)Chamber tombs with arcosolia. Keyed as a in fig. 16.2.A1:T3 3 arcosolia and repository (ca. 0.66 X 0.71 X 0.20 m)A1:T4 3 arcosolia, multiple arches on each; blocking stone atentrance.A2:T2 6 arcosolia, 2 on each side (large opening in roof)A6:T6 6 arcosolia, 2 on each sideA6:T18 3 arcosolia with possible trough graves, recessed openingat base of 2 arcosoliaTomb Type IV (Common during the Byzantine period)Chamber tombs with loculi and arcosolia. Keyed as M in fig. 16.2.A1:T2 3 arcosolia and 3 loculi; blocking stones inside chamberA1:T5 3 arcosolia (one with plastered ceiling) with trough gravesand 2 ledged loculiA1:T6 3 arcosolia and 1 loculus with arched openingA5:T5 2 arcosolia and 10 loculi; lamp niches on each side ofentrance, Late Roman potteryA6:T4 3 arcosolia and 5 loculi; lamp niches on each side of door;partial roof collapse in main chamber;nicely cut doorway with step leading into the chamber; 1 loculus had robber trench leading into A6:T12.formed with the bottom widening out along each side forming arcosolia with either trough graves or flat floor. Keyed as • in fig. 16.2.A1:T7A1:T8A2:T1A2:T3A2:T4A2-.T5A2:T7A2:T9A2:T10A2:T11A2:T12A2:T13A2:T14A2:T15A3:T3A4:T1A4:T2A4:T3A5:T1A5:T2A5-.T3A5:T4A5:T7A5:T9A5:T13A5:T6A5:T8A5:T10A5:T14A5:T15A5:T16A6:T1A6:T2A6:T3A6:T5A6:T10A6:T11A6:T15Arcosolia not visible Arcosolia not visible Arcosolia not visible 2 arcosolia2 arcosolia facing northwest and southeast No arcosolia No arcosolia2 arcosolia facing east and west Sub-type 1 Sub-type 1 Sub-type 12 arcosolia facing east and west, visible ledge 2 arcosolia located outside of Area 2 Sub-type 11 arcosolium with ledges for capstones Sub-type 1Sub-type 1 * . ' .Sub-type 1 *Possible sub-type 1, only outline of shaft was visible Possible sub-type 1, only outline of shaft was visible Possible sub-type 1, only outline of shaft was visible Possible sub-type 1, shaft-filled with debris Possible sub-type 1, shaft filled with debris Possible sub-type 1, shaft filled with debris Possible sub-type 1, shaft filled with debris2 arcosolia 2 arcosolia 2 arcosolia 2 arcosolia Possible sub-type 1 Possible sub-type 1 Possible sub-type 1 Possible sub-type 1 Possible sub-type 11 arcosolium with ledge for capstones and 2 steps leading into the shaft2 arcosolia Possible sub-type 1 Possible sub-type 1Tomb Type V (Common during the Byzantine period)Vertical shaft tombs having a rectangular shape. There are two sub- types, the first has a rectangular shaft, the second was more fullyUnclassified TombA4:T4 Circular tomb, 2 flat benchesFig. 16.1. Typology chart including significant architectural features.one of the largest Type I tombs surveyed containing thirteen loculi with pottery from the Roman and Byzantine periods. The chamber was entered through a nicely cut door with 1 visible step. In front of each loculus was a depression ca. 0.10-0.15 m deep. Many of the loculi contained nicely round arches (fig. 16.4). Bone fragments were observed in the chamber and in 4 loculi.Tomb A2:T6 (fig. 16.5) also contained 13 loculi and 1 recessed bench. In 1 loculus, a piece of glass (possible tear bottle fragment) was observed on the surface. A parallel tomb from Abila (J-6) contained 6 loculi with a recessed bench in die east wall (Davis 1985: 78). Tomb A5:T11 contained 2 recessed benches with 11 loculi.Hesban Survey Site 116 (Hanina) contained a chamber tomb with 36 loculi on 2 tiers with three sarcophagi (Ibach 1987: 26 and pis. 2.142-43).From the southern necropolis at Hesban, TombsF .l, F.6, F.14, F.18, and F.31 were square- chamber, multi-loculi tombs with original construction dated to the Early Roman period (Waterhouse 1973: 115-20; Beegle 1975: 205-8; and Davis 1978: 130-41). Tomb 1 at Beit Zarca (Khadija 1974: 38-39) and Tomb Type Two at Luweibdeh (Dana 1970: 37-38) are both examples of our Type I tomb. Near Tell Safut, a 2-tiered, 26 loculi tomb was excavated (Madayeh 1960: 115), and at Rajib, Tombs 1 and 3 were multiloculi tombs (Bisheh 1973: 63-67). Near Amman, a multi-loculi tomb was discovered (Zayadine 1981: 341 and fig. 1).At Abila in northern Jordan, parallels can be seen in cemeteries H, J, K, and L (Davis 1983: 33-48 and figs. 1, 2, 6-8; Davis 1985: 70-80 and figs. 2 and 7; Fuller 1987: 31-48 and figs. 1-6, 10). At Pella in Area H, a multi-loculi tomb was357THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.2. Location of tombs in Necropolis A.THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.3. Plan and section of Tomb A6:T17.359THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.4. Arched loculi inside of Tomb A6:T17.discovered atop another tomb (Smith 1973: 183-95). Five other tombs at Pella also correspond to our Type I (McNicoll, Smith, Hennessy 1982: 84-87 and figs. 16- 17). Pella Tombs 64 and 65 of Area 6 were multi-loculi chambered tombs with locking devices found intact including metal handles (McNicoll 1986: 175-77).In C is-Jo rdan , s im ilar chambered loculi tombs dating to the Roman period were excavated at Sheqef (Avni 1986b: 100-101 and fig. 52) and Horvat Benaya (Kloner 1986: 12-13). A large Type I burial cave with nine loculi was dated to the Roman period and reused in Byzantine period (Barag 1978: 1- 59). By Horvat Egoz, a multi-loculi tomb was found dated to the Early Roman period (Avni and DahariFig. 16.5. Plan of Tomb A2:T6.360THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-gUMEIRI (EAST)Tombs I, II, and III contained loculi with trough graves: Tomb I contained one trough grave and Tomb III contained two trough graves (Sailer 1957: 46-55). Recently in Jerusalem, a chamber tomb with four loculi was excavated (Zias 1980: 53-56). Parallels include a burial chamber at Kefar cAra (Sussman 1976: 92-101), and an irregularshaped loculi chamber from cArcAra (Zias 1982: 60-65).Type II. Only Tombs A3:T1 and A3:T2 had horizontal shafts ending in a single loculus or chamber (fig. 16.6). Both tombs had a ledge at the top of the loculus with an arched space above; cover stones were not found. The loculus of A3:T2 measured ca. 1.47 x 1.20 m with a height of ca. 0.61 m. No pottery was recorded. From die western necropolis at Hesban come three parallels: Tombs E.2 and E.3 with Early Roman and Byzantine pottery (Waterhouse 1973: 120), and Tomb E.6 with Roman pottery (Stirling 1976: 102). Tomb G3 at Jericho could be a possible parallel (cf. Bennett 1965: 524 and fig. 264).Type III. Only four examples of chambered tombs with arcosolia were found. The arcosolia seem to contain platforms rather than trough graves. Tomb A1:T3 (fig. 16.7) included three arcosolia and a circular repository (ca. 0.68 m in diameter and ca. 0.20 m deep) in the southwest corner of the chamber (figs. 16.8). The construction phase of parallel types at Hesban were clearly dated to the Late Roman period (Waterhouse 1973: 122-23).Tomb A2:T2 had two arcosolia on each of the three sides of the chamber (fig. 16.9). The Type III chamber tomb comes in various forms with thesame basic features. Tomb A6:T18 was another example, this time with an opening under each arcosolium (figs. 16.10-11). The chambermeasured ca. 2.60 x 2.50 m.From Jordan at Hesban, only the 1971 excavations produced Type III arcosolia,chambered tombs, and all of them contained trough graves (Waterhouse 1973: 120-23). At Pella, the 1967 excavation of Tomb 2 in Area IIB and Tomb 5 in Area HE (with only two arcosolia), parallel our Type III (Smith 1973: 175- 180). Tomb 39A at Pella was also a chamber tomb with three shallow arcosolia and one trough grave (McNicoll, Smith, Hennessy 1982: 88-101 and fig. 18). See also Tomb 7 at Jerash (Kraeling 1938: 560-61). Arcosolia tombs were found at Abila in areas J and L (Davis 1983: 49-50; Ibid. 1985: 79-81; Fuller 1987: fig. 15). Davis excavated only one trough grave at the base of each arcosolia in Tombs J-3 and J-4 (1983: 49- 50). Tomb 2 at Rajib was an arcosolia chamber which was entered from a loculus of another tomb (Bisheh 1973: 63-68).In Cis-Jordan, parallels can be seen at Beit Fajjar (Husseini 1935: 175-77), Tell en-Nasbeh Tombs T.13, T.16, T.19, and T.22 (McCown 1947: 116-20 and figs. 17-18, 20). At Bet Guvrin, a survey revealed approximately seventy burial caves containing arcosolia with trough graves (Avni 1986a: 14-15). At cAin Yarbud, a tomb contained three arcosolia each with three sunken graves (Husseini 1936: 54-55).Type TV. The best example of chamber tombs with both loculi and arcosolia was A1:T5 (fig. 16.12) with three arcosolia and two loculi. The tomb was the only one in the necropolis in which the arcosolia contained trough graves, usually three to four (fig. 16.13). The loculi (fig. 16.14) may possibly have been an addition to the tomb for more burials after the arcosolia were built. Two of the three loculi contained ledges and only one had part of a capstone in it. Plaster was observed on the wall of one arcosolium, probably to seal cracks in the limestone.Tomb A6:T4 had a central chamber with three arcosolia, five loculi, and five lamp niches. In the back wall of one arcosolium, a tunnel was found extending about1.50 m into a loculus of neighboring Tomb A6:T12. The tunnel was possibly used by tomb robbers who may have broken into361THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.8. The door of Tomb A1:T3.Fig. 16.9. The northern side of the chamber in Tomb A2:T2 showing multiple arcosolia.Tomb A6:T12 by this tunnel rather than by its entrance which still had its blocking stone intact. At the entrance of Tomb A6:T4 was recorded a cup-like indentation which might have been used for ceremonial washing (cf. Water- house 1973: 117).Plaster was found in a few tombs in both Cis-Jordan and Transjordan: Hesban Tombs F.5, F.27 and F.29 (the latter possessing one arcosolium with trough graves and eight loculi [Davis 1978: 130 and pi. 11:A]), and in Tombs H23 and K23 at Jericho (Bennett 1965: 523-25 and figs. 265-66). No pottery was found in Tomb A6:T4, but a tentative date can be suggested by similar tombs at Hesban from the Byzantine period (Davis 1978: 134). At Hesban, the rolling stone Tomb G.10 was a Type IV tomb (Stirling 1976: 102), as was also Tomb F.28 where the arcosolia (without trough graves) were located above the loculi (Davis 1978: 134-35, fig. 11 and pi. XIIB). Tomb L-13 from Abila was also of this type (Fuller 1987: 45- 48 and fig. 10), as was one from Midras (Kloner 1977: 252).Type V. Vertical, rectangular shaft tombs occurred in two sub- types. The first contained a single grave at the bottom of the shaft. Nineteen tombs of this type were identified. The pottery from parallel tombs suggest a date in the Late Roman and Early Byzantine periods (Waterhouse 1973: 123-25; Beegle 1975: 204-208).Tomb A4:T2 measured ca. 1.75 m long x 0.50 m wide x 1.20 m deep and was the best example of the first sub-type (fig. 16.16). Neither ledges nor arcosolia were observed. Hesban Tombs F .lla and F .llb may be possible parallels to sub-type one. Most graves dated to the Roman period.363THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.10. Note the repository-type opening underneath the Fig. 16.11. Plan of Tomb A6:T18.southeast arcosolium of Tomb A6:T18.Fig .,16.12. Plan of Tomb A1:T5.364 ,THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.13. Interior of Tomb A1:T5: west arcosolium, trough graves, and plaster on ceiling.Fig. 16.14. Note the relationship between the arcosolium and the loculi.Fig. 16.15. The nicely-cut doorway of Tomb A1:T5.365THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.16. Tomb A4:T2, a rectangular-shaft, Sub-type 1 grave.In Cis-Jordan, Tombs T907 and T236 at Megiddo (dated by the excavators to ca. A.D. 400) were similar, but were covered with cobbles(Guy 1938: 129-30). At Nablus, five tombs (Tombs 1, 2, 4, 5, and 8) were of this type (Hamilton and Husseini 1935: 170-74 and fig. 1).Fig. 16.17. Plan of Hesban Tomb K.l (after Davis 1978: fig. 13).366THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)Fig. 16.18. Tomb A2:T13 showing an arcosolium and ledge for capstones.Two rectangular pit graves, Tombs 3007 and 3012, were found in a cemetery outside Ashdod and dated to the fourth century A.D. (Fortuna 1971: 187-88). Tombs 20, 21, 28, 41-45 from the West Cemetery at Tell en-Nasbeh are rectangular graves (McCown 1947: fig. 20).The second sub-type is a rectangular shaft grave with arcosolia on each side of the shaft (fig. 16.17). The best representation was tomb A2:T13 (fig. 16.18). The rectangular shaft measured ca. 1.86 m long x 0.53 m wide. Ledges at the top held capstones.In Jordan, Hesban parallels provide dates from the Late Roman through Early Byzantine periods. Sub-type 2 tombs were excavated in cemeteries F and K (Waterhouse 1973: 103-13; Beegle 1975: 203-11; Davis 1978: 136, 148-49). In Cemetery J at Abila, nine shaft tombs (nos. 9, 10, 14, 15, 18, and 22 through 25) were found (Davis 1985: 84- 89 and figs. 10, 12). Davis dates the usage of these types of tombs to the Byzantine period only and cites Hesban for parallels (1985: 84). At Nacur, a Sub-type 2 tomb was excavated and contained traces of plaster (cAbbadi 1973: 69-71).In Cis-Jordan at Nablus, only one of seventeen vertical shaft tombs contained arcosolia (Hamilton and Husseini 1935: 170-72 and fig. 1). Tombs 17,23, and 24 from Tell en-Nasbeh contained arcosolia with ledges for cobblestones (McCown 1947: fig. 20 and pis. 22:7-8). At Bethany, the Passionist’s Tomb was a shaft grave with arcosolia (Sailer 1957: 57 and pis. 57A, 57B).Unclassified TombThere is one tomb which does not fit any of the above categories. Tomb A4:T4, an unusual, circular, bench-tomb (fig. 16.19), is smaller than the typical Roman tomb of this region. It contained two benches around the edge of the tomb. Unfortunately, lack of datable evidence prevents an assignment of dates for the tomb’s usage. Yet the distinctive type of architectural form seems to indicate that the tomb was first constructed in pre-Roman times. A possible parallel from Jordan may be found in Dhiban tombs J4 and J6 (Tushingham 1972: 86-107).AcknowledgmentsI would like to express appreciation to 0ystein S. LaBianca for his encouragement prior to and during the field phase of this project, and to Douglas Waterhouse for his friendship, as well as his critical appraisal of the manuscript.367THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)368THE NECROPOLIS AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI (EAST)REFERENCEScAbbadi, S.1973 A Byzantine Tomb from Nacur. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 18: 69-70.Avni, G.1986a Bet Guvrin. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 5: 14-15.1986b Sheqef (Har Nadal). Excavations and Surveys in Israel 5: 100.Hesban 5. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology/Andrews University.Khadija, M. M.1974 Beit Zarca Tombs. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 15: 38-39.Kloner, A.1977 H. Midras (Kh. Durusyia). Israel Exploration Journal 27: 251-53.Avni, G., and Dahari, A1985a Givcat Shamma. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 4: 35-36.1985b Horvat Egoz. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 4: 25.1986 Horvat Benaya. Excavations and Surveys in Israel 5: 12-13.Kraeling, C. H, ed.1938 Gerasa, City o f the Decapolis. New Haven: The American Schools of Oriental Research.Barag, D.1978 Hanita Tomb XV, A Tomb of the Third and Early Centuries C.E. cAtiqot XII: 1-59.Macayeh, F.1960 Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Jordan. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 4-5: 115.Beegle, D. M.1975 Heshbon 1973: Necropolis Area F. AndrewsUniversity Seminary Studies 13: 203-12.Bennett, C.-M.1965 Tombs of the Roman Period. Pp. 516-33 inExcavations at Jericho, Vol. II, ed. K. M. Kenyon. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology.Dana, S. F.1970 Luweibdeh Roman Tomb. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 15: 38-39.Davis, J. J.1978 Heshbon 1976: Areas F and K. Andrews University Seminary Studies 16: 129-49.1983 Abila Tomb Excavations. Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin 21:28-58.1985 Abila Tomb Excavations: 1984. Near EastArchaeological Society Bulletin 24: 65-92.Fortuna, M. T.1971 Excavation of Ashdod 1963, 1965: Area F. cAtiqot 9-10: 186-90.Fuller, N. B.1987 Abila Tomb Excavations: 1986. Near EasternArchaeological Society Bulletin 29: 31-48.Guy, P. L. O.1938 Megiddo Tombs. Oriental Institute Publications 33. Chicago: University of Chicago.Hamilton, R. W., and Husseini, S. A. S.1935 Shaft Tombs on the Nablus Road, Jerusalem.Quarterly o f the Department o f Antiquities o fPalestine 4: 170-74.Husseini, S. A. S.1935 A Fourth-Century A.D. Tomb at Beit Fajjar.Quarterly o f the Department o f Antiquities ofPalestine 4: 175-78.1936 A Rock Cut Tomb-Chamber at DAin Yarbud.Quarterly o f the Department o f Antiquities o fPalestine 6: 54-55.McCown, C. C.1947 Tell En-Nasbeh. Vol. 1. Berkeley and New Haven: The Palestine Institute of the Pacific School of Religion and The American Schools of Oriental Research.McNicoll, A.1986 Preliminary Report on the University of Sydney’s Seventh Season of Excavations at Pella (Tabaqot Fahal) in 1985. Annual o f the Department Antiquities o f Jordan 30: 175-77.McNicoll, A.; Smith, R. H.; and Hennessy, B.1982 Pella in Jordan I: An Interim Report on the Joint University o f Sydney and the College o f Wooster Excavations at Pella 1979-1981. Canberra: Australian National Museum.Sailer, S.1957 Excavations at Bethany. Jerusalem: Franciscan.Smith, R. H.1973 Pella o f the Decapolis, Vol 1: The 1967 Season o f the College o f Wooster Expedition to Pella. Wooster, OH: College of Wooster.Stirling, J. A.1976 Heshbon 1973: Areas E, F, and G.10. Andrews University Seminary Studies 14: 101-107.Sussman, V.1976 A Burial Cave at Kefar cAra. cAtiqot XI: 92-101.Tushingham, A. D.1972 Dhiban in Moab 3rd Campaign 1952-3. Annual o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 40: 86-107.Waterhouse, D.1973 Heshbon 1971: Areas E and F. Andrews University Seminary Studies 15: 113-125.Zayadine, F.1981 Recent Excavations and Restorations of the Department of Antiquities (1979-80). Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 25: 341-355.Zias, J.1980 A Roman Tomb at cArcAra. cAtiqot XIV: 60-65.Ibach Jr., R. D.1987 Archaeological Survey o f the Hesban Region: Catalogue o f Sites and Characterization o f Periods.1982 A Rock-cut Tomb in Jerusalem. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 245: 53-56.369(CHAPTER 17Preliminary Comments on the Geology o f the Tell e l-cUmeiri RegionDouglas W. Schnurrenberger University o f Maryland, Munich CampusIntroductionThe area discussed in this paper and referred to as the Tell el-cUmeiri region, consists of a circular area with a radius of 5.0 km. This region is centered on Tell el-cUmeiri which is approximately 15.0 km south of Amman, capital of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (see fig. 1.1). The region lies within the southern margin of the "Ammonite Hills," north of the Madaba Plains and within the geomorphological province of the "Highlands at the Eastern Rim of the Wadi Araba-Jordan Graben" (Bender 1974: 9). These highlands form the relief on the tectonically- active, westernmost plate boundary of the Arabian Plate ... a boundary clearly marked by the Wadi Araba-Dead Sea-Jordan Valley Rift. The region is centered on several ecotones as well as ancient political boundaries. It is bordered to the south by the extensive, low-relief Madaba Plains, and to the west by the deeply-excised wadis draining into the Dead Sea-Jordan River Valley. On the east it is bordered by the eastern deserts.The goal of the geological study of the Tell el- cUmeiri region during the 1986 season (and succeeding field seasons) is to place the activities of the ancient inhabitants of the area within a geoarchaeological context (in the sense of Butzer 1981), focusing on the interaction between geology/geomorphology and aspects of the humanexploitation of their environment.Excavations at Tell el-cUmeiri and survey of the surrounding area have already documented periods of expanding and contracting human settlement in the region (Geraty, et al. 1989). Extensive research outside the project area has already amply illustrated_the degree to which local geomorphic rates, especially soil erosion, have greatly accelerated during historic times in the face of expanding human populations (Butzer 1974; Vita-Finzi 1969). The degree of synchronicity (or lack thereof) and timing, of changed geomorphic rates and patterns of human exploitation of the region served as the focus of the geoarchaeological investigations reported here.This study builds upon the groundwork laid down by previous geoarchaeological investigations in the greater Madaba Plains Project area (Lacelle 1986a, 1986b, 1986c; James 1976; Bullard 1972). These authors discussed the geology of Tell Hesban (near Madaba) and of the 10.0 km-radius area surrounding that site, including a portion of the Tell e!-cUmeiri region.Climate and HydrologyThe climate of the region is semi-arid, and is marked by a short "rainy" season from November370PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON THE GEOLOGY OF THE TELL EL-CUMEIRI REGIONto March. During this period, a yearly average of approximately 300-500 mm of precipitation falls. A long dry period follows for the remainder of the year. Due to high temperatures for much of the year, potential evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation totals for most of the season (National Atlas of Jordan, 1987). A detailed discussion of the climatic influences on the greater Amman area of Jordan is presented in Ferguson and Hudson (1986).Due to the amount and pattern of rainfall, as well as high evapotranspiration rates, there are no permanent streams in the project area. During the brief rainy season, short cloudbursts or prolonged periods of rain may fill the erosional channels in wadi bottoms with flowing water. At that time, shallow and deep aquifers, as well as soil moisture, are recharged. Due to the high swelling ability of local soils owing to clay content (Lacelle 1986b; Abu-Ajamieh, et al. 1988), and the production of impressive desiccation cracks (fig. 17.1), infiltration rates are relatively rapid on wadi-bottom sediments. Soil moisture stored in this fashion sustains the rain-fed agriculture during the dry season. While infiltration rates were manipulated by ancient agriculturalists by a variety of water harvesting methods, water stored in deeper aquifers ultimately discharges through surface springs in the deeply excised wadis which drain into the Dead Sea.The significance of this climatic information is that the project region lies on a delicate environmental balance. Precipitation totals, combined with soil moisture capacity, are apparently sufficient to support a forestedvegetation (for a discussion, see Younker 1989; Lacelle 1986c). However, slight changes in the complex equation governing climate, soils, and vegetation may lead to drastic changes in geomorphic rates and vegetation cover.Lithology and StructureThe impermanent stream courses of the Tell el-cUmeiri study region drain ultimately into the tectonically active Jordan Rift Valley. The project area contains the upstream portions of a number of small wadi systems that finally drain into the Wadi Heidan/Wadi el-Mujib drainage. Continued lowering of the Jordan Valley acts to also lower the base level of streams within its drainage basin. In some cases this produces very spectacular down-cutting and exposures of bedrock such as that exposed in the Wadi el-Mujib. Within the Tell el-cUmeiri region, down-cutting is not so severe (although just beyond the boundaries of the project area, the Wadi Nacur drops steeply off to the west into the Wadi Hesban drainage and then ultimately into the Dead Sea).Within the Tell el-cUmeiri region, folding and faulting during the Late Tertiary and into the Quaternary periods, and subsequent removal of much of the soil mantle, has exposed much of the local bedrock lithology (although good sections are lacking for much of the project area). The project area is underlain by a thick sequence of Middle- to-Upper Cretaceous deposits, almost exclusively carbonate rocks of the Cenomanian through Turonian Ages (Bender 1974; Lacelle 1986b). These carbonate strata are primarily limestones with interbedded marls, occasional chalks, and chert nodules or beds.For much of the project area, the carbonate strata are horizontal or generally dip gently to the southeast (although locally, more steep dips are evident). Where an approximately horizontal orientation is dominant, differential weathering of thin, less resistent strata has produced a stepped cross-section up the wadi slopes, often simulating human terracing. In other places, the strata are folded into open folds or dip at a somewhat steeper angle. In die latter case, a stepped topography is still produced even though individual "terraces" can possess a fairly steep slope. The hills consisting of folded strata produce a smoother bedrock surface, lacking the terracing of the less deformed strata.Fig. 17.1. This desiccation crack in clay-rich wadi bottom soil reaches a depth of about 40 cm.371PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON THE GEOLOGY OF THE TELL EL-CUMEIRI REGIONFig. 17.2. Thin, sediment-filled wadi bottom and adjacent denuded hillslopes.Surficial Sediment and SoilsThe topography of the region consists of areas of gentle relief in the southern and southwestern portions of the project area, and higher relief portions in the northern and western portions. The southern and southwestern portions of the project area present a picture of bedrock hills and ridges leading down into wadi floors filled to various depths with sediment from the hillslopes. Wadi bottom gradients are gentle and wadi floor erosional gullies are generally limited in length and depth (figs. 17.2-3), although certain segments may be from about 2.0-4.0 m in depth (such as the gully directly east of Tell el- ^Umeiri). The higher relief portions of the project area exhibit steep hillslopes with minimal soil mantle, steeper gradient valley floors, and more deeply eroded wadi bottom erosional channels which often expose bedrock at their base.Unconsolidated sediment is thinly distributed on plateaux and hillslopes, occasionally reaching a thickness of up to a meter in depressions or protected places. In many, the soil/sediment cover is discontinuous, filled depressions between exposed rock outcrops (fig.17.4). In other areas, the cover is continuous, mantling the entire hillslope to a depth not exceeding about 1.5-2.0 m. In the wadibottoms, unconsolidated sediment has accumulated to depths varying up to 5.0 m.The zonal soil in the Tell el- c U m e i r i r e g i o n c o n s i s t s predom inantly of the Red Mediterranean or terra rosa soils (Lacelle 1986b). These soils are t y p i c a l l y found in areas characterized by over 350 mm of annual rainfall (Moorman 1959: 20), such as the highlands of the Tell el-cUmeiri region south of Amman (Agrar and Hydrotechnik 1977; Ferguson and Hudson 1986). The Red Mediterranean soils are believed to represent very ancient "relic" soils from periods of higher precipitation in the past when intense chemical weathering of residual portions of the carbonate bedrock produced the clay-rich, strongly-reddish soil.The age of surficial sediment accumulations can only be estimated from exposed sediments in wadi bottom erosional channels. These sediments consist predominantly of colluvium derived from adjacent hillslopes, although smaller amounts of alluvium are present. Where significant depth of sediment is exposed in wadi bottom erosional channels, from two-to-three lithostratigraphicunits, distinguished on the basis of color and texture, are present. As a general rule, the lower lithostratigraphic units are typically finer textured, containing relatively small amounts of coarse,Fig. 17.3. This view downstream along the Wadi el-Bisharat shows one large (now defunct) gully, and a smaller, newer (currently active) one.372PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON THE GEOLOGY OF THE TELL EL-CUMEIRI REGIONr .';iWkKSCS----,i‘%-v'3r .•. . *N ■.. s ' _ *>— -v - ■ V;R’ 3-M;-,M';. i • "V - ■■ a v t -.j 1’', . ^ " “S • f & f t 'q ̂f7 „• !.. a. 'V O ? ■Fig. 17.4. Sediment fills this small depression in exposed bedrock.Sand Lenses with clay drapes; thin gravel stringersCoarse, clast- supported gravelsLimestone bedrockSection 3Plow zoneSilty clay with gravelClay siltCovered by colluviumSection 1Fig. 17.5. Several sections exposed in wadis showed ceramic readings.1gravel-sized clasts. The upper units more typically consist of matrix- supported gravels and occasionally clast-supported alluvial gravel units. The upward coarsening of sedimentary units may mirror the progressive denudation of the landscape with the coarse-grained upper units reflecting deep erosion down to the bedrock cover.The age of the sedimentary fill in the wadi bottoms may be estimated, or at least the upper age limit may be obtained, from ceramics contained within (figs. 17.5-6). To date, only a limited sampling of wadi-bottom fill has been carried out. In the majority of cases, the included pottery had similar readings: possible Iron Age body sherds, Roman and Byzantine diagnostic sherds. The only instance in which older sherds were obtainedFig. 17.6. This section indicates the age of included ceramics.373PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON THE GEOLOGY OF THE TELL EL-CUMEIRI REGIONwas from the erosional cut directly east of the Tell. Here, the reading was dominantly Bronze Age through Byzantine period sherds. These data suggest that the bulk of sediment exposed in the wadi bottoms was deposited during the Byzantine period or later. The Bronze Age readings adjacent to the tell are in all likelihood the result of sampling localities positioned downstream of the Bronze Age occupation on the eastern and southern slopes of Tell el-cUmeiri.Geomorphology(1986a) attributes hilltop and slope erosion in the Tell Hesban region to soil creep instead of channelized or unchannelized precipitation runoff. In addition, he points out the strong cohesive qualities of the clay-rich Red Mediterranean soils which prevent significant runoff erosion as noted by others in Cis-Jordan (Amiran and Gilead 1954: 286). Compared to sheet-wash and rain- splash erosion, soil creep is generally less significant in poorly vegetated, arid and semi-arid climates (Chorley, Schumm and Sugden 1984: 258). In a climate lacking significant frosts, soil creep is largely a result of the expansive properties of the Smectite group clay minerals. Although no clay mineral analysis has been conducted to date, expansion noted in moistened clay samples indicates the presence of a certain percentage of expandable clay minerals, and hence the likelihood of significant soil creep.As noted by Lacelle for the Hesban region (1986a), and myself in the Tell el-cUmeiri region, extensively rilled and gullied hillslopes are rarely present in the greater Amman region. This does not, however, rule out a significant role for precipitation runoff in the denudation of the hillslope surfaces in the region. The lack of extensive rill networks in the region apparently results from a combination of cultural and naturalThe dominant geomorphic processes operating in the region consist of removal of surficial sediment from plateaux, hilltops, and hillslopes, accumulation in the wadi bottoms, and ultimately, removal of the valley-fill from the wadis which proceed eventually tothe Jordan River. The efficiency of _______________________the removal of materials from the tw? * ~... -fry - ^hilltops and upper hillslopes isattested by the bare, rock surfaces r ~ "*l ' ’V'vexposed on virtually all hilltops.These vary from complete to nartial'exposure (fig. 17.7). The accumulation of sediment in the narrow wadi bottoms is nowhere of great depth, rarely exceeding about 4.0 m, and commonly between 1.0 m and 2.0 m (fig. 17.8).Based on the lack of extensive rills or gullies on slopes, Lacelle Kg. 17.8. Bedrock is exposed on the floor of this shallow gully in a wadi.374PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON THE GEOLOGY OF THE TELL EL-CUMEIRI REGIONfactors. Most of the hillslopes in the region are terraced either by actual construction, or simply as a result of differential weathering of only gently- dipping bedrock strata. Terracing divides the slope into a series of segments possessing a relatively more gentle slope than the slope of the entire hillslope. This both decreases velocity of any surface flows, and decreases potential flow depth by favoring greater infiltration. Recognition of rills is also made more difficult by continual reworking of the surface soil in the context of agricultural practices. Finally, the rapid infiltration of runoff into desiccation cracks and the cohesion of the clay minerals acts to protect the ground surface, although where terracing features had fallen into disrepair and the area was not recently plowed, rill networks and gullies were observed.Discussion and ConclusionsGeomorphic rates and processes in the Tell el- cUmeiri region are strongly conditioned by vegetative cover on hillslopes and wadi bottoms, by human constructions designed to reduce or prevent erosion, and by file adequate, but seasonal, pattern of rainfall. Throughout the semiarid and arid Middle East, numerous workers have documented patterns of wadi excision and deposition related either to changes in climate or changes in the pattern of human use of the landscape (e.g., Rosen 1986; Vita-Finzi 1969). Whatever the fundamental cause of changes in the geomorphic regime, the immediate cause is certainly related to changes in the pattern and distribution of vegetation on hillslopes, primarily a result of agricultural activity (although in some cases, perhaps attributable to climatic change).The goal of this investigation was to relate local geomorphology to changes in human activities or population through time. Work is clearly progressing towards the identification of changes in human settlement patterns in the project area (see Younker chapter 12, above). Thus far it has proven difficult to adequately date changes in the geomorphic regime. This difficulty stems from the lack of datable organic remains, the imprecision of dating using redeposited ceramic remains, and the lack of deeply stratified sections due to excessive erosion. It is hoped that this can be remedied in future seasons by examining sections lower in the drainage basin where thicker deposits of alluvium occur.REFERENCESAmiran, D. H. K., and Gilead, M.1974 Early Excessive Rainfall and Soil Erosion in Israel. Israel Exploration Journal 4: 286-95.Abu-Ajamieh, M., et al.1988 Natural Resources in Jordan. Amman: Natural Resources Authority.Agrar and Hydrotechnik GMBH and Bundestalt furGeowissenschaften und Rohstoffe1977 National Water Master Plan for Jordan. Frankfurt: Natural Resources Authority of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Amman, and the German Agency for Technical Cooperation, Federal Republic of Germany.Bender, F.1974 Geology o f Jordan. Contributions to the Regional Geology of the Earth, ed. H. J. Martini. Supplementary Edition of Volume 7. Berlin: Gebuder Bortraeger.Bullard, R. G.1972 Geological Study of the Hesban Area. Andrews University Seminary Studies 10: 129-41.Butzer, K. W.1974 Accelerated Soil Erosion: A Problem of Man-Land Relationships. Pp. 57-78 in Perspectives on Environment, eds. I. R. Manners and M. W. Mikesell. Washington: Association of American Geographers.1981 Archaeology as Human Ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago.Chorley, R. J.; Schumm, S. A.; and Sugden, D. E.1984 Geomorphology. New York: Methuen.Ferguson, K., and Hudson, T.1986 Climate of Tell Hesban and Area. Pp. 9-22 in Environmental Foundations: Studies o f Climatical, Geological, Hydrological, and Phytological Conditions in Hesban and Vicinity, eds. 0 . S. Labianca and L. Lacelle. Hesban 2. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University.Geraty, L. T., et al.1989 Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan1987 National Atlas o f Jordan. Amman: The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.James, Jr., H. E.1976 Geological Study at Tell Hesban. Andrews University Seminary Studies 14: 165-69.Lacelle, L.1986a Bedrock, Surficial Geology, and Soils. Pp. 23-58 in Environmental Foundations: Studies o f Climatical, Geological, Hydrological, and Phytological Conditions in Hesban and Vicinity, eds. 0 . S. Labianca and L. Lacelle. Hesban 2. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University.1986b Surface and Groundwater Resources of Tell Hesban and Area, Jordan. Pp. 59-74 in Environmental Foundations: Studies o f Climatical, Geological,375PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ON THE GEOLOGY OF THE TELL EL-CUMEIRI REGIONHydrological, and Phytological Conditions in Hesban and Vicinity, eds. 0 . S. Labianca and L. Lacelle. Hesban 2. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University.1986c Ecology of the Flora of Tell Hesban and Area, Jordan. Pp. 99-122 in Environmental Foundations: Studies o f Cliniatical, Geological, Hydrological, and Phytological Conditions in Hesban and Vicinity, eds. 0 . S. Labianca and L. Lacelle. Hesban 2. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University.Moorman, E.1959 The Soils o f East Jordan: Report to the Government o f Jordan. Expanded Technical Assistance ProgramNo. 1132. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Vita-Finzi, C.1969 The Mediterranean Valleys. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Younker, R. W.1989 Present and Past Plant Communities of the Tell el- cUmeiri Region. Pp. 32-40 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.376CHAPTER 18The Seal o f Shim c azLarry G. Herr Canadian Union CollegeIntroductionOn the last full day of the season, a small seal made of red limestone was discovered in situ in the debris underlying Surface 7L08:40B of Field Phase (FP) 6 in Field F by volunteer Ann Fisher then of Taiwan Adventist College. The associated pottery belonged to the Late Iron II period (seventh and sixth centuries B.C.). The seal was scaraboid in shape and included a short inscription and a crude decorative pattern on its flat side (figs. 18.1-2).Fig. 18.1. Photograph of the Shimcaz seal.Description and AnalysisThe inscribed surface of the seal was of the standard size and a hole was drilled through the length of the seal, presumably so that it could be hung on a string around the owner’s wrist or neck either by itself or as part of a string of beads. The surface of the seal showed signs of wear, but all letters are clear. The inscription was divided into two panels by a crude decoration of a single horizontal line through two drilled holes (one hole4377THE SEAL OF SHIMCAZis less clear than the other). Three shallow holes, made by a drill, were closely spaced at the bottom of the lower panel. No other decorative features seem to have existed, although a small scratch descended into the lower panel from the midline and a crack meandered from one of the drilled holes in the bottom panel to the edge of the seal.The inscription Consisted of five letters: four in the top panel and one in the bottom. Because of the clarity of the preserved letters, it would appear unlikely that others have been worn from the bottom panel. It seems that most of the space in the bottom panel was simply left unfilled. The inscription reads lSmcz, "belonging to Shimcaz." The name is a typical two-word sentence name, meaning "strong name" or "the [divine] name is strong."The first element, Sim meaning "name," may have been a theophoric substitute for a divine name, much like the kinsmen words °ab and °ah in Abraham and Ahiram, respectively. As far as I can determine, this element is unknown so far in the Ammonite onomasticon, but occurs in the Bible, especially among individuals associated with Transjordan, including Shemceber (the king of Zeboim in Gen 14) and Shemida (the son of Gilead in Num 26:30-31). The best known example is, of course, Shem, the son of Noah and eponymous ancestor of the Semites.The second element, caz, meaning "strong," is very frequent* in virtually all northwest Semitic onomastica. It occurs in names on several Ammonite seals, such as 3lcz on two seals (Avigad 1954: 150; Puech 1976: 60) and mlkmcz(Bordreuil 1986: no. 84). The element also occurs as the hypocoristicon cz3 on the Nimrud Ostracon, now reassessed as an Ammonite inscription (Naveh 1980).The script is clearly Ammonite (note especially the squared cayin) and dates to the sixth century B.C., probably the first half. Unfortunately, none of die letters are diagnostic enough to be more precise. The bent leg and wide head on the mem suggest a form advanced beyond the typical seventh century seal forms (Herr 1978). The squared, open cayin can be found in the Ammonite seal script from the mid-seventh century B.C. on. The same holds true for the Z- shaped zayin, although its oblique angles may suggest a later form. (Zayin is so rare on Ammonite seals, however, that it is difficult to establish a good typology).Several factors suggest the owner of the seal was not a wealthy person. The red limestone from which it was made was virtually worthless. The decorative features were very crude, and the bottom panel was simply left blank when the name was completed (perhaps because of cracks in the stone), giving the seal a lack of balance and symmetry. Moreover, some of the letter forms display idiosyncracies suggesting an unprofessional hand engraved them. The head of die mem is disproportionately long; the opening on the cayin should face upward instead of to the right; and the oblique zayin is apparently unique in the Ammonite script. (Perhaps the inscriber felt a need to fill more of the bottom panel than a normal zayin by stretching the letter.)REFERENCESAvigad, N.1954 Seven Ancient Hebrew Seals. Bulletin o f the Israel Exploration Society 18: 147-53.Bordreuil, P.1986 Catalogue des sceaux ouest-semitiques inscrits de la Bibliotheque Nationale, du Musee du Louvre el du Musee Biblique de Bible et Terre Sainte. Paris: Bibliotheque Nationale.Herr, L. G.1978 The Scripts o f Ancient Northwest Semitic Seals. Missoula: Scholars.Naveh, I.1980 The Ostracon from Nimrud: An Ammonite Name List. Maarav 2: 163-71.Puech, E.1976 Deux Nouveaux sceaux ammonites. Revue biblique 83:59-62.378The Scarab Seal ImpressionCHAPTER 19Donald B. Redford University o f TorontoDescription and AnalysisThe seal impression, measuring about 19.0 x13.0 mm and ca. 1.8 mm deep, was set vertically on the handle of a jar approximately 3.0 cm from the point of its attachment to the body of the vessel. In spite of its vertical placement the impression is to be read horizontally. The upright cartouche containing the prenomen of Thutmose III, Mn-ftpr-rc , dominates the impression, andFig. 19.1. Photograph of the scarab seal impression.is flanked on the left by ntr nfr nb f(wy) "the Good God, Lord of the Two Lands," and on the right by a winged uraeus (figs. 19.1-2) .The oblong scarab centering an upright cartouche with flanking epithets or insignia was fairly common during the 18th and 19th Dynasties. Those of Thutmose III continued to be manufactured into the 20th Dynasty. ExamplesTHE SCARAB SEAL IMPRESSIONFig. 19.2. Drawing of the scarab seal impression.contemporary with the reign show ntr nfr nb fwy on one side and di cnh dt, "given life for ever," on the other (Newberry 1908: pi. 28.9; Matouk 1971: no. 487; Jaeger 1982: fig. 207, 214; pis. 350-51). Those dating from the 19th Dynasty, however, often replace di cnh dt with ptpt hfst nb(t), "crushing every foreign land" (Rowe 1936: nos. 515-16; Matouk 1971: nos. 407-8; Newberry 1908: pi. 28.10; Jaeger 1982: fig. 17; Giveon1985: no. 57), or the like. The format of the Tell el-cUmeiri impression, i.e., with winged uraeus in place of ptpt h3st nb(t), is known from the reign of Ramesses IV (Matouk 1971: 739; Hornung and Staehelin 1976: no. 426); and exact parallels, i.e., showing Mn-jipr-r VP E>Fig. 21.13. Loop handles with thumb impressions and pre-fire incisions from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984 and 1987, Fields A -F , and Sites 23 and 34 (Rujm Selim).398ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRINo.Field or Site Year LocusPailNo. FP Date Description- A 1984 7K40:3 95 - ■ E Iron/L Iron IIJar handle with thumb impression at the top.1 A 1984 7K41:2 45 - Iron II Large ja r handle with two circular depressions at the top.- A 1984 7K41:3 60 - Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.- A 1984 7K50.-1 8 - Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.- ' A 1984 7K50:3 31 - - ■ Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.- A 1984 7K50:3 46 - Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.- A 1984 7K5l:4 52 ■ - Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.2 A 1987 7K 60:16 53b 5 Mixed Jar handle with thumb indentation at the top.3 A 1987 7K61:26 65 3B Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.4 A 1987 7K61:27 71 3B - Jar handle with two converging grooves on the upper handle.5 A 1987 7K61:32 88 3B L Iron Cooking pot handle with thumb impression at the top.- A 1987 7K70:3 88 1 Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.6 A 1987 7K71:22 . 51 2 L Iron II Cooking pot rim with thumb impression at the top.-7 B 1984 7K 80:17 100 i - ■ - Handle of a krater rim with shallow thumb impression at the handle/rim junction.B 1984 7K90:15 89 - Post-Iron Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.- B 1987 7J86:3 59b 5 Mixed Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.8 B 1987 7J86:3 63 5 Mixed Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.9 B 1987 7K81:5 18 1 Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.10 B 1987 7K81:5 34 1 Iron 11 Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.■ B 1987 7K81:21 57 4 LB/Iron I Large storejar handle with one, vertical line slightly off-center rendered before or after firing.11 C 1984 8L82:8 63 ' ■ Large ja r handle with two horizontal slashes at mid-point. Sherd is worn. Slashes rendered before or after firing.- D 1987 6K07:4 38d 2 Mixed Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.- E 1987 2:6 30a 2 Mixed Jug handle with thumb impression at the top.- E 1987 2:77 49b - Iron II Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.12 F 1987 6L98:18 75 3 Iron II Large ja r handle with thumb impression at the top.- F 1987 6L98:23 66 3 Iron II Storejar handle with thumb impression at the top.13 F 1987 6L98:23 83 3 L Iren Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.14 F 1987 7L08:14 132a 2 L Iron for handle with groove down the center and a thumb impression mid-point in the groove.15 F 1987 7L08:21 102 4 L Iron/ E PersJar handle with thumb impression at the top.- F 1987 7L08:22 113 4 L Iron Storejar handle with thumb impression in a groove.16 F 1987 7L09:8 43 4 L Iron Jug handle with thumb impression at the top.17 F 1987 7L09:11 64 4 L Iron Jug handle with thumb impression at die top.- 23 1987 - - - L Iron Storejar handle with thumb impression at the top.- 23 1987 48 * Cooking pot rim with thumb impression at the rim/handle junction.- 34 1987 2:14 67 L Iron Storejar handle with thumb impression at the top.- 34 1987 2:14 68 - - Jar handle with thumb impression at the top.Fig. 21.13, continued. Descriptions of loop handles with thumb impressions and pre-fire incisions from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984 and 1987, Fields A, B, C, D, E, F, and Sites 23 and 34 (Rujm Selim).399ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIVessel Type Count PercentJugs 7 31.8Cooking pots 2 9.1Storejars 13 59.1Sub-total 22 100Unknown type 11Total 33Fig. 21.14. Distribution according to vessel types of loop handles with a finger or thumb indentation. One storejar has two indentations from the Tell el-cUmeiri combined 1984 and 1987 assemblages.fragm entary sherds belonging to unreconstructible pots. The large jars with the simple linear patterns scratched into the rim may once have stood in a common storage area. Each could have held the property of a particular (extended) family. The laick of variety of the marks could imply that they served to identify a large group of people, i.e., a family, rather than individual ownership.Private ownership can also be inferred from the more personalized marks found on handles. Small handles are easily identified as belonging to jugs, but some of the medium-to-large handles could also have been part of jugs or small jars taken outside the home to carry water either from the water source or on daily expeditions to the fields or the next village. The greater diversity of marks found on jug handles could have been necessary since they were used outside the home. The symbols found on the smaller, easily transportable vessels were more diverse than those found on the ' larger, stationary jars and pithoi which remained forever in larders. Further, it is suggested that the marks on handles represented personal belongings while those on jars designated family ownership.The significance o f the pre- and postfiring marks. Pre- and post-firing marks in the Iron II-III pottery show clear distinctions according to vessel types and sizes. Certain marks were found in both groups, such as "t"s and individual vertical lines, but their simplicity and ease with which they can be rendered, imply that no conclusions should be drawn from this overlap. This applies equally for the continued use of the "t" as a post-firing mark beginning in the Middle Bronze,extending through the Late Bronze/Iron I and into the Iron II-III periods. Most of the excavated samples came from Iron II deposits primarily4M - l - ~ %56?1Fig. 21.15. Sherds with marks incised after firing from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984 and 1987, Fields A, B, C, and F.400ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRINo.Field or Site Year LocusPailNo. FP Date Description1 A 1984 7K40:1 7 ■ - Iron II Jar handle with two vertical strokes down the center.2 A 1984 7K40:9 46 - Iron 11 Large jar handle with a "U-shaped incision in the center. Mark of ownership.3 A 1984 7K41:3 55 • Iron II Jar handle with a fragmentary, multi-linear horizontal and vertical pattern. Mark of ownership.4 A 1984 7K41:9 90 - - Cooking pot rim with one, vertical slash at the handle/rim join. Mark of ownership.5 A 1984 7K51:7 10 - Mixed Jar rim with one, vertical slash. Sign of ownership.6 A 1984 7K51:16 95 ' Iron II Jar rim with one, vertical slash. Sign of ownership.7 A 1984 7K51:18 99 - Iron I/II Jar rim with one vertical slash. Sign of ownership.8 A 1987 7K 60:16 53a 5 Mixed Thick ja r handle with one vertical and three short, oblique incisions. Mark of ownership.9 B 1987 7K80:3 63 1 Mixed Jar handle with an oblique "U-shaped incision in the middle. Mark of ownership.10 B 1987 7J88:2 10 1 Mixed Jar with two vertical slashes down the center. Mark of ownership.11 B 1987 7J88:2 13 1 Mixed Rim of a krater or large ja r with a circular mark. Possible post-fire mark of ownership.12 B 1984 7J88:3 10 - LB/Iron I Jar handle with a "U-shaped incision. Possibly intentional.13 C 1987 8L82:22 106 5 MB Jar handle with a "U-shaped incision. Mark of ownership.14 E 1987 2:5 16 5 Mixed Jug handle with fragmentary, multi-directional incisions.15 F 1987 6L99:4 17 4 Iron II Jug rim with a "U-shaped incision on the handle. Mark of ownership.16 F 1987 7L08:14 125 2 - Body sherd of a ja r with fragmentary, horizontal and oblique scratches.17 F 1987 7L09:5 47b 4 Mixed Jar neck with "V"-shaped incision. Mark of ownership.18 F 1987 7L09:13 57 4 * Large handle with a fragmentary, "U-shaped incision in the center. Mari: of ownership.Fig. 21.15, continued. Descriptions of sherds with marks incised after firing from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984 and 1987, Fields A, B, C, and F.because those deposits have received the widest exposure thus far. Until large areas of second millennium B.C. material are excavated, it is premature to speculate on the abundance or continuity of the marks.The different distribution and use of pre- and post-firing marks on Iron II sherds implies that each category had its own meaning. For all of the pre-fire marks, expediency and simplicity prevailed. The minimal, yet recognizable, distinctions in the marks on large jars suggest that each mark represented a different potter and/or workshop, and possibly more than one generation of a single family of potters. One person might have signed pots with a single incised line (fig. 21.10:3, 5) while the progeny or siblings used two (fig. 21.10:16). Yet another member of the family, perhaps a third generation, could have used three lines (fig. 21.10:4). These pre-firing marks are found on the very large jars whose life span may have been 100 years, thus making it difficult todetermine the precise relationship between the marks and potters. The longevity of the large jars implies that each could have been in use for much of the Iron II period. The similarity of the marks implies that they may have been manufactured or used simultaneously. Each potter sought to distinguish his or her work in a subtle, yet decisive manner. Large jars were probably made infrequently, but to mark the occasion, the potter signed each one. Additional evidence of the work of individual potters might be encoded in the precise rendering of the rim and overall vessel proportions, but to test this requires recon- structible jars. Nevertheless, jar rims with one incision resemble each other in shape more than the other marked rims. The two rims with three strokes also resemble each other more than any of the other rim shapes. The three marks could represent three contemporaneous workshops or potters, or three generations of potters within a single extended family. The similarity and401ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI3 4Fig. 21.16. Post-firing marks from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984 and 1987. Marks of ownership. No. 1. Post-firing single incision on ajar rim. Field A (1984), 7K51:16 Pail 95 (fig. 21.15:6). Mark of ownership. No. 2. Post-firing single incision on a cooking pot rim, Field A (1984), 7K41:9 Pail 90, (fig. 21.15:4). Mark of ownership. No. 3. Post-fire, 't"-shape scratched on a handle, Field F (1987), 7L09:13 Pail 57 (fig. 21.15:18). Mark of ownership. No. 4. Post-fire, "t"- shaped incision on the handle of a jug, Field F (1987), 6L99:4 Pail 17 (fig. 21.15:15). Mark of ownership.distribution of the marks imply proximity, perhaps temporal (such as three contemporaneous workshops) or social (such as several generations of potters in one family).Nothing in the distribution of the marks suggests that they were designed to inform on the contents or the capacity of the containers. Since different marks are found on vessels of more or less the same size and shape, the pre-firing marksdo not relate to size or contents. If the marks designated vessel size, one would expect all jars of a given size to have the identical mark, but this is not the situation.F u r t h e r e v i d e n c e suggesting that the pre-fire marks represent the mark of a potter and/or workshop rather than anything else, is the appearance of particular marks on more than one type of vessel. The single stroke found on large jars from the tell is also, found, on a cooking pot from Site 34 (Rujm Selim). Although the number of sherds is small, it is tempting to speculate that they reveal the existence of a potter or workshop who provided wares for both Tell el-cUmeiri and its hinterland sites.The post-firing scratches on the handles of jugs, small jars, and cooking pots may have been signs of ownership. The small containers on which they are found would have been taken out of the home to fill with water or to clean. Because the pots were used outside the home, there was a need to identify the owner or user. The small jars and jugs could have been used by workers in the fields at certain times of the year, and for carrying water from the spring to the tell or to the home.Among the post-firing marks, simple linear patterns predominate. On handles, the "t" shapes, single lines, and multi-linear scratches are most common. The repetition of the single slash, always a fine, narrow line, in the same place on the rims of four containers, three jars and a cooking pot (fig. 21.15:4-7) is of interest. All examples come from Field A, the area of the Ammonite citadel. They were not randomly found all over the site. Nor were they randomly used all over the site. There is coherency both in the nature of the marks and their distribution.A second series is seen in the "t" shape found402\ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIon three jug or jar handles. Other patterns scratched in the clay involve more complex linear designs. Lines would be the easiest pattern to render in the fired clay. As with the pre-firing marks, the post-firing marks do not appear to signify vessel contents because the marks are not scratched into the rims of storejars. Instead, they are on small portable containers which were used outside of the home, for example at the communal well and in the fields.Marks comparable to those found at Tell el- cUmeiri are recorded for the Amman Citadel collection. The single vertical slash and the "V"- and "t" -shapes are catalogued by Dornemann (1983: 102) without reference to their execution before or after firing. Unlike the Tell el-cUmeiri assemblage thus far, marks were also incised on the bases of clay containers.The variety of the pre- and post-firing marks at Tell el-cUmeiri is limited. Although two opposite sides of the tell and its Iron Age deposits have been excavated, the variation within the marks is not great. One interpretation for the relative paucity and lack of variety in post-firing marks concerns the overall number of families resident at Tell el-cUmeiri. One household or family may have used the "t" to mark its property, another family used the single incised line, others used multi-linear marks, and one family used no mark. This results in less than ten, with as few as five, families resident at the site. There could well have been more, but how many additional households might one expect? Perhaps minor variations in the location or rendering of each mark represented different, but closely related individuals or families, yet the repetition of the same pattern suggests a limited number of marks sufficed and that the total population was not large.In his assessment of the seventh century Khilda Fortress located northwest of Amman, Yassine (1988: 17-18) has proposed that itfunctioned as the core of a larger system. He has identified isolated architectural elements situated on the alluvial plain as the advanced posts and agricultural units associated with the fortress at Khilda. In contrast, positioned on the hill above, stood Khilda Fortress A which functioned as the military headquarters for the commander. This would imply that the site was not the home of a large number of people, but a center for military personnel. As such, the population was confined to a limited number of residents at Khilda.One way to test the hypothesis that the Tell el- cUmeiri population was small, is a study of the hinterland. If rural communities surround the tell, the question of where the people lived is partially solved. In suggesting that those who lived on thetell were not numerous, the implication is not that in the Iron Age, a non-sedentary population predominated. Dornemann (1983: 4, 182) has noted the impropriety of assuming that nomads are the answer to gaps in information. Instead, an investigation of the hinterland of Tell el-cUmeiri provides evidence of at least 34 Iron II settlements ranging in size and function which have been described as farms, estates, agricultural complexes, and villages (Geraty, et al. 1986: 126; Younker, chapters 12-13, above). Earlier survey work in Jordan also revealed the presence of a large number of Iron II settlements, many of which were located on the valley floors (Yassine, Sauer, and Ibrahim 1988: 198) where they are subjected to numerous preservation problems. For Tell el-cUmeiri, the excavation of hinterland sites will aid in mapping the distribution of Iron Age sites and people.For the present, the available ceramic evidence represented by the post-firing marks scratched into portable pottery, suggests a tell population limited in size. "Hie bulk of the populace lived near their farms and fields in villages not far from the tell which served as the administrative and commercial center. Those who were resident at the tell may have included the two extremes of the social and economic scale-the social or political elite and the lowest stratum of the society—the people who lived and worked in the citadel complex. Otherwise, the populace was dispersed in the hinterland. It is also assumed that the residents of the tell and the more rural sedentary inhabitants were associated with, participated in, and benefited from the migratory segments of the population. Townspeople, villagers, and nomads probably belonged to a small number of extended families whose allegiance was maintained regardless of their place of residence.The pottery reveals evidence of those who made and used it. In antiquity, the marks on the pottery conveyed a different meaning to different members of the society. The people who made the pottery found at Tell el-cUmeiri could probably identify and recognize the potter behind each mark. Those who used the pots may have been able to recognize the mark of each family, but not each potter. For those archaeologists who find them, the marks are a visual language which provides evidence concerning the organization of the pottery industry, the number of families who made and used the pots, and those who lived at Tell el-cUmeiri and nearby sites.The Iron Age Manufacturing TraditionA pottery "tradition" refers to all of the403ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRImanufacturing techniques used by a community of potters at any given time. A few general statements can be made about the coexistence of several pottery making techniques, including hand and wheel work.A combined coiling and turning technique appears to have been common for normal sized vessels of all types. Open and closed shapes, whose rims and bodies were either coiled or constructed on the turntable with the use of centrifugal force, have lower bodies which may have been trimmed and shaped as the vessel stood upside down on a rotating turntable. Vessel bodies and rims would have been coil built on a turntable and then set aside to dry slightly before more work was rendered. Once sufficiently dry, by,replacing the vessel upside down on the turntable, the potter trimmed or "turned" the lower body to the desired thinness. As a result, drag and scratch marks, made as the potter scraped away excess clay are confined to the lower body rather than the entire vessel. This technique of manufacture explains the distribution of burnish on carinated bowls as described by Franken (1973). As the potter trimmed away the unwanted clay of the lower body, wet clay was exposed. Although the potter may have used a single tool and technique to burnish the upper and lower body, the latter will lack the burnish sheen because the clay was wet. In contrast, the clay of the upper body, originally thinned during the initial stage of manufacture, was then dry enough to cause the surface to appear shiny as a result of the pressure of the burnishing tool. Based on experiments carried out at the University of Leiden in 1975, if overly dry or wet clay is burnished, no sheen results. Furthermore, samples fired to various temperatures but treated with a Single burnishing technique, lost their sheen if fired to an overly high temperature. The desire to get a shiny surface is one of the factors contributing to the "underfiring" evidenced by the gray cores of burnished pottery. Rather than evidence of "poor firing" or lack of expertise, the darkened, unoxidized core represents the control ancient potters exercised over their craft and their conservative use of fuel.To shape large jars, such as some found at the tell and at Site 34 (Rujm Selim), a second technique involving coils without the turntable is used. The vessel interior and wall thickness are irregular and the jar fractures horizontally along coil joins (fig. 21.17).Evidence for the use of a fast wheel includes small bowls and lamps thrown from a cone of clay known as a hump. Some of the heavier pieces show no attempt to modify the string-cut bottom. Lamp bases include uneven rounded disks and irregular concave bases which attest to the rapidity of their manufacture rather than the skill of the potters. Other lamps have flat bases showing the concentric rings resulting from the tool used to cut each one from the hump. An advantage of using the clay hump is that more than one object can be fashioned on the wheel without re-centering the clay after each piece is made. Besides these small lamps and bowls, the prevalency of throwing pottery remains unanswered.From contemporaneous sites, the evidence of manufacturing techniques is sparse. At Tell Mazar, a handmade Late Iron Age cup provides further evidence of the persistence of hand built pottery into the first millennium B.C. (Hom&s- Fredericq and Franken 1986: 175-77, n. 574). An examination of pottery belonging to the "Edomite" tradition from Buseirah and Tawilan suggests the use of turntables in addition to a heavy wheel suitable for throwing pottery. For the seventh century Jericho pottery, Franken and Kalsbeek (1974: 87) noted the coexistence of wheel and hand techniques and described the bulk of the pottery as coiled and turned rather than wheel thrown {ibid.: 108). Bowls and jars were coil built and then trimmed and thinned on a turntable {ibid.: 46). The smallest juglets, lamps, and small bowls were thrown from a hump {ibid.: 48). Franken and Kalsbeek (1974: 90) also suggestedfig . 21.17. Evidence of coil manufacture on a Late Iron Age pithos from Site 34, Rujm Selim (1987), 2:14 Pail 61. Note the fractures along coil joins and the irregular interior surface.404ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIdiversification of the pottery industry indicating that potters specialized according to vessel type and manufacturing technique.Organization of Iron Age Pottery IndustryFor the present, the Iron Age pottery industry appears to have been divided into four sets of potters: those who produced the full range of open and closed forms, large and small; a second group who produced cooking pots; a third group who hand built oversize containers; and still others who made the highly burnished "Ammonite" ware. All were craft specialists.This reconstruction relies on the preliminary petrographic analysis and the manufacturing techniques. For the petrographic study, Iron II storejars, burnished bowls, cooking pots, and sherds of the black burnished "Ammonite" bowls were submitted. Whereas a large utilitarian jar, burnished bowl, and cooking pot sample join in Group 2, the fine "Ammonite" bowls belong to a different group, suggesting two sets of potters. A third set of potters was responsible for some of the Iron II cooking pots, but not all, since the Iron II cooking pot from the tell is grouped mineralogically with cooking ware of the Early Bronze and Iron I periods (London, Plint, and Smith, chapter 23, below).Ethnographic and ethnoarchaeological studies of traditional potters demonstrate that potters do not use two types of clay. They might mix clays together, but individual potters each work with one clay mixture. If there are special clays for bricks or pithoi, there are special groups of potters to use them. If one clay is used to create all types of pots, including cooking ware and decorated pieces, all shapes can be made in one workshop or household. Differences in clays, however, represent differences in the potters who use them.The vicinity around Amman is a likely source for the Iron II wares of Group 2. In the petrologic sample was a sherd from a modern jar made in a workshop near Tell el-cUmeiri, at Zizia. The petrographic analysis demonstrated that the clays of the Iron II pottery are similar to the clay used by the potters at Zizia who work with clays dug near Amman. The seventh and sixth century B.C. wares may have been made in the vicinity of Tell el-cUmeiri, which is a potential production location due to the availability of water. It is the only permanent water source between Amman and Madaba. Water is one of the priorities of pottery production. Mentioned above in connection with the site as a center of pottery production, are the two molds for a figurine and a shrine of Iron Agedate found in a survey of the site (Franken and Abujaber 1989: figs. C.5-6).The abundance of zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines at Tell el-cUmeiri, in addition to the molds, might hint at the sacred nature of the site. Given the presence of the spring, often held sacred by people living in semi-arid zones, Tell el-cUmeiri may have been a center visited by various people in the Iron Age who dedicated figurines at shrines. Temples and shrines, in some instances, have workshops nearby which produce figurines. If the site served as a religious center, neutrality was assured and hostilities were forbidden, an elaborate defense system would not have been necessary.Reshaped and Reused SherdsGiven our concern about the people who made and used the pottery, it is worthwhile noting what happened to the pots once they no longer served the purpose for which they were intended. Over 600 sherds were recycled, reshaped, and reused to form ceramic disks, scrapers, pendants, and spindle whorls. The ceramic disks are sherds intentionally reshaped into circular or facetted forms. They are not the result of wear or rolling. The sherds referred to as scrapers (fig. 21.18:1-3) are so designated due to the smooth, worn edge(s) and the ease with which they fit into the hand. Their use is unknown. Some may have been involved with pottery production, but there is no evidence to confirm this. They do not have a center hole like the objects from Amman Tomb F which Dornemann (1983: 152) compared with the "feluccas" of Megiddo and the "polishing implements" from Mesad Hashavyahu. The scrapers found at Tell el-cUmeiri were fashioned from broken pottery unlike the Amman Tomb F objects which were intentionally shaped into oval and rectangular forms, some with pre-fire marks incised in the wet clay.Ceramic Disks. Ceramic disks are circular sherds with facetted or worked edges (figs. 18:4- 43; 21.19-21.24). Sherds normally break into irregular, angular fragments. Rounded or oval sherds with irregular edges were intentionally shaped from broken pottery, including body sherds, bases, and handles. All 1987 reworked disks were collected (n=428). Reshaped coarse ware sherds, especially of the Early Bronze Age, when rolled and worn can become rounded without human intervention and were not included among the intentionally reshaped sherds unless they were found on floor deposits. Early Bronze Age sherds are under-represented given the difficulty in identifying intentionally reshaped sherds from those which may have been rounded due to405ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI406ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRINo. Field Year LocusPaUNo. Diam. Thick. Description1 D 1987 5K96:3 165 - - Arrows indicate smoothed edge of this reshaped red-slipped sherd. Scraper.2 F 1987 6L99:2 7b - - Reshaped sherd with smoothed upper edges. Scraper.3 F 1987 7L09:6 32b - - Reshaped sherd with smoothed edges. Scraper.4 F 1987 7L08:21 150 - ' - Reshaped circular sherd with po6t-fire incisions arranged as concentric circles.5 1 E 1987 3:38 d - - Reshaped square sherd with post-fire incisions in the form of a face.6 F 1987 7L09:17 75a 34 14 Sherd reshaped into a disk.7 F 1987 7L09:17 68 42 9 Sherd reshaped into a disk.8 F 1987 7L09-.22 76 46 8 Sherd reshaped into a disk.9 F 1987 7L09:17 75b 48 6 Sherd reshaped into a disk.10 F 1987 6L99:19 42 53 17. Sherd reshaped into a disk.11 F 1987 7L09:22 79 57 11 Sherd reshaped into, a disk.12 F 1987 7L08:21 83 34 12 Sherd reshaped into a disk.13 F 1987 6L99:4 20 38 8 Sherd reshaped into a disk.14 F 1987 7L08:21 84a 47 14 Sherd reshaped into a disk.15 F 1987 7L08:21 84c 50 12 Sherd reshaped into a disk.16 F 1987 6L99:4 21a 50 16 Sherd, reshaped into a disk.17 F 1987 7L09:10 53h 50 9 Sherd reshaped into a disk.18 F 1987 7L09;10 53a 53 12 Sherd reshaped into a disk.19 F 1987 6L99:4 27 54 17 Sherd reshaped into a disk.20 F 1987 7L09:8. 44b 57 13 Sherd reshaped into a disk.21 F 1987 7L09:22 79 57 11 Sherd reshaped into a disk.22 F 1987 6L99:4 21b 58 16 Sherd reshaped into a disk.23 F 1987 7L09:10 56 60 18 Sherd reshaped into a disk.24 F 1987 6L98:36 117a 61 13 Sherd reshaped into a disk.25 F 1987 6L99:4 31 71 15 Sherd reshaped into a disk.26 F 1987 7L09:8 44a 70 13 Sherd reshaped into a disk.27 F 1987 7L09:10 55 72 11 Sherd reshaped into a disk.28 F 1987 7L08:22 107 77 12 Disk base reshaped into a disk.29 F 1987 6L98:36 118 118 21 Base reshaped into a disk.30 F 1987 6L98:23 82a 46 13 Ring base reshaped into a disk.31 F 1987 6L98:23 82b 58 10 Handle reshaped into a disk.32 F 1987 6L98:23 79 63 15 Sherd reshaped into a disk.33 F 1987 6L98:23 98 64 11 Sherd reshaped into a disk.34 F 1987 6L98:23 81 70 16 Sherd reshaped into a disk.35 F 1987 6L98-.23 67 70 18 Sherd reshaped into a disk.36 F 1987 7L08:7 59a 34 7 Sherd reshaped into a disk.37 F 1987 6L98:5 19 37 10 Sherd reshaped into a disk.38. F 1987 7L08:7 59b 43 8 Sherd reshaped into a disk.39 F 1987 7L08:16 67 50 10 Sherd reshaped into a disk.40 F 1987 7L08:7 38b 62 11 Handle reshaped into a disk.41 F 1987 7L08:7 41a 66 13 Sherd reshaped into a disk.42 F 1987 7L08:7 53 74 10 Sherd reshaped into a disk.43 F 1987 7L08:7 47 77 13 Sherd reshaped into a disk.Fig. 21.18, continued. Descriptions of reshaped sherds from Tell el-cUmeiri 1987. Diameter and thickness are measured in millimeters.407ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-gUMEIRIP a ilNo. Year Field LO C U S No. Description1 1984 C 8L73:5 5.52b Ceramic disk reshaped from a base.2 1984 C 8L73:5 5.52a Ceramic disk reshaped from a base.Fig. 21.19. Early Bronze Age ceramic disks shaped from flat bases from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984.post-depositional causes. The largest disks were minimally modified flat jar bases of the Early Bronze Age (fig. 21.19).People selected a particular type of body sherd and ware to reshape. They avoided highly burnished, thin, fine-grained fabrics in preference for the coarser, thicker wares. In diameter, the disks are 2.5 to 22.0 cm and thicknesses varied from 0.6 to 2.1 cm. Finer pottery would have been toodifficult to reshape without causing further breakage of the sherd. Greater control was maintained by reshaping the coarser wares. Sherds once belonging to large jars and open forms were preferred (91.4%) due to the minimal curvature and almost flat surfaces. Handle fragments (4.7%) and bases (3.9%) were also reshaped; their forms provided a convenient means to lift reshaped sherds. The reshaped handle fragments,408ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIPailNo. Year Field Locus No. Date Description1 1987 D 6K07:4 38b EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.2 1987 D 5K96:17 43 EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.3 1987 D 6K07:13 44a EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.4 1987 D 5K96:18 39 EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.5 1987 D 5K96:10 26b EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.6 1987 D 5K96:10 36 EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.7 1987 D 5K07:20 62 EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.8 1987 D 6K07:4 38a EB III Sherd reshaped into a disk.9 1987 A 7K60:16 5lc Iron I Sherd reshaped into a disk.10 1987 A 7K60.16 51b Iron I Sherd reshaped into a disk.11 1987 A 7K60:16 52a Iron I Sherd reshaped into a disk.12 1987 A 7K60:16 51a Iron I Sherd reshaped into a disk.Fig. 21.20. Early Bronze and Iron I ceramic disks from Tell el-cUmeiri. Sherds are numbered from left-to-right, top-to-bottom.409ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIPailNo. Year Field Locus No. Date Description1 1987 A 7K61:13 59 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.2 1987 B 7K80:3 52b Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.3 1987 B 7K80:3 74b Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.4 1987 B 7K80:3 85b Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.5 1987 A 7K71:1 7 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.6 1987 F 6L98:13 46 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.7 1987 B 7K80:3 75c Iron 11 Sherd reshaped into a disk.8 1987 B 7K80:3 26a Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.9 1987 F 6L98:5 19 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.10 1987 B 7K81:15 52 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.11 1987 B 7J86:3 31a Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.12 1987 B 7J86:3 31b Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.13 1987 A 7K61:13 67 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.14 1987 A 7K 70:10 45c Iron 11 Base reshaped into a disk.15 1987 F 6L98:1 1 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.16 1987 A 7K50:1 9 Iron II Sherd reshaped into a disk.Fig. 21.21. Iron H ceramic disks from Tell eI-cUmeiri. Sherds are numbered from left-to-right, top-to-bottom.410ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRINo. Year Field LocusPailNo. Description1 1987 B 7J86:3 40a Sherd reshaped into a disk.2 1987 F 6L98:17 100 Sherd reshaped into a disk.3 1987 F 7L09:20 73b Sherd reshaped into a disk.4 1987 A 7K61:1 22 Sherd reshaped into a disk.5 1987 A 7K60:9 55 Sherd reshaped into a disk.6 1987 A 7K61:11 40d Sherd reshaped into a disk.7 1987 B 7J86:2 14b Base reshaped into a disk.8 1987 B 7J88:1 4 Sherd reshaped into a disk.9 1987 F 6L98:23 67 Sherd reshaped into a disk.10 1987 C 8L82:22 105 Sherd reshaped into a disk.11 1987 F 6L99:4 31 Sherd reshaped into a disk.12 1987 F 7L09:5 47a Sherd reshaped into a disk.Fig. 21.22. Ceramic disks from deposits with pottery of several periods (Iron II and later) from Tell el-cUmeiri, 1987. Sherds are numbered fromleft-to-right, top-to-bottom.411ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRINo. Year Field LocusPailNo. Description1 1987 B 7J86:2 15 Handle reshaped into a disk.2 1987 F 6L98:2 51 Handle reshaped into a disk.3 1987 F 7L08:7 38B Base reshaped into a disk.4 1987 E 1:5 16c Handle reshaped into a disk.5 1987 B 7J88:1 4 Sherd reshaped into a disk.6 1987 A 7K60:5 38a Sherd reshaped into a disk.7 1987 F 6L99:4 31 Sherd reshaped into a disk.8 1987 B 7J86:2 14b Sherd reshaped into a disk.Fig. 21.23. Ceramic disks from Tell el-cUmeiri deposits with pottery of several periods (Iron II and later). Sherds are numbered from lefl-to-right, top-to-bottom.412ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRINo. YearField or Site LocusPaUNo. Description1 1987 2 5:15 - Sherd reshaped into a disk.2 1987 B 7K 80:15 98 Sherd reshaped into a disk.3 1987 34 3:4 22 Sherd reshaped into a disk.4 1987 B 7J86:2 6 Sherd reshaped into a disk.5 1987 A 7K60:16 54 Sherd reshaped into a disk.6 1987 A 7K70:1 3 Sherd reshaped into a disk.7 1987 2 5:7 - Sherd reshaped into a disk.8 1987 A 7K60:5 42 Sherd reshaped into a disk.9 1987 F 6L98:21 68 Base reshaped into a disk.10 1987 A 7K 60:16 53c Sherd reshaped into a disk.11 1987 F 6L98:23 97 Base reshaped into a disk.12 1987 A 7K60:2 13 Sherd reshaped into a disk. -Fig. 21.24. Ceramic disks from deposits with pottery of several periods from Tell el-cUmeiri, and Sites 2 and 34. Sherds are numbered from left-lo-right, top-to-bottom.413ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIS u r f a c e s2 3 4 6Fig. 21.25. Histogram of the size distribution of ceramic disks from Tell el-cUmeiri (1987) Field F stratified deposits. Surfaces of four different Field Phases are represented: Byzantine (2), Early Persian (3), and Iron II (4 and 6).consisting of the handle stub and wall attachment, made a convenient jar cover, as did the slightly raised edges of a reshaped disk or ring base. The modified ring bases show regular facetting immediately above the base on the lower wall. This could not result from accidental breakage. Some of the circular disks have a slight depression on one or both sides, precisely in the center. One sherd had two rows of circular indentations rendered after firing, while a square-shaped sherd has a face scratched into the surface (figs. 21.18:4-5).Circular disks were probably used for various purposes. Smaller disks have been categorized as gaming pieces to which small reshaped square and triangular sherds can be added. Larger rounded sherds have been designated as jar stoppers or lids. The distribution of reshaped sherds suggests that some may have been used as jar stoppers. Seven disks came from Field E, the area of the water system and spring where the overall number of finds was small (except for jug handles). The presence of reshaped sherds suitable for jar coverings implies that jugs and small jars were filled at the spring rather than large jars or skins exclusively. The spring at the bottom of the tell would have been the place to refill water containers of all sizes.The largest circular disks may have been used as jar stoppers as observed in Cyprus (Egoumenidou and Floridou 1987: fig. 15). Another function could involve pottery production. The larger disks may have served as the work surface, known as the "bat," on which pottery was made. Potters rarely work directly on the head of the turntable, but prefer to shape each pot on a portable surface on which it can be carried away to ' dry. Ceramic bats are particularly useful because wet clay will not adhere to dry clay. Ceramic bats absorb water from the base of the pot in production, thereby aiding it to dry without being exposed to freely circulating air. Other materials suitable for bats (except for stone) are organic (wood, leaves, and basketry), and therefore would not be preserved archaeologically.If the disks were made to represent something, their size distribution is instructive. Although an occasional disk was 22.0 cm, the more common maximum diameter was 15.0 cm and the minimum diameter was 2.0 cm. A reasonable division of all disks between 2.0 cm and 15.0 cm would create three or four groups based on the difficulty in, reshaping a curved sherd to fit a precise size. The maximum diameter was measured for all disks. A selected sample of well-stratified pieces414ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRI%\PailNo. Year Field Locus No. Description1 1987 F 6L98:3 31b Sherd reshaped into a square.2 1987 A 7K71:6 15 Sherd reshaped into a rectangle.3 1987 F 7L09:8 62c Sherd reshaped into a square.4 1987 B 7J86:3 83 Sherd reshaped into a square.5 1987 F 6L99:12 35a Sherd reshaped into a rectangle.6 1987 F 7L09:8 62b Sherd reshaped into a rectangle.7 1987 F 6L98:34 100b Sherd reshaped into a rectangle.8 1987 F 6L98:34 100a Sherd reshaped into a square.9 1987 B 7K81:2 9 Sherd reshaped into a triangle.10 1987 F 6L98:4 32b Sherd reshaped into a triangle.11 1987 D 5K96:1 3 Sherd reshaped into a triangle.12 1987 F 7L09:6 31 Sherd reshaped into a triangle.13 1987 B 7J86:3 55a Sherd reshaped into a triangle.Fig. 21.26. Reshaped ceramic squares, rectangles, and triangles from deposits with Iron II and later pottery at Tell el-cUmeiri. Sherds are numberedfrom left-to-right, top-to-bottom.415ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIField or PailNo. Site Year Locus No. FP Date Description1 A 1987 7K50:2 137 - L Iron II Krater rim.2 A 1987 7K60:2 11 1 Mixed Body sherd.3 A 1987 7K70:1 5 1 Mixed Body sherd.4 A 1987 7K70:1 81 1 Mixed Body sherd (large jar).5 A 1987 7K70:6 83 1 Mixed Thin-walled body sherd.6 A 1987 7K70:10 45 2 E Per* Body sherd.7 A 1987 7K70:12 57e 2 E Pers Body sherd.8 A 1987 7K70:12 61a 2 E Pers Body sherd.9 A 1987 7K70:12 61c . 2 E Pers Body sherd.10 A 1987 7K70:2 63a 2 E Pers Body sherd.11 A 1987 7K70:12 63c 2 E Pers Body sherd with one complete and two incomplete holes.12 B 1987 7.186:3 33 5 L Iron II Body sherd.13 B 1987 7J86:3 59 5 L Iron II Body sherd with an incomplete hole.14 B 1987 7J86:3 60 5 Iron I/II Body sherd.15 B 1987 7J86:3 70c 6 - Body sherd.16 B 1987 7J86:3 115 5 Iren I Jar body sherd with three holes.17 B 1987 7K80:3 43 1 E Pers Body sherd with four complete and two incomplete holes.18 B 1987 7K80:3 82 1 E Pers Body sherd with three holes.19 B 1987 7K80:3 87a 1 E Pers Body sherd.20 B 1987 7K80:3 87b 1 E Pers Body sherd.21 B 1987 7K80:3 87d i E Pers Body sherd.22 B 1987 7K81:5 27 1 Mixed Body sherd.23 B 1987 7K81:5 ■ 29 1 Mixed Body sherd.24 D 1987 5K96:2 11 3 Mixed Body sherd.25 D 1987 5K96:3 40 6A EB HI Body sherd.26 E 1987 2:5 15 5 Iron I/II Shoulder/neck sherd.27 F 1987 6L89:1 9 1 Mixed Jar sherd with two holes.28 F 1987 6L98:1 6 1 Mixed Jar sherd with two holes.29 F 1987 6L98:4 145 3 E Pers Sherd of a thick-walled ja r or large basin.30 F 1987 6L98:15 87 - Iron II Body sherd.31 F 1987 6L98:23 112 3 Mixed Rim of a large bowl.32 F 1987 6L99:4 52 4 Iron I/II Storejar rim.33 F 1987 6L99:12 35b 4 L Iron II Rim of a large burnished bowl.34 F 1987 7L08:14 121 2 Mixed Krater rim with three holes.35 F 1987 7L08:21 . 101 4 L Iron II Body sherd.36 F 1987 7L09:5 47b 4 L Iron II Jar shoulder fragment.37 F 1987 7L09:8 62a 4 L Iron II Body sherd with one complete and one incomplete hole.38 F 1987 7L09:24 162 6 Iron II Burnished bowl.39 34 1987 - - - - Body sherd.40 34 1987 2:14 79 - Iron II Body sherd.41 34 1987 35 40 - - Body sherd.Fig. 21.27. Sherds with repair holes from Tell el-cUmeiri (1987), Fields A, B, D, E, F, and Site 34 (Rujm Selim). Each sherd has one repair hole unless otherwise indicated.(fig. 21.18:4-43) presented in a histogram (fig. enough to state that the size differences are21.25), results in a division of the disks into three statistically significant. Based on a study of 44main groups, but the current data base is not disks from Field F, which yielded the largest416ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRInumber on well-defined surfaces, the diameters of the three groups appear to be equidistant from each other. The mean diameters of each group,3.50 cm, 5.50 cm, and 7.00 cm result in circumferences of 10.99 cm, 17.27 cm, and 21.98 cm. The circumference of the middle size is one and a half that of the smallest and the largest group is twice that of the smallest. These data suggest an attempt to create disks of three sizes. It should be noted that the samples included in figs.21.25 and 21.18 represent material from four surfaces rather than the hundreds of disks from unstratified deposits.If there was an effort to shape the disks into size categories it is possible that they served a function other than jar stoppers or gaming pieces. It is proposed that they were intentionally made to be used as counters in a system of accounting in which they represented some predetermined commodity. They were of no intrinsic value, but served as counters for people or products. In Field F, the possible Iron Age gate complex, 176 disks were found of which 43% came from surface deposits. It is possible that they were used in the gateway area where all types of business and exchange took place. Reshaped sherds are not always collected at excavations, but they could play a role in various aspects of the society. Schmandt-Besserat (1983: 118) has observed that people use a variety of pebbles and sticks as counting devices to indicate quantity, not the item being counted. In a similar fashion, the reshaped sherds may have functioned as counters, especially if not everyone was able to read and write. The evidence of their use as counters comes from the sizing of the sherds and their location on the tell. Further measurements and studies are necessary to test this reconstruction.The use of reshaped sherds in the Early Bronze Age suggests that circular disks were useful objects (fig. 21.19-20). Of 68 disks, over half (57%) come from the surfaces of domestic structures rather than refuse deposits. They may have served as jar stoppers, but since there is a limit to the number of jar stoppers a society needed, there must have been other uses for the disks.Non-circular reshaped sherds. In addition to reshaping body sherds into disks, other sherds were intentionally reworked into square (fig. 21.26:1, 3-4, 8), rectangular (fig. 21.26:2, 5-7), and triangular forms (fig. 21.26:9-13). These shapes did not result from normal breakage or wear: the edges of the sherds are smooth and worn. As with the disks, these sherds may have been used to represent something, but they are less numerous than the reshaped disks.Sherds with Repair HolesFifty-three sherds from the tell and three from Site 34 (Rujm Selim) contained repair holes, i.e., holes drilled into the wall of a cracked pot (fig. 21.27). No evidence of organic material or metal used to secure the two holes together was identified. Six sherds had two or more holes. No two sherds with holes belong to the same pot, indicating a low rate of recovery and that most of the sherds were not found where the pots had been used or mended. Of the total, 70% came from unstra ti f ied deposits containing predominantly sherds of the Iron Age (fig. 21.28). No sherds with repair holes were found in clean Early Bronze Age deposits.Iron I Iron 11 Unstratilied Unknown TotalCount 1 l i 29 15 56Count l l i 29 elim. 41% 2.4 26.8 70.7 0 99.9Fig. 21.28. Distribution of sherds from Tell el-cUmeiri with repair holes according to chronological periods (1987 season only).The wares most often repaired were over 0.60 cm in thickness. Of the 56 sherds, only 7 (12.5%) measured under 0.60 cm, 42 (75%) were between 0.61 cm and 1.04 cm, and 7 (12.5%) were thicker than 1.05 cm (fig. 21.29). Vessel types repaired included kraters (n=3), bowls (n=3), jars (n= 6); the other repairs were made in body sherds. Few were burnished wares or cooking utensils. Two sherds with holes were reshaped into circular forms. Although not all were collected, of the 19 sherds with repair holes found in 1984, there were 15 body sherds, 2 rims, a base, and 1 shoulder fragment (fig. 21.30).0.5 cm 0.6-1.5 cm 1.5+ cm TotalCount 7 42 7 56% 12.5 75.0 12.5 100Fig. 21.29. Ware thickness of sherds with repair holes from Tell el- Umeiri (1987 season).The distribution of repair holes comments on the use and manufacture of pottery. Sherds with repair holes were absent from Early Bronze Age deposits. This reflects the unsuitability of the third millennium B.C. coarse wares for drilling holes; the large size of the non-plastics could cause the wall to further crack if a hole were drilled. A second consideration is the organization of the pottery industry and the availability of clay pots. If domestic potters made the wares used in each household, pottery may have been relatively easy to replace. In contrast, attempts to repair Iron Age417ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIpottery could reflect the difficulties and/or expense of acquiring new pots to replace broken pieces.BodySherd Rim Base ShoulderNoData Total1984 15 2 1 i 0 19% 78.9 10.5 5.3 5.3 0 1001987 42 7 2 0 5 56% 82.4 13.7 3.9 0 e lim . 100Fig. 21.30. Distribution of sherds with repair holes according to vessel feature from Tell el-cUmeiri 1984 and 1987 seasons.ConclusionPottery contributes to the chronological ordering of the deposits in which it is found, but it also reveals information about the social environment in which it was used. Ceramic forms and surface treatments changed through time as did techniques of manufacture, centers of pottery production, and patterns of local as well as long distance trade. At Tell el-cUmeiri, these issues are under investigation, but after two seasons of excavation and survey work, we can only state the direction and define the research strategies.In the attempt to address a series of questions related to the people rather than the pottery alone, the focus of attention is on how the pots were made, used, reused, and discarded. At this early stage of research, the marks preserved in the clay already reveal traces left by those who made and used them. As the small Early Bronze Age exposure at the site is expanded, it will be possible to further test the idea that both domestic potters and craft specialists were active. Variations in the clay bodies, manufacturing techniques, surface treatment, and the marks incised prior to firing suggest a multi-facetted ceramics industry in the middle and late third millennium B.C. It is not feasible to comment on the population size of the site in the Early Bronze Age given the limited area excavated and the lack of evidence concerning the use of the site.The available Iron II pottery shows less variation in the clay bodies than for the thirdmillennium B.C. (based on the preliminary petrographic analysis). Craft specialists dominated the pottery industry. The limited number of marks scratched into the fired wares are understood to be signs of ownership and imply a limited resident population at the tell, despite its location adjacent to a perennial spring and one of the main thoroughfares in the Levant. It is the interaction between the tell and its hinterland sites that will enable a reconstruction of the site and its population. Comparison of the pottery excavated at the tell and at nearby sites involves mineralogical, typological, and technological considerations.In addition to studying how pots were made and by whom, it is usefiil to analyze the reuse and reshaping of sherds. It is suggested that sherds shaped into ceramic disks may have served as a system of accounting in which each disk was of no intrinsic value, but represented either people or products.In conjunction with the study of the ancient pottery, an ethnoarchaeological survey of the potters in northern Jordan helps to place the ceramics industry in a larger context. Clays used today could have provided Bronze and Iron Age potters with some of the same problems traditional potters face today. Potters have a limited number of options to work the clay. The solutions changed through time as did the needs of those who used and reused the pottery.AcknowledgementsA large number of pre- and post-firing marks found in the excavation results from the careful attention given to each sherd during the pottery washing for which I thank all of the volunteers. Vanessa Martin, Tracy Wilmot, and Dena Zook helped to draw the reshaped sherds. The ethnoarchaeological research in Cyprus was made possible by a Fulbright Research Award in 1986, the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute, and the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus.REFERENCESAmiran, R. Beynon, D. E., et al.1969 Ancient Pottery o f the Holy Land. Jerusalem: Masada.1986 Tempering Types and Sources for Early Bronze Age Ceramics from Bab edh-Dhrac and Numeira, Jordan. Journal o f Field Archaeology 13: 297-305.1978 Early Arad: The Chalcolithic Settlement and the Early Bronze Gty I, First-Fifth Seasons of Excavations, 1962-1966. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.Bikaki, A. H.1984 Keos. Vol. IV. Ayia Irini: The Potters’ Marks. Mainz: Philipp von Zabem.418ASPECTS OF EARLY BRONZE AND LATE IRON AGE CERAMIC TECHNOLOGY AT TELL EL-CUMEIRIBlitzer, H.1984 Traditional Pottery Production in Kentri, Crete: Workshops, Materials, Techniques and Trade. Pp. 143-57 in East Cretan White-on-Dark Ware, ed. P. P. Betancourt. University Museum Monographs No. 51. Philadelphia: University Museum.Domemann, R. H.1983 The Archaeology o f the Transjordan. Milwaukee, WI: Milwaukee Public Museum.Egoumenidou, F., and Floridou, A.1987 Phikardou. A traditional village in Cyprus. Nicosia: Department of Antiquities of Cyprus.Franken, H. J..1973 Ring Burnished Bowls from the 7th Century B.C. in Palestine. Pp. 144-48 in Symbolae el Mesopotamicae Francisco Mario Theodoro de Liagre Bohl dedicatae, eds. M. A. Beek; A. A. Kampman; and C. Nijland. Leiden: Brill.Franken, H. J., and Abujaber, R. S.1989 Yadoudeh: The History o f a Land. Pp. 407-36 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Franken, H. J., and Kalsbeek, J.1969 Excavations at Tell Deir cAlla I. A Stratigraphical and Analytical Study o f the Early Iron Age Pottery. Leiden: Brill.1974 In Search o f the Jericho Potters. Ceramics from the Iron Age and from the Neolithicum. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Graves, M. W.1981 Ethnoarchaeology o f Kalinga Ceramic Design. Ph.D.dissertation, University of Arizona. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Hampe, R., and Winter, A.1962 Bei Topfem und Tdpferinnen in Kreta, Messenien und Zypem. Reprint 1974. Mainz: Philipp von Zabem.Hardin, M.1977 Individual Style in San Jose Pottery Painting: The Role of Deliberate Choice. Pp. 109-36 in The Individual in Prehistory, eds. J. N. Hill and J. Gunn. New York: Academic.1979 The Cognitive Basis of Productivity in a Decorative Art Style: Implications of an Ethnographic Study for Archaeologist’s Taxonomies. Pp. 75-101 in Ethnoarchaeology, ed. C. Kramer. New York: Columbia University.Helms, S.1987 A Question of Economic Control during the Proto- Historical Era of Palestine/Transjordan (c. 3500-2000 BC). Pp. 41-51 in Studies in the History and Archaeology o f Jordan III, ed. A. Hadidi. London: Department of Antiquities, Amman Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and Routledge and Kegan Paul.Kramer, C.1985 Ceramic Production and Specialization. Paleorient 11/12: 117-19.London, G. A.1985 Decoding Designs: The Late Third Millennium B.C.Pottery from Jebel Qacaqir. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.1987 Regionalism in Traditional Cypriote Ceramics. Pp.125-36 in A Knapsack Full o f Pottery. Archaeo- Ceramological Miscellanea Dedicated to H. J. Franken. Department of Pottery Technology, Newsletter 5.1989 On Fig leaves, Itinerant Potters and Pottery Production Locations in Cyprus. Pp. 65-80 in Crosscraft and Cross-cultural Interactions in Ceramic, eds. P. E. McGovern and M. R. Notis. Ceramics and Civilization 4, ed. W. D. Kingery. Westerville, OH: American Ceramic Society.1991 Standardization and Variation in the Work of Craft Specialists. Pp. 250-75 in Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology, ed. W. A. Longacre. Tucson: University of Arizona.London, G. A.; Egoumenidou, F.; and Karageorghis, V.1989 Traditional Pottery in Cyprus. Mainz: Philipp von Zabem.Longacre, W. A.1981 Kalinga Pottery: An Ethnoarchaeological Study. Pp.49-66 in Pattern o f the Past, eds. I. Hodder, G. Issac, and N. Hammond. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Schmandt-Besserat, D.1983 Tokens and Counting. Biblical Archaeologist 46: 117-20.Voyatzoglou, M.1974 The Jar Makers of Thrapsano in Crete. Expedition 16: 18-24.1984 Thrapsano, Village of Jar Makers. Pp. 130-42 in East Cretan White-on-Dark Ware, ed. P'. P. Betancourt. University Museum Monographs No. 51. Philadelphia: University Museum.Wright, G. E.1937 The Pottery o f Palestine from the Earliest Times to the End o f the Early Bronze Age. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.Xanthoudides, S.1927 Some Minoan Potter’s-wheel Discs. Pp. 111-28 in Essays in Aegean Archaeology Presented to Sir Arthur Evans, ed. S. Casson. Oxford: Clarendon.Yassine, Kh.1988 Archaeology o f Jordan: Essays and Reports. Amman.Homes-Frcdericq, D. and Franken, H. J., eds. Yassine, Kh.; Sauer, J. A.; and Ibrahim, M.1986 Pottery and Potters—Past and Present. 7000 Years o f 1988 The East Jordan Valley Survey, 1976. Pp. 189-207Ceramic Art in Jordan. Ausstellungskataloge der in Archaeology o f Jordan: Essays and Reports, ed.Universitat Tubingen Nr. 20. Tubingen: Attempto. Kh. Yassine. Amman.419CHAPTER 22An Ethnoarchaeological Survey o f Potters in JordanGloria A. London University o f WashingtonMarlene Sinclair Athabasca UniversityIntroductionA brief survey of traditional potters in north and central Jordan, carried out as part of the Tell el-cUmeiri project, helps to place the ancient Jordanian ceramic industry in context. What can we learn about the past from the present? Does the traditional pottery industry still exist in Jordan, or do more modern manufacturing techniques and styles predominate? Who makes the clay containers used today? Where and how are they made? What are the clay sources? What is the full repertoire? How is the industry organized? Our observations and interviews with potters and their customers address these issues.In recent years, various aspects of traditional lifestyles in Jordan have been examined more thoroughly in ethnoarchaeological studies than has pottery production. A. McQuitty (1984) studied bread and cooking ovens. Traditional architecture and the use of domestic space are under investigation by M. Biewers at Aima near Tafila (personal communication, 1987), at Smakieh by O. Aurenche and P. Desfarges (1985), in the central Jordan Valley by L. Layne (1987), and in the north by A. Khammash (1986). Harvesting techniques in the Ajlun District have been recorded by M. Fuller (1986). Bedouin crafts have been described by S. Weir (1976), camp sites are discussed by E. Suleiman (1986) arid S. Simms(1988), and tent construction has been examined by E. Banning and I. Kohler-Rollefson (1986). Goat husbandry has also been the subject of a study by I. Kohler-Rollefson (1988: 89). The ethnoarchaeological components of the Madaba Plains Project include an assessment of shelters used during the Late Ottoman period, animal husbandry, and farming in the vicinity of Hesban (Geraty and LaBianca 1985; LaBianca 1984; 1990) and Tell el-cUmeiri (Geraty, et al. 1986: 142; 1989).In his survey of Near Eastern potters nearly twenty years ago, F. R. Matson (1974) lists potters working in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Egypt, and Cyprus. Recent ethnoarchaeological studies of potters attest to the persistence of the craft in Egypt (Nicholson and Patterson 1985), Nubia (Adams 1988: 49), Iraq (van As and Jacobs 1985: 21-24), and Cyprus (Johnston 1974; London 1986; 1987a,b; 1989a,b; Yon 1985). In the Levant, male and female potters continue to work, and although detailed studies are not available, there are references to the traditional craft (Glock 1987: 96; Hankey 1968). No systematic study of Jordanian potters has been published. H. J. Fran- ken (1986: 244-48) refers briefly to the male potters of Zizia and B. Mershen (1985; 1986) devotes attention to village women potters in the north.420AN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANIn Jordan, as in the Levant, some traditional potters continue to produce ceramic wares for use by the local population, but the female potters are rapidly decreasing in number. None were seen making pottery during the two-month field work. It was suggested by one elderly woman potter that she would make pottery after completing the harvest work at the end of the summer. Male potters are responsible for the majority of the jars and decorative wares currently used by the populace. Their work forms the bulk of this report.The brevity of our survey does not permit a definitive statement on pottery-making in Jordan, but it does outline the current state of the craft. Our observations include village and town potters, both male and female, domestic potters and craft specialists. Clay pots are visible in Jordan in various contexts. In rural households, clay cooking pots and water jars are in active use. In the capital city of Amman, clay pots adorn gardens. At construction sites in urban areas,O 5 I O K MNt^ A M M A NO T E L L el U ME I R I• H I S B A Nm e l - Q A S T A L0 M A D A B A( 5 ) Z I Z I AFig. 22.1. Map (1:250,000) showing the location of the pottery production center at Zizia, 30 km south of Amman, where migrant Egyptian potters work. Potters’ workshops were also observed near the village of el-Qastal. (All photographs and illustrations are courtesy of the authors).workers use large jars to store and cool drinking water. Throughout the northern towns and villages, large jars filled with water serve aspublic water fountains. Attractive stands along the main roads sell a variety of pottery, most of which is wheel-thrown.The Women PottersInformation about rural potters who work in their courtyards was collected during a visit to a farm house near Ajlun and provides a preliminary account of the indigenous ceramic tradition. An interview with an elderly Ajlun potter and her daughter (who lives in Amman and does not carry on the tradition) helps to explain the evidence of pottery manufacture in and around her house at Khirbet el-Ghubb, in the Wadi Nahleh.Jars, dung cakes, and sherds in the multipurpose courtyard attested to the site as a pottery production location, Two jars stood empty, squeezed together near the rock which formed the perimeter of the courtyard. The dung cakes, pressed against the rock, were drying in the sun and would later provide fuel to fire the pots. The potter explained that the pots would be arranged in a firing pit dug in the courtyard and then covered, with dried dung cakes. A small box containing a collection of ancient sherds to be crushed and used for grog inclusions was also seen in the courtyard. The sherds came from sites near the farm which have been identified by Augustinovic and Bagatti (1951-2), Kutsch (1965), and Mittmann (1970).The three types of clay containers used at the farm included jars, a round-bottomed cooking pot, and a steamer with holes in the base. In addition to the two jars standing in the courtyard, one jar filled with water was used in the house. The cooking pot and steamer were upside down on the flat roof of a building. The pots appear to have been coil-made (Mershen 1985: 75).Five minutes drive from the farm was a sherdcrushing installation mentioned by Mittmann (1970: 80-81). It consisted of a flat, rock outcrop on which the remains of crushed sherds were in evidence. A rubbing stone was found nearby on the ground by J. Greene. Whether or not the sherds crushed there were used for pottery manufacture remains unknown. Crushed sherds can be used by construction workers and brick makers as well (London 1989: 221). In addition to crushed pottery, the Wadi Nahleh potter adds quartz sand to the clay.The Itinerant Potters of ZiziaProfessional potters who work in a factory west of Zizia (Jizeh) observed and interviewed in June and July of 1987 (fig. 22.1), are not the same individuals recorded several years ago by421AN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANFig. 22.2. Layout of the workshop at Zizia. Four piles of clay (A) stand behind the tank filled with clay and water (B) and the sieve (C) through which the clay mixture passes before emptying into the slurry tank (D). The slurry will dry in the large shallow area (E) which is lined with sand. The interior workspace is divided into the area of clay preparation, where the salt is piled, clay is stored (F), and the pug-mill with the clay columns, (G) stand. On the table and platform enclosing the two wheels are pots in various stages of manufacture. Unfinished pottery stands on the floor (H) where it must dry before more work can be rendered. Finished pieces are positioned close to the door leading to the kilns (K). The use of the new enclosed space under construction (L) is unknown. Adjacent to the kilns is the pile of plastic trash (J) used for fuel. The arrows pointing to each kiln indicate the position of the firing boxes. In front of the kiln are fired and drying pottery. The waster pile stands on the opposite side. A side view shows the arched entrance of the fire box into which laborers shovel plastic fuel. Circles represent the various types of ceramic vessels and drums.Franken (1986: 248), but they belong to the same group of migrant potters from Egypt. Of the two production locations at Zizia, potters worked at only one during our visits. Pots were sold at two locations: one in Zizia, and a second at el-Qastal (both located on the road). At el-Qastal, skins were soaking in a vat, perhaps in preparation for drum heads. In addition, pickup trucks came to the production site to transport the wares.In every aspect, the Zizia potters differ from the Wadi Nahleh potter. The Zizia potters are migrant craft specialists from Egypt who work for a company with several workshops in the Amman region. They use a kick wheel to throw a wide variety of pots which they fire in permanent kilns fueled with plastic trash.The workshop. The workshop (fig. 22.2), located at a distance of 30 minutes walk from the village, consisted of outdoor kilns and settling basins, in addition to indoor areas for clay * preparation, pottery manufacture, and drying. In 1987, construction workers were in the process of adding another room to the two-year-old existing structure.Clay preparation. Four ingredients originating at Suweilah, northwest of Amman, were mixed together to create a workable clay. Each batch of clay, prepared once a week, consisted of 60 buckets of raw material which included 2 0 buckets of red clay, 15 of tan clay, 15 of gray clay, and another 10 of a much coarser gray material. Wind-blown straw was an unintentional addition.422JAN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANFig. 22.3. To prepare clay at Zizia, four clays are mixed together in a square basin filled with water. A laborer has one leg in the basin to illustrate that the clays are trampled under foot before they are released through a sieve (behind him) and empty into the slurry tank below. At a lower level (cf. fig. 22.4) is the shallow settling basin.The four clays were trampled under foot in a deep settling tank filled with water where they stood for one day before being released into other tanks (fig. 22.3). From a hole in the bottom of the tank, the clay emptied into a rectangular settling basin, about 30 cm deep and approximately 2.0 x 3.0 m in size, where the clay mixture was exposed to the sun to dry. The basin was lined with a purple colored Nubian sand to facilitate lifting the clay once it had dried sufficiently. To prevent all of the clay from drying too quickly, part of the settling basin was covered by large plastic sheets (fig. 22.4). As needed, smaller amounts of maleable clay were taken indoors where the next stage of clay preparation took place.A pile of clay measuring about 1.0 x 1.0 x 1.3 m was covered with coarse salt and kneaded by trampling under foot (fig. 22.5). The laborer gradually added approximately 5 kg of salt to the clay which he kneaded for 30 minutes. (Salt was also in the water used by the potters as they shaped the pottery.) After the salt had been mixed with the clay, a potter left his place behind the wheel to assist with the final stage of clay processing. Working together, the potter and the laborer put the clay into a pug-mill. The purpose of the pug-mill was to force the air from the clay to achieve greater strength and better shape for the finished products. In 15 minutes, the machine produced 65 columns measuring 46 cm high and 15 cm in diameter, which were placed upright, sprinkled with water, and covered with plastic sheeting. Immediately afterwards, the clay was ready for use and each column would eventually be placed on the wheel. The potters remarked that in Egypt they worked without a pug-mill, but wedged the clay manually in the rams-head technique.Manufacturing technique. Two kick wheels, rotated counterclockwise in the bicycle method (one foot after the other rather than one foot exclusively), were set into the ground at a level lower than the floor. The wheels, whose wooden heads slanted on a slight angle directed away from the potter, were used simultaneously by two potters. The potters normally did not leave their seats once they finished a piece, but relied on assistants to carry away finished or semi-finished pots and to bring pottery or clay to them.Fig. 22.4. In the settling basin, the clay dries and cracks under the sun where it remains until it is taken into the work room. The plastic sheets prevent the clay from drying at a faster rate than it can be used.423AN ETIINOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDAN’ The design of the wheel and workspace of the potters was intentionally below the ground level as a consequence of the manufacturing ' technique. To start an object, the potter created one part (the base or the upper body) from a large body of clay called a "hump"(fig. 22.6). It. was then cut off the wheel using a piece of string and set on the platform in front of the wheel. The potter made a series of bases or bodies which dried slightly before they were joined together. At all times, each potter had many pots in various stages of manufacture. It was ..the responsibility . of the assistant to carry away each piece to the drying area on the floor. No shelves were available; the floors were covered with pots in various stages of drying. At the appropriate time, depending on the humidity and thickness of the wares, the assistant carried each piece back to the potter. This composite technique of manufacture, which involves joining together separately made vessel parts, is common to potters who work with a faSt-rOtating wheel. Given the need to return each piece to the wheel, it was beneficial to build the work surface close to the ground to alleviate lifting the unfinished, heavy clay to the height of a table.In addition to preparing clay, removing and carrying the unfinished pieces, the assistants, who■Ip" f W l■ I ,f‘ Ii ' - 1A 'f \ ' . 1 '-f r . K ,v . \/ ‘ " '' "<;/rji/p§®iF — i r 29553'0I?*? W * « . • -.■ ■ V ’ ''w - , .■ ■Fig. 22.5. Inside the work area, a laborer tramples salt into the clay. Salt is responsible for the white color of the fired ware.Fig. 22.6. The two Egyptian potters at Zizia throw pots from a "hump." One potter scallops a flower pot thrown in one piece from the hump. The second potter has a new hump positioned on the wheel. On the platform in front of the potters, stand unfinished pots which will be replaced on the wheel for further work once the hump has been used.were referred to as laborers rather than potters, were responsible for adding handles to jars. Although the potters shaped' the .handles in the pulling technique, it was the assistants who quickly applied them to the pots. *The tools used by the potters included wooden wheel heads, cloth to smooth the vessel surfaces, string to cut off finished or semi-finished pieces from the hump, wooden scrapers, and a metal container with salt water. The potters decorate some of the jar shoulders with a "rouletted" pattern created by rolling the grooved side of a knob from a cassette player , which results in rows' of thin vertical lines in the wet clay.The repertoire. The potters at Zizia make an assortment of clay containers including the jar (ztr), jug (ibrtq), flower pot {zariba, or with a scalloped rim: mazhariya), drum (tabla, made in three sizes), and water pipe bases (argila). Three types of jugs, each associated with a different country, were manufactured. The Jordanian ibrtq has a handle and a spout, while the Iraqi version has a scallop decoration on the body. A cone-shaped cup at the top of the Egyptian ibrtq and the absence,: of a handle or spout differentiate it from the others. One .424AN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANdrinks from the cupped rim rather than pouring from the spout. To limit the amount of water, the Egyptian jug has either a single hole in the center in place of a normal neck opening or there is a sieve-like partition in the neck (fig. 22.7).The potters referred to each jug by its country of origin. In addition, two trick or "magic" water jugs are made at Zizia.Drying and firing. Finished pieces dry in a windowless room behind the work space. Prior to firing, the vessels stand in the sun in front of the kiln (tannfir). Two round kilns, built of sun-dried bricks and cement blocks, are connected by steps (fig. 22.8). The kilns are fired simultaneously, but each has a separate fire box. Pottery is stacked in the firing chamber through the open roof which is later closed with mud plaster and pieces of metal to create a temporary roof.The fire box for the fuel is built below the stacked pots. The fuel, piled adjacent to the kiln, consists of recycled plastic bags and empty bottles. Firing lasts for 12 hours between 6:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. and another 12 hours of cooling follows before the roof is opened. According to one informant, the process starts with a low fire to dry the pots thoroughly, during which the roof of the kiln remains open. This precaution is designed to prevent breakage during the critical early firing©ORFig. 22.8. The two round kilns, connected by steps, have open roof tops through which the pottery enters the kilns. On the crown of each kiln stands a temporary dome-shaped mud construction which is dismantled to remove the fired wares. The fire boxes are behind each kiln.stage. Then the roof is closed and the fire is increased to a medium flame before the major fire is achieved. Three firings occur weekly with no work on Friday. The potters and their assistants work full time to meet die needs of their clients.Data are not available on the Zizia kiln capacity nor on the percentage of wasters. Broken pots scattered around the kiln area attest to breakage during the firing or handling of the fired wares. The preferred fired color is white, which is achieved by trampling salt into the clay and by adding salt to the water used during the manufacture. In the kiln, the vessels first turn black, then red, and finally white. Red-fired pottery is unsatisfactory and is among the wasters broken around the kiln area. The red and white wares are products of the same kiln and firing, but represent an uneven distribution of heat.Fig. 22.7. The Egyptian jug has a cup shaped neck and rim with either one hole in the neck (upper), or a ring of smaller holes. There is no spout or handle and one drinks directly from the cup.Archaeological ImplicationsThe ethnoarchaeological survey of potters in Jordan provides information useful for reconstructing the ancient ceramics industry. Issues related to the availability of clays, the organization of the industry, and regional variation can be addressed.Despite the dearth of references to traditional potters in Jordan, the raw materials are not lacking for a local industry. Clays suitable for hand-made and wheel-thrown wares are available. These same clays could have supplied the ancient potters, as is suggested by the petrographic425AN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANanalysis of clays from Zizia and Iron Age wares from Tell el-cUmeiri (London, Plint, and Smith, chapter 23, below). Non-plastics used by the potters today, such as grog and quartz, were used in the Early Bronze and Iron Age wares excavated at Tell el-Umeiri.The organization of the current industry in Jordan includes two sets of potters, each of whom uses different clays, manufacturing, and firing techniques to create different repertoires. Female potters use local clays to hand build pottery fired in pits and fueled by dried dung. They limit their repertoire to traditional cooking pots and storejars. Itinerant male potters, who mix four types of clay using traditional and mechanical means, throw traditional and modern pots on the wheel and fire them in permanent kilns fueled by plastic. This division within the industry is known elsewhere in the Middle East, for example in Cyprus (London 1987a; London, Egoumenidou, and Karageorghis 1989: 20) and in Egypt (Taylor and Tufnell 1930: 119).It is likely that the ancient ceramics industry included both male and female potters who used different techniques to fabricate different pottery forms sold in different contexts. Specialization and differentiation in the ancient industry is suggested by the variety of clays, manufacturing techniques, and forms typical of each archaeological period. The ancient potters who made the large storage containers probably did not make the finer wares. Other potters may have specialized in cooking ware. It is useful to consider the ancient Bronze and Iron Age ceramics industry as a multi-facetted complex rather than a monolithic operation.Also relevant for understanding the organization of the pottery industry is the presence of laborers who work with the craft specialists at Zizia. The laborers prepare the clay, add handles to jars, and fire the pots. Although the potters are skilled craftsmen, the involvement of unskilled laborers in the production, in this instance handle application, results in the quick, sloppy appearance of the handles in contrast to the well shaped containers. Could this same division of labor account for some of the poor handles known on archaeological wares?Another finding of the ethnoarchaeological investigation is the regional differentiation in the water jugs made by the Egyptian potters at Zizia. Jugs identified as "Egyptian," "Jordanian," and "Iraqi" could be easily differentiated by observing the form and accessory pieces, especially thepresence or absence of handles and spouts. These same nuances in the form and finish of one vessel type can aid archaeologists to identify wares which are characteristic of different regions in antiquity. In addition, all three jug types are made by the potters at Zizia. They produce the shape that is familiar to them from their home, the shape used locally, and the Iraqi form which is used by migrant workers. The manufacture of Egyptian- style jugs by itinerant potters who use Jordanian clays may have parallels in antiquity.ConclusionsA survey of potters in northern Jordan reveals the existence of traditional female potters who hand build cooking pots and water jars. Their wares are in less demand than the wheel-thrown jars, flower pots, drums, and jugs made by the male potters. Important for archaeologists is the coexistence of these two industries involving different people, technologies, clays, repertoires, and distribution techniques. The concept of a multi-facetted ceramics industry in antiquity is vital for reconstructing the organization of pottery production in the Bronze and Iron Ages. The ethnoarchaeological survey suggests that regardless of the wealth and cultural developments characteristic of urban areas, traditional technologies survive.AcknowledgementsOur thanks are extended to all those who assisted in the ethnoarchaeological study, including L. T. Geraty, L. G. Herr, and 0 . S. LaBianca who directed the 1987 Madaba Plains Project, as well as N. Bat Schoen, J. Caves, and A. McQuitty who offered valuable assistance. Mr. H. Haddad, Amman Antiquities Inspector, kindly made it possible to carry out the field work. D. McCreery, as the Director of the American Center of Oriental Research in Amman, assisted us in every way. J. Greene helped us to locate the Ajlun potter, the pottery crushing installation, and provided the archaeological references for the area. P. Bikai kindly made a 1989 visit possible during which we met a different set of male potters who had come from Egypt to work in Jordan. Finally, we wish to mention with much appreciation those Jordanians who extended their hospitality to us.426AN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANREFERENCESAdams, Wm. Y.1988 Puzzle of the Nubian Pots. Archaeology 41.2: 46-53.Augustinovic, A., and Bagatti, B.1951/2 Escursioni nei dintomi di Ajlun. Liber Annuus 1951- 1952:227-314.Aurenche, O., and Desfarges, P.1985 Enquete ethnoarchitecturale a Smakieh (Jordanie). Rapport preliminaire. Pp. 331-45 in Studies in the History and Archaeology o f Jordan II, ed. A. Hadidi. London: Department of Antiquities of Jordan.Banning, E. B., and Kohler-Rollefson, I.1986 Ethnoarchaeological Survey in the Bldd Area, Southern Jordan. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Paldstina- Vereins 102: 152-170.Franken, H. J.1986 The Last Potters. Pp. 244-48 in Pottery and Potters— Past and Present. 7000 Years o f Ceramic Art in Jordan, eds. D. Homes-Fredericq and H. J. Franken. Ausstellungskataloge der Universitat Tubingen Nr. 20. Tubingen: Attempto.Fuller, M. J.1986 An Ethnoarchaeological Study of HarvestingTechniques at Harta, Jordan. Pp. 359-84 in Abila Reports. St. Louis Community College—Florissant Valley.Geraty, L. T., et al.1986 Madaba Plains Project: A Preliminary Report of the 1984 Season at Tell el-cUmeiri and Vicinity. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 24: 117-44.1989 Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Geraty, L. T., and LaBianca, 0 . S.1985 The Local Environment and Human Food-Procuring Strategies in Jordan: The Case of Tell Hesban and its Surrounding Region. Pp. 323-30 in Studies in the History and Archaeology o f Jordan II, ed. A. Hadidi. London: Department of Antiquities of Jordan.Glock, A. E.1987 Where to Draw the Line: Illustrating Ceramic Technology. A Knapsack Full o f Pottery. Archaeo- Ceramological Miscellanea Dedicated to H. J. Franken. Department o f Pottery Technology, Newsletter 5: 93-110.Hampe, R., and Winter, A.1962 Bei Topfem und Topferinnen in Kreta, Messenien, und Zypem. Reprinted 1976. Mainz: Philipp von Zabem.Hankey, V.1968 Pottery Making in Beit Shebab, Lebanon. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 100: 27-32.Homes-Fredericq, D., and Franken, H. J., eds.1986 Pottery and Potters—Past and Present. 7000 Years o f Ceramic Art in Jordan. Ausstellungskataloge der Universitat Tubingen Nr. 20. Tubingen: Attempto.Johnston, R. H.1974 The Cypriot Potter. American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus: First Preliminary Report, Seasons o f 1971 and 1972, eds. L. Stager, A. Walker, and G. E. Wright. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research, Supplement 18: 131-39.Khammash, A.1986 Notes on Village Architecture in Jordan. Lafayette, LA: University Art Museum, University of Southern Louisiana.Kohler-Rollefson, I.1988 The Aftermath of the Levantine Neolithic Revolution in the Light of Ecological and Ethnographic Evidence. Paleorient 14.1: 87-93.Kramer, C. 1985 Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. Annual Review o f Anthropology 14: 77-102.Kutsch, E. 1965 Bietrage zur Siedlungsgeschichte des wadi kufringi. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 81: 113- 31.LaBianca, 0 . S 1984 Objectives, Procedures, and Findings of the Ethnoarchaeological Research in the Vicinity of Hesban in Jordan. Annual o f the Department of Antiquities o f Jordan 28: 269-82.1990 Sedentarization and Nomadization: Food System Cycles at Hesban and Vicinity in Transjordan. Hesban 1. Berrien Springs, MI: Institute of Archaeology/Andrews University.Layne, L. 1987 Village-Bedouin: Patterns of Change from Mobility to Sedentism in Jordan. Pp. 345-73 in Method and Theory for Activity Area Research, ed. S. Kent. New York: Columbia University.London, G. A. 1986 Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology in Cyprus. Newsletter of the American Schools o f Oriental Research 38: 9-10.1987a Cypriote Potters: Past and Present. Report o f the Department o f Antiquities, Cyprus 1987: 319-22.1987b Regionalism in Traditional Cypriote Ceramics. A Knapsack Full o f Pottery. Archaeo-Ceramological Miscellanea Dedicated to H. J. Franken. Department o f Pottery Technology, Newsletter 5: 125-36.1989a On Fig Leaves, Itinerant Potters and Pottery Production Locations in Cyprus. Pp. 65-80 in Cross- craft and Cross-cultural Interactions in Ceramics, eds. P. E. McGovern and M. R. Notis. Vol 4 in Ceramics and Civilization, ed. W. D. Kingery. Westerville, OH: American Ceramic Society.1989b Past Present: The Village Potters of Cyprus. Biblical Archaeologist 52.4: 219-29.London, G. A.; 1989; Egoumenidou, F.; and Karageorghis, V.Traditional Pottery in Cyprus. Mainz: Philipp von Zabem.427Matson, F. R. 1974McQuitty, A. 1984Mershen, B. 19851986Mittmann, S. 1970Nicholson, P., 1985AN ETHNOARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF POTTERS IN JORDANThe Archaeological Present: Near Eastern Village Potters at Work. American Journal o f Archaeology 78: 345-47.An Ethnographic and Archaeological Study of Clay Ovens in Iordan. Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 28: 259-67.Recent Hand-made Pottery from Northern Jordan. Berytus 33: 75-87.The Museum’s Collection of Recent Pottery. Newsletter o f the Institute o f Archaeology and Anthropology, Yarmouk University 2: 8-10.Simms, S. R.1988 The Archaeological Structure of a Bedouin Camp. Journal o f Archaeological Science 15: 197-211.Suleiman, E.1986 Habitations of the Bdul Bedouins in the Petra Area.Annual o f the Department o f Antiquities o f Jordan 30: 29-32 (Arabic).Taylor, J. du Plat, and Tufnell, O.1930 A Pottery Industry in Cyprus. Ancient Egypt 119-21.van As, A., and Jacobs, L.1985 Technological Research of Paleo- and Meso- Babylonian Pottery from Tell ed-Der (Iraq)—A Report. Department o f Pottery Technology, Newsletter 3: 15-26.We r. S.Beitrage zur Siedlungs- und Territorialgeschichte des nordlichen Ostjordanslandes. Wiesbaden: Harras- sowitz.1976 The Bedouin. Aspects o f the Material Culture o f the Bedouin o f Jordan. World of Islam Festival. London: Museum of Mankind.Yon. M.and Patterson, H.Pottery Making in Upper Egypt: An Ethnoarchaeo- logical Study. World Archaeology 17: 222-39.1985 Ateliers et traditions ceramiques. Pp. 103-14 in Chypre. La vie quotidienne de I’antiquite a nos jours. National de la Recherche Scientifique.428CHAPTER 23Preliminary Petrographic Analysis o f Pottery from Tell e l-c Umeiri and Hinterland Sites, 1987Gloria A. London University o f WashingtonHeather Plint University o f AlbertaJennifer Smith University o f AlbertaIntroductionTo address questions related to internal variation of the clay bodies used at Tell el- cUmeiri and nearby sites, 22 sherds from all periods were selected for petrographic analysis. This pilot study, despite the small sample size, provides data which have cultural implications regarding the organization of the pottery industries of the Early Bronze Age and Iron II period.The primary concern of the initial study does not involve the identification of clay sources or production centers. Our main focus is variation of the clay bodies within and between the different archaeological periods and vessel types at Tell el- cUmeiri and two hinterland sites. The questions under discussion are the following:1. In the Early Bronze Age, did potters use different clays for different vessel types or wares with a particular surface treatment? Is there evidence of specialization within the Early Bronze industry?2. Did potters prefer a carbonate rich clay body for the manufacture of cooking pots beginning as early as the third millennium B.C.?3. Were clays used in the Early Bronze Age also used in later periods? Were local clays readily available?4. Is the same degree of homogeneity or variation discernable within the Early Bronze and Iron Age pottery industries?5. What is the degree of variation within Iron II wares at Tell el- Umeiri? Did potters use a single clay to fabricate both utilitarian and fine wares, or were the fine wares produced from special clays and perhaps represent the work of specialized potters and/or trade?6. Did people at Tell el-cUmeiri and nearby hinterland sites use pottery made from the same or similar clays? Is there evidence of a regional trading or marketing network?7. Could clay deposits used by potters today near Amman have been exploited by potters in antiquity?8. Is evidence of manufacturing technique discernable in the polished section of sample sherds?At a later stage of research with a larger sample, the goal will be to compare and contrast the wares with contemporaneous pottery from other sites. For the present, the results have not been compared with material from other sites outside Amman, except for the sample of clay used by potters today at Zizia.429PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987Sample SelectionSamples collected in the field (numbered 1-22) include sherds of clearly identifiable pots from well-dated deposits, and when possible, from floor surfaces. In selecting sherds from these deposits, it was important to include diagnostic parts of the vessel such as rims, bases, or decorated sherds rather than body sherds. All samples have been drawn and represent vessels or surface treatment which archaeologists traditionally date based on shape and/or decoration (fig. 23.1).The selected sample is not necessarily representative for all examples of any one form for any single period. For example, the Early Bronze Age pithos cannot be considered representative of all Early Bronze pithoi, but it is well-dated to the mid-third millennium B.C. based on its shape and surface treatment. Whether or not all Early Bronze pithoi were made of the same clay was not under investigation. Instead, the sample was designed to determine if Early Bronze pottery of different types such as cooking pots, jars, pithoi, and decorated vessels were made of the same clay.Utilitarian wares predominate the petrographic sample in addition to which there is a small number of specialty wares. The purpose of the study is to compare the clays used for cooking pots and jars of the third, second, and first millennia B.C. rather than to compare cooking pots within a single period. The emphasis is on the basic pottery used to store and cook food, as well as the changing patterns of clay use through time.The sample is representative of the general assemblage in that most sherds are ordinary examples of each category of vessel. Unusual sherds were avoided. On visual inspection and in consultation with L. G. Herr, who is responsible for the ceramic typology developed at Tell el- cUmeiri, the sherds submitted for petrographic analysis were normal examples of cooking pots, jars, and bowls.In selecting the painted and burnished wares, the same criteria were applied as for the normal wares, but the surface treatment was an extra consideration. The painted and burnished wares were less representative of the collection as a whole. Decorated sherds accounted for a small fraction of the excavated material. No tombs, where one might expect to find decorated wares, have been investigated. Whether or not the painted and burnished wares within each period were made of the same clay as the normal wares was an issue of concern for all periods.In addition, most of the decorated sherds wereselected to address questions relevant for each archaeological period. For example, whether or not the clay used for the Iron II black-burnished bowls is the same clay used for the normal wares would be useful to determine for several reasons. If a single clay was used for various vessel types, one would be inclined to infer that the bowls and other forms were locally made by craft specialists who produced a wide range of pottery forms. If the black-burnished bowls were made of a clay different from that used for the other wares, one might infer that the bowls were made elsewhere, especially since they resemble "Assyrian Palace Ware." There is a possibility that the bowls represent one of the more tangible aspects of the interaction between the Assyrian heartland and one of its provinces.One further factor influencing sample selection was the intention to compare and contrast pottery from Tell el-cUmeiri and the hinterland Site 34 (Rujm Selim). Microscopically similar vessels from each site were sampled. For this preliminary petrographic study, the most ordinary sherds were collected rather than those with special features.Early Bronze Age sherds comprise four samples: a large-necked pithos with rope decoration around the shoulder and white surface treatment characteristic of EB II and III pithoi (fig. 23.1:1), a holemouth jar rim (fig. 23.1:2), a round-bodied cooking pot with a loop handle (fig. 23.1:3), and a painted bowl (fig. 23.1:4).One chocolate-on-white Middle Bronze Age sherd (fig. 23.1:5) and one biconical Late Bronze Age jug decorated with red and black paint (fig. 23.1:6) represent the more exotic samples. The composition of chocolate-on-white wares has been investigated by neutron activation analysis, but was found not to correspond to the other wares sampled from the Baqcah Valley in Jordan (McGovern, Harbottle, and Wnuk 1982: 12). A study by Knapp (1989: 136) of this ware from Pella and Tell el-Hayyat using proton-induced x- ray and gamma ray emission analysis demon- trated again that the chocolate-on-white sherds were distinct and separate from the normal wares and clays, but no source has been confirmed. The biconical jug, found with greatest frequency along the Levantine coast (Amiran 1969: 147), may have been imported to Tell el-cUmeiri.Over three-quarters of the petrographic samples belong to the Iron Age which is the period presently best exposed at Tell el-cUmeiri. Domestic and utilitarian wares predominate the Iron Age sample given the goals of the excavation to learn about die organization of the ancient technologies and subsistence strategies. This does not imply a dearth of fine, burnished wares at the430PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 198713435i r=^r16Fig. 23.1. Sherds for petrographic analysis from Tell el-cUmeiri, Site 34 (Rujm Selim), and Site 23. Brick sample was not drawn. (Courtesy of the authors).431PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987No.Petro.No.FieldNo.Field or Site LocusPailNo. Date Description1 22 1 C 8L82:26 113 GB III Pitho6 with rope decoration and white surface treatment.2 16 2 D 5K97:5 85 EB III Holemouth ja r rim.3 21 3 D 6K07:8 40 EB III Cooking pot with loop handle.4 1 3a D 6K07:26 80.5 EB III Painted bowl.5 18 4 . C 8L82:24 120 MB II Chocolate-on-white bowl.6 15 5 B 7J86:25 77 LB Biconical painted jar.7 19 6 F 7L09:14 71a Iron I Cooking pot rim.8 11 7 F 7L09:14 71b Iron I Cooking pot rim.9 14 8 B 7J89:6 33a,b Iron I Collar rim storejar.10 20 9 A 7K70:6 34.1 L Iron II Mortarium.11 17 10 B 7K80:3 86 L Iron II Cooking pot.12 8 11 B 7J86:3 71a L Iron II Burnished bowl with double ring base.13 10 . 12 A 7K41:2 33 L Iron II Pithos with potter's mark.14 9 13 F 6L98:41 136 L Iron II Large jar.15 7 14 F 7L09:28 86 L Iron II Fine ware, burnished bowl.16 13 15 F 6L98:42 133 L Iron II Black-burnished, carinated bowl.17 12 16 Zizia - - Modem Water jar.18 3 17 F 6L98:23 76 L Iron II Large, utilitarian vessel.19 4 18 34 2:14 72 L Iron II Cooking pot.20 6 19 34 2:14 84 Hell Storejar.21 5 20 23 - - HeU Large storejar.22 2 21 cUmeiri - - E Pers Sun-dried brick (not drawn).Fig. 23.1, continued. Description of sherds for petrographic analysis from Tell el-cUmeiri, Site 34 (Rujm Selim), and Site 23.site. Furthermore, the sample emphasizes the coarse-grained wares for which petrographic analysis is especially useful (Schubert 1986: 163) in contrast to fine-grained wares requiring other testing procedures.For the Iron I period, two cooking pot rims (fig. 23.1:7, 8) and one collar rim storejar sample (fig. 23.1:9) were selected in order to examine the differences in the raw materials used for each vessel type. The findings can then be compared and contrasted with the cooking pots of Iron II date from the tell (fig. 23.1:11) and hinterland Site 34 (Rujm Selim; fig. 23.1:19), as well as pithoi of the Iron II period (fig. 23.1:13, 14) and necked jars of the Hellenistic period (fig. 23.1:20, 21). The collar rim storejar, which has become synonymous with the emergence of the Israelites, is found in Transjordan in increasing numbers (Ibrahim 1978). Rather than representing a particular people, the jars may belong to the material culture indicative of a rural lifestyle and the need to store basic commodities by village populations regardless of their ethnic affiliation (London 1989a).Bowls, cooking pots, storejars, and pithoi of the Iron II period from the tell were sampled to investigate variation, or its absence, in the raw materials used for each vessel type. The three Late Iron bowls include a burnished bowl with double ring base, which is one of the hallmarks of the "Ammonite" repertoire (fig. 23.1:12), one example of the thinnest, finest "Ammonite" burnished ware (fig. 23.1:15), and a black- burnished carinated bowl (fig. 23.1:16). The questions addressed here concern whether or not these bowls were fabricated from the same clay as that used for the jars or perhaps a finer version of the same clay body. Do the bowls fall within the range of local geology or do they differ markedly? Is there mineralogical evidence to support the designation "Ammonite" ware? A large air pocket or bubble in one "Ammonite" bowl (fig. 23.1:12) suggests manufacture at or near the site since distorted forms tend to remain close to their production source in communities of traditional potters (Personal Observation in Cyprus 1986 and in the Philippines 1981, G. A. London).As for die cooking pots, were the same clay bodies used in the Iron I and II periods? How do432PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987the cooking pot wares from Tell el-cUmeiri (fig. 23.1:7, 8, 11) compare with those from the hinterland sites (fig. 23.1:19)?The Iron II store pithoi (fig. 23.1:13, 14) from the tell will be compared with the Iron I collar rim storejar, and the Hellenistic pithoi from Site 34 (Rujm Selim; fig. 23.1:20), and from Site 23 (fig. 23.1:21). Differences in clays used for the jars versus the pithoi might reflect two separate manufacturing techniques and two sets of specialized potters.To gauge the availability of local clays, samples of two objects assumed to have been made at, or near, the site were selected. This included an un-fired brick of the Early Persian period (petrographic no. 2) and a Late Iron II large utilitarian vessel (fig. 23.1:18). In addition, a sherd from a Modern jar made at Zizia by potters who use locally available clays, provides a sample of native raw materials (fig. 23.1:17).Finally, the mortarium (fig. 23.1:10), a shape unfamiliar in the Ammonite region, perhaps represents an import. Its origin is of great interest, but it is the relationship to domestic wares that is the goal of the petrographic study. Does it conform to the other Iron Age wares or does it constitute a separate group?MethodEach sample was given a field number. In the laboratory, new petrographic numbers were assigned at random to eliminate any bias in the chronological ordering of the field numbers. A Leitz petrographic microscope with magnifications of 40X, 100X, and 400X was used to identify the inclusions. Mineral and rock types were recorded along with an estimation of their percentage frequency using a comparison chart to determine percentage composition (Terry and Chilingar 1955). A comparison chart for estimating roundness and sphericity was used to evaluate the shapes of the inclusions. Grain size was also measured.Analysis and Function of the InclusionsFor the purpose of this report, the terms "inclusions" and "non-plastics" describe the material indigenous to the clay and/or materials added to it by the potters to create a workable clay body. Potters have several options: they can use the clay as they find it, modify it by extracting indigenous inclusions after which they use it as is or add other non-plastics, or finally, potters can add various materials without removing anything. The method of claypreparation depends on the nature of the raw material, the manufacturing technique, the shapes to be made, the surface treatment rendered to the ' finished product, and the firing technique. Each decision made by the potter, beginning with clay selection and processing, influences all subsequent steps.The choice of inclusion type, size, and shape, organic or non-organic is critical for the manufacturing technique; it determines how much water the clay can hold while it is worked. Rocks and minerals permit a potter to work the clay in a wetter state than might otherwise be possible since each inclusion is surrounded with a coating of water. Inclusions also influence the surface treatment, especially painting and burnishing (London 1991: 202-3). Rocks and minerals inhibit paint from adhering to the surface of a pot due to their impermeability. If non-plastics protrude on a pot to be burnished, they might be dragged across the surface resulting in drag lines and scratches.Each type of additive has a purpose during the production, firing, and use of a pot. Organic material benefits the clay by increasing its plasticity and by reducing the risks in drying and firing pottery in contrast with less porous wares (Kelso and Thorley 1943: 93; London 1981: 193; Matson 1956: 35; 1958: 295). Straw, cattails, dung, weeds, etc., open the walls which greatly- benefits the finished product by creating walls that breathe. Such jars are preferred for water storage and cooling, but not wine. As water evaporates through the porous walls, the jar cools its contents. Earthenware jugs and jars that allow too much evaporation, or absorb too much of the contents, are avoided for wine storage. Grog (crushed pottery) and clay pellets provide an excellent binder because there is good contact and adhesion with the clay body. Pottery with grog inclusions also fires quicker than sherds with rock and mineral inclusions based on experiments carried out by G. A. London involving briquettes with stones, grog, and organic materials fired to the same temperatures. The value of another type of inclusion, carbonaceous materials, is dealt with below.Ethnoarchaeological studies of potters reveal different practices concerning the use of nonplastics. African potters observed by Krause (1985: 92) and Cretan potters (Blitzer 1984: 148) add only water to the clay. An alternative is to mix two different clays together to create a workable clay body without adding non-plastics as is done by the Filipino potters in Kalinga (Longacre 1981: 54) and Paradijon (London 1985: 200), and two communities of potters in Crete (Blitzer 1984: 145; Voyatzoglou 1973: 14).433PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987To determine whether or not a potter manipulates or alters clay is difficult. The angularity of the inclusions, such as carbonates, can provide a clue. Other materials not native to clay, such as grog, must be intentionally added to the clay. Organic material which has fired away leaving voids, also suggests the presence of an added tempering material (Franken and Kalsbeek 1969: 77; Matson 1972: 210). Although some organic material is often found in the clay as a result of wind or stream action, in the form of roots, and from the burlap bags used by potters to transport clay, the presence of large quantities of voids of approximately the same size, implies that they may have been intentionally prepared and added. Another means to determine manipulation of the Clay involves the presence of two discernable clay bodies in a single vessel.The preliminary analysis of the 22 samples results in six groups whose integrity requires further examination by expanding the sample size. With this understanding, the six groups can be described by their predominant inclusions:Group 1 Fossils (n=2)Group 2 Quartz (n=4)Group 3 Angular coarse crystalline carbonates (n=4)Group 4 G rog(n= l)Group 5 Moderate quantities of elongated and aligned voids, fossils, and fine grained carbonates (n=4)Group 6 All others (n=7)To create Groups 1 - 6 , inclusion type, size, and shape were taken into consideration (fig.23.2). A more detailed characterization of the inclusion types and quantities was carried out than is presented in fig. 23.3 which lists the major inclusions. For each sherd, the percentage of nonplastics to clay was determined and the averages are presented. Voids, however, were not included in this computation. Unlike the other groups, mineralogical coherency is weak for Group 6. It includes all seven sherds that fell outside the other categories. Five of the samples in Group 6 belong to decorated and/or burnished containers.Preliminary Interpretation of the Initial FindingsThe conclusions, based on a sample of 22 specimens spanning millennia, are preliminary and must meet the demands of more rigorous testing. Despite the limited sample size, several patterns emerge which are relevant for addressing the issues for which the petrographic study was designed.Group 1. Group 1 includes an Early Bronze cooking pot and the Iron I collar rim storejar. The two samples differ in that elongated angular fossilspredominate in the cooking pot and oolites characterize the jar. Both types of pots are those most likely to have been made where they were used. Trade in cooking ware is a possibility as is trade in the large jar. However, the problems involved with transporting so large a jar might argue for local manufacture.Based on this sample, it is premature to comment on the origin of the collar rim storejar or its place of manufacture. The other Iron I samples, two cooking pots, belong to Group 3 which includes cooking ware of the Early Bronze and Iron II periods. A larger sample of Iron I bowls and jugs rather than cooking pots is required to address the question of the production location of the collar rim storejar, especially since it appears that cooking pots and jars were made of clays suited to the function of the vessel. Bowls and jugs may have been made of a clay used for the collar rim storejars, but not necessarily. Given the long life span of very large sedentary jars, the collar rim storejars could have been the work of potters who specialized in large containers for which they used a different clay than that used for portable ceramics. A larger Iron I exposure with a more complete range of vessel types will allow further testing to address this issue.With regard to another question posed above, the Early Bronze wares do not form one consistent group. The contrary is true: each of the fourEarly Bronze samples falls into a differentcategory, perhaps suggesting that a large number of people made pottery in the middle third millennium B.C., some of whom may have been craft specialists while others were domestic potters. It is conceivable that both levels of production functioned simultaneously along with a third category of itinerant potters. Each group may have worked with a different clay body and non-plastics, using manufacturing techniquesspecific for each vessel type. The petrographicanalysis demonstrates that special clays were used for different types of vessels, such as cooking pots, pithoi, and the painted vessel. In contrast to the Iron II ceramic forms, there appears to be greater variation in the EB III wares.Group 2. Whereas each Early Bronze form belongs to a different group, for the Iron II repertoire, vessels of different types were made from a single clay, designated as Group 2. This group, characterized by quartz non-plastics, includes three highly dissimilar types of Iron II pottery from Tell el-cUmeiri and Site 34 (Rujm Selim): a large utilitarian vessel, a double ring burnished bowl of good quality, and a cooking pot. This grouping might represent local manufacture, assuming that the huge utilitarian434PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987GroupPetroNo. Date Descriptioni 14 Iron I Collar rim storejar.i 3 eb m Cooking pot.2 3 Iron H Large, utilitarian vessel.2 4 Iron H Cooking pot from Site 34.2 8 Iron H Burnished bowl.2 12 Modem Jar from Zizia.3 11 Iron I Cooking pot.3 16 EB in Holemouth jar.3 17 Iron H Cooking pot.3 19 Iron I Cooking pot.4 22 EB Large jar with shoulder band.5 5 Hell Large jar from Site 23.5 6 Hell Storejar from Site 34.5 9 Iron n Large storejar.5 10 Iron II Storejar with potter’s mark.6 1 e b m Painted bowl.6 2 Pers Brick.6 7 Iron II "Ammonite" burnished fine ware bowl.6 13 Iron H "Ammonite black-burnished bowl.6 15 LB Biconical decorated jar.6 18 MB Chocolate-on-white ware.6 20 Mortarium.Fig. 23.2. Petrographic analysis of sherds from Tell el-cUmeiri, Site 34 (Rujm Selim), and Site 23. Sherds are from Tell el-cUmeiri unless indicated.container would not have travelled a great distance from its place of production. The use of one clay for the three types of pots, implies that this group might represent the local "Ammonite" tradition of pottery manufacture. This hypothesis is strengthened by the fourth member of Group 2, the modern Zizia jar made some 20 km from Tell el- cUmeiri (London and Sinclair, chapter 22).Whether or not pottery was made at or near the ancient site remains unanswered, but it is significant that two molds for pottery figurines were found in a survey of Tell el- Umeiri (Franken and Abujaber 1989: figs. C.5, C.6). If clay figurines were manufactured at Tell el-cUmeiri, ceramic containers may have been made as well.The cooking pot in Group 2 comes from Site 34 (Rujm Selim). Its presence in the group implies that pottery made of the same clays was used at Tell el-cUmeiri and nearby sites. The implication is that there was economic interaction andintegration between the two sites. The other Iron II cooking pot, categorized in Group 3, reveals that at least two clay bodies were used for cooking pots. This implies that more than one manufacturing center served the region.In toe thin section of the burnished bowl (fig. 23.1:12), there is evidence of alteration of the clay by the potters. For the base and body, two compositionally similar clays were discernable, but both the grain size and the proportion of nonplastics in the clays differ: the base is characterized by a higher percentage and larger size nonplastic than the clay of the body. The clay of the base was added after the walls were shaped. To prevent a differential drying rate for the walls and base, the potters used a clay with extra nonplastics for the base to help it dry quickly and to reduce the risk of cracking. This confirms that potters manipulated their raw materials either by adding or extracting non-plastics. Elsewhere,435PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987Non-plasticsGroup1 2 3 4 5 6Carbonates 12; 6 12 20-37 5 20-25 10-20Fossil fragments 10; 40 - - - 1-3 Occ. tr.Grog - - - 15 Tr.-3 Occ. tr.Opaques 3; 1 Tr. 1-2 3 2-10 1 - 4Quartz l; 2 35-37 15-20 2 2-10 1-15Voids - Tr. - 10 elong. 5-7 elong. Occ. tr.% of clay to nonplastics (voids not included)25:75;50:5045:55 40:60 25:75 35:65 28:72Fig. 23.3. Major non-plastics in Tell el-cUmeiri sherds arranged by groups. (All values are percentages; Occ. = Occasional, tr. = traces, elong. = elongated). Group 1: Because this group consists of two samples, the values of each are presented. For the first (petrographic sample no. 21), the ratio of non-plastics to clay is 1:3 or 25:75; sample no. 14 has a ratio of 1:1 or 50% each of non-plastics and clay. Group 2: Included in these figures are three samples; the fourth member of the group (petrographic sample no. 8) is a bowl consisting of two clay matrices, both of which have the same major inclusions as the other sherds in Group 2, but the percentages differ: quartz in the body versus the base accounts for 4.5% and 68%; carbonates are 15% and 1%. The ratios of non-plastics to clay for each clay are 20:80 and 70:30. The carbonates of Group 2 are calcite. Group 3: All four samples in this group are cooking pots; the EB HI sample (petrographic no. 16) differs from the later cooking pots in having only 1 % quartz content. Group 5: The fossil fragments are limited to the kite Iron II samples (petrographic sample nos. 9 and 10) and are absent from the Hellenistic period sherds.potters are known to have used different clays for the body and base of individual containers. For example, Mesopotamian wares examined by van As and Jacobs (1987: 17) provide another instance of potters who used extra non-plastics to strengthen the base and to avoid problems created by differential drying rates.Group 3. A collection of four cooking pots from three archaeological eras (Early Bronze Age, Iron I period, and Iron II period) belong to Group 3. The group is characterized by a coarse, crystalline, carbonate mineral, probably calcite. Small (0.5 mm diameter) angular-to-subrounded coarse and fine grained as well as large (0.5-1.0 mm diameter) coarsely crystalline carbonates constitute between 20-40% of the inclusions in addition to quartz with minor feldspar and opaques which comprises the remainder. The subrounded, angular, and subprismoidal shapes of the calcite suggest intentional crushing by the potters to create inclusions specifically for cooking pots. Calcite, along with limestone and shell, have thermal expansion coefficients close to that of clay (Step- onaitis 1984: 113). As a consequence, calcareous non-plastics are suitable for cooking ware which is subjected to repeated reheating. The use of calcite to temper cooking ware is well known (Beynon, et al. 1986: 303; Franken and Kalsbeek 1974: 58; Rye 1976; 1981: 33; Stimmel, Heimann, and Hancock 1982) and persists until the recent past in the Levant (Crowfoot 1932).Group 4. The large Early Bronze Age pithos with rope molding on the shoulder and white surface treatment is the only member of Group 4. Grog inclusions predominate and are a wise choicefor a thick-walled container for several reasons. Grog tends to reduce the porosity of a fired ware (Franken and Kalsbeek 1974: 187). The grog would have contributed to the fast and even firing of the thick-walled pithos since it has the same thermal expansion as the clay to which it is added (Rye 1976: 115). That this large jar forms its own group is not unusual. The potter who made it may have specialized in the manufacture of large containers exclusively. Grog inclusions prepared by the potter could have been a part of the specialized production and not practiced by other potters who made smaller pieces. Potters specializing in large containers are known in the ethnographic literature (London 1989b; Hampe and Winter 1962: 11; Voyatzoglou 1974, 1984).Finally, it is noteworthy that a white, chalky substance covers the exterior surface of the Early Bronze Age pithos. The surface treatment is possibly another means to seal the surface and limit porosity, in addition to the use of grog inclusions. This suggests that the pithos was not a water container, but served to hold a substance that was to be kept dry or at least not evaporate. This is confirmed by the contents of a pithos from Tell el-cUmeiri Field D in which over 4000 garbanzo beans were counted (Daviau, chapter 6, above).Group 5. Group 5 includes two Late Iron II jars from Tell el-cUmeiri and two large containers from hinterland sites: one from Site 34 (Rujm Selim) and the other from Site 23, both of Hellenistic date. This group suggests the use of similar clays during two periods and the preferred use of a special clay with abundant organic nonplastics and fine-grained carbonates for the436PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987manufacture of large containers. The clay body is unique as demonstrated by the presence of elongated and aligned voids and cavities (5-7% of the matrix) which characterize the use of organic inclusions. They served to open the thick jar walls and facilitate drying and firing of the vessels (Franken and Kalsbeek 1974: 183). For the two Late Iron II samples (petrographic nos. 9 and 10), fossil fragments accounted for 1-3% of the inclusions. The relatively high ratio of non-plastics to clay, 1:2 or 35:65, resulted in a more open clay body which would have reduced the risk of cracking while the jars dried and later when they were fired.On the rim of one Iron II jar is a potter’s mark (fig. 23.1:13). If vessel size is an indication of the distance a pot is likely to travel, these large jars were made in the vicinity of the site and the potter’s mark represents someone who lived or worked in the Ammonite region. Although the jars were not complete, their estimated height exceeds 80 cm. They were larger than jars suitable for transporting goods on a regular basis.Group 6. Group 6 combines sherds which mineralogically lack sufficient internal consistency to be considered as a viable group. Of the seven sherds, five display special treatment: paint and/or burnish. Except for the brick and mortarium, Group 6 includes all of the decorated wares. For this reason, they may constitute a group whose properties reveal the requirements of the surface treatment rather than the nature of the inclusions.Characteristic of the sherds are fine-grained non-plastics (carbonates with a high quartz content) and a lack of voids. Fine-grained inclusions and the absence of organic material are two properties beneficial for decorated fine wares. Large-sized inclusions hinder the manufacture of a thin-walled fine ware. When they protrude on the surface, large inclusions prevent adhesion of slip or paint. The non-porous rocks and mineral fragments do not absorb the slip or paint. Large rocks and minerals on the surface cause scratches and other surface marring during burnishing treatment. As a result, fine-grained inclusions are better suited for fine-walled, decorated wares than are large fragments. Large voids are equally undesirable on the surface of decorated or burnished fine wares.The origin of the Late Iron II black-burnished bowls which resemble Assyrian Palace Ware was not determined by the petrographic analysis. It can be stated that of the three sherds of black- burnished bowls, one belongs to Group 2 and the other two are in Group 6. The high percentage of quartz was consistent with the other Iron II sherds of Group 2, but the bowl differs from the rest ofthe group in that it lacks the voids of former organic material. This might imply that although the major mineral inclusion was similar, organic materials were not used for the burnished ware. It suggests the use of a slightly modified clay, for the finer wares, which was otherwise comparable to the clay used for the regular wares. Of the three black-burnished bowls, the two in Group 6, referred to as "Ammonite," have finer and thinner walls than the sample in Group 2. Given the thinner walls and their vessel forms, they resemble the Assyrian Palace Ware moreso than the Group 2 bowl.Assyrian Palace Ware, as described by Amiran (1969: 291), Dornemann (1983: 175), Hestrin and Stern (1973), and Rawson (1954), may have been imported to the Levant and Jordan. Assyrian intervention in the region of Tell el- cUmeiri is known from the Assyrian Annals (Pritchard 1955: 284-85). Control of the Transjordanian provinces was crucial for the Assyrian domination of the eastern Mediterranean region. To achieve the latter, Assyria established treaties which stipulated taxes, tribute, and labor with the Transjordanian provinces. The more congenial relationship between Assyria and Transjordan contrasts with the Assyrian mass transfer of goods and population from the Mediterranean provinces. Transjordan was thus a buffer territory within the Assyrian Empire. One potential benefit of this status may have been the importation of Assyrian Palace Wares, as is suggested by the two samples of Group 6. However, it is premature to accept Group 6 as a unit or to infer that these wares were imports. The presence of one black- burnished bowl in Group 2, believed to be of local manufacture, suggests that at least some of the fine wares were produced locally using materials available in Transjordan.Group 6 might best be described as a collection of special clay bodies, characterized by fine-grained inclusions and a dearth of organic material, used for decorated wares, rather than evidence of their manufacture at the same production location. Further testing, a larger sample, and more refined methods are needed to examine the fine wares and to resolve this issue.The two samples in Group 6 that do not belong to fine wares are the unfired Early Persian brick and the mortarium. The brick may have been made of locally available material which was unsuitable for pottery production. In Cyprus, traditional potters use a variety of clays to make bricks, only some of which, when refined, are used for pottery, (Personal Observation, G. A. London 1986). As for the mortarium, a shape rarely found in the Ammonite region, its origin437PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987requires further testing. That it does fall outside the other Late Iron II ware categories suggests that it is foreign to the region, but more testing is needed. Subsequent to our study, Bennett and Blakely (1989: 198) have demonstrated a Syrian origin for mortaria from Tell el-Hesi, based on neutron activation analysis. Since the Tell el- cUmeiri mortarium sherd differs mineralogically from all other wares, it is possible that it was also a northern import like the Tell el-Hesi mortaria.Future ResearchA larger sample from Tell el-cUmeiri and the hinterland sites is essential to test further the preliminary results of the initial petrographic study. More samples from each period are required and additional types of analyses are needed to test the finer wares. With an enlarged sample, it will be possible to compare the results with data from nearby sites.ConclusionVariation within the ceramic wares at Tell el- cUmeiri reveals elements of change and continuity spanning millennia. Potters prepared a special clay for cooking pots beginning in the Early Bronze Age and continued through the Iron I and II periods. Large jars were manufactured from clays with special additives designed to reduce the risks involved with drying and firing the thick-walled containers. Examination of storejars from the Iron II and Hellenistic periods suggests that a special clay, highly tempered with organic inclusions, was the preferred clay for the thick-walled jars. Porous walls were a by-product of the organic material. The Early Bronze Age pithos was fabricated from a clay with grog inclusions intentionally added. The clay differs from that used for the other Early Bronze wares. Grog inclusions indicate that the jar was used to hold something other than water. The sample submitted for petrographic analysis, although small, allows one to detect a certainoverall consistency and selectivity in the use of clays and non-plastics which attest to the skill and knowledge of the potters.The greater variation within the Early Bronze Age wares might imply that a larger number of people made pottery in the late third millennium than in the first millennium. Whereas industries such as masonry, metallurgy, and ceramics may have achieved a high degree of specialization in the Early Bronze society, there is no evidence that the domestic pottery production ceased to exist. In the Iron II period, craft specialists predominated. They made the ftill repertoire by manipulating locally available clays (Groups 2 and 5) to accommodate the manufacture of burnished bowls, cooking pots, and large utilitarian containers. In addition to their work, other sources of cooking pots and burnished wares were available to the residents of Tell el-cUmeiri.The initial evidence suggests that some of the clays used to make the pottery found at Tell el- cUmeiri were mineralogically the same as that used for ceramics excavated at hinterland Sites 34 (Rujm Selim) and 23. Samples of the full ceramic repertoire will enable one to measure the similarities among the various sites which can provide evidence of local markets, trade, and urban/rural similarities, differences, and interaction.A larger sample of material from all periods represented at the site will address the question of variation within each archaeological period and between periods. The goal is to understand both the organization of the pottery industry and trade in ceramic wares, and their contents.AcknowledgementsThanks are extended to William Glanzman and George McCourt for reading and commenting on the pre-print of this report, and to Reuben Bullard for discussions on petrographic analysis. Julio Juarez and John I. Lawlor assisted by sawing the sherds, and their contribution is greatly appreciated.REFERENCESAmiran, R.1969 Ancient Pottery o f the Holy Land. Jerusalem: Masada.Bennett, W. J., and Blakely, J. A.1989 Tell el-Hesi: The Persian Period (Stratum V). Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.Beynon, D. E., el al.1986 Tempering Types and Sources for Early Bronze Age Ceramics from Bab edh-Dhrac and Numeira, Jordan. Journal o f Field Archaeology 13:3: 297-305.Blitzer, H.1984 Traditional Pottery Production in Kentri, Crete: Workshops, Materials, Techniques and Trade. Pp. 143-57 in East Cretan White-on-Dark Ware, ed. P. P. Betancourt. University Museum Monographs No. 51. Philadelphia: University Museum.Crowfoot, G.1932 Pots, Ancient and Modem. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 6: 179-81.Domemann, R. H.1983 The Archaeology o f the Transjordan. Milwaukee: Milwaukee Public Museum.438PRELIMINARY PETROGRAPHIC ANALYSISOF POTTERY FROM TELL EL-CUMEIRI AND HINTERLAND SITES, 1987Franken, H. J., and Abujaber, R. S.1989 Yadoudeh. The History o f a Land. Pp. 407-J6 in Madaba Plains Project 1: The 1984 Season at Tell el-c Umeiri and Vicinity and Subsequent Studies, eds. L. T. Geraty, et al. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University/Institute of Archaeology.Franken, H. J., and Kalsbeek, J.1969 Excavations at Tell Deir cAlla I. A Stratigraphical and Analytical Study o f the Early Iron Age Pottery. Leiden: Brill.1974 In Search o f the Jericho Potters. Ceramics from the Iron Age and from the Neolithicum. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Hampe, R., and Winter, A.1962 Bei Topfem und Topferinnen in Kreta, Messenien und Zypem. Reprint 1974. Mainz: Philipp von Zabem.Hestrin, R., and Winter, A.1973 Two "Assyrian" Bowls from Israel. IsraelExploration Journal 23: 152-55.Ibrahim, M. M.1978 The Collared-rim Jar of the Early Iron Age. Pp. 1 lb- 26 in Archaeology in the Levant: Essays fo r Kathleen Kenyon, eds. R. Moorey and P. Parr. London: Aris and Phillips.Kelso, J. L., and Thorley, J. P.1943 The Potter’s Technique at Tell Beit Mirsim,Particularly in Stratum A. Pp. 86-142 in The Excavation o f Tell Beit Mirsim III. The Iron Age, ed. W. F. Albright. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 21-22. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.Pg. 35 in Vol. 2 of Excavations at Gpzlu Kille, Tarsus, by H. Goldman. Princeton: Princeton University.1958 Appendix 4. A Technological Look at the Shamshir Ghar Potsherds. Pp. 294-98 in Shamshir Ghar: Historic Cave Site in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, by L. Dupree. Anthropological Papers Vol. 46, Part 2. New York: American Museum of Natural History.1972 Ceramic Studies. Pp. 200-20 in The MinnesotaMessenia Expedition, Reconstructing a Bronze Age Regional Environment, eds. W. A. McDonald and G. R. Rapp. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.McGovern, P. E.; Harbottle, G.; and Wnuk, C.1982 Late Bronze Age Pottery Fabrics from the Baqcah Valley, Jordan: Composition and Origins. Museum Applied Science Center fo r Archaeology Journal 2: 8- 12.Pritchard, J. B., ed.1955 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the OldTestament. Second edition. Princeton: Princeton University.Rawson, P. S.1954 Palace Wares from Nimrud, Technical Observations on Selected Examples. Iraq 16: 168-72.Rye, O. S.1976 Keeping Your Temper under Control: Materials and the Manufacture of Papuan Pottery. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 11: 107-37.1981 Pottery Technology. Washington, DC: Taraxacum.Knapp, A. B.1989 Complexity and Collapse in the North Jordan Valley: Archaeometry and Society in the Middle-Late Bronze Ages. Israel Exploration Journal 39.3-4: 129-48.Schubert, P.1986 Petrographic Modal Analysis—A NecessaryComplement to Chemical Analysis of Ceramic Coarse Wares. Archaeometry 28.2: 163-78.Krause, R.1985 The Clay Sleeps. An Ethnoarchaeological Study o f Three African Potters. University, AL: University of Alabama.London, G. A.1981 Dung-tempered Clay. Journal o f Field Archaeology 8: 189-95.1985 Decoding Designs: The Late Third Millennium B.C.Pottery from Jebel Qac aqir. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Steponaitis, V. P.1984 Technological Studies of Prehistoric Pottery from Alabama: Physical Properties and Vessel Function. Pp. 79-122 in The Many Dimensions o f Pottery, eds. S. E. van der Leeuw and A. C. Pritchard. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Stimmel, C.; Heimann, R. B.; and Hancock, R. G.1982 Indian Pottery from the Mississippi Valley: Coping with Bad Raw Materials. Pp. 219-28 in Archaeological Ceramics, eds. J. S. Olin and A. Franklin. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.1989a A Comparison of Two Contemporaneous Lifestyles of the Late Second Millennium B.C. Bulletin o f the American Schools o f Oriental Research 273: 37-55.1989b On Fig Leaves, Itinerant Potters, and Pottery Production Locations in Cyprus. Pp. 65-80 in Cross- Craft and Cross-Cultural Interactions in Ceramics, eds. P. E. McGovern and M. R. Notis. Vol. 4 in Ceramics and Civilization, ed. W. D. Kingery. Westerville, OH: American Ceramic Society.1991 Standardization and Variation in the Work of Craft Specialists. Pp. 182-204 in Ceramic Ethno- archaeology, ed. W. A. Longacre. Tucson: University of Arizona.Longacre, W. A.1981 Kalinga Pottery: An Ethnoarchaeological Study. Pp.49-66 in Pattern o f the Past, eds. I. Hodder, G. Isaac, and N. Hammond. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Matson, F. R.1956 Techniques of the Early Bronze Potters at Tarsus.Terry, R. D., and Chilingar, G. V.1955 Comparison Charts for Visual Estimation of Percentage Composition. Journal o f Sedimentary Petrography 25.3: 229-34.van As, A., and Jacobs, L.1987 Second Millennium B.C. Goblet Bases from Tell ed- Deir—The Relationship between Form and Technique. A Knapsack Full o f Pottery. Archaeo-Ceramological Miscellanea Dedicated to H. J. Franken. Newsletter o f the Department o f Pottery Technology 5: 39-53.Voyatzoglou, M.1973 The Potters of Thrapsano. Ceramic Review 24: 13- 16.1974 The Jar Makers of Thrapsano in Crete. Expedition 16: 18-24.1984 Thrapsano, Village of Jar Makers. Pp. 130-42 in East Cretan White-on Dark Ware, ed. by P. P. Betancourt. University Museum Monographs No. 51. Philadelphia: University Museum.439APPENDIX ATell e l-cUmeiri Field Locus SheetsR. William Cash St. Mary’s College Warren C. Trenchard Canadian Union CollegeThe methods of record keeping this season were virtually identical to those used in 1984. However, the method of computer data entry was modified as follows. Successively, once each week, each of the six Field supervisors submitted their hand-written locus sheets to the data processor (James K. Brower) for entry into the computer database. The resulting computergenerated locus sheets were available to the supervisors prior to resuming excavation the next morning.After the completion of the excavation season, database maintenance was performed by R. William Cash and Warren C. Trenchard in order to verify data inputted in the field, supply missing data, and reconcile any problems revealed in the maintenance process. Project directors then reviewed the content of the database after which the database was printed for inclusion in this season report. Consequently, the locus sheets included in this appendix manifest the combined effort of many season and post-season personnel.441SOIL LOCUS SHEET4^-P *toIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K50, Locus 1 (Supplement) North Balk Removal Summary: Balk removalREASONRemarks: Balk removalDESCRIPTION POTTERYPail Date Count Sskts Loc PreservationSupervisor: TP Oates: 07/29 to 08/04Reading Pub135 07/29 1/ 17 6 LI2, Iron bods, 1EB bod136 07/30 25/145 51 LI2, EH, 11138 07/30 26 LI2, 1EI1, 111145 08/04 27/217 45 LI2, El2, IByz, 1MB146 08/04 5/ 51 21 LI2Regno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period MateriGrinder 15 07/30 136Grinder 16 07/30' 136Slingstone 17 07/30 138'Grinder 18 07/30 138Grinder 19 . 07/30 138PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/30/0507/30 Progress of excavationPhoto DrawingSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K50, Locus 2 (Supplement)North Balk Removal Summary: Balk RemovalDESCRIPTION POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: TP Date: 07/30Reading Pub137 07/30 32/170 41 LI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K50, Lo c u s 3 (Supplement) Supervisor: TP Dates: 07/30 to 07/31North Balk Removal Suimary: Balk removalDESCRIPTION POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub139 07/30 15/115 LI2HO 07/31 9/159 14 LIZ, few £12OBJECTSDescription Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinder 14 07/30 139 415 07/30 139 4Slingstone 16 07/31 140 4PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject A/07/31/0407/31 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K50, Locus 5 (Supplement)North Balk Removal Summary: . Balk removalDESCRIPTION POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation ComnentsSupervisor: TP Date: 07/31Reading Pub141 07/31 17/237 37 L12, few EI2OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing1/2 Slingstone 07/31 141 4SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K50,-Locus 8 (Supplement)North Balk Removal Summary: Balk removalDESCRIPTION ' POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: TP Dates: 07/31 to 08/03Reading •Pub142 07/31 1/ 33 12 bods143 08/03 18/133 LI2, EI2, 11144 08/03 5/ 45 LI2. EI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K51, Locus 1 (Supplement) North Balk Removal Summary: Balk removalDESCRIPTION POTTERYSupervisor: NL Dates: .07/28 to 07/29Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments' Reading100 07/28 54 LI2, few Ell •101 07/28 42/172 41 L11, few E11, 1L1102 07/28 16/166 25 1EPer, LIZ, EI2103 07/28 22/202 25 lAy/Mam, 1EPer, LI2, EI2, 111*• 104 07/28 18/120 16 LI2, EI2105 07/29 33/173 30 112, few EI2106 07/29 16/156 19 LI, I, 1EBOBJECTSReg no. Description field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period • Material Photo • Drawing1/2 Slingstone 6 07/28 102 2 11/2 Grinder 7 07/28 104 3 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectPubA/07/28/0007/28 Pre-excavation A/07/29/0407/29 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0407/29 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field A, Summary: REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTIONSquare 7K60, Locus 1 Topsoil.Topsoil. Top--Very ClearSupervisor: TP Dates: 06/23 to 07/23Color; Light brownish gray 10YS6/2Texture: Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 50% Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 10% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 60%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 2 , Compactness.................... . Moderately LooseWetness......................... . . . Moderately Dry Structure........................ . WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles!........... .. . . 1600/m2 Medium Pebbles............... . 320/m2Large Pebbles............. .. . . 96/m2 Small Cobbles;............... 40/m2Medium Cobbles........... .. . . 100/m2 Large Cobbles................. . 30/m2Small Boulders........... .. . . 4/m2 Medium Boulders............. 2/m2Distribution............... .. . . RandomArtifact: Flint............................ 8 Distribution................... .• RandomOrganic: Bone.................... ......... . . . Rare Distribution................... . RandomMeasurements: Length.......................... . . . 5.000 m Width............................... . 5.000 mDepth.............................. . . 0.050 to 0.200 m Direction of Slope........ . 147 degDegree of Slope......... . . . -10 degRemarks: Surface soil and some pottery.STRATIGRAPHYOver: 2LEVELSLoc . Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom11 914.00 913.80 31 914.33 7 914.60 914.50LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K50-.1-8, 7K51:1, AND 7K60:1Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading1 06/23 30/ 28 Few ER, LI2 dom, EB -2 06/23 10/169 L12, LB3 06/24 0/155 LI24 06/24 0/322 LI25 06/25 42/256 ' LI2, 11, MB/LB1 bod,6 06/25 24/145 L12, IR1, UD7 06/26 21/166 LI28 06/26 11/110 L129 06/26 18/103 LI2, prob I117 07/02 35/217 54 L1218 07/02 23/220 LI2 dom, EI2, 1157 07/23 8 2 LI261 07/24 31/246 34 00 L.I.2.E.I.262 07/27 21/265 61 00 L.I.2.E.I.2, 1 I.68 08/04 28/250 79 12 E.P..L.I.2 , E.1.269 08/04 8/239 73 12 L.I.2,70 08/04 20/240 30 18 E.P..L.I.271 08/04 9/ 89 8 18 E.P.'.L. 1.272 08/04 20/160 52 18 E.P.,L.!.2,E.I.2,M.Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level TotalBronze fibula 1 06/25 4Possible grinder 2 06/26 6Possible grinder 3 06/26 8Possible grinder 4 06/26 8Jar stopper 5 07/02 12Grinder fragment 6 07/02 13Ballistic missile 7 06/26 9Imperfect sling stone 8 07/23 57 2 1Grinder stone 9 07/23 57 1 1Spindle wheel 10 07/24 61 01 11/2 Sling stone 11 08/04 70 36 11 Flat stone, possible rounder 12 08/04 77 6 11 Sling stone 13 08/04 78 6 11 Sling stone 14 08/04' 770 6 11 Sling stone 15 . 08/04 770 • 6 11 Sling stone 16 08/04 77 6 1Date Subject Number Date SubjectPeriod Material Photo DrjB/06/19/0406/19 Pre-excavation E/06/25/0606/25 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Top soil.Stratigraphy: Top soil covers the square and overlLocus Date: l IR2A/07/02/0307/02 Progress of excavation A/07/03/0307/03 Progress of excavation: all future loc i.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus 2 Summary: Loose topsoil.REASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Dates: 07/01 to 07/02Progress of excavation. Top-*Very ClearInclusions:Soil:Stone:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Clay........... 5% S ilt ............ 80%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 30%Sub*round.. 50% Round.......... 50%Hardness........................... 2 •Wetness.............................. Moderately DryAsh Pockets.......................... 1/m2Small Pebbles.................. 1600/m2 •Large Pebbles..................... 50/m2Small Boulders.................... 4/m2Length............................... 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 136 degFine Sand.. 60%Compactness............ Very LooseStructure.............. RandomMedium Pebbles................. 50/m2Medium Cobbles................. 25/m2Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................ 3.000 mDegree of Slope............... 10 degRubble and f i l l soil with some p°ttery- The ash pocket is probably a very small hearth.Bottom TransitOver:LEVELSLoc Top3, 4, 5, 6 Bottom Transit Loc' Top32 913.75 21 914.0720 913.65 19 914.4519 913.70 9 914.14POTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading17 •07/01 35/252 38 LI218 07/01 23/243 LI2 dom, EI2, 1119 07/01 8/103 1 ROM bod, LI2, 1220 07/02 . 39/289 Feu BYZ bods, LI2, EI2, 1 1121 07/02 24/308 1 BYZ, LI2 dom, EI222 07/02 13/133 LI2, EI2999 06/29 29/379 41 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 UD999 06/29 31/371 42. Few EPER, LI2, EI2, 1 E8999 06/30 32/212 36 LI2, EI2999 06/30 25/249 24 1 BYZ, 1 ER bod, LI2 dom, EI2, 1 UD999 06/30 26/325 25 LI2, EI2999 06/30 23/135 12 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 UD999 06/30 8/125 9 LIZ, £12.60 07/24 42/197 77 2 . Feu EP, LI2 dom, EI2, LB, 1 UDOBJECTSReg no. Descriptioni FieId no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSlingstone 8 07/01 17 1Basalt grinder fragment 9 07/01 18Large stone stopper fragment 10 07/01 18Semi-round stone--poss grinder 11 06/29 11 1Sling stone 12 06/29 11 1Grinder fragment 13 06/29 10 1Grinder fragment 14 06/29 11Grinder fragment 19 06/30 14Mortar fragment 20 06/30Ballistic missile fragment 15 06/29 11Spindle whorl 16 06/29 11Grinder 17 06/29 10Mortar fragment . 18 06/29 11Grinder fragment 21 06/30 13Grinder fragment 22 06/30 13Spindle whorl 23 06/30 14 2Glass fragment 24 06/30 14Possible arrow head 26 07/01 17Ballistic missile fragment 27 07/01 17Whetstone 29 07/01 1830 07/01 17Basalt bowl fragment 31 07/24 60 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateA/07/01/0207/01 Progress of excavation A/06/29/0206/29 Progress of excavation A/07/01/0207/01 Progress of excavationA/07/02/0307/02 Progress of excavation A/06/30/03C6/30 Progress of excavation 0/07/28/0407/2803/31/91 ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus 3 Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Removal of loci 1, 2 exposed the wall.Separability: Top**ClearDESCRIPTIONMeasurements: Length.. . . . . . . . .Orientation.......STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2Abuts: 4Sealed Agnst By: 7, 8, 5, 12, 16 LEVELSLoc Top . Bottom Transit2.540 m Width.22 degLoc Top Bottom Transit32 913.9232 913.75PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject32 913.9522 914.24Number Date SubjectSupervisor: TP Oates: 07/02 to 07/300.410 mNumber Dote SubjectA/07/02/0307/02 Progress of excavate A/07/28/0007/28 Removal of M Balk A/07/30/0087/30 Removal of S BalkLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K60:l-3-p̂4̂4̂ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus 4 Supervisor: TP Dates: 07/01 to 07/30Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Loci 1 & 2 exposed the tjal l .Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:limestone.. .-.V.................. 100%Measurements: Length...............................Orientation....................... 2.820 m '294 degWidth.................... ........... 0.790 to 1.000 mRemarks: A wall only.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2Abutted By: 3, 11, 14Sealed Agnst By: 5, 8, 9, 7LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Trans:'6 914.06 14 913.91 13 913.91PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/02/0307/02 Progress of-excavation A/07/27/0407/27 Progress of excavation /OO/OO/OOA/07/14/0407/14 Progress of excavation A/07/28/0407/28 Progress of excavation•. A/07/24/0407/24 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0607/30 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus 5 Supervisor: TP . Oates: 07/01 to 07/KSummary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Area of excavation bounded by loci 3 and 4.Separability: Top*-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 85% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 25% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 50% Round......... SOXConsistence: Hardness.. . . ......... 2 Compactness................___ Moderately LooseWetness....... ......... Moderately Dry Structure..................... . . . RandomMeasurements: Length......... ......... 2.800 m Width........................... . . . . 2.000 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1 ,2Over: 12Equals: 3Seals against: 3, 4LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit32 913.63 20 913.60 15 913.3526 913.65 13 913.6319 913.70 31 913.32POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatic Comments Reading38 07/10 25/172 40 13 1 prob OTT, EPER, LI2, EI2, M, LB39 07/10 6/ 74 14 19 LI2, 1140 07/13 11/151 32 26 112, EI241 07/13 9/ 33 29 19 LI242 07/13 12/116 32 25 LI289 07/27 0/ 25OBJECTSReg no. Description Field r:o. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPounder or slingstone 1 07/13 40 25 1Small pounding stone 2 07/13 41 25 13 07/13 42 204 07/10 39 19Grinder fragment 5 07/13 42 20 1Grinder fragment 6 07/13 42 25 1Mortar 7 07/14 43 32 1Grinder tringular fragment 8 07/10 38 13 1Sling stone 9 07/10 389 13 .1imperfect sling stone 10 07/10 38 13 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/01/1307/01 Surface, harth & 2 walls A/07/10/0407/10 Progress of excavation A/07/02/0307/02 Progress'of excavation A/07/13/0407/13 Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample...................... From area around clay pot excavated.Flotation Sample.............INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 912.80 14 912.7313 912.75 26 912.71POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading57 07/23 6/ 82 27 02 L.I.2.OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSNumberA anvilled pottery weight Date Subject1Number07/23Date57' 28 Subject1Nunber Date SubjectB/07/23/0007/23 Loci 17,18 A/07/28/0007/28 Removal of N Balk A/07/30/0087/30 Removal of S BalkPubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus 18 (Supplement) Supervisor: TP Date: 07/22East Balk RemovalInstallation SupplementSurma ry: Butting against locus 4 and East balk and South balkREASONRemarks: Further progress of excavationSeparability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: 10YR .5/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt . .. . . . .. 20X . Sand........... 65% Fine Sand.Mediun Sand 5 OX Course Sand 10XParticle Shape: Sub-round.. 60X Round......... 40XConsistence: Compactness. Firm Wetness......................... . . . MoistStructure... . RandomPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/28/0407/28 Removal of N balk A/07/30/0607/30 Removal of S. balkSOIL-LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K60, Locus 19 (Supplement) East Balk RemovalSummary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Seals against: Remarks:LEVELSLoc TopA wall abutting locus 4 and against locus 17Progress of excavation Top--ClearLocus 4 and South balk Bottom Transit Bottom. TransitSupervisor: TP Date: 07/23Loc Top Bottom Transit21 912.00 20 912.87 19 912.16PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Oate SubjectA/07/04/2807/04 Removal of N. balk B/08/04/0108/04 Locus 19 wallA/07/30/0607/30 Removal of S. balk B/08/04/0208/04 Architectural working phLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K60:15-19-pk00SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7X60, Locus 20 (Supplement) East Balk RemovalSummary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Seals against: Remarks:LEVELSLoc TopSoil rock area between locus 19 and locus 3Progress of excavation Top--ClearDark yellowish brownClay......... . 5%Medium Sand 25% Sub-round.. 60%10YR4/4S ilt........... 60%Course Sand 15% Round......... 40%Hardness........................... 2Wetness................................Moderately MoistLength............................... 2.026 m00. 0000:00 Locus 19Bottom TransiiSupervisor: TP Date: 07/23Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 60% •Compactness........................Moderately FriableStructure......................... WindWidth................................. 0.030 mTransit Loc Top Bottom Transit21 912.55 20 912.79 19 912.63POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub58 07/23 19 L.I.2PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Oate SubjectA/07/28/0407/28 Removal of N balk A/07/28/0607/28 Removal of S. balkARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A,.Square 7X60, Locus 21 (Supplement) East Balk Removal Summary: WallREASONRemarks: Discovered in balk removalSeparability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHY.Under: 7Equals: A .7X61:5 , A ,7K50:4Supervisor: TP Dates: 08/07 toARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7X60, Locus 22 (Supplement) Supervisor: TP Dates: 08/07 toEast Balk Removal Simtnary: WallREASON •Remarks: Discovered in balk removalSeparability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Equals: A .7X61:2 , 5, 4DSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7X61, Locus 1Summary:REASONSeparability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Topsoil.Top--ClearPale brownC lay...___ 5%Medium Sand 30% Angular.... 15%Hardness...............Wetness.........Small Pebbles.. . .Distribution.......Pottery................Bone......................Distribution.......Length..................Depth....................Bottom--Average10YR6/3S i l t . . ....... 10%Course Sand 55% Sub-angular 10% 2Very Dry90/m2 Random Frequent Rare Randan 5.000 m0.140 to 0.400 rSupervisor: ND Dates: 06/22 to 06/29Sand........... 85% Fine Sand.. 15%Sub-round.. Compactness. Structure___50% Round......... 25%. . . . Slightly Rubbly . . . . RandomMedium Pebbles...........___ 10/m2Distribution. _ _ RandomShells.................. ............ 1Width................................. 5.000 mSTRATIGRAPHYOver:Equals:2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, A .7X71:1, A .7X71:2,16, 17, A .7X51:21, 23 : 1LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 914.02 913.83 31 913.73 913.3311 913.96 913.72 35 913.77 913.50POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading1 06/22 25/325 70 LI2, few EB bods2 06/22 78/470 60 Prob OTTO, prob BYZ, 1 LR, LI2 dom3 06/22 16/256 39 LI2, EI2, 1 11, 1 LB/MB, 1 MB24 06/23 57/500 57 Pos's Fat R, L12 dom, LB5 06/23 95/560 . 55 Few ROM, LI2 dom, LB6 06/23 120/700 46 1 LR, L12 dom, EI2 _7 06/24 37/300 50 1 ROM bod, LI2 dom/ EI28 06/24 31/300 40 LI2, EI29 06/24 24/365 55 LI2, prob EI210 06/24 24/435 50 LI211 06/24 29/436 55 LI2, EI212 06/24 28/397 27 •LI2, few EI213 06/25 33/222 37 LI214 06/25 67/351 58 LI2, L1115 06/25 20/183 40 LI2, poss EB16 06/26 18/243 35 LI2, EI217 06/26 31/251 72 L1218 06/26 36/286 115 LI2 (6th century), LI219 06/26 6/ 45 5 LI2, 1 LB20 06/29 33/200 27 1 LPER, LI2 dom, EI221 . 06/29 22/189 16 LI2, EI222 06/29 27/157 19 1 LBYZ/UM bod, LI2, EI223 06/29 5/ 50 6 LI231 07/06 15/232 9 LI2, few EI232 07/06 26/200 7 LI2, EI234 07/06 29/253 15 LI2, few EI236 07/07 10/100 9 LI2, few EI237 07/07 12/ 97 10 LI2, few EI289 07/29 30/227 31 LI2, few EI2, 1198 07/30 57 1 Mod Bod, few Rom bods, LI2, EI2OBJECTSReg no. Descriptioni Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material PhotoFigurine head 1 . 06/23 5 SW 1Figurine head 2 06/23 5 SE 1Pottery, figurine head 3 06/23 5 SE 1Metal bull.-t? 4 06/23 5 SE 1Small black stone 5 06/23 6 SE 1Jar stopper 6 06/24 10 1Spindle wheel 7 06/24 7 1Jar stopper 8 06/24 12 1Slingstone 9 06/26 16 1Piece of glass 10 06/26 17 1Spindle wheel 11 06/26 18 1Stopper 12 06/25 15 1Stone grinder 16 06/29 21Basalt stone 13 06/29 21 1Basalt stone 14 06/29 218asalt stone 15 06/29 21PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateDrawingPubA/06/23/0206/23A/06/24/0406/24A/06/29/0406/29A/06/30/0406/30INTERPRETATION-Function:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationTopsoil.A/07/01/0407/01A/07/02/0207/02A/07/03/0207/03A/07/06/0307/06Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/07/0307/07 Progress of excavation B/07/08/0507/08 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7X61, Locus 2 - Suninary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Stones show wall.Separability: Top-*Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone.......................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder................... 100%Chinkstones: Pebble................................ 70%Dressing: Semi-hewn........................ 100%•Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkRows: 2Measurements: Length................................ 5.300 mOrientation...................... 120 deoSupervisor: ND Dates: 06/30 toCobble............................... 30%Support.............................. Free-standingWidth................................. 0.900 to 1.000 mLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K60:20-22 AND 7K61:l-2STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom .Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 913.80 21 913.80 29 913.80POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub52 07/13 6/ 72 3 LI2PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date' Subject Number OateA/06/30/0406/30A/07/01/0407/01A/07/02/0207/02A/07/03/0207/03A/07/06/0307/06A/07/07/0307/07A/07/07/1207/07A/07/07/1307/07B/07/08/0507/08Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Surface,threshold,pot Complete pot Progress of excavationA/07/09/0307/09 A/07/10/0707/10 A/07/13/0407/13 A/07/14/0307/14 A/07/15/0307/15 8/07/17/1207/17 8/07/17/1307/17 A/07/20/0307/20 A/07/21/0307/21Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress before removal Progress before removal Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/27/0307/27A/07/27/1507/27A/07/28/0307/28A/07/29/0307/29A/07/30/0307/308/07/22/0507/22A/07/24/0307/24Progress of excavation Stairs and floor Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 3 Supervisor: NDSummary: Uall.REASONRemarks: Stones show wall.Separabili ty: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone.................. . . . . 100%Dressing: Semi-hewn.................. ___ 100%Mortar: Dry-laid.................... . . . . 100% . Average Thickness. . . . . . . 26.0 cmFacing: UnfacedConstruction: Style.......................... . . . . Boulder & Chink . Support.................. ......... Free-standiMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 2.830 m Uidth...................... ......... 1.380 mOrientation............... ___ 120 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: . 1 .Bonded To: 5LEVELSLoc . Top 8ottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit32 913.63 33 913.55PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateDates: 06/30 tongSubjectA/06/30/0406/30A/07/01/0407/01A/07/02/0207/02A/07/03/0207/03A/07/06/0307/06A/07/07/0307/07B/07/08/0507/08A/07/09/0307/09Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/10/0307/10A/07/13/0407/13A/07/14/0307/14A/07/15/0307/15A/07/16/0307/16A/07/17/0307/17A/07/20/0307/20A/07/21/0307/21Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress ofexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationA/07/27/0307/27A/07/27/1507/27A/07/28/0307/28A/07/29/0307/29A/07/30/0307/30A/07/22/0507/22A/07/24/0307/24Progress of excavation Stairs and. floor Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationProgress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 4 Stannary: Uall/rock tumble?REASONRemarks: Separate group of stones.Separability: Top*-Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTION mMaterial:Limestone................. 100%Masonry:Uall Stones: Cobble........................... 20%Medium Boulder................. 30%Chinkstones: Pebble.............................. 25%Dressing: Unhewn.............................. 50%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: • Style................................ Boulder & ChinkRows: RandomMeasurements: Length.............................. 1.500 mHeight............................... 0.760 mSupervisor: ND Dates: 06/30 to 07/20Small 8oulder................... 50%Cobble............................... 75%Semi-hewn.......................... 50%Uidth................................. 1.200 to 1 .6 0 0 mOrientation.................. . 30 deg4̂\QSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 1S, 27LEVELSLoc Top Bottom transit27 913.78 913.02POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Corrments Reading Pub68 07/20 5/127 8 LI2, EI2PHOTOGRAPHSNurrber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/06/30/0406/30 Progress of excavation B/07/08/0507/08 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0307/16. Progress of excavationA/07/01/0407/01 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavation A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavationA/07/02/0207/02 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0307/10 Progress of excavation B/07/17/1207/17 Progress before removalA/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0407/13 Progress of excavation B/07/17/1307/17 Progress before removalA/07/06/0307/06 Progress of excavation A/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavationA/07/07/0307/07 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0307/15 Progress of. excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: What at first appeared to be a wall becaues of certain stone configurations, turned out to be blockage of apossible threshold and not a wall.•ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 5 Supervisor: ND Dates: 06/30 toSunmary: Uall.REASONRemarks: Rocks show continuatiori of wall.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone........................ . 100%Masonry:Uall Stones: Small Boulder................. . 100%Chinkstones: Pebble............................. . 20% Cobble.................... ......... 80%Dressing: Semi-hewn........................ . 100%Mortar: Dry-laid......................... . 100% Average Thickness. ......... 30.0 cmFacing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................... . Boulder & Chink Support................... ......... Free*stand mgMeasurements: Length............................. . 1.450 m Uidth.................... . ......... 1.420 mOrientation.................... 30 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Bonded To: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit31 913.50PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/06/30/0406/30 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavationA/07/01/0407/01 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0307/10 Progress of excavation A/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavationA/07/02/0207/02 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0407/13 Progress of excavation A/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavationA/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavation A/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavationA/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation - A/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavationA/07/07/0307/07 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0307/30 Progress of excavationB/07/08/0507/08 Progress of excavation A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation A/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:2-5U \oIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 6 Supervisor: NDSOIL LOCUS SHEETSuimary: Soil above a surface.REASONRemarks: Between two walls.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 15% Sand........... 80X Fine Sand.. 25%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 35%Particle Shape: Angular___ 20% Sub-angular 15% Sub-round.. 25% Round......... 30XConsistence: Hardness.......................... . 2 Compactness....... .......... . . Slightly LooseWetness........................... . Slightly Dry Structure.................... . . . Random /Inclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ .. 95/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . 5/m2Distribution.................. .. RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Rare Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 1.580 m Width........................... . . . 0.450 mDepth................................ . 0.450 m Direction of Slope___. . . 220 degDegree of Slope.............. 7 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Exposed surface?STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 14Seals against: 2, 3, 4, 21LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35POTTERY903.81 913.36Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading24 06/30 8/ 42 7 LI2 .PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectDate: 06/30' PubA/06/30/0406/30 Progress of excavation 8IOOATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction: Very thin layer of soil over soil exposure locus 14.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION '*U87 Field A/ Square 7K61, Locus 7- Supervisor: ND Dates: 06/30 to 07/01S urinary: Soil above surface.REASON .Remarks: Between two walls.Separability: Top-Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 15X Sand........... 80X Fine Sand.! 25%Medium Sand 40X Course Sand 35XParticle Shape: Angular___ 20X Sub-angular 25X Sub-round.. 25X Round......... 30%Consistence: • Hardness...................... .. . . 2 Compactness............. .___ Moderately LooseWetness........................ . . . Moderately Moist Structure.................. . . , . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............. . . . 70/m2 Medium Pebbles......... .. -... 75/m2Large Pebbles............. . . . 20/m2 Small Cobbles........... .. . . . 42/m2Medium Cobbles........... . . . 15/m2 Large Cobbles........... . 1Q/m2Small Boulders........... . 1/m2 Distribution.............. ___ RandomArtifact: Pottery........................ . . . Rare . Distribution.............. . . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................ . . 5.000 m Width........................... . . . . 1.800 mDepth........................... .. . . 0.120 to 0.200'm Degree of Slope......... . . . . 2 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Exposed surface.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 8Seals against: 2, 17LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 913.83 913.63 11 913.72 913.60POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation- Comments Reading Pub25 07/01 4/ 89 1190 07/29 4/122 2599 07/30LI2LI21EI bod, LI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinding stone 17 07/01 25 1Grinding stone 18 07/01 25 1PHOTOGRAPHSUnfinished slingstone? 1 07/30 99 1Number Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/06/30/0406/30 Progress of excavation A/07/01/0407/01 Progress of excavation .A/07/02/0207/02 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction: Another soil layer above an exposure surface.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 8Summary: Exposure.surface.REASONSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom**ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 20%Mediun Sand 25% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Angular.... 5% Sub-angular 60%Consistence: Hardness.................... . . . . 3 -Wetness...................... . . . . Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles........... .. . . . 90/m2Large Pebbles........... .. . . . 10/m2Medium Cobbles......... .___ 6/m2Small Boulders........... 1/m2Measurements: Length......................... ___ 5.000 mDepth........................... . . . . 0.150 to 0.250 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHTUnder: 7Over: 9, 25Seals against: 2, 16, 17Supervisor: ND Dates: 07/02Sand........... 75% Fine Sand.. 60%Sub-round.. -15% Round........... - 20%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 30/m2Small Cobbles.................. 20/m2Large Cobbles....................... 4/m2Distribution............. ......RandomWidth................................. 1.300 mDegree of Slope............... 2 deg 'Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc lop Bottom7 913.63 913.48 11 913.60 913.36 9 913.65 913.40Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading26 07/02 37/213 46 LI2, 1 UD27 07/02 17/137 19 LI2, EI228 07/03 6/ 52 5 LI2, EI291 07/29 4/ 65 6 L12, Ir1,92 07/30 28Reg no. Description Field no.. Oate Pail Loc Level TotalGrinding stone 22 07/02 26 1Grinding stone 23 07/02 26PHOTOGRAPHSSlingstone 24 07/03 28 1Number Date Subject Number Date Subject07/05PubA/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0307/30 Progress of excavation BIOOATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction: An exposure sureface, topsoil in times past possibly.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A. Square 7K61, Locus 9Summary:REASONRemarks:Separability:Exposure.Between three walls? Top--AverageSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/03 to 07/07Bottom--AverageLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:6-9DESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 20% Sand........... 75% Fine Sand.. 70%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular.... 25% Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 25% 'Consistence: Hardness....................... . . . 3 Compactness................ . . . . Moderately CrumblyWetness......................... . . . Moderately Hoist Structure....................___ RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............ . . . . 90/m2 . Medium Pebbles...........___ 40/m2Large Pebbles............ . . . . 15/m2 Small Cobbles.............. . . . 40/m2Medium Cobbles............ . . . 20/m2 Large Cobbles.............. . . . 20/m2Small Boulders........... 2/m2 Distribution.............. ___ RandomMeasurements: Length......................... ___ 4.000 m Width...........................___ 1.300 mDepth........................... . . . . 0.190 to 0.390 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 8Over: 12, 18, 20Seals against: 2, 16, 17LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7. 913.63 913.24 9 913.40 913.207 913.48 913.22 10 913.36 913.17POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Cconnents Reading Pub29 07/03 23/207 17 LI230 07/06 27/300 28 EPER, LI2, El233 07/06 6/ 59 6 Few EPER, LI235 07/07 5/ 50 13 LI293 07/30 16 LI294 07/30 10 LI2, EI295 07/30 LI296 07/30 1 LI297 07/30 1 LI2100 07/31 19/169 23 1E Per, LI2, EI2101 07/31 12/ 89 17 Few LI2, EI2OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period .'Material Photo DrawingJavelin point 25 07/03 29 8 913.48 1Amber bead found by worker 26 07/03 29 127 07/06 30 128 07/06 30 1Slingstone . 29 07/06 30 130 07/06 30 1Slingstone fragment 34 07/07 35 1Slingstone 35 07/07 35 1Small pot 36 07/07 35 15 913.32 1Metal piece 1 • 07/30 93 1slingstone 2 07/30 93 1Slingstone 3 07/30 93 1Slingstone 4 07/30 93 1Grinding stone 5 07/30 93 1Flat squarish stone 6 07/30 93 1PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number DateA/07/03/1207/03 Javlin point in situ A/07/07/0307/07 Progress of excavation A/07/07/1307/07 Complete potA/07/06/0307/06 Progress of excavation A/07/07/1207/07 Surface,threshold,potBIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................Flotation Sample.............INTERPRETATIONFunction: Like locus 8, a topsoil exposure surface above surfaces 12, 20.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 10 Supervisor: ND Dates: 07/06 to 07/09Summary: Rock tumble.REASONRemarks: In order to delineate wall lines.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 80/m2 Medium Pebbles......... . 10/m2Large Pebbles............... .. 10/m2 Small Cobbles................... 5/m2Medium Cobbles............. 3/m2 Large Cobbles................... 2/m2Small Boulders............. 2/m2 Distribution.. . J............. RandomMeasurements : Length........................... . . 5.500 m Width................................ 1.400 mDepth............................. .. 0.130 to 0.230 nrRemarks: Under inclusions, for stone concentrations, my numbers came from two areas that had most of the rocks. Thefirst is around Locati ons 20, 19, and the other •is at location 28.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 11, 13LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 913.44 913.21 21 913.37 913.24 28 913.57 913.51POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading Pub38 07/07 21/135 17 LI2, EI239 07/08 35/145 23 LI2, EI257 07/15 2/ 33 3 LI2 XOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing1 07/07 38 1Very small bead/ring? 2 07/08 39 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber' Date Subj'ect• 8/07/08/0507/08 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Either f i l l between walls 2 and 3 or rock tumble from them.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION.U87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 11 Super•visor: ND Oates: 07/08 toSurma ry: Rubble f i l l .REASONRemarks: Change of soil textureSeparability;: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... . 30% Sand........... 65% Fine Sand.-. 15%Medium Sand 75% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 25% Round......... 15%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 2 Compactness...................... Very RubblyWetness.......................... .. Slightly Dry Structure.................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 2Q0/m2 Medium Pebbles................. 80/m2Large Pebbles............... 10/m2 Small Cobbles................... 4/m2Medium Cobbles............. 2/m2 Large Cobbles................... 1/m2Distribution................. .. RandomArtifact: Pottery.......................... .. Frequent Distribution..................... RandomOrganic: Bone............................... . . Frequent Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 1.400 m Width................................. 1.300 mDirection of Slope___ .. 90 deg Degree of Slope........... .. 5 degRemarks: Appears to be between two possible stub walls which run between walls 2 and 3.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10Over: 15, 27Equals: 13LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc ‘ Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit27 913.30 912.69 27 913.34 912:64 28 913.40 913.06POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading Pub40 07/08 28/151 12 1 poss Edomite LI2, .1 MB2, LB141 07/08 26/125 12 1 prob EPER, LI2:, EI242 07/08 10/104 5 Few EPER, LI244 07/09 26/189 10 LI2, 1 EB45 07/09 36/196 13 LI2, few E1253 07/13 9/121 16 LI2, 1 EI258 07/15 8/ 48 7 LI2PHOTOGRAPHS 'Number Date Subj'ect Nunber Date Subj'ect Number Date Subj'ectA/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0307/10 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0407/13 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction: Rubble f i l l that was put between walls 2 and 3 possibly at its destruction.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:9-11SOIL LOCUS SHEET4̂U lK>IDEMTIFI CAT IONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 12 Supervisor: ND Dates: 07/07 toSummary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Found a surface.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 10X S ilt........... 10X Sand........... 80X Fine Sand. . 20%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Angular.... 5X Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 30X Round....... . 25%Consistence: Hardness.................... . . 3 Compactness........... ......... Moderately FirmWetness...................... .. Moderately Dry Structure............... ......... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles........... .. 10/m2 Medium Pebbles.. . . ......... 7/m2Large Pebbles........... .. 4/m2 Small Cobbles....... ......... 4/m2Medium Cobbles......... 2/m2 Large Cobbles....... ......... 1/m2Small Boulders......... 1/m2 Distribution......... ......... RandomMeasurements: Length........................ .. 1.600 m Width...................... ......... 1.500 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: On the east side of a threshold that is between locus 2 and the extension of the wal in 7K71.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 9Equals: A .7K71:0Seals against: .18, 17, 2, 16LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit9 913.20 10 913.17POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat'ion Comments Reading PubA3 07/07 1/ 1 1 On surface 1 EPER jugletPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/08/0507/08 Progress of excavati on A/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation A/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavationA/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavati on A/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavation B/07/22/0507/22 Progress of excavat ionA/07/10/0307/10 Progress of excavati on A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation ' A/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavationA/07/13/0407/13 Progress of excavati on A/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavationA/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavati on A/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESFlotation Sample___Remarks: Flotation sample is contents of small jar found on surface.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Surface, associated with threshold 18.'SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 13 Supervisor: ND Oates: 07/09 to 07/20Summary: Rock tunble.REASONRemarks: Possible butress wal l was really rock tumble.Separability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONTexture: Clay........;. 10X S ilt........... ' 15X Sand........... 75X Fine Sand.. 20%Medium Sand 30X Course Sand 50XInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles........... . 47/m2 Medina Pebbles....... ......... 13/m2Large Pebbles..’....... 2/m2 Small Cobbles.. . . . . ......... 3/m2Medium Cobbles......... 2/m2 Large Cobbles......... ......... 1/m2Small Boulders......... 2/m2 Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery...................... . Frequent Stone with hollow........... 1Distribution............. . RandomMeasurements: Length__: . . . ; .......... . 2.400 m Width....................... ....... ; 1.300 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10Over: 27Equals: 11LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 913.21 21 913.24POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub47 07/10 28/123 10 21 LI2, EI2, 1 EB48 07/10 28/148 18 20 LI2, EI249 07/10 32/192 15 19 LI2, EI2, few MB, 1 EB50 07/10 4/ 59 4 20 LI2, 1 EB59 07/15 17/139 18 LI2, few E12, 1 1162 07/15 28/154 17 LI2, few EI267 07/20 U2, 1 E12 bodOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc • Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt stone 1 07/10 48 19 1Small squarish stone 2 07/10 48 19 1Arrowhead? 3 07/10 49 18 . 1Spindle whorl 4 07/15 59 1Spindle whorl 5 07/15 62PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/09/0307/09 A/07/10/0307/10 A/07/13/0407/13 BIODATA SAMPLESINTERPRETATIONFunction:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavationSoil Sample.More rock tumble between walls 2 and 3, or possible f i l l material.A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation A/07/20/03Q7/20 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 14 Summary: Soil exposure surface.REASONRemarks: Found surface-like soil.Separability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brownTexture: Clay............ 10%Medium Sand 60% Particle Shape: Angular.... 5%Consistence: Hardness........................Wetness..............................I nc l us i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles.Large Pebbles.Measurements: Length..............Depth...............Surface Mat'l: Beaten Earth STRATIGRAPHYBottom--Average 10YR6/3S ilt........... 25%Course Sand 20% Sub-angular 25% 3Slightly Dry150/m2 10/m2 1.580 m0.300 to 0.340 mUnder: 6Over: 19Seals against: 3, 4, 21, 30 LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom35 913.36 913.04 29 913.40 913.06POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CorrmentsSand........... 65%Sub-round.. 55%Compactness.........Structure.............Modi Lin Pebbles... Distribution......Width....................Supervisor: NDFine Sand..Round.........Slightly Fi Random20/m2 Random 0.450 mTransitReading20%15%Date: 07/13Pub51 07/13 PHOTOGRAPHS Number28/119 31Date Subject35A/07/13/0407/13INTERPRETATIONFunction:Progress of excavation A soil exposure surface, ancient topsoil.LI2, EI2ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 15 Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Large stones indicate wall.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Hard Limestone................. 100%Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: style................................. Boulder & ChinkMeasurements: Orientation...................... 30 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4, 11LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/13 toAverage Thickness........... 28.0 cm28 913.11LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:12-15PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Oate Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/14/0307/14 A/07/15/0307/15 A/07/16/0307/16 A/07/17/0307/17 A/07/20/0307/20 INTERPRETATION Function:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationSupport for the stairsA/07/21/0307/21 A/07/27/0307/27 A/07/27/1507/27 A/07/28/0307/28 A/07/29/0307/29Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Stairs and floor Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/30/0307/30 Progress of excavation A/07/22/0507/22A/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavationLocus 30ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field A, Summary: REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONMaterial:Mortar:Square 7K61, Locus 16 Wall.Stones show wall. Top--ClearHard Limestone...........Dry-laid....................... . . 100% . . . 100%Supervisor: NDAverage Thickness........... 22.0 cmFacing:Construction:UnfacedStyle........................... . . . Boulder & ChinkMeasurements: Orientation................. 30 deg•STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc Top1Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitOates: 07/13 to11 913.80 17 913.77PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/14/0307/14A/07/15/0307/15A/07/16/0307/16A/07/17/0307/17Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/20/0307/20A/07/21/0307/21A/07/22/0507/22A/07/24/0307/24Progress of excavation Progress of excavationProgress of excavationA/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavation A/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 17 Summary: Wall from 7K71.REASONRemarks: Large stones show configuration.Separability: Top-*ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Hard-Limestone......... 100%Masonry:UalL Stones: Cobble............................... 10%Medium Boulder................. 60%Chinkstones: Pebble................................... 20%Fill Stones: Cobble..................... 100%Mortar: Dry-laid......................... 100%Facing: . UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkRous: 2Measurements: Length............................... 1.040 mOrientation...................... 30 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Equals: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/13 toSmall Boulder.................. 30%Cobble.................. ............ 80%Support............................. Free-standingWidth................................. 0.530 m9 913.89PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate SubjectA/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavation A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Wall, possibly supportNumber Date SubjectA/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavation A/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavation A/07/22/0307/22A/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavation of arches or pillars.Number Date SubjectA/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavation A/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavationINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A. Square 7K61, Locus 18 Supervisor: ND Dates:Suninary: Threshold.TYPEDESCRIPTIONProbable ThresholdRfeearial: RectangularLining: NoneMeasurements: Length............................. .. 0.890 m Width.................... ........... 0.000 to 0 .670 mOrientation.................... . 30 degRemarks: Is only about 1 2 as wide as wall(17).STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 9 %LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit9 913.35PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavation A/07/27/0307/27 Progress tA/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation A/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavation A/07/28/0307/28 Progress tA/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavation A/07/22/0507/22 A/07/29/0307/29 Progress cA/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation A/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0307/30 Progress cINTERPRETATIONFunction: Used as a threshold .possibly made by removing stones from (17).SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 19 Supervisor: ND Dates:Summary: Surface.REASONSeparability: Top*-Average 8ottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 60% Fine Sand.. 30%Medium Sand 50% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular.... 10% Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 20% Round......... . 20%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 3 Compactness........... . ..........Very Fi rmWetness........................... . Moderately Moist Structure.............. . . . . . . . RandomI nolus ions:Stone: Small Pebbles................. . 160/m2 Medium Pebbles............... 90/m2Large Pebbles................. 10/m2 Distribution......... . ..........RandomMeasurements: Length.............j . . .......... . 1.130 m Width....................... .......... 1.240 mDepth............................... . 0.130 to 0.150 mSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 14Over: 22Seals against: 3, 4, 21, 30LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 913.04 912.89 29 913.06 912.93 ’ 07/13 to 07/14Count Bskts Loc Preservation54 07/13 14/ 71 22 LI2PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectA/07/14/0307/14 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoi L Sample..................INTERPRETATIONFunction: A soil exposure surface, basically topsoil in my opinion.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:15-19LA-P*SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field A,• Suimary: REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONSquare 7K61, Locus 20 Surface.Found surface. Top-*AverageDates: 07/13 toColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: . Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 15% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 15%Medium Sand 65% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: ' Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness....................... . . . 2 Compactness................ . . . . Moderately F:irmWetness......................... . . . Slightly Moist Structure....................___ RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............ ___ 80/m2 Medium Pebbles............ . . . 20/m2Large Pebbles............ 3/m2 Small Cobbles............._ _ 4/m2Mediun Cobbles...........___ 3/m2 Large Cobbles............. 3/m2Small Boulders........... 2/m2 Distribution.............. . . . . RandomMeasurements: Length......................... . . . . 1.900 m Width........................... . . . . 0.900 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthOn west side of threshold which is between walls 2 and 17.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 9Equals: 23Seals against: 18, 17, 2 LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 913.24PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject '8 913.22Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/14/0307/14A/07/15/0307/15A/07/16/0307/16A/07/17/0307/17A/07/20/0307/20INTERPRETATIONFunction:Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress ofexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationA/07/21/0307/21A/07/22/0507/22A/07/24/0307/24A/07/24/0307/24A/07/27/0307/27Surface associated with threshold(18).Progress of excavationProgress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/28/0307/28A/07/29/0307/29A/07/30/0307/30Progress of Progress of Progress ofexcavatexcavatexcavat' ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 21 Surmary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Stones show wall.Separability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone........Masonry:Wall Stones:Fill Stones: Mortar:Facing:Construction:Measurements:Cobble........... ..Medium Boulder..Cobble................Dry-laid.............UnfacedStyle..................Length................Orientation.......STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35 913.48 .PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/13 to100%30% - Small Boulder................... 60%10%100%100%Boulder & Chink1.000 m Width...................; ............ 0.470 m30 degNunber Date Subject • Number Date SubjectA/07/14/0307/14A/07/15/0307/15A/07/16/0307/16A/07/17/0307/17A/07/20/0307/20INTERPRETATIONFunction:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/27/0307/27A/07/27/1507/27A/07/28/0307/28A/07/28/0307/28A/07/29/0307/29Progress of excavation Stairs and floor Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavation A/07/22/0507/22A/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavationSupport for the stairs,Locus 30.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 22 Supervisor: NO Dates: 07/14 toSimmary: Another surface.REASONSeparability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 25% Sand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 25%Medium Sand 60% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 55% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 5%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 3 Compactness................... . . Moderately FirmWetness.......................... .. Slightly Moist Structure...................... . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 123/m2 Medium Pebbles............. 10/m2Large Pebbles............... 2/m2 Small Cobbles............... 3/m2Medium Cobbles............. 2/m2 Large Cobbles............... 1/m2Distribution................. .. RandomMeasurements: Length............. .................. 1.110 m Width............................. . . 1.240 mDepth................................. 0.070 to 0.090 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: . 19Over: 26Seals against: 3, 4, 21, 30LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom T rans i t35 912.89 912.80 29 912.93 912.86POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Coerments Reading Pub63 07/16 2/ 37 7 1 poss EPER, IR bods xOBJECTSReg no. Descri ption Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Per iod Material Photo DrawingWorkedI bone 1 07/16 62 35 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil exposure surface over a floor surface,' probably the topsoil after the site wasn't being used any more.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 23 Surmary: Soil above surface.REASONSeparability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHY Under: •Over:'Seals against: LEVELSLoc TopTop--AverageLight yellowish brownClay........... 5%Mediun Sand 23X Angular.... 5%Hardness..............Wetness.................Small Pebbles.. Large Pebbles.. Medium Cobbles. Small Boulders.Length...............Depth........... ,243, 5Bottom TransitSupervisor: NDBottom--Clear10YR6/4S ilt ........... 25%Course Sand 60%Sand........... 70X Fine Sand.. 17%Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 65% - Round......... . 10%2 Compactness................___ Moderately CrumblyModerately Moist Structure................... . . . Random130/m2 Medina Pebbles.__... . . . . 50/m210/m2 Small Cobbles.. . . . . . . . . . . 4/m22/m2 Large Cobbles............. 1/m21/m2 Distribution........... ..___ Random1.700 m0.050 to 0.070 mWidth........................... . . . . 0.700 mLoc Top Bottom TransitDate: 07/1431 913.40 913.30 32 913.35 913123POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub55 07/14 11/ 43 9 Few LI2, few EI2PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction: Loose soil above a floor surface below, possibly f i l l material.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:20-23SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A. Square 7K61, Locus 24Summary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION ' Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Surface.Found surface. Top-*ClearYellowish brownClay........... 5%Medium Sand 30%Angular___ 10%Hardness..............Wetness.. : ...........Inclusions:Soil: ...........................Stone: Small Pebbles...Large Pebbles... Medium Cobbles.. Small Boulders..Measurements: Length................Surface Mat'l: Beaten Earth STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 23LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/14 to10YR5/4S ilt........... 15% Sand........... 80% • Fine Sand.. 20%Course Sand 50%Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 2S% Round......... 5%3 Compactness................___ Moderately FirmModerately Moist Structure..................... . . . Random1/m2100/m2 Med inn Pebbles............ . . . 30/m28/m2 Small Cobbles............., . . . 6/m23/m2 Large Cobbles............. 1/m21/m2 Distribution.............. ___ Random1.700 m Width........................... . . . . 0.700 mLoc Top Bottom Transit31 913.30 32 913.23POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub56 07/14 6/ 32 4 L1261 07/15 4/ 59 8 LI2 X64 07/16 17/138 16 LI2 X65 07/17 14/ 98 25 LI2OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBone tool?Figurine?PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectA/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0307/16 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample.................. ;INTERPRETATIONFunction: Floor surface1 07/142 07/16A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61', Locus 25 Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Found firmer soil.Separability: Top--Average ' Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTION-Color: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay............ 10% S ilt ............ 30%Medium Sand 45% Course Sand 25%Particle Shape: Angular.'__ 5% Sub:angular 55%Consistence: Hardness................................... .......................... 3Wetness............................. Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................. 50/m2 •Large Pebbles.................. 2/m2Medium Cobbles................ 1/m2Measurements: Length................................ 0.600 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHY.Under: 8LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit17 913.32 913.02POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/15 toSand........... 60% Fine Sand.. 30%Sub-round.. 35% Round.......... 5%Compactness....................... Moderately FirmStructure..... .................... RandomMedium. Pebbles..................... 4/m2Small Cobbles...................... 2/m2Distribution.................... RandomWidth...................... ’.......... 0.700 nr60 07/15 PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date4/ 47 12Subject Number Date Subject A/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavati*Number Date Subject A/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavatior use.A/07/15/0307/15 Progress of excavation 5RETATIONjnction: Soil exposure surface above a floor surface, possible topsoil after the floor was no longer4^SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7IC61, Locus 26 Supervisor: ND Date: 07/17Surcnary: Surface, possibly a floor.REASONRemarks: Firmer soil with flecks of lime and pottery.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt .......... 10% Sand........... 85% Fine Sand.. 35%Medium Sand 25% Course Sand 40%Particle Shape: Angular.... 10% Sub-angular 60% Sub*round.. 25% Round......... 5%Consistence: Hardness........................ ... 3 Compactness......... ........... . Very FirmWetness............................. Slightly Moist Structure........................ . RandomInclusions: *Stone: Small Pebbles................ .. 100/m2 Median Pebbles............... . 20/m2Large Pebbles................ 2/m2 . Small Cobbles................. 1/m2Distribution.................. .. RandomMeasurements: Length............................. .. 0.900 m • Width............................... . 1.240 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYLinder: 22Over: 27Seals against: 3, 4, 21, 30LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 912.80 912.72 29 912.86 912.68POTTERYPail Oate Count Bskts Loc Preservafion ' Comments Reading66 07/17 11/' 86 19 LI2, few EI2PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0307/20 . Progress of-excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Floor surface.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 27 Supervisor: ND Oates: 07/20 to 07/21Sunnary: Surface and rock tumble.REASONRemarks: I was tired of digging and wanted something to do.Separability: Top--Average Bottom**AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3'Texture: Clay........... 8% S ilt........... 20% Sand........... 72% Fine Sand.. 20%Mediun Sand 40% Course Sand 40%Particle Shape: Angular.... 15% Sub*angular 55% Sub-round.. 20% Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness................ ___ Moderately CrumblyWetness............................. Slightly Dry Structure...................___ RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 100/m2 Mediun Pebbles........... . . . . 40/m2Large Pebbles.................. 20/m2 Small Cobbles............. 5/m2Mediun Cobbles................ 4/m2 Large Cobbles............. 2/m2Small Boulders................ 2/m2 Medium Boulders......... 1/m2Distribution.................... . RandomMeasurements: Length............................... . 5.000 m Width........................... . . . . 1.460 mDepth................................. 0.060 to 0.120 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4, 11, 13, 26Over: 28Seals against: 2, 3, 15, 21, 30LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Trans itPub35POTTERYPail912.72 912. Date Count.54Bskts Loc Preservation27 912.64 912.58 Comments Reading19 912.78 912.6669 07/20 14/113 11 LI2, EI2, 11 x70 07/20 19/149 8 LI2 X71 07/20 28/123 17 LI2, 11 x72 07/21 16/ 93 11 LI2, El 1OBJECTSReg no. Descriptiorl 1: ield no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Periiod Material Photo DrawingMetal piece? 1 07/20 69 2Ballistic missile fragment 2 07/20 71 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Nunber • Date SubjectA/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavation A/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:24-274̂LA0\SOIL LOCUS SHEET'IDENTIFICATIONU87 field A, Square 7K61| Locus 28 Supervisor: ND Date:Summary: Surface.REASONSeparability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 15% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 25%Medium Sand 30X Course Sand 45%Particle Shape: Angular___ 15% Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 15%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 3 Compactness......... ............ Moderately CrumblyWetness........................... . Slightly Dry Structure......................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ . 95/m2 Medium Pebbles............... 60/m2Large Pebbles................ . 40/m2 Small Cobbles___............ 15/m2Medium Cobbles............... . 4/m2 Large Cobbles___............ 6/m2* Distribution.................. . RandomMeasurements: Length............................. . 5.000 m Width................................ 1.460 m *Depth............................... . 0.040 to 0.180 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 27Over: 29Seals against: 2, 3, 15, 21, 30LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 912.64 912.46 27 912.58 912.54 19 912.66 912.58POTTERY .Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatiion Comments Reading73 07/21 29/188 21 1 Prob E Per, L11, EI174 07/21 11/137 15 1 Per, EI208JECTSReg no. Descri ption Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt: stone, very light 1 07/21 73 1Stone handle? 2 07/21 73 1Grinder fragment 3 07/21 74 • 1BIODATA SAMPLESINTERPRETATIONFunction:Soil Sample................Soil surface-or f i l lSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 29Suimary: SurfaceREASONSeparability: Top-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brownTexture: Clay........... 5%Medium Sand 60%Particle Shape: Angular___ 5%Consistence: Compactness......................Structure..........................Inclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles..................Large Pebbles..................Medium Cobbles.................Small Boulders.....'.___Distribution....................Measurements: Length...............................Depth.................................Surface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 28, 31Seals against: .2, 3, 15. 21. 30LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/21Bottom-Average10YR5/4S ilt........... 20% Sand........... 75% Fine SarCourse Sand 15%Sub-angular 35% Sub-round.. 50%. Round...Very Firm Wetness........................Random. 100/m2 Medium Pebbles............ . . . 50/m240/m2 Small Cobbles.............. . . . 12/m210/m2 Large Cobbles............. 4/m22/m2 Medium Soulders......... 1/m2Random5.000 m Width........................... . . . . 1.550 m0.140 to 0. 190 mLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 912.46 912.32 27 912.54 912.36 19POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading75 07/21 12/148 2077 07/23 10/ 81 11PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/22/0507/22 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Exposure surface.LI2, 1LBProb. E Per, EI207/21Pubto 07/23PubXARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 30 Supervisor:Summary: StairsREASONRemarks: Found aseries of stones layered like stairs.Separability: Top-*Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone.................. ....... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:: Cobble............................... 60% Small 8oulder... ............. 40%Dressing: Unhewn...............; ___ ....... 10% Semi-hewn........... ............. 90%Mortar: Dry-laid.................... ....... 100%Facing: UnfacedSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 14, 190, 22, 26, 27,, 28, 29, 31, 32Abuts: 21Sealed Agnst 8y:: 14, 19, 22, 26, 27, A .7L61:28 , 29, 31, 32Bonded To: 15LEVELSLoc ‘ Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc TopND Dates: 07/23 toBottom Transit29 911.9729 912.1429 912.48PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject29 912.6529 912.9629 913.15Number Date Subject29 913.3835 913.55Number Date SubjectA/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavation A/07/2B/0307/28 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0307/30 Progress of excavationA/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 31 Supervisor: ND Dates: 07/23 toSuntnary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: The coin came up heads.Separability: Top-Average Bottom-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 25% Sand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 30%Mediun Sand 45% Course Sand 25%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 45% Sub-round.. 35% Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness............................ 2 Compactness........... . ..........Slightly LooseWetness............................. Slightly Moist Structure................ ..........RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 110/m2 Medium Pebbles___. .......... 30/m2Large Pebbles................... 6/m2 Small Cobbles....... . .......... 3/m2Medium Cobbles................. 2/m2 Large Cobbles....... ........... 1/m2Small Boulders................. 1/m2 .Measurements: Length............................... 5.000 m Width...................... . ......... 1.500 mDepth................................. 0.040 to 0.060 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 29Over: 32Seals against: 2, 3, 15, 21, 30LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 912.32 912.28 27 912.36 912.32 19 912.39 912.33POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading78 07/23 32/153 22 LI2, EI2, 1 Iron 179 07/23 19/108 36 LI2OBJECTSRegno. Description' Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpout 1 07/23 78 1Part of a spindle wheel 2 07/23 78 1rock 3 07/23 79 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectPubXA/07/04/0307/04INTERPRETATIONFunction: Fill or surface between walls 2 or 3.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K61:28-31SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 32 Summary: DirtREASONSupervisor: NO Dates: 07/23 to 07/27Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Measurements:Top--AverageYellowish brownClay........... 5%Mediim Sand 50% Angular.... 15%Hardness...............Wetness................Small Pebbles.. . . Large Pebbles... . Medium Cobbles... Small Boulders...Length..................Depth....................Bottom--Average10YR5/4S ilt........... 20%Course Sand 30% Sub-angular 40% 2Slightly Moist100/m2 10/m2 2/m2 1/m2 5.000 m0.130 to 0.430 mSand........... 75% Fine Sand.. 20%Sub-round.. 35% Round.......... 10%Compactness.................. Slightly LooseStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 23/m2Small Cobbles...................... 5/m2Large Cobbles..................... 2/m2Width..............'.................. 1.500 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 31Over: 33, 34, 0Seals against: 2, 3, 15, 21, 30,LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35 912.28 912.15POTTERYLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom27 912.32 911.92 19 912.33 911.90Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading80 07/24 15/233 30 LI2, EI181 ' 07/24 27/141 56 LI2, dominant EI2, 1 It82 07/24 24/143 21 LI2, EI2, 1 UD83 07/24 26/152 16 LI2, EI2, 1MB (reused)84 07/24 21/170 28 LI2, EI285 07/24 4/ 30 5 Early LI286 07/27 16/173 18 LI2, EI288 07/24 13/ 64 10 LI2OBJECTS. Reg no .• Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period. Material Photo DrawingPubXX. Basalt grinding stone.Piece of bronze.Basalt grinding stone,broken. Small basalt drinking stone. Metal.Small pot.Metal piece.Small squared stone.Slightly sqaured stone. . Ballistic missile.Grinder frag Ballistic missile.Metal piece nail?PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavation A/07/24/1407/24 Juglet in situ A/07/24/1507/24 Juglet in situ INTERPRETATIONFunction: More f i ll (o r soil1 07/24 812 07/24 813 07/24 814 07/24 815 07/24 826 07/24 83 19‘7 07/24 858 07/24 8410 07/24 8411 07/24 8512 07/24 8413 07/27 8614 07/27 88 'imber Date SubjectA/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavation A/07/27/1507/27 Stairs and floor A/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavationsurface) between wall 2 or 3.Number Date SubjectA/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0307/30 Progress of excavation4̂U\-oSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 33 Supervisor: ND Dates: 07/27 toSurrma ry: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Reddish color, harder packed soilSeparability: Top*-Clear Bottom*-ClearDESCRIPTION• Color: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 7% S ilt........... 35% Sand........... 58% Fine Sand.. .20%Medium Sand 60% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular.... 10% Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 10%Consistence: Compactness.................. ... Moderately Firm Wetness........................ . . . F DryStructure...................... .. RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 100/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . . . 20/m2Large Pebbles.................. 25/m2 Small Cobbles............. 3/m2Medium Cobbles............. 2/m2 Distribution............... . . . RandomMeasurements: Length........................... ... 1.240 m Width............................ . . . 0.580 mDepth............................. .. 0.180 mSurface Mat' l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 32Over: 34Seals against: 2, 15, 21, 30LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35 912.15 911.97POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Conrnents Reading87 07/27 22/157 16 L12, 111PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectA/07/27/1507/27 Stairs and floor INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil surface which built up over floor stone surface.IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K61, Locus 34 Sunmary: FloorREASONRemarks: Flat lying stonesSeparability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone................Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble......................STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 33LEVELSLoc .Top Bottom Transit35 911.97PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/27/1507/27 Stairs and floorARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETSupervisor: ND Dates: 07/27 toBottom--Clear100%90% Small Boulder..:............. 10%Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K6L32-34L /l00SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 1Summary: Topsoil.REASONSeparability: Top-Very Clear Bottom-Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 30%Particle Shape: Sub*angular 10% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness......................Wetness......................... . . . 3___ Very Dry-Medium Sand . 20%Round......... 30%Compactness.........Structure.............Inclusions:Stone:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYSmall Pebbles................ 1600/m2Large Pebbles................... 80/m2Medium Cobbles................. 10/m2Small Boulders................. 1/m2Distribution.................. RandomLength................................ 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 100 degSoil in northern half of locus appearsMedina Pebbles.. Small Cobbles... Large Cobbles... Medina Boulders.Width___-...........Degree of Slope, be from earlier sift .Over: 2, 3, AEquals: A .7K71:1LEVELSloc Top 8ottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: NBK Dates: 06/22Course Sand 50%Very Loose Wind420/m216/m25/m21/m25.000 m 21 degLoc • Top Bottom Transit13 914.71 13 914.61 9 915.6119 914.62 7 914.51 • 11 915.2531 914.32 13 914.52 11 914.8523 914.65 8 915.68POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatio Comments Reading2 06/22 6/ 36 9 LI21 06/22 14/164 45 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 EB3 06/23 14/277 22 LI2, 114 06/23 28/245 22 LI2, EI2, 115 06/23 15/150 30 LI2, 11, MB, LB26 06/24 27/220 35 1 MX bod, LI2, EI27 06/24 37/222 28 LI2, Ell, UD bod8 06/24 37/181 14 LI29 06/24 13/ 63 7 LI210 06/25 29/239 30 LI2, EI211 06/25 10/125 16 L1251 07/10 2/ 85 16 East balk removal LI281 07/23 22/172 15 L.I.2 , E.I.298 07/27 36/200 25 L.I.2, E.I.2102 07/31 21/ 21 21 L.1.2 ,Iron,E.1.2OBJECTSReg. no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingJar stopper 1 06/23 3 1Ceramic with hole 2 06/23 6 1Worked stone 3 06/24 6 1Grinder 4 06/24 6 1Metal object 5 06/24 7 1Byzantine tessera 6 06/24 7 1Basalt stone, flat surface 7 ' 06/25 10Carnelian bead 8 06/22 1Jar stopper 9 06/22 1Glass 10 07/23 81PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject . Number Date SubjectA/06/23/0306/23 Progress of excavation E/06/25/0506/25 Progress of excavationB/06/24/0306/24 Progress of excavation A/06/29/0506/29 Progress of excavation06/29PubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 2Suninary: Soil separating tumble and topsoil.REASONRemarks: To separate tunble from topsoil.Separability: Top-Arbitrary Bottom-ArbitrarySupervisor: NBK Dates: 06/26 to 07/02DESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 30% Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 30%.Consistence: Hardness.................... . . . . 3 Conpactness.................... . Very CrumblyWetness...................... .___ Very Dry Structure........................ . RandomInclusions:Stone: Smal l Pebbles........... .___ 900/m2 Medium Pebbles............... . 300/m2Large Pebbles........... .. . . . 50/m2 Small Cobbles................. . 20/m2Medium Cobbles........... 18/m2 Large Cobbles................. 8/m2Small Boulders........... 3/m2 Medium Boulders............. 2/m2Distribution.............. ___ RandomMeasurements: Length......................... . . . . 5.000 m Width............................... . 3.500 mDirection of Slope...---- 90 deg • Degree of Slope............. . 8 degRemarks: Arbitrarily distinguiishes locus 2.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 6, 9Equals: A ,7K80:2, A .7K71:2Remarks: cLEVELSLoc Top .Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 914.61 0 137 914.51 33POTTERYPail Date Count' Bskts Loc Preservation914.52914.28Corrments17 914.52Reading12 06/26 23/130 24 LI21310306/2900/0035/225 38 L12., 1 prob EB4104 08/03 13/ 48 13 L.:I .2,E.I.2/1.1105 08/03 4/ 29 12 L.:1.2,106 08/03 40/ 35 4 L.I..2107 08/07 1/ 26 4 L.I .2108 08/03 23/ 83 24 L.I..2,prob E. Rom.,Iron 1 bods109 08/03 25/ 95 47 l . :1.2, Few E. Per,E.i.2,1.1, l110OBJECTS08/03 2/ 22 5 L.i1.2Reg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo OrawingPossible grinder 1 06/29 12Possible pendant 2 06/29 12 'Jug handle 3 06/29 12Colored glass 4 06/29 12Pot rim with small holes 5 06/29 12Ballistic missile 6 08/03 105Ballistic missile 7 08/03 105Stone 8 08/03 107Grinder 9 08/03 108PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subjectfl/06/30/0106/30 Progress of excavation A/07/02/0407/02 Progress of excavationPubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 3 Sutimary: Rock format ion- *pi le.REASONRemarks: May be top of wall.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom-Very ClearDESCRIPTIONTexture: Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Yellowish red 5YR5/6Sand........ 100% Fine Sand.. 80%Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 50%Hardness............................ 3Wetness.............................. Very DrySmall Pebbles................... 800/m2Large Pebbles........: ......... 48/m2Medina Cobbles................. 5/m2Medium Boulders............... 1/m2Length........................... 1.900 mDepth................................. 0.070 to 0.220 mDegree of Slope....... ....... 16 degProbably a rock fa ll.1Equals: A .7K60:3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom13 914.40 13 914.4013 914.39 8 915.01 914.398 914.45 14 914.61Supervisor: NBK Dates: 06/23 to 07/01Medium Sand 15% Course Sand 5%Round......... 30%Conpactness...................... Very CrumblyStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 80/m2Small Cobbles................... 10/m2Large Cobbles....................... 3/m2Distribution......... Random'Width................................. 1.900 mDirection of Slope......... 90 degT rans i t Loc Top Bottom Transit13 914.518 914.52LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K70:l-3POTTERYPail Date ' Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading14 06/29 2815 06/3016 06/30 2517 07/01 30/260 618 07/01 20/190 619 07/01 9/148 1088 07/27 19/169 26OBJECTSDescription Field no. Date PailGrinding stone 1 06/30 16 .Spindle whorl 2 06/30 16Ballistic missile 3 06/30 17Metal button 4 07/01 19Spindle whorl 5 06/30 15PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectLI21 prob BYZ, LI2 E!1, 1 UD L12L12/1, II LJ2L.I.2.E.I.2level Total Period Material Photo DrawingA/07/01/0307/01 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEET'IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 4Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Stones appear to form the face of a wall.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone......... ........... .. . 100%Measurements: Length...................; ----- .. . 5.000 mHeight........................... .. . 0.590 to 0.790 mDip................................. 13 degRemarks: Terrace wall only.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1 ,8Over: 10Sealed Agnst By: 3, 5, 7, 9, 6LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom13 914.59 914.00 16 914.69 913.9215 914.73 914.01 16 914.61 913.98PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectWidth.. . . . .OrientationTransitCompleteSupervisor: NBK Dates: 06/23 to 07/08. u.ouu mLoc Top Bottom Transit16 914.72 914.06A/07/07/1707/07 Documentation of wall #4 INTERPRETATIONFunction: Terrace wall.Stratigraphy: Probable terrace wall for loci 3, 5, 6, 7.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 5Siamary: Rock pile/tower.REASONRemarks: Arbitrary designation.Separability: Top*-Arbitrary Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: • Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness........................... 3Wetness............................. Very DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 500/m2Large Pebbles.................. 20/m2Medium Cobbles................ 10/m2Small Boulders................ 8/m2Measurements: Length............................... 1.900 mDepth................................. 0.070 to 0. 130 mDegree of Slope............... 9 degRemarks: Dirt in middle surrounded by rocks eitherSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3Over: 7' Supervisor: NBK Date: 07/01Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 40%Round....... ; 40%Compactness.................. .... Very LooseStructure........................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 50/m2Small Cobbles......... ......... 15/m2Large Cobbles...................... 9/m2Distribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 1.900 mDirection of Slope......... 176 degn rubble or in supposed tower.LEVELSLoc Top .Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 914.40 914.32 13 914.40 914.31 15 914.3213 914.39 914.32 15 914.32 8 914.318 914.45 914.32 14 914.32POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading20 07/01 . 4/114 14 12 bowlOBJECTSReg.no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinding stone 1 07/01 20Grinding stone 2 07/01 20PubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 6 Supervisor: NBK Dates: 07/01 to 08/05Summary: Rubble.REASONRemarks: Arbitrary designationSeparability: Top--Arbitrary Bottom-ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark brown 10YR4/3Texture: Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 80% Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.-. 40% Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 3 Compactness........... ......... Moderately Loose- Wetness........................ . . . Moderately Dry Structure............... ......... Random1 nc l us i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles............. . . . 500/m2 Medium Pebbles.. . . ......... 200/m2Large Pebbles............ .. . . 100/m2 Small Cobbles....... ......... 50/m2Medium Cobbles........... . 13/m2 Large Cobbles........ ......... 2/m2Distribution............... . . . Random »Measurements: Length......................... .. . . 2.800 m Width...................... ......... 1.300 mDirection of Slope___. . . 101 deg Degree of Slope... ......... 7 degRemarks: Does not appear to be significant.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over: 13Equals: A .7K71:5, A .7K81:9, A .7K80:3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit17 914.52 15 914.5310 914.54 11 913.82POTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading21 07/01 • 21/111 11 Storage jars L1222 07/01 29/289 14 Storage jars LI224 07/02 25/225 19 Storage jars LI2, EI224 07/02 L1229 07/03 35/245 20 LI2, few EI232 07/03 24/254 14 LI2, few EI2, 1133 07/03 30/260 14 112, few 12, few 1134 07/03 6/ 44 3 LI250 07/09 19/129 20 L12, few EPER52 07/10 5/ 30 4 East balk removal Prob EPER, 1 1253 07/11 13/213 31 East balk removal LI282 07/23 23/183 14 L. I.2OBJECTSReg iio. Description Field nio. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period MaterialRounded stone object 1 07/01' 21Rounded stone object 2 07/01 22Grinder 3 07/02 24Spindle whorl 4 07/01 22Spindle whorl 5 07/03 33Stone knife 6 07/23 85 1Stone knife 7 07/23 85 1Grinding stone 8 07/23 86 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/02/0407/02 Progress of excavation A/07/07/0507/07 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0507/13 Progress of excavationA/07/03/0407/03 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0507/09 Progress of excavationPubLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K70:3-6SOIL LOCUS SHEETosoIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70,Summary:REASONRemarks: Separabili ty: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture: Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Top of tower--rock tumble--rock.Found layer of jumbled rocks below dirt. Top--ClearYellowish brown 10YR5/4Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 20%Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 40%Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately DrySupervisor: NBK. Dates: 07/01 to 07/08Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 40%Round......... 30%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure........................ RandomMeasurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:LEVELSLarge Pebbles.. . Medium Cobbles.. Small Boulders..Distribution___Length.................Degree of Slope.-............. 9 degAppears to be rock fa ll.300/m2 Medium Pebbles............. .. 50/m215/m2 Small Cobbles............... 12/m28/m2 Large Cobbles............... .. 4/m23/m2 Medium Boulders........... 2/m2Random1.900 m Width.................. .......... .. 1.900 m0.300 to 1.200 m Direction of Slope___ .. 176 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit15 914.32 15 914.32 15 913.1214 •914.32 8 914.31 14 914.00POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatio Comments Reading23 07/01 6/ 66 9 LI225 07/02 17/127 28 LI2, 1 LB26 07/02 24/268 1 EPER, LI2, few EI2, 1 1128 07/02 22/195 17 LI2, EI230 07/03 7/ 67 10 LI247 07/08 33/183 LI2, EI2, 1 UD90 07/27 Of 28 2791 07/27 31 L. 1.2,1.192 07/28 16/156 40 • L.r.2, Few E.I.2.1L.I93 07/28 18/168 10 L.I.2 ,Few E.J.2,L-B.94 07/28 26/196 23 L. I.2 ,E. I.2 ,1L. I .95 07/28 8/ 45 12 L.I.2 ,IE.I.2,21.1OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinder 1 07/02 25Sal 1. istic missile 2 07/02 28Basalt 3 07/02 28Mortar 4 07/02 25Spindle whorl 5 07/08 47Game piece 6 07/08 47Gri rider 7 07/28 91 11 Ballistic imissile 8 07/28 94Date Subject Date Subject Date SubjectA/07/02/0407/02 Progress of excavation A/07/03/0407/03 Progress of excavationA/07/07/0507/07 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0507/09 Progress of excavationA/07/28/0507/28 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION .• U87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 8Suimary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture: Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclus i ons: Stone:Measurements:Soil in rocks separating loci 7 & 6.Different structure. Top--Very Clear Bottom--ArbitraryDark brown 10YR4/3Sand...___ 100% Fine Sand.. 50%Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 40%Hardness........................... 3Wetness............................. Moderately DrySmall Pebbles................... 50/m2Large Pebbles................... 18/m2Medium Cobbles................. 5/m2Smal l. Boulders................. 6/m2Distribution.................... RandomLength............................... 3.200 mDepth................................. 0.350 to 0.900 mDegree of Slope............... 10 degDivides locus 6/7 & 2.Supervisor: NBK Dates: 07/02 to 07/03Course Sand 20%Medium Sand 30%Round......... 30%Compactness..:................ Moderately CrumblyStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles...Small Cobbles----Large Cobbles.... Medium Boulders..20/m210/m28/m23/m2Width................................. 2.700 mDirection of Slope......... 144 degSTRATIGRAPHY Under: Over: Equals: LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit22 914.44 21 914.4215 914.97 9 914.06POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading27 07/02 27/217 19 LI2, EI2, 1 MB31 07/03 25/325 20 LI2, E12OBJECTSReg no. Description Field nio. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinding stone 1 07/02 27Grinding stone 2 07/02 27Grinding stone 3 07/02 27Stopper 4 07/02 31PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/03/0407/03 Progress of excavation A/07/07/0507/07 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0507/09 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION 'U87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 9 Superv isor: NBK Dates : 07/03 to 08/'Dirt layer under Top-ArbitrarySummary:REASONSeparability:DESCRIPTIONColor: BrownTexture: Sand.Particle Shape: Sub-angul Consistence:locus 2 in southern half of square. Bottom--Arbi trary10YR5/3 Fine Sand.. Sub-round..Course Sand 101Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYHardness........... .'.............. 3Wetness............................... Very DrySmall Pebbles................... 1800/m2Large Pebbles................... 10/m2Length................................. 5.000 mDepth.................................. 0.200 to 0.500 rDegree of Slope.................. 8 degMedium Sand 20%Round......... 50%Compactness....................... Very LooseStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 50/m2Distribution...................... RandomWidth.................................. 2.500 mDirection of Slope......... 132 degUnder: 2Over 12Equals: 10, A .7K60:3, A .7K60:6LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 914.20 35 914.28 34 914.0633 914.28 32 914.23POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation • Comments Reading35 07/06 44/234 25 LI2, EI236 07/06 28/328 25 LI2, EI237 07/06 38/346 30 LI2, EI238 07/06 37/150 39 LI2, 1 1139 07/07 21/161 16 LI2, few El240 07/07 29/319 15 LI2, few EI241 07/07 22/321 13 LI2, few EI242 07/07 20/215 20 Few EPER, LI2, EI243 07/08 24/214 21 Few EPER, LI2, EI2OBJECTSReg io. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingStone stopper 1 '07/06 35Grinding stone 2 07/07 39Stone fer tility figure 3 07/07 ' 40Stone object 4 07/07 40Stone grinder 5 07/07 41PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateA/07/06/0507/06 Progress of excavation B/07/08/0607/08 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0507/10 Progress of excavationA/07/07/0507/07 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0507/09 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K70:7-9SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION — CompleteU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 10 Supervisor: NBK Dates: 07/18 to 07/19Sumnary: •Soil under wall.REASONRemarks: Cleared wall.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 35% Medium Sand 50% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 50%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 2 Compactness........... ......... Moderately LooseWetness.......................... .. Moderately Dry Structure.............. .......... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 500/m2 Medium Pebbles____......... 200/m2Large Pebbles............... 50/m2 Small Cobbles.................. 6/m2Distribution........J___ .. RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 4.600 m Width....................... ......... 0.800 mDepth............................. .. 0.500 to 0.600 m Direction of Slope.......... 88 degOegree of Slope........... 13 degRemarks: Soil under terrace walSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4Over: 13. Seals against : 11LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 914.49 914.00 15 ' 914.50 914.05 16 914.52 913.97POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Conments Reading . Pub44 07/08 28/173 1 prob EPER, LI245 07/08 28/178 30 LI2, EI2, 1 LB46 07/08 32/197 30 LI2, few EI2, 1 M48 07/08 46/166 • LI2, 2 1149 07/08 15/195 25 Few EPER, LI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl fragment 1 07/08 45Grinding stone 2 07/08 45Basalt 3 07/08 47Stone object 4 07/08 47Projectile point 5 07/08 47Stopper 6 07/08 47Missi le 7 07/08 47Stone grinder 8 07/08 47Spindle whorl 9 07/08 45PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/09/0507/09 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Preparation for wall locus 4.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field A, ’ REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Lining:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Equals:LEVELSLoc TopSquare 7K70, Locus 11Plaster wall of cistern. Certain CisternPlaster............................. 100%PlasterPlaster cistern.6A .7K71:4 , A .7K81:6 , 3 Bottom Transit Loc TopRectanguUBottom TransitSupervisor: NBK Dates: 07/13 to 08/05Loc Top Bottom Transit12 914.0912 914.0512 914.15 12 . 912.3512 912.35ONSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 12Summary: Soil under 9.REASONSeparability: Top-Arbitrary Bottom-Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Sand........... 100% Fine Sand.. 60% Medium Sand 30% Course SandParticle Shape: Sub-angular 10% Sub-round.. 40% Round......... 50%Consistence: Compactness................ . . . . Very Loose Wetness........................ . . . Very DryStructure..................... . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.............. . . . '800/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . . . 300/m2Large Pebbles............. 50/m2 Small Cobbles.............. 15/m2Medium Cobbles........... 5/m2 Large Cobbles............. 3/m2Small Boulders........... 1/m2 . Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length......................... . . . . 5.000 m Width........................... .. . . 2.500 mDepth........................... . . . . 0.980 to 0.870 m Direction of Slope___. . . 90 degDegree of Slope......... 4 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 9Over: 14. Equals: A . 7K71:6Supervisor: NBK Oates: 07/13 to 08/05Bottom Transit914.23 . 914.06913.36913.08Pai 1 Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Coirments Reading54 07/13 29/239 20 1 poss OTT, 1 I55 07/13 16/196 15 LI256 07/14 21/301 16 LI2, EI2-57 07/14 28/258 16 1 poss LR bod.58 07/14 15/205 19 1 EPER, LI259 07/14 17/167 9 1 EPER, LI260 07/15 21/231 24 LI2, EI261 07/15 20/190 18 Few EPER, LI2,62 07/15 20/195 25 Few EPER, LI2,63 07/15 26/206 25 Few EPER, LI2,64 07/16 27/311 26 Few EPER, LI2,65 07/16 22/193 15 LI266 07/16 22/213 21 LI2, £1267 07/16 19/169 17 LI268 07/17 25/140 16 LI2, few 1269 07/17 18/169 21 LI2, EI2, prob70 07/17 24/228 23 LI2, EB71 07/20 5/ 38 5 LI2, 1UDDescription Field no. Date Pail Loc Level TotalFigurine head 1 07/13 54 33 1Bone knife 2 07/14 56 33 1Grinding stone 3 07/14 56 33 1Animal body 4 07/15 60 1Stone ball 5 07/15 60 1Grinder 6 07/15 60 . 1Spindle whorl 7 07/15 61 1Spindle whorl fragment 8 07/16 65Grinding stone 9 07/16 65Ballistic missile 10 07/16 67Grinder fragment 11 07/17 68Spindle whorl 12 07/17 69Date Subject Nunber Date SubjePhoto DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSNunberA/07/14/0507/14 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0507/15 Progress of excavationA/07/16/0507/16 Progress of excavation A/07/17/0507/17 Progress of excavationNumber Date Subject A/07/21/0507/21 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K70:10-12SOIL LOCUS SHEET4̂ONN>IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 13 Supervisor: NBKSummary: North half of square.REASONSeparability: Top--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: S ilt ........... 20% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 65% Medium SandCourse Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 30% Round___'.. 40%Consistence: Compactness................ .. . . Very Crumbly Wetness......................... .. Very DryStructure..................... . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.............. . . . 300/m2 Medium Pebbles............. .. 100/m2Large Pebbles.............. . . . 50/m2 Small Cobbles............... 18/m2Medium Cobbles............ 15/m2 Large Cobbles............... 12/m2Small Boulders............ . . . 4/m2 Mediun Boulders........... 2/m2Large Boulders............ 2/m2 Very Large Boulders... 1/m2Distribution................ . . . RandomMeasurements: Length........................... . . . 0.500 m Width............................. .. 2.500 mDepth........; ................... . . . 0.330 m Direction of Slope___ .. 180 degDegree of Slope........... 9 degRemarks: North half of square soi lSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Over: 14Equals: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitDates: 07/20 to 03/1525%10 914.10 13 913.14 914.03 9 913.POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments72 07/20 30/230 3173 07/20 11/ 91 3274 07/20 875 07/21 35/212OBJECTSDescription Field no. Date Pail. LocSpindle whorl 1 07/20 72 13Stone ball 2 07/20 72 13Stone 3 07/20 73 13Grinder 4 07/21 75Reading-- L. 1.2,E.1.2,L. I . I.Prob L.B.L.I.2,1 prob E.P..E.I.2L. 1.2,E.Per,E.1.2 ,1 .1,L.B.Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 14 Suimary: Soil under rock fa ll,lociREASONRemarks:Separabi DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Soil under rock fall Top--Very Clear Bottom-Arbitrary10YR6/4 Sand.......Particle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:LEVELSLight yellowish brownS ilt ........... 30%Course Sand IXSub-angular 20% Sub-round.Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Very DrySmall Pebbles.................. 200/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Medium Cobbles.............. 5/m2Small Boulders.............. 1/m2Length................................ 5.000 mDepth......... '...................... 0.150 to 0.500 nDegree of Slope.................. 9 degSoil under rock fa ll,loc i 12 and 1312, 13Supervisor: NBK Dates: 07/21 to 08/0570% Fine Sand.. 70% Medium Sand30% Round......... 40%Compactness................___ Very CrumblyStructure....................___ RandomMedium Pebbles................. 20/m2Small Cobbles...................... 6/m2Large Cobbles...................... 3/m2Distribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 130 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc . Top Bottom13 913.77 33 915.08 32 913.2927 913.36 9 923.70 31 913.28Count Bskts Loc Preservatic76 07/21 28/203 3377 07/22 1/35 5ReadingL.1.2,1.1,probably E.P.,E.I.2 Iron AgePHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/24/0007/24 A/07/24/0007/24 progress of excavation A/07/28/0007/28 Removal of N balkB/07/23/0087/23 Progress of excavation A/07/27/0007/27 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0087/29 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 15 Summary: Probe 2x2 S.W. cornerREASONSeparability: DESCRIPTION 'Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Top--Arbi traryBrownS ilt........... 40%.10YR5/3 - Sand........... 60% •Fine Sand.. 75%Course Sand Sub-angular5%30% Sub-round.. 40% Round......... 30%Hardness.__Wetness......... . . . 3___ Very Dry'Compactness. Structure...Inclusions:Stone:MeasurementsRemarks:STRATIGRAPHYSmall Pebbles................... 500/m2 Medium Pebbles___Large Pebbles................... 50/m2 Small Cobbles........Medium Cobbles............ 12/m2 Large Cobbles........Small Boulders.................... 2/m2 Medium Boulders...Distribution.................... RandomLength................................ 2.000 m width......................Depth................................. 0.500 to 0.700 m Direction of SlopeDegree of Slope............... 4 degDetermine i f 1.1 sherds appears to connect with square 7k60Supervisor: NBKMedium SandVery Loose Random100/m220/m28/m21/m22.000 m180 degDates: 07/21 to 08/0520XUnder: A0.7K60:14LEVELS'Loc Top Bottom Tran:sit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 913.28 32 913.29 ‘ 912.70 32 913.03 912.71POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts. Loc Preservation Comments Reading74 07/22 27/ 77 21 L.I.2.E .1.2,1.175 07/22 45/ 75 22 L>I.2 ,E.1(.2,1.1, 1 Roman,E. Persian80 07/23 16/166 L.I.2.E.•Per,1.1OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinding stone , 07/22 78Ballistic missi le 2 07/22 78Stone missile 2 ' 07/22 78PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/22/0007/22 Progress of excavation A/07/24/0507/24 Progress of excavation B/07/23/0807/23 Progress of excavation A/07/27/0507/27 Progress of excavationA/07/28/0507/28 Progress of excavation A/07/29/0607/29 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEET 'IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 16 (Supplement) Supervisor: NBKInclusion-- stoneSummary: Soil inside cistern I.ocus 11REASONRemarks: Soil inside cisternSeparabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Sand..;___ 100% Fine Sand.. 70% Medium Sand 20% Course-SandParticle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness......................... . . 2 Compactness............. ........ Very CrumblyWetness........................ . . . Very Dry Structure................. ........ RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ . . -200/m2 Medium Pebbles........ ........ 50/m2Large Pebbles.................., 20/m2 Small Cobbles.. ; . . . ........ 16/m2Medium Cobbles............. 10/m2 Large Cobbles......... ........ 8/m2Small Boulders............. .. 4/m2 Medium Boulders.. . . ........ 2/m2Distribution................. .. RandomMeasurements: Length............................ .. 2.140 m Width........................ ........ 2.110 mDepth............................. .. 1.420 to 1.580 m Direction of Slope. ........ 194 deg .Degree of Slope........... . . . 4 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6LEVELSLoc Top- Bottom Transit Loc Top 8ottom Transit6 913.97 912.35 12 913.87 912.35Dates: 07/29 to 08/0510%LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K70:13-16Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading97 07/29 . 18/148 34 L12 EI299 07/30 31/131 32 LI2 EI2 Iron100 07/30 5/ 32 LI2 Ei2 Bods101 07/31 17/ 97 17 Ll2,1Bronze bod ,Iron,EI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingStone kni fe 1 07/30 99 1PHOTOGRAPHSBallistic stone 2 07/30 99 1Nunber Date . Subject Nunber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectA/07/30/0007/30 A/07/30/1307/30 Pogress of excavation A/07/30/0507/30 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETWallTop-'Very ClearIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 17 Summary: WallREASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Material:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHY Under:Equals:LEVELSLoc TopBottom--Very Clear 3.000 mBottom Transit18 913.60Loc Top . Bottom Transit 30 913.60 913.10Supervisor: NBK Dates: 08/03 to 08/15203 degARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K70, Locus 18' Supervisor: NK Dates: 08/04 to 08/05Summary: WallREASONSeparability: Top--Very UnclearDESCRIPTIONSTRATIGRAPHYAbuts: 17SOIL LOCUS SHEET.IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 1 Summary: Topsoil.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Removal of topsoil Top--Very ClearParticle Shape: Consistence:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYOver:Equals:LEVELSBrownClay...........Medium Sand Sub-round..20%80%20%Bottom--Average10YR5/3S ilt.......Course Sand 15% Round_____ 80%60%Dotes: 06/24 to 07/23Hardness........................... 1Wetness................................Moderately DrySmall Pebbles..................... 300/m2Large Pebbles..................... 45/m2Distribution.................... RandomPottery............................. FrequentDistribution....................RandomBone.................................... RareDistribution.................... RandomLength............................. '. 5.000 mDepth.................................. 0:140 to 0.630 nOegree of Slope................. 8 deg2, 3, 4, 5, 6A .71(81:1, A .7K61:2, A .7K61:9, A .7K61:12, A .71(81:13Fine Sand.. 50%Compactness...................... Moderately CrumblyStructure......................... WindMedium Pebbles.. Small Cobbles...60/m25/m21/m2, avg. 4.0 iWidth................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 138 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom31 913.87 913.75 11 913.79 913.65 28 914.18 913.797 914.44 913.93 35 914.00 913.61 22 914.01 913.744ÔNPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading1 06/23 57/250 BYZ, ROM bod, LI22 06/24 6/ 50 123 06/25 10/475 LI2, EI24 06/25 31/300 LI2, EI25 06/25 22/450 LI2, few EI26 06/26 14/205 MOO, LI27 06/26 28/280 MOO, few ROM, LI2, few EI28 06/26 35/250 Few MOD, LI29 06/26 14/134 L1210 07/01 40/400 102 LI2, EI211 07/02 66 LIZ, EI212 07/02 23 LI2, EI213 07/03 26/175 49 LI2, 1 BYZ'bod14 07/03 20/200 45 1 EPER, LI2, few EI217 07/07 25/210 41 1 North balk LI2, few EI2, 1 IR bod8 07/08 30/190 15 1 North balk 1 prob EPER, LI2, 1 EI2OBJECTS 'Reg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSmall scarab 3 06/25 3 • 13Copper ring - 4 06/25 4 . 195 06/26 4Spinning wheel 6 06/26 3 33Mould? 7 06/26 6 26Possible stamp 8 06/26 7 25Stone spindle wheel 9 06/26 8 34Meta of grinding stone 10 06/26 9 16Very small spindle wheel 11 06/26 9 35Small stone, possible metal head 12 06/26 9 35Small smoothed stone 13 06/26 9 36Stopper 14 06/25 3Metal ring 15 07/01 9 17Glass ornament 16 07/01 9 26Grinder 17 07/01 9 26Grinder, sandstone 18 07/01 9 22Grinding stone 19 07/02 11 21 'Canon ball # 20 07/02 12 14Jar handle stamp 21 07/02 11Spindle whorl fragment 22 06/25 3PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateB/06/19/0306/19 E/06/25/0806/25 , A/06/29/0306/29 INTERPRETATION Function:Pre-excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationTopsoil.A/06/30/0206/30 Progress of excavation A/07/02/0107/02 Progress of excavation A/07/03/0107/03 Progress of excavationA/07/07/0207/07 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0207/30 Progress of excavation-SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 2 Supervisor: DFSurrmary: Rock tumble.REASONRemarks: General spread of rocks and boulders.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 800/m2 Medium Pebbles... ........... 96/m2Large Pebbles.................. 48/m2 Small Cobbles___ ........... 10/m2Medium Cobbles................ 3/m2 Large Cobbles.. . . ........... 2/m2Small Boulders................ 6/m2 Medium Boulders.. .•......... 1/m2Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 5.000 m Width........... ...... ........... 5.000 mDepth................................. 0.200 to 0.300 mRemarks: Seemingly random rockfallSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10LEVELSLoc • Top Bottom transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top31 913.87 913.50 11 913.79 913.50 28 914.187 914.44 36 914.00 22 914.01PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateDates: 06/25 to 07/22Bottom TransitSubjectE/06/25/0806/25A/07/03/0107/03A/07/06/0207/06A/07/07/0207/07B/07/08/0807/08INTERPRETATIONProgress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/09/0207/09A/07/10/0207/10A/07/13/0207/13A/07/14/0207/14A/07/15/0207/15Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/16/0207/16A/07/17/0207/17A/07/20/0207/20A/07/21/0207721Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationFunction: No apparent function at this point. Possibly part of some form of destruction that has scattered over thesquare and become mixed in with the topsoil.Stratigraphy: The rock-fall was mixed with the topsoil of locus 1.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K70:16-18 AND 7K71:l-2O n-P*ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 3 Supervisor: DP Dates: 07/02 to 08/03Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: . Wall.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 100%Arch. Frags: Door socket...................... 1Masonry:Wall Stones:: Small Boulder................... 95% Medium Boulder... 5% .Chinkstones:: Pebble............................. 5% Cobble................ . 95%Dressing: Semi-hewn____.................. 95% „ Dressed................ 5%Mortar: Dry-laid....... .................. 100% %Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............. .................. Boulder & ChinkTendencies: Attempt at straight-sided walls ijsing irregular boulders.Rows: 2 w/rubbleMeasurements: Length........... ................... 2.600 m Width.................. . 1.000 mOrientation... 25 degRemarks: Appears to be part of other wall structures in adjoining squares.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1 ,2Abutted By: 7Sealed Agnst By: 6, 8, 18, 21, 25LEVELSLoc fop Bottom Trans-it Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit. 3A 913.85 - 28 91A.01 23 913.82PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/03/0107/03 Progress of excavat1ion A/07/15/0207/15 Progress of excavat1ion A/07/27/0207/27 Progress of excavat'ionA/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavat-ion A/07/16/0207/16 Progress of excavafion A/07/29/0207/29 Progress of excavatiionA/07/07/0207/07 Progress of excavat-ion A/07/17/0207/17 Progress of excavat1ion A/07/30/0207/30 Progress of excavat-tonB/07/08/0807/08 Progress of excavat-ion A/07/20/0207/20 Progress of excavat-ion A/07/31/0207/31 Progress of excavat-ionA/07/09/0207/09 Progress of excavatiion A/07/21/0207/21 Progress of excavat:ion A/08/03/0208/03 Progress of excavatiionA/07/10/0207/10 Progress of excavat:ion A/07/22/0207/22 Progress of excavatiion d/00/00700A/07/13/0207/13 Progress of excavat ion A/07/23/0607/23A/07/1A/0207/1A Progress of excavatiion A/07/24/0207/24 Progress of excavat ion.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus ASummary:REASONRemarks:• TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan: Lining:Installation of plaster.Supervisor: DP Dates: 07/03 to 08/09Soft Plaster.................... 100% •RectangularPlasterLength............................... 2.800 m Width........................... . A.200 mHeight............................... 0.250 to 1.450 m Orientation...................... 12 degAs yet there is no definite analysis. The future of the square depends somewhat on the installation's identification: the north balk has been removed and the west wall is yet to be removed, to await a more definite pronouncement.Remarks on levels: Top levels have been taken to include the run of the installation the floor and steps leading out.STRATIGRAPHY. Under: Equals: Seals Agair Sealed By: LEVELSLoc Top1 , 2A .7K81:6 , A .7K80:2A , A .7K81:6 , A .7K70:6 76, 8, 9, 19, 20, 22, 23Bottom Transit Loc Top 8ottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 913.991A 91A.07 PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject8 913.9213 912.56Nurker Date Subject1A 912.57 8 912.50Number Date SubjectA/07/06/0207/06A/07/02/0107/02A/07/07/0207/07B/07/08/0807/08A/07/09/0207/09A/07/09/1107/09A/07/09/1207/09A/07/10/0207/10INTERPRETATIONFunction:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Installation photo south Installation photo west Progress of excavationA/07/13/0207/13 A/07/1A/0207/1A A/07/1S/0207/15 A/07/16/0207/16 A/07/17/0207/17 A/07/20/0207/20 A/07/21/0207/21 A/07/22/0207/22Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress ofexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationA/07/23/0607/23A/07/2A/0207/2AA/07/27/0207/27A/07/29/0207/29A/07/30/0207/30A/07/3T/0207/31A/08/03/0208/03Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationUntil the west balk is excavated-no definite interpretation can be returned. It certainly contained water so whether bath or cistern it was functional.West balk removal has revealed the size and stairs but not the function.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU37 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 5- Supervisor: DP Dates: 07/03 to 07/09Summary: Soil in plaster installation.REASONRemarks: Soil in installation.Separabili ty:: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown . 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 60% Sand........... 20% Fine Sand.. 5%Medium Sand 80% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 1 Compactness.................... . Very CrumblyWetness.......................... .. Very Dry Structure........................ . WindInclusions:Soi l : Plaster.......................... .. 1/m2, 10.0 cm Distribution................... . RandomStone: Small Pebbles.................. 300/m2 Medium Pebbles............... . 60/m2Large Pebbles.................. 45/m2 Small Cobbles................. 3/m2Medium Cobbles.............. 1/m2 Small 8oulders............... 1/m2Medium Boulders........... . 1/m2 Distribution.................. . RandomArtifact: Pottery............................. Rare Flint............................... 3Worked Stones................ 11 Distribution.................. . RandomOrganic: Bone............................... ... Rare Shells............................. 12Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 1.200 m Width...... ...................... . 1.300 mDepth............................... .. 0.250 to 1.400 mRemarks: Soil in installation appears similar to topsoil 1.ocus 1. Worked ashlars with tool marks 2 cm width. 43cm x35cm x 20cm dia.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1 ,2Equals: A . 7K81:9Remarks: Topsoil with scattered rocks of loci 1 and 2.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top 8ottom Transit7 913.07 913.14 13 913.87 912.56 1 913.93 913.148 913.81 913.14 14 913.87 912.57 2 913.93 913.14POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati on Comments Reading Pub15 07/06 31/280 28 EPER, LI2, EI216 07/06 4/320 49 • EPER, L1218 07/07 13/ 98 21 North balk (contam.) LI2, few EI220 07/09 5 Possible contamination L1221 07/09 6 Balk trim LI2OBJECTSReg no: Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlat, roundish foreign stone 1 .07/08 19 7•Possible stopper 2 07/06 15PHOTOGRAPHS • .Nunber Date Subject Number Date Subj'ectA/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavation A/07/07/0207/07 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil f i l l in the installation appears to have preserved the ashlars by hiding them from view.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 6Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks:' Soil removal.Separability: Top-ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Palo brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt........... 70%.Medium Sand 25% Course Sand 70%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 10% Round......... 90%Consistence: Hardness........................... 1Wetness.......................... .. Very DryInclusions:Soi l : Nari Pockets................. 4/m2, 10.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles............... .. 300/m2Large Pebbles............... .. 45/m2Medium Cobbles............. 1/m2Medium Boulders........... 1/m2Artifact: Pottery.......................... .. FrequentOrganic: Bone............................... .. FrequentMeasurements: Length...............: ........... .. 2.800 mDepth.............................. .. 0.440 to 0.480 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2Over: A . 7K61:14Seals against: A .7k80:3, A .7K80:7Supervisor: DP Dates: 07/06 to 07/16Sand........... 20% Fine Sand..Compactness................Structure...................___ Very Crumbly___WindDistribution.............Medium Pebbles.........Small Cobbles...........Small Boulders.........Distribution.............. . . . Random___ 60/m23/m2___ 1/m2........ RandomDistribution.............Width..........................___ Random___ 2.500 mLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K71:3-6LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 913.79 913.35 19 913.81 913.3534 913.73 913.25 22 913.77 913.36POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub22 07/10 28/ 65 6023 07/13 36/156 5624 07/13 35/143 5525 07/14 34/150 3726 07/14 5/ 6 2727 07/14 21/190 3028 07/14 3/ 20 9OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionPossible grinder 1 07/13 23Quern of grinder fragment 2 07/13 23 25Metal ornament 3 07/13 23 ' 25UD fragment 4 07/13 23 25Possible grinder 5' 07/13 24 27Shaped bone fragment 6 07/13 24 27Sling stone 7 . 07/13 24 27Small grinder 8 07/13 . 24 26Small grinder • 9 07/13 •24 27Grinder or slingstone 10 07/13 24 27Door jamb 11 07/13 24 27Cult object--animal 12 07/14 25 28Quern 13 07/14 25 28Hollow rock 14 07/14 25 26Light shaped rock 15 07/14 27 31Sling stone 16 07/14 27 31Flint nodule 17 07/14 27 31Stopper 18 07/13 23Stopper 19 07/14 24Game piece 20 07/14 24Worked marble 21 07/14 28PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject1 BYZ bod, LI2, LB EPER, L12 Few EPER,. Mendable with 7X80:11 Prob EPER EPER, Li2, LI2Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total, few EPER, L12 dom EI2, 11, 1 MB2,LI2, II 1 MBPeriod Material Photo DrawingNumber Oate SubjectLBA/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0207/09A/07/07/0207/07 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0207/10B/07/08/0807/08 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0207/13INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil layer--no apparent function.Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/14/0207/14 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0207/15 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0207/16 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 6 (Supplement)Inclusion--•Yellow/Red PockSummary: Soil layer. Yellow pocket.REASONSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Average .DESCRIPTIONColor: Yel lowish red 5YR5/8Texture: Clay........... 80% S ilt........... 15%Particle Shape: Round......... 100%Consistence: Hardness.................. ......... 2Wetness.................... ......... Very DryLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit27 913.33 913.33Supervisor: DP Dates: 07/14 toSand........... 5% Course .Sand 100%Compactness............Moderately CrumblyStructure.............. RandomO nSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 6 (Supplement) .Inclusion--Yellow Pocket Sunnary: Soil layer.Yellow pocket.REASONSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellow 2.5Y8/8Texture: Clay............. 80% S ilt....... 105Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 55Particle Shape: Round......... 100%Consistence: Hardness............................ 2Wetness............................. Very DryMeasurements: Length................................ 0.300 mDepth................................. 0.100 to 0.150 nLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit28 913.55 913.40Sand...........Compactness..Structure___Width.............ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 7 Summary; E-W wall.REASONSeparability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTION Material:Hard Limestone................. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder.................. 80%Fill Stones: Cobble.............................. 100%Dressing: Unhewn............................ 90%Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder, rubbleCourses: 'Rows:Measurements: Length.............................. 3.250 mHeight............................... 0.900 to 1.000 mPreservation: Partial Superstructure: Little'Remarks: Could be a buttress wall between installations Locus 4+11STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2Abutted By: 3, 4Sealed Agnst By: 6, 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 20, 21, 0Large Boulder. Dressed...........Support...........Width...............Orientation...Supervisor: DP Dates: 07/14 toFine Sand.. 5%.Moderately Crumbly Random 0.100 mSupervisor: DP Dates: 07/14 to 07/2420%10%Free-standing0.700 to 0.800 m 95 degLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc • Top Bottom Transit22 913.80 PHOTOGRAPHSNixnber Date912.78Subject21 913.62 Number Date912.78Subject20 913.55 Number Date912.78Subject-A/07/15/0207/15A/07/16/0207/16A/07/17/0207/17Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/20/0207/20A/07/21/0207/21A/07/22/0207/22Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/23/0607/23A/07/24/0207/24 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD A 7K71:6-74̂OsOsSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field A, Square 7K71, Locus 8Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Caution in case we nniss the surface.Separability: Top-ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 2054 S ilt ........... 60% Sand........... 20% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub*round.. 20% • Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness.................... ....... 1 Compactness................___ ModeratelyWetness......................------ Very Dry Structure.................. .___WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 300/m2 Medium Pebbles......... .___ 60/m2Large Pebbles........... . . . . . 45/m2 Small Cobbles............ 3/m2Small Boulders......... ----- 1/m2 Distribution............... . . . RandomArtifact: Pottery......................----- Frequent Distribution.............. ___ RandomOrganic: Bone........................... ----- Rare Seed............................ 2/m2Distribution............. ___ RandomMeasurements: Length........................ ___ 2.400 m Width............................ . . . 3.370 mDepth.......................... . . . . 0.200 to 0.300 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6Seals against: 3, 7LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom T ransi t25 913.35 913.05 28 913.36 913.1631 913.35 913.05 34 913.25 913.05Dates: 07/15 to 07/22Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading29 07/15 20/120 50 E Per LI230 07/15 4/ 20 25 ? mendable LI231 07/15 • 2/ 20 25 LI232 07/15 3/ 40 42 25 LI233 07/15 6/ 30 9 20-26 EP LI2-OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionPHOTOGRAPHSNumberCut stone Sling stone.Bone piece GrinderPart ceramic spindle. Stone (sling)Stone (sling)Date Subjecti no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo1 07/30 30 25 12 07/15 30 25 13 07/15 30 31 14 07/15 30 31 15 07/22 44 21 16 07/15 44 21 17 07/22 44 21 1Date Subject Nunber Date ' SubjectA/07/15/0207/15 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0207/16 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible buttress between Locus 9*1A/07/17/0207/17 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0207/20 Progress of excavationA/07/21/0207/21 Progress of excavatir cutting marks around base of knobfound among tumble. Size of core was about 40 cm in diameter.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Contiguous to: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 915.23 914.88 26 915.05 914.757 914.56 914.20 35 914.72 914.48Pail Oate Count Bskts2 06/24 24/217 273 06/24 29/302 324 06/255 06/256 06/25 16/1017 06/26 139 06/26 35/115 1610 06/26 32/192 1611 06/26 12/223 17• 97 07/17 20/160 5108 07/24 17/107 34110 07/24 19/149OBJECTSReg no. DescriptiorBalk- col lapse Balk removal1 MOD, LI2, EI2, II LI2LI2, E12, prob LB •L12, E121 poss early PERS, LI2LI2, EB112, few EI2, II LI2, EI2Figurine plaque fragment Chipped rock Spindle whorl fragment Spindle whorl fragment Mortar fragment Grindstone/basalt missile Grinder fragment\basalt missile Grinder Basalt missile Grinder basalt missile Loaf-shaped grinder.Large 1\2 mortar (pix in field) Basalt frag (4 cm thick)Basalt frag Stone fragmentDate SubjectField no. Date- Pail Loc Level Total5 06/24 32 06/241 06/26 33 06/26 84 06/26 96 07/17 97 317 07/24 108 18 07/24 110 19 07/24 110 110 07/24 110 111 07/24 110 112 07/24 110 113 07/24 110 114 07/24 11 1Number Date Subject 1E/06/25/0206/25(DRAWINGSTop P la ns: INTERPRETATION Fun c tion :Locus Date:Progress of excavationLocus 3.Topsoil.LIR2? •6/06/29/0506/29 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field B, Suninary: REASONSquare 7K80, Locus 3Rock tumble/soil around rocks.CompleteDates: 06/29 toRemarks: After clearing topsoil we designated stones & soi l between stones Locus 3.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark yellowish brown 10YR4/4Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt....... .. 60% Sand........... 30% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 35% Course Sand 35%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 50% Round___ .. 50%Consistence: Hardness.......................... 1 Compactness...................... Very CrumblyWetness......................... ... Moderately Dry Structure......................... RandomInclusions:Soil: Brick Material.............. 1/m2, 3.0 cm Distribution.................... RandomStone: Medium Pebbles................ 6/m2 Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2Small Cobbles................ 8/m2 Medium Cobbles................ 4/m2Large Cobbles.................. 4/m2 Small Boulders................ 1/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Glass............................... 1 Tesserae........................... 1Flint................................. 735 Brick Fragments............... 20Worked Stones................ .. 31 Distribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone................................ .. Frequent Shells............................... 356Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length.......................... .. 5.000 m Width................................. 5.000 mOepth................................. 0.360 to 1.660 mSTRATIGRAPHYRocks being removed appear to be tumble. In location 28 may have structure beneath. In areas 10, 11, 16, 17 are more than usual amount of bone along with pottery of large jars. Also quite a bit of flin t. In area 10 near large grinder with handle was found was a large amount of small gravel (2mn-1cm and 1-3cm>. Carnelian or amber stone from which beads were possibly carved. The seal is thought to be wood(?); hole in top triangular shaped. Stamped jar handle was found in area 16 of square. We may be at bottom level of locus 3; in area 20 i: an ashy area (10YR3/3). Two burned bone fragments were found. In area 32 there is another ashy deposit.Under: 1Contiguous to: 2 LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Tr.ansi t117POTTERYPail915.23 913.57 . 914.56 914.20Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat2635ion915.05 913.49 914.72 913.41Comments Reading12 06/29 24/164 Storage jars LI213 06/29 15/155 Few L12, El2, 1114 06/29 20/175 LI2, EI215 06/29 9/149 LI2 dom, few EI216 06/29 23/205 3 stoppers LI2, EI2, 1 prob LB17 06/30 21/228 • 12 Publish rim 1 LR, LI2 dom18 06/30 12/227 17 LI2, 1EI219 06/30 19/259 16 LI2, 1 EI220 06/30 15/139 11 LI2, 1 1121 06/30 29/174 11 Few BYZ, LI2 dom, EI222 06/30 12/152 16 LI2, E12, 11, 1 poss IR bod23 06/30 16/137 13 LI2, EI224 06/30 8/ 90 5 LI225 07/01 31/176 13 LI2, few EI226 07/01 14/139 14 1 prob BYZ, LI227 07/01 10/180 16 LI228 07/01 16/231 16 LI2 dom, 11, 1 LB29 07/01 8/253 16 LI230 07/01 14/224 13 LI2, MB31 07/01 5/120 9 L12, 1 EI232 07/02 23/223 12 LI2, EI233 07/02 4/174 9 LI234 07/02 25/245 15 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 LB .35 07/02 20/225 14 LI2, EI236 07/02 2/142 11 LI237 07/02 6/136 11 LI2, few E12, 1 1138 07/02 19/139 16 LI2, few EI2, few 1139 07/02 7/163 3 LI2, few EI240 07/02 16/166 19 LI2, EI2, few 1141 07/02 12/157 12 LI2, EI2, 1142 07/02 5/155 11 LI2, EI243 07/03 15/117 10 112, £1244 07/03 13/133 11 LI2, EI245 07/03 15/145 8 LI2, few EI246 07/03 11/131 8 L i 2LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:2-3478SOIL LOCUS SHEET47 07/03. 15/225 . 9 LI2, EI248 07/03 19/249 14 LI2, few EI2•49 07/03 12/252 . 14 Attic ware (1 piece) L!250 07/03 21/261 11 LfZ, E12 •51 07/03 9/271 14 LI2, few EI252 07/03 29/291 16 • LI2, 1153 07/03 5/205 14 LI2, few EI2 .54 07/03 1/131 8 LI255 07/06 22/144 9 . 1 poss EPER, LI2, few EI256 07/06 20/280 15 L1257 07/06 18/218 24 LI2, EI258 07/06 11/241 10 LI2, 1 11, 1 LB59 07/06 36/226 19 Few EPER, few 12, 11, 1 EB60 07/06 14/174 17 . Few EPER, LI2, EI261 07/06 24/259 10. L1262 07/07 10/185 19 1 BYZ bod, EPER, LI2, E!263 07/07 17/192 26 1 BYZ bod, LI2, EI2, 1164 07/07 13/205 32 EPER, LI2, EI265 07/07 26/205 20 EPER, LI2, EI266 07/07 27/182 11 Few EPER, LI2, -E1267 07/07 15/160 23 LI2, few El2, few M68 07/08 34/224 24 EPER, LI2, few EI2, 1169 07/08 22/192 33 LI270 07/08 21/152 25 LIZ, EI271 07/08 13/225 LI2, E1272 07/09 15/160 34 Few prob EPER, 12, few EI273 07/09 28/153 16 EPER, L1274 07/09 12/ 45 8 LI275 07/10 13/223 • 22 EPER, LI276 07/10 18/208 16 Few LI2, 12, 1177 07/10 20/150 26 LI2, E12, 11 -78 07/10 8/ 42 8 LI2, EI279 07/13 13/163 30 LI2, few 12, 1180 07/13 30/258 33 EPER, LI2, EI281 07/13 18/180 50 LIZ, few EI282 07/14 9/230 12 1 EPER, LI2, M, 1 LB83 07/14 17/192 12 LI2, 1184 07/14 18/163 17 LIZ, EI285 07/14 •17/153 19 LI2, EI286 07/14 26/262 25 • LI2 dom, few EI2.87 07/14- 21/105 11 LI2, few EI2, 1 LB93 07/15 8/190 14 LI2, E1295 07/16 32/182 23 Few EPER, LI2, EI296 07/17 16/116 14 LI2, few EI2, few 1199 07/20 12/ 80 31 LI2109 07/26 15/132 30 L12, few EI2112 07/26 6/ 56 29 L i 2, 1 poss MB113 07/26 26/146 30 Possibly continued Ll2 .114 07/27 0/ 3 1 LI2, 1 poss MB118 07/28 18/113 24 Pot #1, inside L12 Buried120 07/28 5/ 47 21 Pot #2,buried L!2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingHalf grinder 1 06/29Grinder fragment 2 06/29Half grinder 3 06/29Grinder 4 06/29Grinder fragment 5 06/29Quern 6 06/29Pottery base? 7 06/29Stone object 8 06/30Stone? 9 06/30Stone? 10 . 06/30Basalt grinder 11 06/30Stone? 12 06/30Quern? 13 07/01Metal with hole 14 07/02 33 SIGrinder fragment 15 07/02 33 SIBottle stopper 16 07/02 SIStone missile/grinder 17 07/02 39 33Stone weight? 18 07/02 15Stone missile or grinder 19 07/02 41 SI. Grinder (sandstone) 20 07/01 PRLoom weight 21 07/03 10Grind stone •22 07/03 SI23 07/03 15Ceramic water vessel 24 07/03 15Round stone 25 07/03 46 SIGrind stone 26 07/03 10Amber or carnelian stone 27 07/03 49 S!Pendant with stamp 28 07/03 49 SIHandle with stamp 29 07/03 16Semi-precious stone 30 07/03 49 SIRound stone 31 07/03 16Spindle whorl 32 07/03Figurine 33 07/02 PRGrind stone 34 07/06 32Grind stone' 35 07/06 32Possible worked stone 36 07/06 SIWorked bone (game piece) 37 07/06 SIPestle (with mortar from 7K81?) 38 07/06 11Mortar 39 07/06 26Mortar 40 07/07 8Mortar 41 07/07 31Mortar 42 07/07 31Mortar 43 07/07 5Grinding stone 44 07/07 33Loom weight 45 . 07/07. 33Loom weight 46 07/07 10Worked stone 47 07/07 10Weight? 48 07/07 10Worked stone? 49 . 07/08 68 SIStone missile 50 07/08 69 23Spindle whorl/stopper ' 51 07/07 PRGrinding stone 52 07/09Grinding stone 53 07/09Game piece/bone- 54 07/09Grind stone fragment 55 07/10 75 33Mortar fragment 56 07/10 75 SIMortar fragment 57 07/10 75 32Bone fragment (game piece?) 58 07/10 75 SIGlass fragment 59 07/10 75Grind stone. 60 07/10 31Loaf grindstone fragment 61 07/13 79 26Spindle whorl 62 07/13 79 SILoom weight 63 07/13 79 SISpindle whorl 64 07/13 81 26- Worked ceramic/seal impression? 65 07/14 83Loom weight 66 07/14 84Sandstone? 67 07/14 . 85Loom weight fragment 68 07/14 86Loaf-shaped grindstone fragment 69 07/14 86 34Stone weight 70 07/16 95Ceramic seal 71 07/16 95 SIStone pestle 72 07/17 96 17Stone mortar (med size )1\2 73 07/24 112 1Large stone mortar 1\2 74 07/24 112 1Ballistic missile. - 77 07/24 112 -179 07/24 120 1PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateA/06/29/0306/29 E/06/30/0206/30 A/07/01/0507/01 B/07/02/0607/02 A/07/03/0607/03 A/07/06/0607/06 BIOOATA SAMPLESDRAWINGSTop Plans: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/07/0607/07 Progress of excavation B/07/08/0907/08 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0607/09 'Progress of excavation A/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavation A/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavationA/07/15/0607/15A/07/16/0607/16A/07/17/0607/17A/07/20/0607/20B/07/28/1307/286/07/28/0707/28Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Two storage Progress ofexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationjars in situexcavationSoil Sample.................... . Clump of sulphur colored soil.Locus 2.Tunble which resulted from a cut to perhaps to acommodate the water installation or possibly a later phase. Locus 3 represents f i l l in a large trench? which cut a swath around the water installation and cut o ff walls (7) and (25) in the process.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 3 (Supplement) Supervisor: GG Dates: 07/28 toEast Balk Removal •Summary: ProbeREASON •Separability: Top--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONRemarks: 2 Pithoi found in 24, 3 sandstone fragments found inside one rectangular, one prism, one square. (Rect sent infor soil sample to see what coats it) Levels of jars #01,2 are 913.40 top, 912.66 bottom.OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date .Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo -DrawingPendant seal 97 07/28 118 24 1Small rough cup.maybe d.socket 98 07/28 120 18IODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample...................... Bottom of 2 pithoi(1+2)LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:3ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus A Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Obvious wall.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone................. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder.................. 70%Chinkstones: Pebble............................... 50%Fill Stones: Cobble............................... 2%Dressing: Unhewn............................... 70%Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkRows: 2Measurements: Length............................... 2.350 mHeight............................... 0.820 to 0.940 m 'Preservation: Partial Superstructure: LittleRemarks: Wall appears to be'in the same phase as (4)7K90 was built on mudbrick at level 913.94.Supervisor: GO Oates: 07/07 to 07/23Medium Boulder................. 30%Cobble............................... 50%S oil..'.............................. 98%Semi-hewn.......................... 30%Width................................. 1.000 .to 1.100 mOrientation...................... 203 degSq. 7K90 '84 season and perpendicular to our (4).(4) in Sq.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over: 4, 21, 22Sealed Agnst By: 8, 15, 17LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13POTTERYPail914.90Date- Count Bskts Loc Preservat14ion914.80Comments913.86Reading9 914.72 913.90Pi*105 07/23 4/ 25 107 07/23 2/ 15 17 OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail'LI2LI2 bods, Loc Level Total, E12Period Mater ial Photo DrawingBone knife(may be balk contam.;> 1I . 07/22 105 7 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/08/0907/08A/07/09/0607/09A/07/10/0607/10A/07/13/0607/13A/07/14/0607/14DRAWINGSTop Plans: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Locus Date:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/15/0607/15A/07/16/0607/16A/07/17/0607/17A/07/20/0607/20B/07/22/0807/22Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationB/07/22/1807/22B/07/23/0007/23B/07/23/1907/23B/07/23/2007/23B/07/23/2107/23Wall 4 before removalShow 4 in relation 26/25 Relationships 4,25,26 Relationships 4,25,268,15,17 L4 +L26*Wall for domestic use?Sealed against by surfaces 8, 15, 17 and over soil layer 18 and hearth 21,22. May have been installed at the same time as water installation.If 8=6 and 15=11 then wall (4) was used in conjunction with the water installation.LIR2ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 5 Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Apparent courses and rows of stones.Separability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTION Material:Hard Limestone................ 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder.................. 25%Chinkstones: Pebble.............................. 50%Fill Stones: Cobble.............................. 100%Dressing: Unhewn.............................. 99%Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkMeasurements: Length.............................. 3.200 mHeight............................... 1.030 to 0.460 mPreservation: Lean Direction................. 210 degLength and width of wall contirMedium Boulder.. Cobble................Width.......Orientatic Lean Degree..i North Balk. South face has parti:CompleteSupervisor: GG Oates: 07/08 to75%50%1%___ 1.100 m___ 120 deg___ 6 degil lean. Mud brick underneath.4̂\DSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Sealed Agnst By: 30, 31, 16 LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit11 914.82 913.79PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Nunber Date Subject. 8/07/08/0907/08 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavation A/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavationA/07/09/0607/09 Progress of excavation A/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavation A/07/17/0607/17 Progress of excavationA/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavationDRAWINGSArchitectural : L-5INTERPRETATIONFunction: Wall forming part storage area.Stratigraphy: May have been in phase with (4) since it isi over mudbrick. Unable to know if it abutts or bonds to (7).Locus Date: .LIZSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field 8, Square 7K80, Locus 6 Supervisor: GG Dates: 07/07 to 07/14Surma ry: Possible occupation surface.REASONRemarks: Hard packed earth surface.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light brownish gray 10YR6/2Texture: Clay........... 50% S ilt........... 45%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Sand........... 5% ' Fine Sand.. 70%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 50%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Very DryCompactness........... .......... Moderately FirmInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 100/m2 Distribution......... .......... RandomOrganic:Measurements:Distribut ion......... .......... Random-Length............................... 0.700 mDepth................................. 0.070 mWidth................................ 0.350 mSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthRemarks: Locus 6 is fragmentary and located in area 35 and appears to extend 'into southern balk. Structure: Man made.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over: 10Equals: 8Seals against : 9Cut by: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35 914.25 914.18POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub88 07/14 0/ 28 2 IR bodsPHOTOGRAPHSNumber D ate S u b je c t Number Date Sub ject . Number Dote S u b je c tB/07/08/0907/08 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavationA/07/09/0607/09 Progress of excavation A/07/10/1.107/10 Locus 6 surface A/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavationDRAWINGS'Top Plans: Locus 9.Balks: SINTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible living surface used in conjuction with water installation in A.7K71.Stratigraphy: Appears to be a surface used in conjuction with cobble stone surface 9 which balk removal may show to beconnected to the water installation. Hay have been equal to Locus 8 which sealed against wall (4).IRLocus Date:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:4-64̂ooOARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87. Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 7 Supervisor: GG Dates: 07/07 toSunnary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Two rows semi-stable stones.Separability: Top-'AverageDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone........... . . . 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:: Cobble......................... . . . 30% Small Boulder......... ........ 70%Fill stones:: Cobble......................... . . . 100%Dressing: Unhewn......................... 70% ?«ni - hAur» *nvMortar: Dry-laid...................... . . . 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style........................... . . . Boulder & ChinkRows: 2Measurements: Length......................... . . . i .450 m Width........................ ....... 0.730Orientation................ 208 degRemarks: Rocks semi-stable.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3Cut By: 3Sealed Agnst By: 15, 17, 18Bonded To: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit10 914.39PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject16 914.26Number Date . Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/09/0607/09A/07/10/0607/10A/07/13/0607/13DRAWINGSArchitectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation A/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavation A/07/17/0607/17 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation A/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation A/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavationL-7Wall for storage room.Seems to be earlier than (5) at the South end, though a surface may go under it at same level as (5), where it joins (5). S end of (7) may have been part of cut for (3).SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 8 Supervisor: GG Dates: 07/10 to 07/20Summary: Surface.REASON. Remarks: Hard packed/bricky earthSeparabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light brownish gray 10YR6/2Texture: Clay........... 30% S ilt........... 60% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 70%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 50% /Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness.................... . Moderately FirmWetness............................. Very DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 80/m2 Distribution.................. . RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Rare Shells............................. 3Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length.................... ........... 1.000 m Width......... '.................... . 1.000 mDepth................................. 0.300 to 0. 380 mSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthRemarks: Because of similar materiial and simi lar levels, Locus 8 is probably equal to Locus 6. Structure:Locus 8 consists of two fragments, both of which sealed against wall 4.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3Over: 15Equals: 6Seals against: 4 Cut by: 3, 0LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit20 ; 914.23 913.85 15 914.15 913.85POTTERY .P a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading Pub94 07/16 4/ 18 5 Sealed L12PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectA/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavationA/07/10/1207/10 Surface seals ag. locus4 A/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavationORAWINGSTop Plans: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Locus Date:Locus 4.Living surface.Appears to have been used at the same time as loci 6 and 9 therefore may have been associated with the water installation in A.7K71. It also sealed against wall 4. f ■LI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU37 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 10 Supervisor: GGSuimary: Soil layer under Locus 6.' REASONRemarks: New soil differentiation.Separability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 35% S il t . ; ....... 65% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 90%Medium Sand 9% Course Sand 1%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 90% ' Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness................. ......... 2 Compactness................. . . . Moderately F i rmWetness................... ......... Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles........ ......... 1000/m2 Medium Pebbles......... .___ 12/m2Large Pebbles....... ......... 12/m2 Small Cobbles........... . 2/m2Distribution......... ......... LayeredOrganic: Bone........................ ......... Frequent Distribution.............. ___ RandomMeasurements: Length.................... ......... 0.680 m Width............................ . . . 0.330 mDepth...................... .......... 0.110 mSurface Mat*l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Clean/sealed locus under locus 6. May be underlayment for 6.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6Over: 11Cut by: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35 914.18 914.07POTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading89 07/15 PHOTOGRAPHS • Number3/ 19 2Date Subject! 2A/07/15/0607/15DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Progress of excavationLocus 9.S.Could be surface used then patched or relaid for Could be associated with cobblestone Surface 9. IR2Clean LocusLocus 6, or an underlayment for Locus 6.Complete Date: 07/15PubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 11 Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Flat lying cobblestones and sherds.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 70%Medium Sand 30XS ilt....... . 20% Sand........... 10%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness..................Wetness.................. .......... 1......... Moderately DryCompactness.........Inclusions:Stone: Small Cobbles.................. 6/m2 Small Boulders...Distribution.................... LayeredArt i fact: Flint................................. 2Organic: Bone......................... ......... Frequent Distribution.......Measurements: Length............................... 0.680 m Width....................Depth................................. 0.070 mSurface Mat1l : CobblesRemarks: Cluster of six large flat-lying (10x12 cm & 7x8.cm) sherds lying nesherd that matched another sherd from pail 26 of Field A, Sq. 7K61,STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10Over: 12Supervisor: GGFine Sand.. 70% .. Moderately Firm2/m2.. Layered .. Layered .. 0.330 mct to cobblestones. Pail Locus 6.Complete -Date: 07/15#90 contained one/LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:7-11LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit99 914.07 914.00POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati< Comments Reading Pub90 07/15 5/ 27 2 1 matched 7KTi,V 26,S.A EPER, Ll2 XDRAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 9.Balks: S.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Underlayment for beaten earth surface 10 or 6(?>.Stratigraphy : May be in phase with 15.Locus Date: EPer •.06/21/91 SOIL LOCUS SHEET Page 1IDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7k80, Locus 12 Supervisor: GG Date: 07/15Sunnary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Hard beaten earth.Separability: •Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 70% Silt....... .. 20% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 70%Medium Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 10% Round.. . . .. 80%Consistence: Hardness........................... . 1 Compactness.............. ___ Moderately FirmWetness.............................. Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. . 5000/m2 Medium Pebbles.........____ 100/m2Arti fact: Flint................................. 6 Distribution,........... __ _ RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Frequent Distribution.-........... . . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................... . 0.680 m . Width......................... ___ 0.330 mDepth................................. 0.080 mSurface Mat11.: Beaten EarthRemarks: This beaten earth is at same level as surface in area 15. It was under■ tipped cobble stones (fla t). One smallsherd stands upright--packed earth is packed around it. Very small distance down from top of locus 11.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 11Over: 13LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35 914.00 913.92POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub91 07/15 2/ 48 2 1 EPER, IR bodsOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingAtticware fragment?DRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:S.Underlayment for 11. Supported by locus 13.' EPer07/15 91 3506/21/91 SOIL LOCUS SHEET Page 1IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 13 Supervisor: GGComplete Date: 07/15Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Change from hard beaten to soft loose soil.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 90% S ilt........... 5% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Round......... 90%Consistence: Hardness........................... . 0 Compactness................___ Very CrumblyWetness............................. Slightly Moist Structure.................. .___ RandomInclus i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 50/m2 Medium Pebbles......... . . . . 25/m2Large Pebbles.................. 25/m2 Small Boulders......... . . . . 4/m2PM nr 6 Distribution............. ___ RandomOrganic: Bone.................................. . Frequent Distribution.. . . . . . . ...... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 0.680 m Width......................... . . . . 0.330 mDepth................................. 0.300 mSurface Mat'l: Loose soil-P*OOSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Cut by: LEVELSLoc Top35 913.92POTTERYPail Date92 07/15 INTERPRETATION Function: Locus Date:123Bottom Transit 913.62Count Bskts Loc Preservati< 4/ 34 4SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 14Sumnary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:Remarks:Surface with heavy ash.Heavy ashy deposit.Top--Very ClearDark brown . 10YR3/3Clay............. 90% S i l t . . . . . . . 5%Medium Sand 5% Course Sand 5%Sub-round.. 10% Round.......... 90%Hardness........................... 1Wetness............................. Moderately DryLength............................. 0.920 mOirection of Slope................ 362 degHighest level of ashy deposit 913.92 (in Lowest level of ashy deposit 913.80. ColtDates: 07/16 toSand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 90%Compactness...................... Moderately FriableWidth....... ........................ 1.700 m •Degree of Slope............... 18 deglini-balk). Highest level of ashy deposit center of length 913.1 includes 10YR3/3 (dark brown) and 10YR5/2 (greyish brown).SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 8, Square 7KB0, Locus 15 Sumnary: Surface.' REASONRemarks: Clear surface.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONSupervisor: GGComplete Dates: 07/17 to 07/20Color: Pate brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 90% S ilt........... 5% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 90%Medium Sand 5% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 10% Round......... 90%Consistence: Hardness....... ........... 2 Compactness.............. . . . . Moderately FirmWetness......... . ........... Very DryInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets. . ........... t0/m2 Distribution............. . . . . RandomStone: Small Pebbles___. ........... 100/m2 Medium Pebbles......... 15/m2Organic: Bone.............. . ........... Rare Shells........................ ............. 1 'Distribution. . ........... RandomMeasurements: . Length........... . ........... 2.250 m Width......................... . . . . 0.750 mDepth............ . ........... 0.200 mSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthRemarks: Flat-lying large pottery sherd.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top4, 7Transit9 913.99POTTERYPail DateBottom.913.97Count Bskts Loc Preservatit 8/ 25 898 07/20 OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionJar handle/stempedPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavat DRAWINGSTop Plans: Loci 4, 7.INTERPRETATION Function:• Stratigraphy:Locus Date:LI2Field no. Date Pail Loc Levei Total Period Material Photo Drawing 1 07/20 98Number Date SubjectA/07/20/1107/20 Surface 15Surface between walls 4 and 7.Surface seals against walls 4 and 7 and represents an earl • use than locus 8.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:11-15■IDENTIFICATION ' CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 16 Supervisor: GG Oates: 07/20 to'Suimary: Surface-•lime-like.REASONRemarks: Color change/hard consistency.Separability: Top*'ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR8/3Texture: Clay........... SOX S ilt........... 25% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 50%Medinn Sand 25% Course Sand 25XParticle Shape: Angular___ 25% Sub-angular 25% Round......... 50%Consistence: Hardness................ ......... 3 Compactness. ............ Very CrumblyWetness.................. ......... Very DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles....... ......... 5/m2 Distribution. . ........... RandomMeasurements: Length.................... ......... 2.000 m • Width........... . ............ 0.500 mDepth..................... ......... 0.030 to 0.050 mSurface Mat'l: LimeRemarks: Surface was found along balk and patches of it oni wall 5. Rest was damaged by large rock tumble and removedwith tumble. A patch of hard beaten earth sealed against wall..STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3Over: 36Seals against: 5Cut by: 3LEVELSL“ T°'> Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit17 913.86 913.83 18 913.84 913.79 29 913.93POTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading Pub115 07/27 INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Locus Date:1 / 1 1 I rSurface or support for a surface.May be same phase as 18 or 27. Parts of 18 are directly over mudbrick as is 16. But 18 goes under A and 16 seals against 5. There is some suggestion that 4 and 5 are in the same prase which would make 16 later than 18. 16 and 27 may be in phase.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7k80, Locus 17 Summary: Cobblestone underlayment.REASONRemarks: Cobblestones.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Inclusions:Stone: Large Pebbles................... 15/m2Large Cobbles....... .......... 4/m2Measurements: Length............................... 2.700 mDepth................................. 0.170 mSurface Mat'l: Cobbles STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 15Over: 18Seals against: 4, 7 LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit15 913.99 913.82POTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n CoamentsS u p e rv is o r: GGSmall Cobbles.................. 11/m2Width................................. 0.900 mReading100 07/20 2/ 10 5101 07/22 1 / 8 3106 07/23 4 /1 3 SPHOTOGRAPHSNumber .. Date S u b je c tLI2LI2, 11 bod LI2.EI2Nunber Date S ub jectA/07/20/1207/20 Cobblestone surface L.17' A/07/21/0607/21 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONF un c tion : L iv in g s u rfa c e .Stratigraphy: Associated with.walls 4 and 7.Complete Dates: 07/20 to 07/21PubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION . ConpleteU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 18 Supervisor: GG Oates: 07/22 toStannary: Beaten earth surface.REASONRemarks: Flat-lying sherds and small (1*3cm) stones; beaten earth.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 75% S ilt ........... 15% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 96%Medium Sand 1% Course Sand 3%Particle Shape: Angular.... 10% Round......... 90%Consistence: Hardness................ ......... 2 Compactness................___ Moderately FirmWetness.................. ......... Very DryInclusions:Soil: Flat lying sh....... ......... 8/m2 Distribution.............. ___ PatternedStone: Small Pebbles....... ......... 200/m2 Medium Pebbles........... 12/m2Large Pebbles....... ......... 6/m2 Distribution.............. ---- PatternedMeasurements: Length........... ; . . . . ......... 3.000 m Width........................... ---- 1.800 mDepth................................. 0.040 to 0.120 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: This surface appears to go under 4 and is in conjunction with a possible fire pit. Cobble stones o f -17 werelying over the pit.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 17, 4Over: 27Contiguous to: 34, 35, 21, 22Seals against: 26, 25LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit15 913.82 913.78 20 913.84 913.72POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatioin Comments Reading102 07/22 Sherds,F lat-lying on sur Ir bods103 07/22 5/ 9 LI2126 07/31 5/ 35 24 LI2, 1 EI2, 1LBOBJECTSReg no. Descr iption Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingStone pestle 1 07/31 1Stone pestle 1 07/31 19 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate SubjectA/07/31/0707/31 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Living surface.Stratigraphy: Contiguous with Pits(35) and P itfills 34 and Fire Hearth 22 and ash Layer 21. It lies over 27 but alsodirectly on 36 and 37. However 27 seems to go under 26 and seals against it.Locus Date: LI2ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 19Summary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTIONT errace w a ll ( ? ) .V is ib le in B a lk . T o p --C le a rSupervisor: GGCompleteDate:Mortar:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:. Abutted By: LEVELS 'Loc TopDry laid............................ 100%Length............................... 2.700 m Width..:............................ 0.150 to 0.700 m .Orientation...................... 203 degWall seems to have held in places loci 11*13 and then appeared in balk to have slumped out of place when wall fe ll out. See S. balk drawing.311, 13Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit28 913.66 34 913.70INTERPRETATIONFunction: Terrace wall (? ).Stratigraphy: Seems to have held in place, Loci 11-13 but was probably already in place when these loci were laid becausethe lowest courses of these are as yet un-excavated in our square.LI2Locus Date:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:16-19SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 21 Supervisor: GG . Dates:Sunmary: Hearth f i l l .REASONRemarks: Ashy deposits.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark grayish brown 10YR4/2Texture: Clay........... 40% S ilt . .. . . . . 60% Fine Sand.. 99% Mediun Sand 1%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 1% Round... . . . 99%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 0 Compactness........... ......... Very LooseWetness......................... .. Very DryInclusions:Artifact: Flint............................. 4Organic: Bone............................... .. Frequent Charcoal............. ......... 3/m2Sheep dropping............. 1/m2, avg. 1.0 cm Distribution......... ......... RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 1.480 m Width...................... ......... 1.100 mDepth............................. .. 0.040 mSurface Mat1l : ashy depositRemarks: Made probe in half of hearth; no pottery. Found 4 bods when rest of locus defined.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4Seals against: 18, 25POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading104 07/22 1 1 Poss.MB bod\UD bodsPHOTOGRAPHS *Number Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/22/1807/22 Wall 4 before removal B/07/22/1907/22 Hearth 21 and 22 B/07/30/0807/30 Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESFlotation Sample............. 2%18'Deposit of fire debris for warmth; little evidence of cooking debris.In use with 18 and perhaps 27 as well since the lowest stones were equal to 27. Very litt le evidence of cooking; few sherds and bones. Use in room bounded by walls 7,25,26.Locus Date: LI2DRAWINGSTop Plans: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 22Sunmary: Hearth.REASONRemarks: Presence of ashy debris confined to rock perimeter.TYPE Certain Fire hearth.DESCRIPTIONMaterial: Stone................................ 10%Plan: CircularLining: StoneMeasurements: Length............................... 1.480 m Width.......Height............................... 0.000 to 0.260 mRemarks: The lowest stones of the hearth were part of Locus 27.STRATIGRAPHY . . .Under: 21Equals: 27Seals Against : 25Sealed By: 18Bonded To: 21POTTERYP a il Oate Count B skts L o c 'P re s e rv a t io n Comments ReadingSupervisor: GG0.900 mComplete Dates: 07/22 to 07/31Pub126 07/31 PHOTOGRAPHS Number0/ 4 6Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/22/1807/22DRAWINGSTop P la ns : INTERPRETATION F un c tion : S t ra t ig r a p h y :• Locus Date:Wall 4 before removal B/07/22/1907/22 Hearth 21 and 22 18Hearth.In use with 18 and 35 and possibly cobbles of 27 as well.A/07/30/0007/30 Removal of S. Balk4̂oowINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 24 Supervisor: GG . Dates: 07/24 to 07/28Sunmary:REASONWater installationRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTIONPlaster on rocks Certain Water installationMaterial: Plan: Lining: Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYHard Stone....................... 100%RectangularPlasterHighest plaster found in E balk removal 914.41. Top step is 914.12; there is only a corner of this installation in 7K80. Very litt le was done with it here. Rather, teams in adjacent squares excavated it.Cuts:Sealed By: Founda. Trench: INTERPRETATION30, 31, 32, 37 920, 19Function:Stratigraphy:Locus Date:For bathing or for c'ultic rituals, or for wine pressing.Our 6,9,8 may have been surfaces related to installation use. However a large trench (3) isthought to be a pit or a dump made when installation was constructed. If so, 8 would not have been connected.EPerARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 25 Supervisor: GG Date:Sumary: WallREASONRemarks:DESCRIPTIONLarge stones in courses and 1 row.Masonry:Wall Stones Chinkstones Fill Stones Mortar:Facing:Construction:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYSmall Boulder.................. 4% Medium Boulder................. 6%Cobble............................... 100%Cobble............................... 100%Dry-laid........................... 100%UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink •Length............................... 2.400 mThe largest boulders of any wall in Sq.7K80..Only one row.Under:Equals:Cut By: Abutted By:3B .7j89:5 3 26Sealed Agnst By: 18, 21, 22, 27 LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transil 25 914.65PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/23/2307/23 BIODATA SAMPLESDocument burial #3 B/07/23/2007/23 . B/07/23/2107/23 S view of 4,25,26DRAWINGSPollen Sample Flint SampleTop Plans: Archi tectural: INTERPRETATION261-4,25,26Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Wall for domestic use.Probably a continuation of wall in 7J89 where storage jars were located. EI2LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:21-25004̂ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 26Remarks: E face.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone................ 100%Masonry:Wall stones:: Small Boulder.................. 75%Chinkstones:: Cobble............................... 50%Fill Stones:: Cobble............................... 50%Dressing: Unhewn............................... 98%Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style......................... ____ Boulder & ChinkMeasurements: Length............................... 2.630 mOrientation.............. ....... 203 degRemarks: Not inner casement tOS1o jCount Bskts Loc Preservatit117 07/27 INTERPRETATION F un c tion : S t ra t ig ra p h y :Locus D ate:Surface.Could be in phase with 15 and 11, < near 24.EI2, II» likely, with 18. Possibly broken by 3 from surface-like fragment; ReadingSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 32 Supervisor: GG Dates: 07/28 toSummary: Ash layer.REASONRemarks: Color.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 40X S ilt........... 60XParticle Shape: Sub-round.. 1% Round......... 99%Consistence: Hardness.. . . . . . . 0Measurements: Length......... . . . . 1.100 mDepth........... . . . . 0.000 to 0.030 mSurface Mat’ l : Ashy depositSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 30, 31, 16Fine Sand.. 99% Medium Sand IXWidth.................................. 0.500 mSeals against: LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit29 913.93 18 913.79 913.76 .18 913.80INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Seems to be part of destruction layer--no hearth in vicinity.Previous to plaster 16--may be destruction layer over mud brick layer. 112?SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 34 Supervisor: GGSurmary: Pit f i l l .REASONRemarks: Loose soil in surface.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4• Texture: S ilt ........... 90% Sand.......... 10% F i ne Sand.. 50% Medium SandCourse Sand 25%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 25% Round......... 75%Consistence: Hardness___ . 0 Compactness............... ___ Very LooseWetness....... •. Moderately Dry Structure.................. . . . . RandomMeasurements: Length......... . 0.810 m Width........... .•............ . . . . 0.670 mOepth........... . 0.000 to 0.150 mSurface Mat' l : Loose f i l lSTRATIGRAPHY •Under: • 4 'Over: 27, 35Contiguous to: 18POTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments ReadingComplete Date: 07/30Pub22 07/30 INTERPRETATIONFunction: Loose f i l l .Stratigraphy: Related to 18 and 22, 35.ooINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 35Summary: Stonelined pit.REASONRemarks: Circular shape.TYPE Certain PitDESCRIPTIONMaterial: Soft Stone.................. . . . 100%Plan: CircularLining: NoneMeasurements: Length.......................... . . . 0.810 m Width.........Height.......................... . . . 0.030 to 0.180 mRemarks; Not a fire pit. Side stones slanted towards center and down.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 34Over: 27Sealed By: ■ 18LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit20 913.76 913.73 20 913.91 913.73INTERPRETATIONFunction: Storage pit (? ).Stratigraphy: In use with 22 and 18Complete Date: 07/30SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 36 Surmary: Bricky cement-like underlayment.REASONRemarks: Change in color and texture.DESCRIPTIONSupervisor: GGComplete Dates: 08/01 toColor: Light brownish gray 10YR6/2Texture: Clay......... . 90% S ilt........... 8%Medium Sand 2%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 2% Round......... 98%Consistence: Hardness....... ....... 2Wetness......... ....... Very DryInclusions:Soil: Ash Pockets.. ....... 50/m2Stone: Small Pebbles ....... ' 10/m2Organic: Charcoal........ ....... 10/m2Surface Mat'l: Bricky,unburRemarks: Used to level burnt mudbrick tumble and toFine Sand.. 98%STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc Top27 which may also extend to cobblestones 27Bottom TransitCompactness........................... M od era te ly F irl NU side of Water Installlation 24.18 913.72INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:21Top913.65Bottom Transit Top913.65To level and found surfaces, walls on top of mudbricks of Locus 37. In use with 27 and (7)?SOIL LOCUS SHEETBottom T ra n s iiIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K80, Locus 37 Summary:REASONRemarks:Separability DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Burnt mudbrick.Wide range of colors. Top--Very ClearLight brownClay........... 90%Medium Sand 2%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 2%Consistence: Hardness.................Measurements: Surface Mat'l: Remarks:Dates: 08/04 to7.5YR6/4 S ilt........... 8% Sand........... 2% Fine Sand.. 98%3. 98%Compactness................ . . . . Very Fi rmVery Ory 5.0OO m Width........................... . . . . 3.000 mBricksExtent of burnt mudbrick is unknown but it is expected to be as extensive as it is in 7K81 and in 7K90. It is obviously under 27, (5) and 3 (where E Balk was removed ). Also 36 seems to have been used to level out 37 tumble.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc Top5, 27, 36 Bottom T rt Loc913.55Bottom T ra n s ii14 913.67INTERPRETATIONFunction: Unknown. Was it tumble or a structure?Stratigraphy: Appears to be earliest material to date in Square 7K80.Top913.42Bottom TransitLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K80:31-374̂ooONSOIL LOCUS SHEET'IDENTIFICATION ,U87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 1Sunmary: Loose topsoil.REASONSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 70% Sand........... 25%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 5% Sub-round.. 55% Round......... 40%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 1 Compactness.........Wetness.......................... .. Very Dry Structure.............Inclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 25/m2 MediumPebbles...Large Pebbles............... 3/m2 Distribution.......Artifact: Pottery.......................... .. Frequent Distribution.......Organic: Bone............................... .. Rare Distribution.......Measurements: Length........................... .. 5.000 m Width....................Direction of Slope___ .. 84 deg Oegree of Slope..STRATIGRAPHYOver: 2, 3, 4Equals: A .7K71:1, B .7K80:2Seals against: 2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom . Transit7 914.69 914.65 31 914.56 914.4811. 913.59 913.55 35 913.71 913.57POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Cements ReadingCompleteSupervisor: DM Dates: 06/19 to 06/23Fine Sand.. 50%Very Crumbly Wind7/m2 Random Random Random 5.000 m 12 deg1 06/19 12/ 76 IS2 06/22 45/381 493 06/23 32/267 394. 06/23 11/100 9OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc1 06/22 2 112 06/22 2 233 06/22 2 22Seeds 4 06/22 2 22Glass 5 06/22 2 15Shell 6 06/22 2 27Stone object 7 06/23 3Flints 8 06/23 3PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectIr2, prob EB bods1 prob UM, LI2 dom, EI2, 11, prob EB, 2 UD LI2, few EI2 prob EB LI2 dom, 1 EllLevel Total Period Material Photo DrawingA/06/22/0106/22 Progress of excavation A/06/23/0106/23 Progress of excavation 6I00ATA SAMPLESShellsINTERPRETATIONFunction: Topsoil, wind placed.Locus Date: LIr2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 2 Sunnary: Rock tunble and associated soil.REASONSeparability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Top*-ClearYellowish brownClay........... 5%Medium Sand 30% Sub-round.. 60%Hardness..............Wetness................Bottom--Clear10YR5/4S ilt........... 70%Course Sand 20%Round......... 40%1Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: • Small Pebbles................... 60/m2Large Pebbles.................. 8/m2Medium Cobbles................. 10/m2Small Boulders................. 7/m2D is t r ib u t io n ......................... RandomArtifact: Glass................................. 1D is t r i b u t i o n . . . .................. RandomOrganic: Bone.......... ........................ RareDistribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope.......... 84 degCompleteSupervisor: DM Oates: 06/25 to 06/30Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 50%Compactness....................... Very Loose/Slightly GravellyStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 20/m2Small Cobbles.................. 25/m2Large Cobbles.................. 14/m2Median Boulders............... 1/m2Flint................................. 8Shells............................... 82. Width................................ 5.000 mDegree of Slope................ 2 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:LEVELSLoc Top 8ottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 914.48 914.13 35 913.57 913.4711 913.55 913.50 22 914.13 913.81POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading5 06/25 27/224 57 LI2, EI2, 1 LB6 06/25 9/120 44 L!2, EI27 06/2*6 30/143 61 1 poss ROM, LI28 06/26 32/127 45 LI 2, 1 LB. 9 06/29 28/135 60 L12, 1 UD10 06/29 6/ 86 19 • LI211OBJECTS06/30 9/ 48 14 LI2Reg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl fragment 1 06/25 5Spindle whorl fragment 2 06/25 6Spindle whorl fragment 3 06/29 9LB pottery reused as a toy 4 06/26 8Ballistic missile fragment 5 06/26 8'Mortar fragment 6 06/25 5PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Nurrtrer Oate SubjectPub-E/06/25/0106/25 INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Progress of excavation A/D6/29/0206/29 Progress of excavation Base for topsoil.The terminus point of a sedentary occupation of the square.LIr2E/06/30/0106/30 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 3 Supervisor: DM Oates: 06/26 to 07/03Summary: Wall coming from west balk to north balk.REASONRemarks: Wall line apparent.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Reused Limestone............. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Large Boulder.. 100%Dressing Mortar:Facing:Construction:Courses:Measurements: Preservation: STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over: 2, 5,Equals: B .71Sealed Agnst By: 1, 2LEVELSUnhewn.................................. 100%Ory-laid.............................. 100%UnfacedStyle........................ Boulder & ChinkLength............................... A.160 nPartial Superstructure: LittleOrientation..Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom8 914.53 914.25 14 914.79 914.25 25 914.57 914.25Count Bskts Loc Preservation Pub22 07/03 21/156 17 8 LI2, EI2, few 11PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Oate SubjectA/07/01/0107/01 Progress of excavation A/07/03/1307/03 East face of wall #3 A/07/03/1407/03 West view of wall3/loc1QINTERPRETATION 'Function: The lowest course of an EPer ephemeral wall.Stratigraphy: The latest building phase in 7K81. Probably dates to EPer and definitely after the water installation (6)since the top step of Locus 6 was found under locus 3 in tumble. Locus date might be EPer.LIr2Locus Date:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K81:l-3ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus'4 Supervisor: OM Dates: 06/26 toStannary:' Wall coming from east balk toward the west.REASONRemarks: Wall line apparent.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Reused Limestone............. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder......... ....... 10% Medium Boulder................ 15%Large Boulder......... ....... 75%Dressing: Unhewn...................... ....... 25% Semi-hewn......................... 75%Mortar: Dry-laid.................. ....... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style........................ ........ Boulder & ChinkMeasurements: Length...................... ........ 2.100 m Width......................... ....... 0.950 to 1.000 mHeight...................... ....... 0.290 to 0.420 m Orientation.............. 106 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2Over: 4Sealed Agnst By: 1 ,2LEVELS .Loc Top Bottom Tran:sit Loc Top Bottom TransitReading29POTTERYPail913.69 913.40 Date Count Bskts Loc21Preservation913.82Corrrients913.4044 07/15 4/ 30 11 Late 1251 07/21 7 /85 L1208JECTSReg no. Description Field no. Oate Pail loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingCylinder 1 07/21 51 29 1Flint Knife 2 07/21 51 02Loom weight 3 07/21 51 02 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate Subject Number Date Subject Number . Date SubjectPubA/07/01/0107/01 Progress of excavation A/07/15/0107/15 Progress of excavation A/07/21/0107/21 Progress of excavationA/07/15/0107/15 Progress of excavation A/07/20/0107/20 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Unclear function as only a small portion of this wall was in 7K81.Stratigraphy: Constructed after the mudbrick in a mudbrick base (Locus 21). Earlier than the water installation (Locus 6).Locus Date: LIr2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU67 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 5• Surmary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Soil and tunble layer.Soil layer.Top*-AveragePale brownClay........... 15%Medium Sand 20% Sub-round.. 50%Hardness........................Wetness.........................Small Pebbles...............Large Pebbles...............Medina Cobbles.............Flint.............................Bone...... ......................Acorn.............................Length...........................Depth.............................Degree of Slope...........10YR6/3 S ilt ........... 75%Course Sand 10%Round......... 50%2Moderately Dry80/m220/m212/m2212Frequent1/m2, avg. 2.0 5.000 m0.280 to 1.720 m 12 degCompleteSupervisor: JW Dates: 06/30 toSand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 70%Compactness................ .. . . Moderately Crumbly/Slightly RubblyStructure.................... . . . RandomMedium Pebbles........... 30/m2Small Cobbles............. .. . . 20/m2Distribution............... . . . RandomDistribution............... . . . RandomShells......................... .. . . 123Distribution................__ RandomWidth........................... .. . . 3.000 mDirection of Slope__ .. . 90 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Equals: 8 .7K80:3, 18LEVELS . ‘Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit9 914.09 913.41 11 913.43 913.04 16 913.88 913.6010 914.80 913.08 8 914.25 913.774̂00Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Garments Reading13 06/30 19/229 34 LI2 few E1215 06/30 5/ 26 6 LI2, EI2 •16 07/01 23/103 25 LI2 dom, few EI2, I117 07/01 7/ 29 18 LI2, 1 MB/LB118 07/02 17/151 LI2, few EI2, 1 EB21 07/03 7/130 LI223 07/06 11/132 20 L1224 07/06' 31/162 32 L12, EI225 07/06 14/158 53 1 EPER, LI226 07/06 11/132 34* 1 LI2, EI2, 1 MB227 07/07 25/125 46 LI2, El229 07/07 20/150 -31 Few LR, LI2, EI230 07/07 22/174 26 L!2, EI231 07/07 28/215 70 . Few EPER, L12, EI2, 1132 07/08 23/178 49 Few EPER, LI2 dom, few E1233 07/08 10/ 95 29 LI2, few E1234 07/08 14/139 39 L12, EI2, 1 1128 07/07 3/ 6 3 Balk trim L1235 07/09 22/132 53 LI2, EI236 07/09 19/ 82 38. EPER, LI237 07/10 8/ 83 12 EPER, LI2, 1138 07/13 7/102 42 LI2 dom, EI2, 1 MB, 1 EB42 07/14 9/139 27 Late Ir2, few Early 12, EB bods43 07/15 18/178 51 E Per, Late Ir2, Ir1, 1 MB45 07/16 10/269 26 Late Ir246 07/16 25/325 29 Late Ir2, 1 MB, 1 EB47 07/17 10/ 95 30 Publish . Late lr2, Iron Age bodsOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBead 1 07/01 16 11Drilled bone 2 07/01 16Ceramic marble 3 07/01 16Rock sphere. 4 07/01 17Flue 5 06/30 13Spear/arrow head 6 07/02 18Broken ballistic 7 07/02 18Mortar ' 8 07/06 24 8Ballistic/pestle 9 07/06 24Translucent sphere 10 07/06 24Stone spindle whorl 11 07/07 27Smooth stone 12 07/07 27Grinder fragment 13 07/08 32Small ballistic . 14 07/09 35Clay pendant 15 07/14 42Inscribed rock. 16 07/15 43 1Loom weight 17 07/15 43PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateA/07/01/0107/01B/07/02/0507/02A/07/03/0507/03INTERPRETATIONFun c tion :S tra tig ra p h y : LOCUS Date:Progress of excavation A/07/06/0107/06 Progress of excavation A/07/09/0107/09 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation A/07/07/0107/07 Progress of excavation A/07/10/0107/10 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation B/07/08/0707/08 Progress of excavation A/07/13/0107/13 Progress of excavationDestruction layer.- Ultimately 5 narrowed to a trench around 6 and represented destruction or collapsed material following latest use of 6.The terminus point of sedentary occupation of the square. Most likely E Per.EPerLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K81:4-54̂0000INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 6Suimary:REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan: Lining: Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:LEVELSLoc TopPlastered vat.Plastered installation discovered under Possible Vat/cisternHard Plaster.................... 100%PlasterMost of this installation lies in 7K71 of the installation were in 7K81.A . 7K71:4 , A .7X70:11 , B .7X80:24Bottom TransitS u p e rv iso r: DMUnknown(see locus sheets from there.) Only a couple stepsDates: 06/30 toon the northern edge25 9K.13PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date S u b je c t Number Oate Subject Number Date SubjectE/07/02/0107/02A/07/24/0107/24INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Plastered vat A/07/27/0107/27 Progress of excavation A/07/28/1207/28 Vat foundation trenchProgress of excavation A/07/28/1307/28 Vat foundation trench A/08/03/0108/03 Progress of excavationA water installation used to contain water in a way NOT similar to a cistern. The most likely.association would be within a cultic sphere. Since its dating is E Persian it is tantalizing to hypothesize that some'J. returning in the time of Ezra or Nehemia settled in Transjordan and brought immersion rites with them. A reaction by the local Ammonites could explain its destruction.Related to wall extension 14 and its underlayments 15 and 16. Also related to foundation trench 19'and dirt2 0 .EPerARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, locus 7Summary: Dirt for plaster surface which was a stepREASONRemarks: Plaster above removed.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Dressing:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Reused Limestone............. 100%Unhewn............................... 25%Dressed............................. 50%Length............................... 1.250 mNot excavated; only initially cleared. 6Over: . 8' Remarks: Top step of water installation.LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit31 914.12 914.11POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Commentswater instal.Supervisor: DMSemi-hewn.J 25%ReadingDates: 06/30 toPub12 06/30 INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:0 / 3 1Fill under top step of plaster installation 6. Part of construction of installation 6.EPerIR bodsSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7X81, Locus 8 .Summary: Cobbles under plastered installation.REASON .Remarks: Separability: DESCRIPTIONMeasurements:Remarks:Removed plaster.Top--Very ClearLength......................... . 1.100 mNot excavated.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6, 7LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: DM Dates: 06/30 toWidth. 0.500 m31 914.11PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/15/0007/15 A/07/15/0007/15•INTERPRETATIONFunction: Foundation for plastered installation,top step.Stratigraphy: Part of construction of plastered installation.Locus Date: E PerSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 9 Supervisor: DC Dates: 06/30 toSummary: Soil layer/fill.REASONRemarks: Soil f i l l of plaster-lined installation.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt ........... 85% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 50%Consistence: Hardness............................ 2 Compactness...................... Very LooseWetness........................•... Very Dry Structure............... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 20/m2 Small Cobbles.................. 15/m2Distribution.................... RandomArti fact: Pottery........•..................... Flint................................. 1Distribution.................... RandomOrganic: Shells............................... 3 Distribution................... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 0.950 m Width................................. 0.170 mDepth................................. 0.250 mRemarks: Locus 9 is f i l l of locus 6 which we call plaster- lined water installation.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Equals: 2, 8 .7*71:5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit31 914.13 913.88POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub14 06/30 0/PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date2 1 SubjectIR bodsE/06/30/0606/30 Plaster lined vat INTERPRETATION. Function: Soil tumble in water installation.Stratigraphy: After Locus 6 in time. Filled with dirt at its destruction during E Per.Locus Date: EPerSOIL LOCUS SHEETREASONSeparability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHY Under: Over: Equals:Locus 10 Soil and tumble.Top--ClearYellowish brownClay........... 5%Medium Sand 30%10YR5/4S ilt........... 70%Course Sand 20%Round.'.___ 40%1Moderately Dry60/m28/m210/m27/m2RandomRare Random 1.300 m0.430 to 0.460 m 2 degSub-round.. 60%Hardness...............Wetness.................Small Pebbles___Large Pebbles.. . . Medium Cobbles... Small Boulders..'.Distribution........Flint....................Bone......................Distribution........Length...................Depth....................Degree of Slope..22 2, 5IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 8, Square 7K81 Sunmary:Supervisor: DM Dates: 07/02 to 07/03Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 50%Compactness................ Very LooseStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 20/m2Small Cobbles................... 25/m2Large Cobbles.........................14/m2Medium Boulders............... 1/m2Distribution.................... RandomShells......................... 4Width................................. 1.000 mDirection of Slope......... .84 degLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K81:6-10Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom7 914.66 914.20 13 914.63 914.20Count Bskts Loc Preservation19 07/0220 07/0320/1216/166LI2, few EI2 L12Regno. Description Field no. Date Paiil Loc Level Total Period MaterialBalli st ic 1 07/02 19Pestle 2 07/02 19PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/03/1407/03 West view of wall3/loc10INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil layer.Stratigraphy: The terminus point of sedentary occupation of ithe square most likely dated to E Per. 5It was separated by a wall from Locus 2. Dating may be EPer.Locus Date: ' Llr206/21/91 . SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7*81, Locus 11 Super■visor: DMSurmary: Surface near west balk at: location 13.REASONRemarks: Surface found under rock tumble.Separabili ty: Top*'ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S i l t . . . . . . . 80% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 50%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness...................... ModeratelyWetness............................. Very Dry Structure......................... RandomInclusions:Soi l : Brick Material................ . 2/m2, 15.0-30.0 cm Distribution.................... RandomStone: Small Pebbles............... 32/m2 Medium Pebbles................ 10/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2 Small Cobbles.................. 4/m2Medium Cobbles................ 3/m2 Large Cobbles.................. 1/m2Distribution......... .'........ RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 1 .300 m Width................................. 0.850 mDirection of Slope......... 106 deg Degree of Slope.............. 14 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5Over: 22Equals: 12, B .7*80:36Cut by: • B .7K80:5Remarks: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit13 913.69PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/13/0107/13 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Rough surface probably dumping area. Possibly underlayment for walls, cobbles.Stratigraphy:. Related to wall 4 as one of the earliest loci in the square to this point. It was dugconstruction of water installation 6:Locus Date: LIr206/21/91 SOIL LOCUS SHEETPage 1 CompleteIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7*81, Locus 12 Summary: Mudbrick-like surface in lociREASONRemarks: Surface found under tumble.Separability: Top--ClearPage 1Supervisor: GW Oates: 07/10 to-P*ooVODESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:LEVELSLoc Top10YR7/3Silt........... 80%Course Sand 5% Round.. . . . . 50%Very pale brownClay........... 15%Medium Sand 10%Sub-round.. 50%Hardness........................... 2Structure................ . RandomBrick Material.................... 6/m2, 17.0-20.0 cm Distribution--Small Pebbles.................. 45/m2 Medium Pebbles..Large Pebbles...................... 3/m2 Small Cobbles...Medium Cobbles.................... 2/m2 Large Cobbles...Distribution......... •......... RandomLength............................... 1.800 mDepth................................. 0.050 to 0.160 mColor range 10YR7/3 (very pale brown) to 2.5YR6/8 (Fine Sand.. 85%Wetness............................. Very Dry. Random 15/m2 2/m2 2/m2Width................................. 1.600 might red) to 10YR6/3 (pale brown).8ottom Transit21 913.60PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/13/0107/13 Progress of excavation.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible surface, but most IStratigraphy: Part of tumble 5.Locus Date: EPerTop Bottom Transit913.69 913.53ikely part of 5 and was excavated as such.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION • U87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 13Summary: REASONSeparability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Inclusions:Stone:Measurements:Tumble between locus 4 and the south balk.Complete Dates: 07/13 toTop--Clear Bottom--Clei10YR6/3Sand..Pale brown Clay........... 15%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Sub-round.. 50% Round.......... 50%Compactness......................Moderately Loose/Slightly RubblyWetness............................. Moderately OrySmall Pebbles................... 80/m2Large Pebbles.................. 20/m2Medium Cobbles................ 12/m2Bone................................... RareDistribution.................... R andomLength............................... 3.000 mDepth.................•............... 0.400 nStructure......................... Random30/m220/m2Width................................. 1.250 mDirection of Slope......... 100 degSTRATIGRAPHY .Under: 2Over: 22Equals: 5Seals against: 4Cut by: 6Very close to topsoil and good possiblity of pottery contamination from later material.Loc Top Bottom34 913.77 913.37Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading39 07/13 6/ 77 24 112, 1140 07/14 4/ 19 10 1 EPer, LIr241 07/14 0/ 20 I non Age bods49 07/20 14/107 30 E Per, Late Ir2OBJECTS • Reg no. DescriptionBallistic Mortar fragmentPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date • SubjectField r1Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing07/13 3907/13 39342 .Number Date Subject A/07/14/1007/14 Foundation trench?Number Date Subject A/07/14/1107/14 Jar in foundation trenchFunction:Stratigraphy:Tunble similar to Locus 5.Earlier than water installation Locus 6 since the water installation's foundation trench cut through Locus 13 and later than 4.Locus Date:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K81:10-134̂vOOARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 14 Supervisor: DM Dates: 07/20 toSimmary: Western wall extension in Locus 4.REASONRemarks: Size and shape of wall rocks change.Separability: Top-.-Clear Bottdm--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Reused Limestone......... •.. 100%wan ator Dressing:ibs: uoDoie......... .Unhewn...........Mortar: Dry-laid.......Measurements:: Length...........Orientation..STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2Over: 15Sealed Agnst By: 13LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit21 913.82 913.40POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatior50 07/21 5/ 42 8INTERPRETATIONFunction: Wall extensic to Locus 6.in and additiStratigraphy: Locus 14 was contiguous iLocus Date: Ur90%100%Small Boulder.. Semi-hewn.........75%10%Height............................... 0.420Reading L12, 11(ith Locus 6 and was later than Locus (wall) 4.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 15Sumnary: Clay/soil surface under Locus 14.REASONRemarks: Removal of 14.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very Cle.DESCRIPTIONColor: Pink 7.5YR7/4Texture: Clay........... 25% S ilt......... : 70%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 45% Round......... 55%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2Measurements: Length................................ 0.950 mOepth.................................. 0.070 mSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 15Over: 16LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit22 913.40 913.33POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsCompleteSupervisor: DM Dates: 07/21 toSand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 75%Compactness......................Width..................................0.900 mReading Pub52 07/21 7 /3 0 8 LI2INTERPRETATIONFunction: Underlayment for Locus 14. Soil used to level the foundation for the wall extension.Stratigraphy: Laid at the same time as wall (Locus) 14 in the general construction of Locus 6.locus Date: LIr2SOIL LOCUS SHEETity:IDENTIFICATION U87 Field B Surmary: - REASONRemarks: Separabi DESCRIPTION Color:Measurements:Surface Mat' l : Remarks:Square 7K81, Locus 16Plastered surface under 15.Dates:. 07/21Hard plaster found under 15.• Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very CleaiLight gray 10YR7/2Length............................... 0.300 mDepth................................ 0.010 to 0.020 mDegree of Slope............... 10 degPlasterPossibly equals Locus 11 with the plaster being cut away as part of the preparat installation). This surface may be the same as Locus 16 in 7K80.Width................................ 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 106 degi for Locus 6 (waterCompletetoSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:LEVELS22 913.33 POTTERYPail Oate1517Bottom Transit 913.32Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading Pub56 07/27 0/ 1 1 1 Iron Age BodINTERPRETATIONFunction: Perhaps surface.Stratigraphy The precise relationsh ip of Loci 16 and 6 is uncertain but they are associated in time and perhaps function.Locus Date: IrSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 17 Supervisor: DM Dates: 07/21 toSummary: Clay surface under U.REASONRemarks: Removal of A.Separabili ty Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: ' Pink 7.5YR7/ATexture: Clay........... 25% S ilt ........... 70% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 75%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. A5% Round......... 55%Measurements Length............................ .. 2.000 m W idth..;............ ......... 1.000 mDepth.............................. .. 0.070 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: AOver: 22Equals: 11, 12Cut by: 5LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit29 913.AO 913.33POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat on Comments .Reading Pub53 07/21 2/ 6A 12 Cleanup LI2, 11INTERPRETATIONFunction: Underlayment for Wall Locus A.Stratigraphy Associated in construction with Wall Locus A and Surfaces 11 and 16 LIr2 in construction.Locus Date: LIr2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 18 Supervisor: DM Dates: 07/23 toSurmary: Probe north of water installation support.REASONRemarks: Brick-dirt mix.Separability Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR7/3Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 2 Compactness......... ......... Moderately CrunblyWetness.......................... . Moderately Dry Structure............. ......... RandomInclusions:Soi l : Brick Material............. 20/m2 Distribution....... ......... RandomStone: Small Pebbles............... . 2A0/m2 Medium Pebbles... ......... 50/m2Large Pebbles............... . 20/m2 Small Cobbles___ ......... 1/m2Mediuti Cobbles............. 2/m2 Large Cobbles___ ......... 1/m2Small Boulders............. 2/m2 Distribution.. . . . ......... LayeredArtifact. Pottery.......................... . Rare Distribution........ ......... RandomOrganic: Bone............................... . RareMeasurements: Length............................ . 1.9A0 m Width...................... ......... 0.980 mDepth.............................. . 0.010 to 0.070 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5Over: 22EquaIs: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 913.27 913.26 ' 20 913.20 913.15 21 913.19 913.12POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat on Cocrcnents Reading PubSU 07/23 1/ 29 10' LI259 07/28 2/ 31 17 prob I1LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K81:14-I8PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/23/0507/23 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Tumble above mudbrickStratigraphy: Equals Locus 5 and is associated with the destruction of the water installation.Locus Date: Llr2.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 19 Supervisor: DM Dates: 07/23 toSurma ry: Foundation trench f or water installation (Locus 6).TYPE Certain Foundation TrenchDESCRIPTIONPlan: IrregularLining: NoneMeasurements: Length....... .............. . . . 3.300 m Width.................... ........... 0.100 to 0.500 mHeight...................... . . . 0.250 to 0.400 m Orientation......... ........... 108 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5Over: 22Cuts: 22Founda. Trench: 20LEVELS•Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 913.27 912.87 20 913.20 912.95' 21 913.19 912.93PHOTOGRAPHSNumber. Date Subject Number Date Subject Number- Date SubjectB/07/23/2807/23 Foundation trench 8/07/28/1107/28 Sherds flat on surface B/07/28/1307/28 Two storage jars in situB/07/24/1107/24 Progress B/07/28/1207/28 Rock lined installationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Foundation trench for the water installation (Locus 6).Stratigraphy: Dug at the time the water installation (Locus 6) was constructed.Locus Date: EPer?SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 20 Summary:ty: -REASONSeparab DESCRIPTION Color:Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Soil in foundation trench.Top--Very ClearLight yellowish brown 10YR6/4Hardness........................... 1Wetness............................. Moderately DrySmall Pebbles........... . 150/m2Distribution.................... RandomFlint................................. 20urganic: eone.................................. ySTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5, 18Over: 22Contiguous to : 19LEVELSLoc Top Botl:om Transit19 913.27 912..87POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation55 07/23 5 /62 1058 07/27 0/ 10 7Medium Pebbles..Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit20 913.20 912.95 21 913.19 912.93Reading LI2, Few ElReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail LocArrow shaft 1 07/22 55 20Total Period Material Photo Drawing• Function: Soil used to finish filling the foundation trench (Locus 19) after the foundation trench had been mostlyfilled with supporting stones.Stratigraphy: Associated in time with loci 6,7,8,14,15,16,18,20.Locus Oate: EPer?4̂VOSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field B, Square 7K81, Locus 21Summary: Bricky underlayment for Locus 16 and 17.REASONSeparability: Top*-Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 25% S ilt........... 70%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 45% Round......... 55%Consistence:- Hardness........................... . 2Wetness.............................. Moderately DryInclusions:Soi l : 8rick Material................ 8/m2Ash Pockets...............; . . , • 1/m2•Stone: Small Pebbles.................. . 500/m2Medium Cobbles................ 2/tn2Small Boulders................ 6/m2Artifact: Pottery.............................. RareOrganic: Charcoal........................... 10/m2Measurements: Length............................... 2.100 mSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 16, 17Over: 22LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit29 913.33POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc PreservationSupervisor: DM Dates: 07/27 toPebble Pockets................. 500/m2Distribution.................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 50/m2Large Cobbles.................. 1/m2Distribution.................... RandomWidth.................................' 0.700 mReading LI2, UD bods62 07/21 2/PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectA/07/28/0107/28 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Mudbrick used as- underlayment or foundation for wall (Loci 4 and 14).Stratigraphy: Associated in time with Locus 22 and is part of the earliest level in 7K81.Locus Date: LIr2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field B, Summary: REASONRemarks:DESCRIPTIONInclusions:Soil:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Remarks:Complete Dates: 07/09 toSquare 7K81, Locus 22 Supervisor:Mudbrick probe.Visible mudbrick under soil tumble.Brick Material................ 15/m2Flint.................................... 13Bone.................................... Rare Distribution...................... RandomLength................................ 5.000 m Width.......... ........................ 4.000 mDepth.................................. 0.540 to 1.200 mBrick color range: 2.5 YR 5/6 Red, 2.5 YR 6/6 Light Red, 5 YR 5/6 Yellowish Red, 7.5 Pinkish Grey,10 YR 8/2 White. Only partially excavated.Equals: B . 7K80::LEVELSLoc Top Bottom 18 -913.77 912..57POTTERY- Pail Date Count Bskts60 07/28 10/ 7S 10761 07/29 2/ 30 67.63 07/30 1/ 34 4464 07/30 1/ 46 5565 07/30 2/ 16 4566 07/30 2/ 47 5108JECTSReg no. DescriptionTop Bottom913.41 912.50ConmentsTop913.04Bottom912.50ReadingFew late Ir2, Iron Late Ir2, UD bods ■ 1 Late Ir2, Ir1 bod 1 prob Latr Ir2 bod, Ir IrLate Ir2Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingJar stopperPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number07/28 600 22Date Subject Nurtber Date Subject A/08/03/0108/03 Progress of excavationrinued this season the bricks haveA/07/29/0107/29 Progress of excavation A/07/30/0107/30 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Mudbrick destruction level. All bricks found so far have been tumbledStratigraphy: Associated with Locus 21 as a mudbrick stratum. As far as excavationsbeen "tumbled". This is part of the earliest evidence in 7K81.Jr2?Locus Date:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD B 7K81:18-22\otoSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 0 Stannary: CleanupDESCRIPTION OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionSupervisor: Date:Field no. Date Pail. Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlint 999 06/22 999Fossil 999 06/23 999Spindle whorl 999 06/23 999SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 5 Summary: Stone wall.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Consistence:Stones in alignment proved to be £ Top-Very clearYellowish brown 10YR5/6Clay........... 70X S ilt........Hardness........................... 3Wetness............................. DrySupervisor: JRB Dates: 07/07 toCompactness...................... LooseStructure......................... RandomInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets..................... 4/m2 .Distribution.................... RandomStone: Small Pebbles................... 20/m2Artifact: Pottery............................'. RareWorked Stones.................. 3Organic: Bone..................................... RareMeasurements: Length................................. 4.400 mDepth.................................. 1.300 mDegree of Slope.................... 5 degSurface Mat'l: Dirt rubbleRemarks: Wall 5 included soil between its stones. Thi5 was originally interpreted as a pit lining, architectural locus, sheet. Wall 5 is later tAsh Pockets...................... 6/m2Medium Pebbles................ 10/m2Flint................................. 12Distribution.................. RandomDistribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 0.900 mDirection of Slope......... 276 degi soil should have received a new locus nuntoer, but, becuase Wall soil in it was not excavated until 1987. See accompanying ian Wall 13.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Contiguous to: Seals against: LEVELSLoc Top61311, 28Bottom Transit9 891.38POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading PubIr1, MB, EB'Ir1, LB MB2, EB bods MB, few EB bods LB, MB bods, EB LB, MB, EB3/4Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinding stone 1 ' 07/07 92Pottery sherd (?) 2 07/08 96628 Spindle whorl fragment 999 06/29 999970 Mortar fragment 999 07/07 999Mortar fragment 999 07/22 999PHOTOGRAPHS .Number Date SubjectA/07/07/0007/07 Progress of Excavation92 07/07 6/ 26107 07/20 4/ 52119 07/27 2/ 17121 07/28 1/ 16124 07/29 9/197126 07/30 6/ 63OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 5 Supervisor: JRB Date:Sumnary: Wall, Locus 5REASONRemarks: Poss. Ir1/LB revetment wall at N balk. Built in 2 phases.Separability: Top—Very ClearReused Limestone......... 80%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................ 50% Small Boulder......... ........ 50%Chinkstones: Pebble............................ .. 90% Cobble...................... ........ 10%Fill Stones: Cobble............................ .. 90% Small Boulder......... ........ 10%Dressing: Unhewn............................ .. 70% Semi-hewn................. ........ 25%Dressed.......................... 5%Mortar: Dry-laid........................ .. 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style......... ; .................. .. Rubble-filied Support.................... ........ BatteredTendencies: 2 phases, one "better dressed" then laid aga'inst earlierCourses: 8Rows: 2 to 3Measurements: Length............................ .. 4.400 m Width........................ .. .. . . 0.800 to 1 .000 rHeight............................ .. 1.300 m Orientation............. ........ 276 degOip................................. .. 5 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure : Most Lean Direction........ ........ 25 degTop Foundation Level.. .. 891.38 mRemarks:STRATIGRAPHY Under:Cuts:Sealed Agnst By: Remarks:LEVELSWall 5 is a terrace revetment wall. Removed 1/2 of "lesser" well-dressed wall. Then its 2nd half to nice/better dressed part. On 28 Jul most of Wall 5 removed. Lowest courses of Wall 5 may be on Bedrock 30, unexecavated however.614, 15, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 : 4, 8, 9, 11UalL 5 may be sealed against/bui11 against bedrock, not reached at end of season-.Bottom Transit9 891.38POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc .Preservation Comments Reading Pub109 07/22 4/ 71 11 ' 2 LB, MB, EB bodsINTERPRETATION .Function: Wall 5 was a terrace revetment wall, possibly used to improve on bedrock terrace (re: 8162, 8L63, 8L64, 8L72,8L73), or to hold back something. We posit that Wall 13 is earlier than Wall 5. Food producing in region possible by positing that inhabitants threw ashes over wall onto present Surface 11.Stratigraphy: Eastern building of wall was dated to Iron I; western building phase was Late Bronze. Hence, we have anLB/Iron I revetment/terrace wall.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 10 SuperSunmary: Wall structure.REASONRemarks: "rock turmble"first encounted in 1984.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONRemarks: Did not reopen this 1984 locus, but found object in it worth Documenting.from balk trim one MB base, and one MB 2 cooking pot frag, with ring rope design and holes made in ring. See objects. I was digging elsewhereSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Remarks:LEVELSLoc Top27Sealed against by 22. Bottom TransitDate:I turned in for pottery reading w pail 122 at the time.99 999.00 891.52OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPottery base 1 07/29 122 10INTERPRETATION •Function: See 1984.8182 does not correlate to 8172:26.The former is too high.Locus Date: MB2ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 13 Summary: Wall.West half of 4 rows of walling.REASONRemarks: Stones in alignment (found in 1984).Separability: Top-Very Clear Bottom—ClearSupervisor: JRB Oates: 00/84 to 07/27LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD C 8L82:5-13DESCRIPTION Material:Origin:Reused:80% 1 100%20%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble.............................. 10%Mediun Boulder................. 10%Chinkstones: Pebble.............................. 10%Fill Stones: Cobble.............................. 100%Dressing: Unhewn.............................. 90%Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: S ty le ....'.......................... Rubble-filledCourses: 2Rows: 2Measurements: Length.............................. 1.600 mOrientation...................... 20 degPreservation:Small Boulder................... 80%Cobble............................... 90%Dressed............................. 10%Support............................. Free-standingWidth................................. 1.600 to 1.800 m.Dip....................................... 6 degTop Foundation Level.... 891.24 mRemarks: Wall 13 originally thought to be random rock tumble. Further excavation proved it to be four rows ofwalling,one to cour- ses high.Some attempt at levelling had been done with reused reworked stones. Formerly thought to be rock tumble.W=(13) ; E=(32),q. v.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6Over: 28, 22, 23Equals: 32Sealed Agnst By: 5, 20, 22, 24LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit9 891.24 890.86 *POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Pub91 07/06 12/ 61 38 -~ MB93 07/07 1/ 1 LI2104 07/16 0/ 41 Bods only: MB, EB111 07/22 5/ 39 MB/EB bods114 07/23 2/ 15 33 MB, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingLimestone,worked stone,nat.disc. 1 07/06 91Seeds 2 07/06 91 2Bones 3 07/06 91 8Ceramics 4 07/06 91 3Pottery? 5 07/07 1Flint 6 07/08 97 23 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate SubjectA/07/06/1207/06 Pottery on surface INTERPRETATIONFunction: (13) functioned as an MB2 wall of possibly two seperate building phases. Its 4 rows looked like they werebuilt 2 then 2. (13) was generally perpendicular to the prevaling orientation of the field C bedrock. Was(13) then a partition of some kind? Suporting two use surfaces as 22 and 23?Stratigraphy: MB2Locus Date: MB2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 15Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: To start excavation for the season.Separability: Top--Arbitrary Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 10% Silt........... 15%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Angular___ 5% Sub-angular 10%Consistence:Inclusions:Hardness...........................Wetness.............................. 3, Very DrySoil: Ash Pockets...................... 5/m2Stone: Small Pebbles..................Large Pebbles..................50/m210/m2Artifact: Pottery.............................Distribution...................., Frequent . RandomOrganic: Bone........................... ....... FrequentCharcoal........................... 7/m2, avg.. 0.Measurements: Surface Mat11:Length...............................Depth.................................Degree of Slope..............Beaten Earth. 5.000 m . 0.070 m 6 degRemarks: Abitrary locus to begin 1987 season. 15 ai4^VCU3Supervisor: TS Dates: 06/23 to 07/01Sand........... 75% Fine Sand.. 30%Sub-round.. 25% Round...... 60%Compactness...................... Very CrumblyStructure............................Wind0 i s t r ibut ion.................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 40/m2Distribution.................... RandomFlint.......................... 31Shells.................................. 12Distribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 3.000 mDirection of Slope......... 182 degare actually the same layer.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 14Over: 20, 22, 23Equals: 3, 8, 14, 20Seals against: 7, 13, 16, 17, 18Cut by: 5Remarks: Locus extended at one point in time from W to E balk.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit23 891.24 891.17POTTERY Pai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading76 06/23 131/ 24 IR2, MB, EB bods77 06/24 20/173 IR1, LB, MB2, EB4, EB78 06/25 18/223 55 Poss LIR2, MB2, EB79 06/26 15/158 32 Poss contaminated IR2, MB280 06/26 3/ 22 2 Cleanup MB bods, EB81 06/29 24/257 42 LB, MB2, EB82 06/29 2/ 19 3 EB483 06/30 13/271 51 MB2, EB84 06/30 0/ 15 4 EB bods85- 07/01 16/203 65 1 LB2/IR1, MB2 domOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingLoom weight 1 06/29 81 1Bones 2 06/30 83Bone object 3 07/01 85 1Bone sample 4 07/01 85 50Shell 5 07/01 85 12Stone objects 6 07/01 85 11627 Spindle whorl frag. 99 06/24 99 1629 Spindle whorl. 99 06/23 99 1656 Grind stone. 99 06/26 99 1785 Small mortar. 99 07/01 99 1609 Tool frag. ' 99 06/26 99 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/06/24/0106/24 Progress of excavation A/06/30/0506/30 Progress of excavat ion A/06/22/0306/22 Pre-excavationA/06/29/0106/29 Progress of excavation 8/07/01/0507/01 Progress of excavation A/06/22/0606/22 Pre-excavationA/06/29/0706/29 Grinding stone A/06/22/0206/22 Pre-excavat ion B/06/23/0106/23 Pre-excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Occupational use layer(14).Stratigraphy: 12 is latest found.Locus Date: LI2PubARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 16 'Summary: Wall at S balk.'REASONRemarks: Stones in alignment.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 80% Hard Chert.Masonry:Wall Stones: Chinkstones: Fill Stones: Dressing:Mortar: 'Facing:Construction:Courses:Rows:Measurements:Cobble............................... 20% Small Boulder...Cobble............................... 100%Cobble................ 100%Semi-hewn.......................... 100%Dry-laid............................ 100%UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink Support...............11Length........'...................... 2.200 m Width..................Height............................... 0.024 to 0.360 m Orientation.........Dip............................. - . . . . 3 degPartial Superstructure: LittleWall 16 is a stone wall. I have been looking for foundation trench 1 have found (16) is over bedrock B30.(16) now seen to extend intoSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: / 15Over: 30Sealed Agnst By: 23Remarks: Expect second course underneath (21 July).LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: JRB Dates: 07/26 to 07/3120%80%Free-standing1.000 m288 degi N side. No FT as of 21 July.No by 2.Any balk.33 890.44INTERPRETATIONFunction: Terrace wall, either destroyed or robbed out. Laid right on bedrock (B30).Stratigraphy: Robbed of upper courses? Prob. EB wall. EB3 surfaces 26 and 27 run up to (7) and (16) respectively.Locus Date: EB3LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD C 8L82:13-164̂4̂ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 17 Supervisor: JR8 Dates: 07/02 to 07/31Summary: Stone wall.REASONRemarks: Ca. six stones in alignment.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone...................... .' . 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................. . 100%Chinkstones: Pebble............................. . 100%Fill Stones: Cobble........... ............. . . 100%Dressing: Unhewn............................. 10% Semi-hewn.................. . . . . 90%Mortar: Dry-laid.......................... . 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style.................. ............ . Boulder & Chink Support...................... . . . . Free-standingCourses: 2Rows: 1Measurements: Length........... .................. . 1.450 m Width......................... . . . . 0.200 to 0.280 nHeight............................. . 0.250 ni Orientation............... 285 degDip................................... 2 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: Little Lean Direction......... 278 degLean Degree.................... 5 degRemarks: Possibly robbed.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: C ,8L87:6Over: C .8L87:22Sealed Agnst By: C .8L87:19Remarks: Very frail installationLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit• 34 891.22POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati on Conments Reading88 07/02 No readingINTERPRETATIONFunction: Wall 17 seems too small to have ever walled anything in. Possible silo, or enclosure for grain on N terracehillside. IF it were a circular installation as constructed, it had been destroyed/robbed out'to leave only a scant indication it ever was "rounded"/"apsidalSlight similarity to EB apsidal structure at S balk of 8L73 (1984).Bottom of 17 not yet excavated.Stratigraphy: Earliest phase of square,'FP7?Locus Date: EB4?SOIL LOCUS SHEET.IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 18Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Soil layer different from the surrounding area.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark yellowish brown '10YR4/4 ^Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt........... 35%Medium Sand 25% Course Sand S%Particle Shape: Angular.:.. 10% Sub-angular 15%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 2Wetness........................ . . . Moderately MoistInclusions:Soi l : Pebble Pockets........... 15/m2, 0.2- 0.3 cmDistribution............... . . . RandomStone: Small Pebbles............. . . . 100/m2Large Pebbles............. 10/m2Artifact: Pottery........................ . . . RareOrganic: Bone............................. . . . RareMeasurements: Length.......................... . . . 0.700 mDirection of Slope... . . . 356 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Locus 18 is the SW corner. The soil color is palconfined to such a sno il area.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 23Over: 31Seals against: 16LEVELS •Loc Top Bottom Transit31 891.33POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: TS Oates: 06/30 to 07/31Sand......... '. 40% Fine Sand.. 70% •Sub-round.. 25% Round........ 50%Compactness.....................Moderately FirmStructure.......................... RandomAsh Pockets...................... 80/m2, 30.0-80.0 cmMedium Pebbles................ 30/m2Distribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomWidth.................................. 0.260 mDegree of Slope.................. 6 degyellowish brown. 21 July: locus not yet excavated. LocusReading Pub84 06/30 3/ 20 4 18 EB bodsINTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Deposited soil layer in EB4.Relation 15(16)? It seems to seal against 16, altough the lowest courses of 16.Perhaps it goes under 18. EB4SOIL LOCUS SHEET ’IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 19 Supervisor: TS Dates: 06/26 toSummary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Soil immediately at S balk.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3' Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ... . . . . 20% Sand........... 60% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular.... 5% Sub-angular 10% Sub-round.. 35% Round......... 50%Consistence: Hardness................... ....... 2 Compactness.................... .. Very CrumblyWetness.................... Structure.......................... RandomInclusions:Soil: Pebble Pockets....... ....... 65/m2, 0.2- 0.3 cm Ash Pockets.................... 90/m2, 0.3- 0.4 cmStone: Small Pebbles......... ....... 130/m2 Medium Pebbles.. . . ' ....... 60/m2Large Pebbles......... ....... 10/m2 Distribution.................. .. 4Artifact: Pottery.................... ........ Rare Distribution.................. .. RandomMeasurements: Length...................... ........ 0.940 m Width............................... .. 0.320 mDepth........... ; .......... ........ 0.260 m Direction of Slope....... .. 357 degDegree of Slope.. . . ........ 5 degSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthRemarks: This locus is located by the south of locus 17. It revealed some pottery which could be dated to EB4. Fronshape of the lined stones of wall 17, it can imply a silo? 19 is so elos:e to S balk,and so small.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6Seals against: 17LEVELSLoc Top Bottom T ra n s itthe99 890.92POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub82 07/29 2/ 19 3 17. EB4PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectA/08/04/0308/04 End of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: . If wall 17 is a silo "walling," locus 19 should be contents of that silo, or a pit in its own right. Needsfurther ex- cavation.Stratigraphy: FP 7 depending on how close it will be to bedrock in excavat ion next season. Suspect FP7 is to be preferred.Locus Date: EB4.Clean LocusSOIL LOCUS SHEET. Square 8L82, Locus 20Sunmary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Change in soil color/texture. Partially arbiiSeparability: Top--Average Bottom--Arbi traryDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt......... . 20%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 20%Consistence: Hardness......... . ........3Wetness............. ........ Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.. ........ 200/m2Large Pebbles.. ....... 30/m2Medium Cobbles. ....... 16/m2Distribution... ....... RandomArtifact: Pottery............. ....... FrequentDistribution... ....... RandomOrganic: Bone.................. ....... FrequentDistribution... ....... RandomMeasurements: Length............... ....... 3.500 mSurface Mat11:Direction of SI Beaten Earth.ope........ 359 degRemarks: It was decided that Locus 20 extended from WSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Seals against:1522, 23 7, 13, 16Sub-round.. 50%Compactness...........Structure...........Medina Pebbles.. . .Small Cobbles........Large Cobbles........Width....................Degree of Slope..Fine Sand..Round.........Very Crumbly Wind130/m2 30/m2 3/m236272.200 m6 degDates: 07/02 to 07/137%20%LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD C 8L82:17-20495LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit99 891.17 891.02POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub' 86 07/02 2/ 24 54 20 MB2, EB bods89 07/02 4/ 27 21 20 MB, EB bodsOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total- Period Material Photo DrawingLimestone 1 07/02 86 3Grindstone 2 07/02 86 1Bones 3 07/02 86 20Flint 4 07/02 86 30840 Bead,white 5 07/02 66 1Obsidian 6 07/02 86 1Pink chalky stone 7 07/02 86 1Limestone 8 07/03 89 16906 Quern frag. 99 07/03 99 1907 Large,loaf-shaped object 99 07/03 99 1910 Quern frag. 99 07/03 99PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/02/0707/02INTERPRETATION-Function:Locus Date:Progress of excavatiorOccupational use layei MB2A/07/03/0907/03 Progress of excavation MB.Surface cut by 5.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION *U87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 21 Supervisor: TS Dates: 07/02 to 07/27Summary: Use layer.REASONRemarks: Different color.Separabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom-ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Brownish yellow 10YR6/6Texture: Clay........... SOX S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 20% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 40% Round......... 20%Consistence: Compactness................ . . . Very Crumbly Wetness.................. ......... Very MoistStructure.................... . . . WindInclusions:Stone:Measurements:Surface Mat'l: Remarks:Small Pebbles.................. 200/m2 Medium Pebbles..Large Pebbles.................. 60/m2 Distribution....Length............................... 1.000 m Width...................Direction of Slope......... 356 deg Degree of Slope.Beaten EarthTaleb started this locus in my (JRB) absence. It may be considered the soil excavated by 21 July. As wall 13 is taken out, 21 may be reopened.Once wall by 28.80/m2 Layered 0.800 m 6 degamong rocks of wall 13. Not (13) was removed 21 was replacedSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 15Over: 28. . Equals: 22, 28, 23Seals agai nst: 13, 10Cut by: 20Remarks: Sealed against by (5).POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading110 07/27 3 /19 OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionMB, EB bodsField no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlintINTERPRETATION1 07/02 87 1Function: • Part of rubble f i l l in construction wall 13 phase A.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field C, Suninary: REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Supervisor: TS Dates: 07/02 to 07/22D if fe r e n t s o i l c o lo r . T op*-V ery C lea r Bottom--ClearTexture: Clay............ 65%Medium Sand 35%S ilt ........... 20%Course Sand 10%Sand........... 15% Fine Sand.. 55%Particle Shape: Angular.... 10% Sub-angular 15% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... • 45%Consistence: Hardness.................... ___3 Compactness. . Moderately RubblyWetness...................... ___ Moderately Dry Structure__ . WindInclusions:Artifact: Pottery...................... .. . . . Rare Flint............ 12Distribution............. ___ RandomOrganic: Bone............................ ___ Rare Distribution. . RandomMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 2.250 m Width......... ... . 1.100 mDepth.......................... 0.200 to 0.250 m Direction of Slope......... . 358 degDegree of Slope.........___ 7 degSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthRemarks: Our nice MS pedestal base from here. Also probably sheep skull with upper jaw. 20 July: Am usiSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:E q ua ls :Seals a g a in s t: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Topdeep probe through locus 5 to 11, and also for try for bedrock with only 14 digging days remaining..Bottom Transit29 890.82POTTERYPail Date890.64Count Bskts Loc Preservatic87 07/02 3 /3 4 17 2298 07/08 1/ 1 29 Partially Pedestal base MB299 07/10 2/ 25 MB105 07/17 11/156 MB, EB bods106 07/20 9/174 MB/LB1, MB2, EB bods116 07/24 1/ 6 E8OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pai l Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlint ! . 07/02 87 29Grind stone 2 07/02 87 29 1Bones 3 07/02 87 29 1Pedestal base 4 07/08 98 29Grindstone frag,discarded 99- 07/17 99 11198 Ballistic missile 99 07/17 99 1 .Ballistic missile frag. 99 07/17 99 1PHOTOGRAPHSNurber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/17/1107/17 Sheep skull in situ B/07/20/0107/20 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0107/21 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATION' Function: Occupational use layer in MB2.Locus Date: MB2LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD C 8L82:20-22-P-OsSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 23 .Summary: Use surface.REASONRemarks: Soil layer is differentSeparability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brownTexture: Clay............ 50%Medium Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular___ • 10XConsistence: Hardness...........................Wetness........................... .(color).Bottom--Average10YR6/4S ilt ........... 30%Course Sand 5% Sub-angular 30% 3Slightly MoistInclusions:- S o i l :A r t i f a c t :O rga n ic :Surface Mat'l: Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under: .Over:Equals:Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc TopBrick Material................ 10/m2, 0.2- 0.3 cmDistribution.................... RandomFlint................................ 48Bone................................ FrequentDistribution................ . RandomLength............................... 1.500 mDepth.................................. 0.150 mDegree of Slope................. 6 degBeaten EarthLocus 23 can be considered a surface, particule202422Bottom T ra n s itSupervisor: TS Dates: 07/03 to 07/17Sand........... 20% Fine Sand.. 75%Sub-round.. 40%Compactness.........Structure.............Round......... 20%V ery Crumbly WindAsh Pockets...................... 10/m2, 0.1- 0.2 cmDistribution.................... RandomShells............................... 30Width................................ 0.700 mDirection of Slope_____ 359 degly in field location #8 where it sealed against locus 13.99 891.02 890.62POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading90 07/03 . 0/ 42 15 MB, EB bods94 07/07 9/ 94 41 20 MB2C/LB2, EB95 07/08 70 MB2B/C, EB100 07/13 15/ 63 43 11 contam from loc 5 1 11, MB101 07/14 11/146 30 12 contam from loc 5 Prob 12, L8, MB,102 07/15 4/ 65 32 MB, EB106' 07/16 4/ 63 21 MB; EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pai l Loc Level TotalBones 1 07/03 90 10Flint 2 07/03 90 16926 Possible spindle whorl 3 07/07 94 20 1Flints 4 07/08 95 20 35Obsidian - - 5 07/08 95 20 2Bones 6 07/08 95 20 40Soil sample 7 07/08 95 20 1Snail shell 8 07/13 100 23 1932 Pendant,drawn ,cerm 99 07/07 99 11282 Ballistic missile 99 07/23 99 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/06/0907/06 Progress of excavation A/07/15/1107/15 Progress of excavationA/07/08/0407/08 Progress of excavation A/07/16/1107/16 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Locus Date:Occupation use layer (surface) in MB2. MB2.EBMaterial Photo DrawingPubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 24 Supervisor: JRB Dates: 07/14 to 07/31Summary: Soil layer along W balk.REASONRemarks: New soil layer under locus 23.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light brown 7.5YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 50%Medium Sand 20%S ilt........... 30%Course Sand 10%Sand........... 20% Fine Sand.. 40%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 80% Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 3 Compactness......... ........... Moderately FriableInclusions:Wetness.......................... .. Moderately'Dry Structure............. ........... Water (Sheet Wash)Soi l : Brick Material.............Distribution.................10/m2 .. RandomAsh Pockets......... ........... 15/m2Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 200/m2 Medium Pebbles___........... 50/m2Large Pebbles...............Distribution................... 25/m2 .. RandomSmall Cobbles___ ........... 10/m2Artifact: Pottery..........................Distribution................... Rare .. RandomFlint.................... ............ 5Organic: Bone................................Distribution........... ...... Rare .. RandomCharcoal................ ........... 5/m2, avg. 5.0Measurements: Length............................ .. -1.500 m Width...................... . .......... 0.700 mSurface Mat11:Direction of Slope___8eaten Earth.. 180 deg Degree of Slope.... .......... 5 degRemarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:Locus 24 was assigned color of 18 is browner23, 28, 22, 29 27, 31 25 1813, 16 5to a standard soil change along u balk. Locus . Locus 24 may be earliest MB2 over EB?18 might be an extension oLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit19 890.62 890.44POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub117 07/24 8/ 49 30 KB EB120 07/28 12/214 42 MB2, EB bodsPHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Oate SubjectA/08/04/0208/04 BIOOATA SAMPLESRemarks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Locus Date:End of excavation A/08/03/0108/03 Progress of excavationSoil Sample........,............. Soil over possible pithos (no pithos). See also Remarks.Second soil sample of rust-colored pocket in association with "fire p it .1' Both samples of bones taken (sheep/goat?).Occupational use in use with MB27 as extended.Very clear along S edge.lith pai 120. One bagSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 25 Supervisor: JRB Dates: 07/22 toSummary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Change of color, ctinsistency along E balk.Separabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt ........... 60% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 75%Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 15% Round......... 85%Consistence: Hardness................... ....... 3 Compactness............. ........ Moderately FriableWetness.................... ....... Moderately Dry Structure................. ....... RandomInclusions:Soil: Brick Material........ ........ 10/m2 Ash Pockets............. ........ 10/m2, 40.0-60.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles......... ........ 25/m2 Smalt Cobbles......... ........ 5/m2Distribution........... ........ RandomArtifact: Pottery.................... ....... Rare Flint........................ ........ 18Distribution........... ....... PatternedOrganic: Bone.......................... ........Rare Distribution........... ........ RandomMeasurements: Length...................... ........ 2.250 m Width.......................... . . . ; 1.100 mDepth........................ ........ 0.280 m Direction of Slope. ....... 195 degDegree of Slope.. . . ........ 5 degSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthRemarks: In excavating locus 22 we definitely took some of the top of locus 25 (see E balk at balk tags). No FT in thisrunning up to wall 13 or wall 7.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 22Over: 26Equals: 24Contiguous to: 21Seals against: 27, 7Cut by: 5LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD C 8L82:23-25LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit2 890.86 890.58. POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation108 07/22 17/83 11112 07/23 3/174 35 1 bod=TellPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/23/1607/23 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Occupational use layer, in FLocus Date: MB2el-Yahudiyeh ware.MB2, EB bods MB, EBSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 27 Supervisor: JMB Dates: 07/24 to 07/31Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Change of soil colour. ect. at W.balk. To get square in phase .Separability: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture:' Clay........... 40% S ilt....... '.. 35% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 70%Medium Sand 15% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 3 Compactness......... ........... Moderately LooseWetness.......................... .. Moderately Dry Structure............. ........... Water (Puddling)Inclusions:Soil: Brick Material............. 3/m2 Ash Pockets......... ........... 5/m2Distribution................. .. RandomStone: Small Pebbles............... 10/m2Artifact: Pottery......................... .. Rare Flint.................... ........... 3Distribution................ .. RandomOrganic: Bone............................... .. Rare Charcoal.............. ........... 3/m2Distribution............. .. RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 1.500 m Width.................... ........... 0.700 mDirection of Slope.... .. 180 deg Degree of Slope.. ........... 50 degSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthRemarks: Ash layer intervenes (of locus B30) (and clari fy this next season). There may be other layers between 27 and30, unexcav ated.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 24Over: 31Equals: 26Seals against: 16LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit' 99 890.05POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading Pub126 07/31 2/ 40 6 contaminated ? Few poss . 11, MB, EBINTERPRETATIONFunction: Occupational use layer in EB 3.Locus Date: EB3SOIL LOCUS SHEET ^IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8182, Locus 28 Supervisor: JMB Dates: 07/27 to 07/31Summary: Use layer.REASONRemarks: Soilrocks after 13 removed.Separabili ty: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3 .Texture: Clay........... 65% S ilt ........... 20% Sand........... 15% • Fine Sand.. 55%Medium Sand 35% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 15% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 45%Consistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness.. . ; . . ........... Moderately RubblyWetness........................... .. -Moderately Dry Structure............. ........... RandomInclusions:Artifact: Pottery........................... .. Frequent Distribution....... ........... RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Rare Distribution....... ........... RandomMeasurements: Length............................. .. 1.600 m Width.................... ...........1.600 mSurface Mat11: CobblesSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 13, 0Over: 24, 23^oals against: 5LEVELSLoc Top99POTTERYPail DateBottom Transit890.72Count Bskts Loc Preservation Cpfiments Reading Pub118 07/24 4/ 27 6 125 07/30 2/ 33 127 07/31 . 5/ 26 OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail LocMB2, EB bods Few MB, EB bods MB, EBLevel Total Period Material Photo DrawingX1346 MB2 needle,11 cm,Hematite corr. 1 07/07 118 28 891.01 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/27/0107/27 Progress of excavation fl/07/27/1207/27 Needle rel. to loc.28 &5 B/07/29/0107/29 Progress of excavationA/07/27/1107/27 MB2? needle in situ B/07/28/0107/28 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: A sub-phase building . Part of rubble, levelling up for uall 13. Rubbly.all right, but s t i ll a surface.Stratigraphy: Part of 22,=23=21,the four extending throughout square.Locus Date: MB2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 29 Supervisor: JMB Date: 07/31Surmary: Cobblestone surface.REASONRemarks: MB 2 cobblestone surface, forms a kind of pavement. Flat -lying stones of very similar size, generouslydistrib.Separabi l i ty: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONConsistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness.............. ___ Moderately Loose/Moderately RubblyWetness........................... . Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Medium Cobbles............... . 20/m2 Distribution............. . . . . PatternedArtifact: Pottery........................... . RareMeasurements: Length............................. . 4.000 m Width......................... . . . . 1.500 mDirection of Slope....... . 190 deg Degree of Slope........ . . . . 5 degSurface Mat11: CobblesSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 28Over: 24, 25Equals: 22, 23 .Cut by: 5LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit99 890.72 890.62PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/31/0107/31 Progress of excavation . A/07/31/1107/3T Pavement/cobblestoneINTERPRETATIONFunction: Cobblestones of MB2 were a surface.Nearby ash layer suggests food preparationsome kind of cooking in assoc, with pave. Domestic housing also quite possible. Locus Date: MB2INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 30 Summary: Bedrock.REASONRemarks: Bedrock appeared under 26.TYPE Certain BedrockDESCRIPTION 'Material: Lining: Measurements: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Cut By:LEVELSLoc TopBedrock.............NoneLength___; ___26, 16, 18, 27Bottom Transit100% 5.000 m99 890.58PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectSupervisor: JMB Date: 08/02Number Date SubjectA/08/04/0108/04 End of excavation A/08/04/0208/04 End of excavation A/08/04/0308/04 End of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: B30 served as a solid foundation for all depositional activity throughout the entire use history of thesite.EB3 (and perhaps earlierjpeople laid wallsCesp. 16)right on bed rock. Area was used for cooking food preparation.Stratigraphy: Earliest phase of FP9 (7 according to 1984 reports).Locus Date: EB3LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD C 8L82:25-304̂oo.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Lo c u s 31 Suirmary: Ash layer.REASONRemarks:Separabi li ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Supervisor: JMBinclusions:Soil:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Seals against: Remarks:LEVELSLoc TopDistinct, extensive blackened soil, unexcav Top--Very Clear.Very dark gray 10YR3/1Clay........... 60S S ilt............. 20%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 5%Sub-round.. 80% Round.......... 20%Compactness......................A Loose/Structure......................... RandomBrick Material................ 20/m2, 3.0 cmSmall Pebbles.................. ■ 50/m2Small Cobbles................. 25/m2Pottery............................. FrequentBone................................... RareDistribution.................... RandomLength................ .............. 2.000 mDirection of Slope......... 195 degBurned sherds. Ash may extend to E.Present extent 90 digging w ^workmen,31 Jul. Extent of layer has not been found.Something may be between 31 and bedrock in location #19,though this has not been excavated.27Layer disappears into W balk.Wetness............................. Very DryAsh Pockets...................... 100/m2Medium Pebbles................. 100/m2Distribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomCharcoal.............................. 30/m2Width................................. 0.900 mDegree of Slope............... 2 degth no sign of lensing out.Discovered on last day of.99 890.44INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy: Locus Date:(1) Cooking fire in either MB2, in which case pit was cut through (Locus 27?)could be cobblestone pavement in assoc, with fire pit. (2) Or, ash layer could be no pit at all and extend under 24 widely in square and in- that case , probably be EB fire- site. Trash burning ? (2) is best option now. To be compared with 8L63:5 where EB burning|camp fire act- ivity was also going on.Food preparation? Ash dump'is was Locus 4 in 1984.EB3ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field C, Square 8L82, Locus 32 Summary: E 12 of locus 13.REASONRemarks: Describing a four-row wall in two adjacent parts as season ended.DESCRIPTION Material:Masonry:Wall Stones:Chinkstones: Fill Stones: Dressing:' Mortar:Facing:Construction:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYLimestone......................... 100% Chert..............Cobble............................... 10% Small Boulder.Medium Boulder................. 10%Pebble............................... 10% Cobble.............Cobble................................. 100%Unhewn............................... 90% Dressed...........Dry-laid. v ........................ 100%UnfacedStyle................................. Rubble-filled Support............Length............................... 1.600 m Width...............Orientation...................... 20 deg Dip..................Partial Superstructure: LittleWall 13 had 2 parts.2 rows to West, 2 to East.W=13, E=32.Under:Over:Sealed Agnst By: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:628, 22, 23 5, 20, 25See locus 8182:13 MB220%80%90%10%Free-standing 0.800 to 0.900 m 6 degDate: 08/02SOIL LOCUS SHEET.IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 1 Summary: Topsoil.REASONSeparability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brownTexture: Clay............ 20%Medium Sand 20% Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 30%Consistence: Hardness.................Wetness...................Inclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets..........Stone: Small Pebbles........Large Pebbles........Distribution.........Measurements: Length.....................Depth......................Degree of Slope...STRATIGRAPHYBottom--Arbitrary 10YR5/2S i l t . . . . '. . . 20% Course Sand 10%Round......... 70%2Moderately Dry1/m2, 3.0-10.0 cm 144/m2 3/m2 Random 6.000 m 0.100 m 10 degCompleteSupervisor: MM Dates: 06/25 to 07/15Sand........... 60% Fine Sand.. 70%Compactness...................... Moderately Crumbly'Structure......... ......... . . . RandomDistribution..................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 63/m2Small Cobbles.................. 1/m2Width.................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 182 degOver 2, 7, 8LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc • Top Bottom Transit11 898.85 898.78 X 21 898.80 898.59 x 35 898.51 898.40 X7 898.88 898.95 X 31 898.33 898.17 XPOTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion ' Comments Reading1 06/25 13/280 71 LI2, EB bods2 06/25 10/ 70 10 1 PER bod, LI2, EB43 06/26 11/350 89 Few BYZ bods, 1 HEL, LI2, EB4 06/29 . 75/475 166 Few BYZ, LI2 dom, EI2, fewi MB, EB432 07/15 26/146 131 North balk LBYZ, LI2, few MB, EB33 07/15 11/ 91 45 North balk EBOBJECTSReg no. • Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPartial grinding stone 1 06/25 1 11In first 10 cm of topsoil 2 06/25 1 173 06/25 2 234 06/25 2 23Mortice from 5K86 & 5K87 5 06/23 1 SUMortice from 5K86 & 5X87 6 06/23 1 SUGrinder from 5X86 and 5IC87 7 06/23 1 SUGlass 8 06/26 3 14Glass 9 06/26 3 9Stone (partial hammer stone) 10 06/26 3 9Smalt mortice 12 06/29 4 26PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate Subject Number Oate Subject Number DateA/06/23/0606/23 BIODATA SAMPLESINTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Pre-excavation E/06/25/1406/25 Progress of excavationSoil Sample...................... Required soil sample.Function= Wind blown debris buildup. Covered entire square.r"B/06/29/0706/29 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELDS C 8L82:31-32 AND D 5K96:1SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 2Simmary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:Measurements:Remarks:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:LEVELSArbitrary decision to start new locus. Sub-topsoil.Arbitrary decision to start new locus.Top--Arbi trary Bottom--ClearGrayish brown 10YR5/2Clay........... 20% S ilt........ . 20%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Sub-round.. 30% Round.......... 70%Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately DryNari Pockets.................... 1/m2, 2.0- 5.CSmall Pebbles.................. 144/m2Large Pebbles.................. 3/m2Distribution....... ........... RandomLength............................... 6.000 mDepth................................. 0.020 to 0.170 mDegree of Slope............... 10 degArbitrary decision to start new locus. Arbitrary decision to start new locus.Complete Oates: 06/29 to 07/28‘ Sand.. 70%Compactness......................Moderately CrumblyStructure...................... RandomDistribution........... .-____RandomMedium Pebbles................. 63/m2Small Cobbles.'................. 1/m2Width.................................. 2.100 mDirection of Slope........ 182 deg1Arbitrary decision to start rLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 898.78 • 898.65 x 35 898.40 898.23 x 1 • 898.41 X21 898.59 898.34 X. ' 9 898.46 X 4 898.63 x31 898.17 898.15 X 5 898.41 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatic Comments Reading5 06/29 1/ 17 9 1 LR2, EB bods6 06/30 20/320 81 LI2, EB4, EB7 06/30 4/ 48 7 1 LI2, EB49 06/30 2/ 48 7 Few LI2, EB10 07/01 11/171 81 Few LI2, EB411 07/02 19/130 60 Few BYZ, LI2, EB14 07/03 18/358 42 1 BY2 bod, LI2, few MB2, EB65 07/28 6 /7 0 17 East balk L12, EBOBJECTSReg no. Desc r i pt i on Field no. Date Pait Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingMortar 1 07/01 10 9 'Part ial grinder 2 07/01 10 9PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/06/30/0506/30 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample...................... Arbitrary decision to start new'locus.Flotation Sample.............Arbitrary decision to start new locus.Arbitrary decision to start new locus. Arbitrary decision to start new locus.on to start new locus.Remarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: ArbitraryBalks:Sub-balks:Archi tectural: ArbitraryINTERPRETATIONFunction: ArbitraryStratigraphy: Arbitrary decision to start new locus.on to start new locus.'vO\oSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION ConpleteU87 Field D,. Square 5K96-, Locus 3 Supervisor: MM Dates: 06/30 to 07/22Summary: Surface/change in color/change in consistence.REASONRemarks: Surface/change in color/change in consistence.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--!2learDESCRIPTIONColor: Light reddish brown 5YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt___ . . . 15% Sand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 40%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 40%Particle Shape: Round......... 100%Consistence: Hardness........................... 1 Compactness................... . . Moderately FirmWetness............................. Very Dry Structure.................... .. . . RandomInclusions:Soi l : Nari Pockets....... ............ 1/m2, 3.0-10.0 cm Distribution................. . . RandomStone: Small Pebbles____. i ....... 72/m2 Medium Pebbles........... .. . . 24/m2Large Pebbles____........... 2/m2 Small Cobbles.............. 1/m2Distribution....... ............ RandomArtifact: Flint................................. 25 Brick Fragments......... .. . . 20Measurements: Length.................. ............ 6.000 m Width........................... .. . . 6.000 mDepth................................. 0.030 to 0.320 m Direction of Slope___. . . 180 degDegree of Slope.............. 8 degRemarks: Surface/change in color/change in consistence.Surface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: . Surface/change in color/change in consistence.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2, 4Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Surface/change in color/change in consistence.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit11 898.65 898.33 X 9 898.46 x 5 898.63 X35 898.23 898.19 X 21 898.34 898.31 x 1 898.41 898.36 X31 898.15 898.10 X 7 898.27 XPOTTERYPail Oate Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub8 06/30 4/ 29 Burnt interiors EB15 07/03 10/140 28 EB16 07/06 32/282 65 2 e !2, EB17 07/06 7/107 44 EB18 07/07 21/421 38 2 IR bods, EB319 07/07 20/190 78 EB20 07/07 3/ 27 19 1 IR bod, EB321 07/08 10/ 65 39 1 LI2, EB34 07/16 4/ 34 15 North balk EB40 07/17 3/ 53 46 East balk. LI2, EB76 07/28 1/ 1 00 East Balk E8 Juglet40 07/14 3/ 53 EB41 07/17 1/ 37 EB •51 07/22 0/ 14 8 1IA, All bodsOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Oate Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing07/02 15 898.5207/06 16 1407/07 18 21Date Subject Number Date SubjectMortar removed from surface 1Partial hammer stone 2Partial grinder 3PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject NumberB/06/30/1006/30 B/07/01/0607/01 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks: Sub-balks: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:Pot sherds in-situ loc3 B/07/02/0707/02 Progress of excavation B/07/06/0507/06 Progress of excavation Progress of excavation B/07/03/0607/03 Progress of excavationSoil Sample...................... Surface/change in color/change in consistence.MicroanalysisSurface/change in color/change in consistence.Surface/change in color/change Surface/change in color/change Surface/change in color/change Surface/change in color/changein consistence, in consistence, in consistence, in consistence.Surface/change in color/change in consistence. Surface. In association with hearth. Burnt pottery lying on this surface. Mortars found on this surface. Pieces of large Surface/change in color/change in consistence.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:2-3L /lOOINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 4Summary: Open hearth. No stones outlining or bordering it. BurntREASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Remarks:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYOpen hearth. No stones outlining or bordering it. Burnt Certain HearthBurned Ceramic................ 100%Open hearth. No stones outlining or bordering it. Burnt NoneLength............................... 1.280 m Width..............Orientation...................... 180 degOpen hearth. No stones outlining or bordering it. Burnt potteryonly and sometimes on outside only. July 6: Norther perimeterUnder: 2Over:Equals:Cuts:Cut By:Seals Against:Sealed By:Bonded To:Founda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: Open hearth. No stones outlining or bordering it. BurntLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransSupervisor: MM Dates: 07/01 to 07/09............ 0.700 to 1.000 massociation is sometimes burnt on inside29 898.35 2223 898.39 898.36 28POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation898.56898.36Comments Reading Pub23 07/08 0 /21 525 07/09 2/ 52 13OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionEBEBField no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl BIOOATA SAMPLES07/09 25 29Soil Sample.Remarks: Open hearth.DRAWINGSTop Plans: Open hearth.Balks: Open hearth.Sub-balks: Open hearth.Archi tectural: Open hearth.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Open hearth.Stratigraphy: Open hearth..................... Open hearth. No stones outlining or borderingNo stones outlining or bordering it. BurntNo stones outlining or bordering it. Burnt No stones outlining or bordering it . Burnt No stones outlining or bordering it. Burnt No stones outlining or bordering it. BurntNo stones outlining or bordering it. Burnt No stones outlining or bordering it. BurntBurntARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 5 Summary: Two rows of stone. Wall.REASONRemarks: Two rows of stone.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 100%Remarks: Two rows of stone.Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble.............................. 30%Chinkstones: Cobble.............................. 100%Fill Stones: Cobble.............................. 100%Oressing: Unhewn.............................. 100%Remarks: Two rows of stone.Mortar: Dry-laid.......................... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkTendencies: Two rows of stone.Remarks: Two rows of stone.Courses: 5 to 6Rows: 2Measurements: Length.................................. 3.300 mHeight..........................: . . 1.000 to 1.150 mDip.................................... 2 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: HalfLean Degree...................... 10 degRemarks: Two rows of stone.Remarks: Two rows of stone..Supervisor: MM Dates: 07/01 to 07/31Small Boulder.................. 70%Support. Free-standingWidth................................. 0.750 to 0.800 mOrientation...................... 202 degLean Direction................ 300 degTop Foundation Level___ 897.63 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:founds. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts: .Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Two rows of stone.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit9 897.78 897.63 X 14 898.31 X8 898.69 PHOTOGRAPHSX 8 898.50 XNumber Date. Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/20/0507/20 Progress of excavat ion . B/07/24/0607/24 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0607/30 Progress of excavat:B/07/21/0707/21 Progress of excavat ion B/07/27/0607/27 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0607/30 Progress of excavatiB/07/22/1407/22 Progress of excavat ion B/07/28/0607/28 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0607/31 Progress of excavatiB/07/23/1207/23 Progress of excavat ion 8/07/29/0607/29 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0608/03 Progress of excavatiBIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: Two rows of stone.DRAWINGSTop Plans: Two rows of stone.Salks: Two rows of stone.Sub*balks: Two rows of stone.Archi tectural: Two rows of stone.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Two rows of stone.Stratigraphy: Two rows of stone.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87'Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 6 Supervisor: MM Dates: 07/01 to 07/06Sunmary: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06.REASONRemarks: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06. Possible alignment of several stones.Separability: Top--UnclearDESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Masonry:Wall Stones: Dressing: Remarks: Construction: Tendencies: Remarks: PresBematfteo: Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench: Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To:Limestone........... .July 2--This is r100%believed to be tumble from 6K06. Possible alignment of several stones. Cobble............................ 100%July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06. Possible alignment of several stones.July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06.July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06. •July 2--'This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06.July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06.Remarks: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06DRAWINGSTop Plans: July 2--This is now be lieved to be tumble from 6K06Balks: July 2-*This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06Sub-balks: July 2--This is now beli eved to be tumble from 6K06Architectural: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06INTERPRETATIONFunction: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06Stratigraphy: July 2--This is now believed to be tumble from 6K06LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:4-6SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 7 SupeSummary: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6. Sub topsoiREASONRemarks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.Separability: Top-Arbitrary Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 20% Silt........... 20% Sand-.......... 60% 'Particle Shape:Median Sand 20% Sub-round.. 30%Course Sand 10% Round......... 70%Consistence: Hardness.................... ....... 2 Compactness......................Wetness............................. Moderately Dry Structure.........................I nc l us i ons:Soil: Nari Pockets.............. . . . . 1/m2, 2.0- 5.0 cm Distribution....................Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 144/m2 Medium Pebbles................Large Pebbles.................. 3/m2 Small Cobbles..................Measurements:Distribution.............Length........................___ Random___ 2.000 m Width.................................Depth......................... ___ 0.310 m Direction of Slope.........Remarks:Degree of Slope.......West of locus 5 and___ 10 degsouth of locus 6.Remarks: West of locus S and south of locus 6.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:Remarks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.LEVELSLoc Top 7 898.85Bottom Transit 898.54POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts loc Preservation Comments Readingrvisor: MH Dates: 07/01 to 07/03Fine Sand.. 70%Moderately Crumbly RandomRandom63/m21/m21.000 m182 degPub12 07/02 BIODATA SAMPLES Remarks: DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks: Sub-balks: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:West of West of West of West ofWest of West oflocus 5 and south of locus 6.locus 5 and south of locus 6. locus 5 and south of locus 6. locus 5 and south of locus 6. locus 5 and south of locus 6.locus 5 and south of locus 6. locus 5 and south of'locus 6.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 8Summary: REASONRemarks:S e p a ra b i l i ty :DESCRIPTIONWest of locus 5 and south of locus 6. Sub topsoil..West of locus 5 and south of locus 6. Top--Arbi trary Bottom-AverageDates: 07/02 to 07/03Color: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 20% S il t . . . . '. . . 20% Sand........... 60% Fine-Sand.. 70%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 70%Consistence: Hardness.................. ....... 2 Compactness................ . . . Moderately CrumblyWetness.................... ....... Moderately Dry Structure.................... .. . . RandomInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets........... ........ 1/m2, 2.0- 5.0 cm Distribution.............. .. . . RandomStone: Smal l Pebbles......... ........ 144/m2 Medium Pebbles............. . . 63/m2Large Pebbles......... ........ 3/m2 Small Cobbles.............. 1/m2Distribution........... ........ RandomMeasurements: Length...................... ........ 2.900 m Width............................... . 1.600 mDepth................................ 0.060 to 0.100 m Direction of Slope___... 182 degDegree of Slope____....... 10 degRemarks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.Remarks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.STRATIGRAPHY U nder:Over:Equals:C ontiguous to : Seals a g a in s t: Cut by : Remarks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.oLEVELSloc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 898.60 898.54 7 898.59 898.49 13 898.49 898.41POTTERYPail date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading13 07/02 4/ 6 21BIOOATA SAMPLESRemarks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.DRAWINGSTop Plans: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.Balks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.Sub-balks: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.Architectural West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.INTERPRETATIONFunction: West of locus 5 and south of. locus 6.Stratigraphy: West of locus 5 and south of locus 6.pubARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field 0,S urinary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Material:Remarks: Masonry: •Wall Stones: Dressing: Remarks: Construction: Tendencies: Remarks: Measurements:Presftematlen:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:.Founda. Trench: Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To: Remarks:LEVELSLoc Top ESquare 5K96, Locus 9 Small wall.Dates: 07/02 to 07/07Sm all w a ll . Top --V e ry C lea r B o tto m -C le a rC obble___Unhewn.. . . Small w a llSmall w a ll Small w a ll L e n g th .. . .H e ig h t___D 'P ..............Small w a ll Small w a ll m o rta r des. 1.000 m. 0 .0 8 0 to 0 .1 0 0 m2 degWidth........... ..................... 0.200 to 0.500 mOrientation.................... 118 degLocus 9 gnated fis a possible interior wall that probably utilized the existing wall 5 and abutted i •Id object #1 of locus 3 was in association with it.Bottom T ra n s it Bottom Transit15 898.59 898.47BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: Small wallDRAWINGSTop Plans: Small wallBalks: Small wallSub-balks: Small wallArchitectural: Small wal IINTERPRETATIONFunction: Small wallStratigraphy: Small wallLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:7-9SOIL LOCUS SHEEToK>IDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 10 Supervisor: MM Dates: 07/03 toSunnary: Change in color. Surface.' REASONRemarks: Change in color.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Reddish brown ‘ 5YR5/4-Texture: S ilt........... 75% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 35% Medium Sand 35%Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Round......... 100%Consistence: Hardness............................ 3 Compactness....................... Moderately LooseWetness............................. Moderately Dry Structure.-....................... RandomInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets....................Stone: Small Pebbles........... ....Large Pebbles..................Distribution....................Artifact: Pottery.............................Distribution....................Organic: Bone...................................Measurements: Length...............................Depth.................................Degree of Slope...............Remarks: Change in color.Surface Mat11: Beaten EarthRemarks:STRATIGRAPHYChange in color.Under:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:3' Remarks: Change in color.2/m2, 2.0- 5.0 cm Distribution.................. Random81/m2 Medium Pebbles................. J6/m22/m2 Small Cobbles................... 3/m2RandomFrequent Flint................................. 26RandomRare Distribution..................... Random6.000 m Width................................... 6.000 m0.070 to 0.190 m Direction of Slope........... 212 deg6 degLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit17 898.33 898. 26 X 31 898.10 897.99 X 21 898.31 898.17 X7 898.27 898..19 X 35 898.19 898.10 X 1 898.36 898.27POTTERYPail. Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading22 07/08 4/ 69 31 EB24 07/09 13/ 93 34 EB27 07/10 14/194 22 EB28 07/10 3/ 53 18 EB36 •07/16 2/ 52 16 North Balk EB47 07/21 1/ 20 3 North Balk EB352 07/22 3/ 25 10 North Balk 2IA bods . EB64 07/28 14/219 25 East Balk 1LI2, EB70 07/28 9/ 97 East Balk EB71 07/28 8/ 33 East BALK EB'72 07/29 21/250 46 East Balk 1 Poss. LI2, EB274 07/29 27/282 36 East Balk EB3OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl 1 07/16 36 4Flint Blade 2 07/21 47Loom weight\Spindle whorl 3 07/20 72Basalt Grinder 4 07/29 72Basalt Grinder 5 07/29 72Basalt.grinder 6 07/29 72Basalt grinder 7 07/29 72Basalt Mortar 8 07/29 72Flint Blade 9 07/29 72PHOTOGRAPHSNumber ' Date Subj< Number Date SubjectPub6/07/07/0507/07 6/07/08/1007/08 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:Sub-balks: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation Progress of excavationSoil Sample....................Change in color.Change in color.Change in color.Change in color.Change in color.Change in color.Change in color.B/07/09/0607/096/07/29/0607/29Change in color.Progress of excavation Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 11 Sirrmary: Stones in alignment. Wall.REASONRemarks: Stones in alignment.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 100%Remarks: Stones in alignment.Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble................. .............. 30%Chinkstones: Cobble............................... 100%Fill Stones: Cobble............................... 60%Dressing: Unhewn................................ 100%Remarks: Stones in alignment.Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100XFacing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkTendencies: . Stones in alignment. Remarks: Stones in alignment.Courses: 4 to 5Rows: ' 3Measurements: Length................................ 2.650 mHeight............................... 0.770 to 1.200 mDip..................................... 8 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: HalfLean Degree...................... 4 deg'Supervisor: MM Dates: 07/03 to 07/31Small Boulder................... 70%Small Boulder.................. 60%Support............................. Free-standingWidth................................. 0.940 mOrientation...................... 126 degLean Direction................. 25 deg •Top Foundation Level__ 897.63 mRemarks: Stones in alignment.Remarks: Stones in alignment.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:Founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:- Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Stones in alignment.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit17 898.44PHOTOGRAPHS . Nunber Date Subject11 898.40 X 10 898.40 8.97 6Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/06/0507/06 B/07/20/0507/20 B/07/21/0707/21 B/07/22/1407/22 8/07/23/1207/23 BIOOATA SAMPLES Remarks: DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:Sub-balks:Archi tectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: 'Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationStones alignment.Stones in alignment.Stones in alignment.Stones in alignment.Stones in alignment.Stones in alignment.Stones in alignment.B/07/24/0607/24 Progress of excavation B/07/30/1207/30 Pavement & threshold8/07/27/0607/27 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0607/31 Progress of excavationB/07/28/0607/28 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0707/31 Progress of excavationB/07/29/0607/29 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0608/03 Progress of excavationB/07/30/0607/30 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:I0-1IARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 12 SuperSummary: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesREASONRemarks: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobbles Three stones in rSeparability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Masonry:Uall Stones: Dressing: Remarks: Mortar:Facing:Construction:Tendencies:Remarks:Courses:Rows:Measurements:.Preservation:Remarks:Remarks:Limestone......................... ,100%The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobbles Three stones in Cobble............................... 100%The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobbles Three stones inDry-laid........................... 100%UnfacedStyle................................. See Remarks Support..............................The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobbles The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesLength............................... 0.050 m Width...........Height............................. . 0.100 to 0.130 m Orientation.Dip.................................... 2 degPartial Superstructure: LittleThe slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobbles The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench:- Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To:Remarks: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesLEVELSLoc Top 11 898.71Bottom Transit 898.63 XBIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesDRAWINGSTop Plans: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesBalks: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesSub-balks: The slope (d ip )•IS -to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesArchitectural: The slope (dip) is to the SE. Construction: Small cobblesINTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:The slope (dip) The slope (dip)•visor: MM Dates: 07/03 to 07/06 il ignment.il ignment.alignment.Free-standing0.100 to 0.120 m 125 degoARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 13Summary: The slope (dip) of this wall is tothe NE.REASONRemarks: The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE. Several stones inSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Masonry:Wall Stones: Chinkstones: Dressing: Remarks: Mortar:Facing:Construction:T endenc i es: Remarks: Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench: Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To: Remarks:LEVELSLoe TopLimestone.......................... 100XThe slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE. Several stones in .Cobble............................... 100%Cobble............................... 100%Unhewn............................... 100%The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE. Several stones in .Dry-laid............................ 100%UnfacedStyle................................. 8oulder & Chink Support___The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE.The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE.2Length............................... 1.700 m Width..___Height............................... 0.110 to 0.180 m OrientationDip..................................... 6 degPartial Superstructure: LittleThe slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE.The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE.2The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE.Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: MM Dates: 07/07 to 07/12alignment.alignment.alignment.Free-standing0.300 to 0.400 m 224 degLoc Top Bottom Transit33 898.31BIOOATA SAMPLES Remarks: DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks: Sub-balks: Architectural INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:28 898.32 898.14The slope (dip) of this wall is to the NE.The slope (dip) The slope (dip) The slope (dip) The slope (dip)of this wall of this wall of this wall of this wallis to the NE. is to the NE. is to the NE. is to the NE.The slope (dip) of thi: The slope (dip) of thi:ill is to the NE. ill is to the NE.X 27 898.32LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:12-13504SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 14Complete 07/08 to 07/30Summary:REASONRemarks: Separabi l DESCRIPTIONChange in color/hard distinct surface. Surface.Change in color/hard distinct surface. Top--ClearColor:Texture:Yellowish brown Silt...... 60%10YR5/4Sand...... 40% Fine Sand.. 50% Medium Sand 25%Particle Shape:Course Sand 25% Sub-round.. 25% Round..... 75%Consistence: Hardness............... 2 Compactness............. Moderately CrumblyWetness................ Moderately Dry Structure............... RandomInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets........... 2/m2, 2.0- 6.0 cm Distribution. .•...... .... RandomStone: Small Pebbles.......... 121/m2 Medium Pebbles...... . 63/m2Large Pebbles.......... 3/m2 Small Cobbles....... 2/m2Artifact:Distribution...........Pottery.....•......... .RandomFrequent Flint................... 51Organic:Measurements:Distribution........... RandomRare Shells.............. 1Distribution...........Length.................Random 6.000 m Width................... 6.000 mDepth.................. 0.020 to 0.100 m Direction of Slope... ... 224 degRemarks: Surface Mat'l: Remarks:Degree of Slope........ 8 degChange in color/hard distinct surface. Beaten EarthChange in color/hard distinct surface.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:LEVELSl color/hard distinct surface.Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transi t LOC Top Bottom Transi t7 898.19 898.13 X 35 898.10 898.00 x 21 898.17 898.07 X17 898.26 898.20 X 31 897.99 897.97 X 1 898.27 898.25 XCount Bskts Loc Preservation29 07/13 4/112 39 EB30 07/13 2/158 97 EB31 07/14 6/146 99 1 12 bod, EB54 07/23 3/ 64 1 North balk EB75 07/29 16/219 27 East balk EB77 07/30 22/285 37 East balk Few Prob BY2Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level TotalWorked tool (flake) 1 07/14 31 29 897.92Hammerstone fragment 2 07/14 31 27 897.94Flint Blade fgagment. 3 07/23 54 00 1Flint Blade fragment 4 07/23 54 00Basalt hand grinder 5 07/29 75 1Basalt Hand Grinder 6 07/29 75Basalt Hand Grinder 7 07/29 75 1 .Basalt Hand Grinder 8 07/29 75 1Flint Blade 9 07/30 77 1Loom Weight\Spindle Whorl? 10 07/30 77 1Stone grinder 1 07/30 77 1Date Subject Number Date SubjectPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject6/07/10/0507/10 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:Sub-balks: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation B/07/13/0507/13 Progress of excavationSoil Sample.................. . Change in color/hard distinct surface.Flotation Sample............. 100%Change in color/hard distinct surface.Change in color/hard distinct surface. Change in color/hard distinct surface. Change in color/hard distinct surface. Change in color/hard distinct surface.Change in color/hard distinct surface. Change in color/hard distinct surface.B/07/30/1207/30 Pavement & thresholdINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field D,Summary:REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTIONSquare 5K96, Locus 15July 9--The pit does not seem to be lined with anythingJuly 9--The pit does not seem to be lined with anything Certain Pit• CompleteSupervisor: MM Dates: 07/08 to 07/09Plan:Remarks:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:IrregularJuly 9--The pit does not seem to be lined with anything NoneLength............................... 2.000 m Width................................. 0.600 to 1.900 mOrientation...................... 182 degJuly 9--The pit does not seem to be lined with anything other than the surface of locus 10 that appears to run beneath the pit.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3Over:Equals:Cuts:Cut By:Seals Against:Sealed By:Bonded To:Founda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: July 9--The pit does not seem to be lined with anythingLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit9 898.30 898.27 x 9 • 898.27 X 10 898.19 X15 898.31 898.19 X 14 898.19 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Reading Pub26 07/09' 13/ 43 19BIODATA SAMPLES1 ROM bod, EBSoi l Sample................Flotation Sample____July 9- -The pit does not seem iRemarks: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. i ned with anything0RAUINGSTop Plans: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. i ned with anythingSalks: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. i ned with anythingSub-balks: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. ined with anythingArchi tectural: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. i ned with anythingINTERPRETATIONFunction: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. i ned wi th anyth ingStratigraphy: July 9--The pit does not seem to be 1. ined with anythinglith anythingARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 16Sumnary: Stones in alignment. Wal l .REASONRemarks: Stones in alignment.Separabili ty: Top--Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone.......................... 100%Remarks: Stones in alignment.Dressing:- Remarks: Stones in alignment.Facing: UnfacedConstruction: S ty le ............................... ShoulderTendencies: Stones in alignment.Remarks: Stones in alignment.Courses: 2 to 3Rows: 1 to 2Measurements: Length............................... 4.000 mOrientation...................... 122 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: HalfRemarks: Stones in alignment.Remarks: Stones in alignment.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10, 14Over:Equals:Founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut 8y:Abuts:Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Stones in alignment.Supervisor: MM Dates: 07/10 toSupport............................. Free-standingWidth................................. 0.900 to 1.000 mDip....... ............................ 4 degLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:14-16LEVELSloc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top ' Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit27 898.24 X 27 ‘ 898.22 X 34 898.18 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub79 07/30 5/106 8 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingNumber Date SubjectB/07/21/0707/21 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1207/23 Progress of excavation B/07/24/0607/24 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: Stones in alignment.DRAWINGSTop Plans:Balks:Sub-balks:Architectural INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:Stones in alignment. Stones in alignment. Stones in alignment. Stones in alignment.Stones in alignment. Stones in alignment.1 07/30 79Number Date SubjectB/07/27/0607/27 Progress of excavation B/07/28/0607/28 Progress of excavation B/07/29/0607/29 Progress of excavationNumber Date SubjectB/07/30/0607/30 Progress of excavation B/07/30/1007/30 Ephem wall prior removalSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 17 Dates: 07/13 to 07/16Summary:REASONRemarks: Separabil DESCRIPTION Color: Texture:iclusions: Soi l : Stone:Organic:Measurements:Remarks: Surface Mat11: Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:LEVELSi color; hard distinct surface. Surface.Change in cc Top--Clearistinct surface. Bottom--ClearLight reddish brown 5YR6/4S ilt ........... 60% Sand............ 40%Course Sand 20%Sub-round.. 2S% Round.......... 75%Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately DryNari Pockets.................... 2/m2, 1.0- 5.0 cmSmall Pebbles.................. 81/m2Large Pebbles.................. • 2/m2Distribution.................... RandomPottery............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomBone................................... FrequentLength............................... 6.000 mDepth................................. 0.050 to 0.130 mDegree of Slope............... 8 degChange in color; hard distinct surface.Beaten EarthChange in color; hard distinct surface.14Change in color; hard distinct surface.Medium Sand 30%Compactness...................... Moderately CrumblyStructure........................... RandomDistribution........... RandomMedium Pebbles.................. 54/m2Small Cobbles..................... 2/m2Flint.................................. 219D i s t r i but ion..................... RandomWidth.................................. 6.000 mDirection of Slope........ 222 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc7 898.13 898.01 X 31 897.97 • 897.89 X 1417 898.20 898.07 X 21 898.07 897.99 X 1335 898.00 897.95 X 9 898.06 X 1 lPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatic Comments Reading35 07/16 20/140 EB38 07/17 3/ 51 17 EB43 07/20 15/298 66 EB45 07/21 1/ 55 14 EB3 bods56 07/23 5/ 68 13 EB80 07/30 7/148 32 East balk 1 IA bods EB81 07/31 15/213 38 E8OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total PeriodBottom Transit897.95898.03Anthropomorphic figurineU loB/07/14/0507/14 BIOOATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:Sub-balks: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Number Date .Subject Number DateB/07/15/0507/15 Progress of excavation B/07/20/0507/20SubjectProgress of excavaticSoil Sample............ Change in color; hard distinct surface.Change in color; hard distinct surface.Change in color; hard distinct surface.Change in color; hard distinct surface.Change in color; hard distinct surface.Change in color; hard distinct surface.SubjectProgress of excavationChangeChangen color; hard distinct surface, n color; hard distinct surface.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 18 Summary:REASONRemarks:Separabil DESCRIPTION Color:T ex tu re :Hard surface. Surface.Hard surface. Top--ClearDates: 07/16 to 07/27Bottom--ClearReddish brown 5YR4/3Silt___;.. 60% Sand...... 40%Course Sand 25%Sub-round.. 25% Round..... 75%Hardness...... ......... 2Wetness................ Moderately DryFine Sand.. 50% Medium Sand 25%Compactness............ Moderately CrumblyStructure.............. Random. Soil: Nari Pockets................ 2/m2, 1.0- 4..0 cm Ash Pockets........... ......... 1/m2, IDistribution................ .. RandomStone: Small Pebbles............... 81/m2 Medium Pebbles.. . . ......... 54/m2Large Pebbles............... 2/m2 Small Cobbles....... ......... 2/m2Distribution................ .. RandomArtifact: Pottery......................... .. Frequent • Flint...................... ......... 372Distribution................ .. RandomOrganic: pAnn Shells.................... ......... 1Distribution................ .. RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 6.000 m Width...................... ......... 6.000 mDepth............................. .. 0.010 to 0.140 m Direction of Slope ......... 218 degOegree of Slope........... 4 degRemarks: Hard surface.Surface Mat'l : Beaten EarthRemarks: Hard surface.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 17Over:Equals:Contiguous toSeals againstCut by:Remarks: Hard surface.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top17 898.07 898.00 X 13 898.03 897.98 X 31 897.899 898.06 897.92 X 7 898.01 897.91 21 897.9914 897.95 897.89 X 35 897.95 897.92POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat’ion Comments Reading37 07/16 8/ 88 38 EB39 07/17 9/ 78 28 EB44 07/20 0/ 29 EB46 07/21 23/288 55 EB348 07/21 2/ 36 EB349 07/22 2/135 33 EB61 07/27 4/ 59 15 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period MaterialStone object? 1 07/22 49PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/21/0707/21 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0607/31 Progress of excavationB/07/22/1407/22 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0608/03 Progress of excavationBIOOATA SAMPLESSoil Sample.................... . Hard surface.Remarks: Hard surface.DRAWINGSTop Plans: Hard surface.Balks: Hard surface.Sub-balks: Hard surface.Architectural : Hard surface.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Hard surface.Stratigraphy: Hard surface.897.83897.98Photo DrawingLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:16-18506SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION . US7 Field D, Summary: REASONRemarks: Separabili ty:Square 5K96, Locus 19 Distinct hardness.Distinct hardness. Top--ClearSurface.Bottom--ClearSupervisor: MM Dates: 07/16 to 07/27DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:Artifact:Light reddish brownS ilt........... 60%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 50%Hardness....................Wetness......................Nari Pockets.............Distribution.............Small Pebbles...........Large Pebbles...........Pottery......................Distribution.............Organic: Bone.........................Measurements: Length......................Depth.. ; ................Degree of Slope... Remarks: Distinct hardness.Surface Mat'l: Beaten Earth Remarks: Distinct hardness.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 18Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by: Remarks: Distinct hardnessLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit9 897.92 897.9017 898.00 897.9414 897.89POTTERY5YR6/4Sand........... 40% Fine Sand.. 50% Medium Sand 20%Round......... 50%2 Compactness................ . . . Moderately CrumblyModerately Ory Structure...................... . . Random1/m2, 1.0- 3.0 cm RandomAsh Pockets................ .. . . 1/m2, 50.0 cm54/m2 Mediun Pebbles........... .. . . 36/m21/m2 Distribution.............. . . . RandomFrequentRandomFlint........................... .. . . 439Frequent Distribution................. . . Random6.000 m Width.............................. . . 5.000 m0.000 to 0.100 m 3 degDirection of Slope..... . . 220 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom13 897.98 31 897.83 897.847 897.91 89 788.9835 897.92 897.85Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading42 07/17 14/ 77 51 EB50 07/22 24/339 64 EB353 07/23 35/366 71 EB362 07/27 4/ 44 8 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail J.oc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlint blade fragment ! 07/22 50Spindle whorl fragment 2 07/22 50. »Spindle whorl fragment 3 07/22 50Spindle whorl fragment 4 07/23 53 1Spindle whorl fragment. 5 07/23 53 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/17/0607/17 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:Sub-balks:Archi tectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavationSoil Sample....................Distinct hardness.Distinct hardness. . Distinct hardness. Oistinct hardness. Distinct hardness.Distinct hardness. Distinct hardness.B/07/22/1407/22 Progress of excavation Distinct' hardness.B/07/23/1207/23 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 20 Supervisor: MM Oates: 07/17 to 07/27Surcnary: Distinct surface. Surface.REASONRemarks: Distinct surface.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom*-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture': Silt...... 60%Course Sand 25%Sand...... 40%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness........... ..... 2Inclusions:Wetness.............___ Slightly DrySoi l: Brick Material..... .___ 1/m2Distribution........___ RandomStone: Small Pebbles...... ..... 34/m2Small Cobbles....... 2/m2Artifact: Pottery............ .___ FrequentDistribution....... .___ RandomOrganic: Bone..... .........___ FrequentMeasurements: Length.................. 5.000 mDepth...............___ 0.060 to 0.110 mDegree of Slope.....___ 4 degRemarks: Distinct surface.Surface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks:STRATIGRAPHYDistinct surface.Under: 19Fine Sand.. 50% Medium Sand 25%Round.'....... 40%Compactness...................... Moderately CrumblyStructure.......................... RandomAsh Pockets...................... 1/m2, 25.0-50.0 cmMedium Pebbles................. 23/m2Distribution.................... RandomFlint................................. 280Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................. 4.000 mDirection of Slope......... 219 degOver:.Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Distinct surface.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom17 897.90 35 897.85 897.76 21 897.88 897.7813 897.91 897.81 31 897.84 897.73 17 897.94 897.88POTTERYP a il Date Count B sk ts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading Pub55 07/23 16/166 33 1 LB,57 07/24 17/347 34 EB358 07/24 26/229 42 EB59 07/24 29/213 24 • EB64 07/27 4/ 35 5 EB 'OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt grinder stone 1Fragment. ' 1 07/24 57 1Basalt Grinding stone fragment 2 07/24 58 1Spindle whorl. 3 07/23 55 1Spindle whorl. 4 07/23 55 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/20/0507/20 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1407/22 Progress of excavationB/07/21/0707/21 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1207/23 Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample................. . . . Distinct surface.Flotation Sample........ . . . 50%Remarks: Disfinct surface:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Distiinct surface.Balks: D>Stiinct surface.Sub*balks: Distiinct surface.Architectural: Distiinct Surface.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Distiinct surface.Stratigraphy: Distimet surface.B/07/24/0607/24 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0607/27 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5%96, Locus 21 Supervisor: TH Date: 07/22Stannary: Hard packed ring of soil and small rocks. Installation?REASONRemarks: Hard packed ring of soil and small rocks.Separability: Top--Arbitrary Bottom--ClearLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:19-21DESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Masonry:Uall Stones: Chinkstones: Pill Stones: Dressing: Remarks: Facing: Construction: Tendencies: Remarks: Courses:Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYLimestone............................ 100%Hard packed ring of soil and small rocks.Cobble___: ......................... 100%Pebble............................. 27%Cobble......................... 100%Unhewn................................. 100%Hard packed ring of soil and small rocks. UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & ChinkHard packed ring of soil and small rocks.Hard packed ring of soil and small rocks.Random RandomLength....................... ... 1.500 mHeight............................... 0.100 to 0.150 mDip.................................... 3 degPartial Superstructure: LittleHard packed ring of soil and small rockslHard packed ring of soil and small rocks.Under: 18Over:Equals:founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Hard'packed ring of soil and small rocks.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit23 898.06PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/22/1707/22 . Installati< BIOOATA SAMPLESRemarks: Hard packedDRAWINGSTop P la ns: Hard packedB a lks: Hard packedS u b-ba lks: Hard packedA r c h i te c tu r a l : Hard packedINTERPRETATIONF un c tion : Hard packedS tra t ig ra p h y : Hard packed•ing of soil and small rocks.•ing of soil and small •ing of soi l and small ing of soil and small ing of soil and smallrocks.rocks.rocks.rocks.ing of soil and small rocks, ing o f'so il and small rocks.Cobble. 75%Width................................. 0.250 to 0.300 mOrientation...................... 220 degARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION •U87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus !Summary:REASONRemarks:Separabili ty: DESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Masonry:Uall Stones: Dressing: Remarks: Facing: Construction: Tendencies: Remarks: Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench: Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To: Remarks:Ring of stones cornering two walls.Ring of stones i Top--ClearHard Limestone................... 100%Ring of stones cornering two wallsCobble............................... 90%Unhewn................................. 100%Ring of stones cornering two walls UnfacedStyle................................. BoulderRing of stones cornering two walls Ring of stones cornering two wallsLength............................... 0.900 mHeight............................... 0.600 mPartial Superstructure: Most Ring of stones cornering two walls Ring of stones cornering two wallsRing of stones cornering two vSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/23 to 07/28Small 8oulder.................. 10%Support............................. Free-standingWidth................................. 0.400 to 0.500 mOrientation...................... 213 degL/1OLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit3 898.62PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate898.02 . Subject Number Oate Subject Number pate SubjectB/07/29/0907/29 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0607/30 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: R-ing of stones corner'ing two walls.DRAWINGSTop Plans: Ring of stones corner:ing two walls.Balks: R-ing of stones corneriing two walls.Sub-balks: R:ing of stones corneriing two- walls.Archi tectural: Riing of stones cornering two walls.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Riing of stones corneriing two walls.Stratigraphy: Riing of stones corneriing two walls.B/07/31/0707/31 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS' SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 23Sunmary: Distinct surface. Surface.REASONRemarks: Distinct surface.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay...... 10% Silt...:... 40%Medium Sand 25% Course Sand 25%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 50%Consistence: Hardness.......... ....2Wetness........... .... Slightly Dry1nclus ions: “Soil: Ash Pockets....... .... 1/m2, 25.0-50.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles..... ....' '35/m2Small Cobbles..... .... 3/m2Distribution...... .... RandomArtifact: Pottery........... .... FrequentDistribution......Measurements: Length............ .... 5.000 mDirection of Slope. .... 219 degRemarks: Distinct surface.Surface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Distinct surface.Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/24 to 00/72Sand........... 50% Fine Sand.. 50%Sub-round.. 30% Round.......... 20%Compactness.....................Moderately CrumblyStructure.......................... RandomDistribution.................... ' RandomMedium Pebbles................. 25/m2Medium Cobbles................. 1/m2Flint........... i ................... 126Width................................. 4.000 mDegree of Slope............... 4 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 20, 0Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Distinct surface.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 897.81 897.74 21 897.78 897.65 35 897.76 897.6517 897.88 897.76 31 897.73 897.59POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading60 07/27 24/494 64 EB363 07/27 10/167 31 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlint blade. 1 07/27 60 1Spindle whorl. 2 07/27 60 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectPubB/07/27/0607/27 BIOOATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks: Sub-balks: Architectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavationSoil Sample.................Flotation Sample...........Distinct surface.Distinct surface. Distinct surface. Distinct surface. Distinct surface.Distinct surface. Distinct surface.Distinct surface. 50%LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:21-23L /lo00ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 24Summary: 2. Rows of stones with f i l l in between.REASONRemarks: 2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Masonry:Uall Stones; Fill Stones; Dressing: Remarks: Facing: Construction: Tendencies: Remarks: Courses:Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Hard Limestone................ 100%2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.Cobble............................... 60%Cobble................................... 100%Unhewn............................... 100%2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.1Length............................... 1.100 mHeight............................... 0.060 mPartial Superstructure: LittleRemarks: 2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.Remarks: 2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 19Over:Equals:Founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: 2 Rows of stones with f i l l in between.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/27 toSmall Boulder.................. 40%Support. Free-standingWidth.................. 0.800 to 0.850 mTop Foundation Level___ 897.75 m13 897.81PHOTOGRAPHS .Number Date897.75Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/31/0707/31 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0707/31 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 25Summary: REASONRemarks: Separabili ty: DESCRIPTIONDid not begin to excavate •Oid not begin to excavate Top--Clearsurface of the locus s till resurface of the locus s till re-S u p e rv is o r: TH Oates: 07/28 toColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 10% Silt........... 40% Sand....... .. 50% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 25% Course Sand 25%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 40% Round___ .. 30%Consistence;Measurements:Remarks: Surface Mat'l: Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:Remarks:LEVELSLoc TopH ardn ess .'.. .Wetness........Length.........Direction of Did not begDid not beg.................. Slightly Dry.................. 5.000 mSlope......... 219 degn to excavate - surface of the locus stn to excavate - surface of the locus stilCompactness........................Slightly LooseStructure......................... RandomWidth....... J....................... 4.000 mDid not begin to excavate - surface of the locus st Bottom Transit13 897.74897.76Loc Top. Bottom Transit Loc . Top Bottom Transit2131897.65897.59 6.00 35 897.65Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation 67 07/28 3 /3 3 17OBJECTSReg no. Description • Field no. Date Pail Loc Level • Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt Grinding Stone. 1 07/28 67 1Basalt Grinding Stone. 2 07/28 67 1BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample....... •.___ Did not begin to excavate • surface of the locus still re-Flotation Sample....... 100%Remarks: Did not begin to excavate - surface of the locus still re-SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 26Summary: Soil inside bin Soil inside bin .REASONRemarks: Soil inside binSeparabili ty: Top--Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Consistence: Hardness............... 2Uetness................ SIightly MoistInclusions:Artifact: Pottery................ RareDistribution........... RandomOrganic: Bone................... RareMeasurements: Depth.................. 0.600 mRemarks: Soil inside binRemarks: Soil inside binSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks: Soil inside binLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit3 898.62 898.02POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatiori CommentsSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/28 to})Compactness............ Moderately CrumblyStructure............... RandomFlint.................... 36Distribution............ RandomReading Pub67 07/28 3/ 33 17 EBOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt grinding stone frag. 1 27/28 67Basalt stone 2 07/28 67BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample............ Soil inside binFlotation Sample....... 100%Remarks: Soil inside binSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 27 Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/28 toSummary: Beaten earth. Surface.REASON .Remarks: Beaten earth.Separability: Top-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light reddish brown 5YR6/4Texture: Silt...... 60%Course Sand 30%Sand...... 40% Fine Sand.. 30% Medium SandParticle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 50% Round..... 20%Consistence: Hardness............... 2 Compactness......... ... BUetness................ Slightly Dry Structure........ . ... RandomInclusions:Artifact: Pottery................ Rare Flint............... ... 117Distribution........... RandomOrganic: Bone................... Rare Distribution........ ... RandomMeasurements: Length................. 1.900 m Uidth............... ... 1.750 mDepth.................. 0.350 m Direction of Slope... ... 210 degDegree of Slope........ 3 degRemarks: Beaten earth.Surface Mat'L: Beaten EarthRemarks: Beaten earth.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:19Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks: Beaten earth.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:24-27509Loc Top Bottom7 897.91 897.56POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading69 07/28 2/ 34 12 EB73 07/29 5/ 69 32 EB78 07/30 PHOTOGRAPHS7/ 64 22 EBNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject6/07/29/0907/29 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0707/31 Progress of excavationPubARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K96, Locus 28Surma ry:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Dressing:Remarks:facing:Construction:Tendencies:Remarks:Courses:Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench: Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To: Remarks:LEVELSFlat lying stones. Pavement.Flat lying stonesT Top--ClearHard Limestone......... 100%Flat lying stones.Unhewn................. 100%Flat lying stones.UnfacedStyle.................. Flat bouldersFlat lying stones.Flat lying stones.Length................. 1.500 m 'Height................. 0.100 to 0.180 mDip.................... H degCompleteFlat lying stones.Flat lying stones.10flat lying stones.Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom5 898.59 898.41 4 898.47 898.37PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectB/07/30/1207/30 Pavement & thresholdSupervisor: THF re e -s ta n d in g1.000 to 1.250 t 240 degComplete Date: 07/30SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 29 Supervisor: THSummary: Unexcavated soil layer.REASONRemarks: Unexcavated soil layer. Hard beaten earth.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light reddish brown 5YR6/4Texture: Clay...... 30% Silt...... 40% Sand...... 30% Fine Sand.Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub*round.. 40% Round..... 30%Consistence: Hardness......... 3 Compactness.........___ Very FirmWetness.......... Moderately Moist Structure......... ..___ RandomMeasurements: Length........... 1.900 m Width................... 1.750 mDirection of Slope..... 210 deg Degree of Slope.....--- 3 degRemarks: Unexcavated soil layer.Surface Mat1l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Unexcavated soil layer.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: Over:27, 0Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks: Unexcavated soil layer.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit7 897.56ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K96, Locus 30 'Summary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Material:Remarks:Dressing:Remarks:Construction:Tendencies:Remarks:PresSenadeo:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHY Under:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Line of stones protruding through L. 25.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitLine of stones protruding through L. 25.Line of stones protruding through L. 25. Top--ClearLine of stones protruding through L. 25.Line of stones protruding through L. 25.Line of stones protruding through L. 25. Line of stones protruding through L. 25. Line of stones protruding through L. 25. Line of stones protruding through L. 25.23Wall.35 898.80Supervisor: PMDDate: 07/31Dates: 07/31 toLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K96:27-30510SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K97, Locus 1Summary: Mudbrick--possible burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil inREASONCompleteSupervisor: KAT Dates: 06/24 to 07/01Remarks: Mudbrick--possible burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil inSeparabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark grayish brown 10YR4/2Texture: Clay........... 50% S ilt........... 35% Sand........... 15% Fine Sand.. 80%Medium Sand 15% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 10% Round......... 90%Consistence: Hardness.................. 2 Compactness.................... .. Moderately LooseWetness.................... Moderately Dry Structure.......................... WindInclusions:Soi l : Brick Material....... 3/m2, 3.0- 6.C) cm Distribution.................. .. RandomStone: Small Pebbles......... 60/m2 Medium Pebbles............... 30/m2Large Pebbles......... 15/m2 Small Cobbles....'........ . 20/m2Distribution........... RandomArtifact: Glass........................ 1 Distribution.................. .. RandomMeasurements: Length...................... 5.000 m Width................................. 5.000 mDepth........................ 0.250 m Direction of Slope.......... 222 degDegree of Slope___ 8 degRemarks: Mudbrick--poss i ble burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil inRemarks: Mudbrick--possible burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil in NE corner dai•ker (Munsell 10YR4/2, dark grayishbrown) while rest of soil in probe is lighter (Munsell 10YR5/2, grayish brown). NE corner apparently organically stained. DirectionSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over: 3, 4, 5Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Mudbrick--possible burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil inLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Trans i'11 899.01 898.86 X 35 898.45 898.20 X 10 898.89 898.67 X17 898.66 898.66 X 31 898.57 898.22 X 7 898.86 898.55 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub1 06/24 29/434 50 BYZ, LI2, EB2 06/25 22/214 36 LI2, LB, prob MB, EB43 06/26 19/416 45 LI2, MB, EB4 06/29 29/463 70 1 ER bod, LI2 dom, prob E12, LB, EB5 06/29 20/231 5 Few 12, EB6 06/30 18/450 34 L12, prob MB bod, EB7 06/30 3/102 9 L12, EB10 07/01 19/157 34 1 BYZ bod, LI2, 11, EB4, UD17 07/03 7/ 95 13 Few LI2, EB domOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBurnt mudbrick ceiling fragment? 8 06/24 1Human bone 9 06/25- 2Unknown object, black 10 06/26 3Mudbrick ceiling frags? 11 06/25 2Mudbrick ceiling frags? 12 06/26 3 9Glass 13 06/29 4 15Mortar frag 14 06/29 5 11Small stone frag 15 06/30 6Mudbrick fragments 16 06/30 6Mudbrick fragments 17 07/01 10Worked frag 1 06/22 suMortar frag 2 06/22 suHand grinder frag 3 06/22 suWorked frag--basalt import 4 06/22 suGrinder frag 5 06/22 suUpper millstone fragment 6 06/22 suStone frag 7 06/22 suWorked stone frag 18 06/24PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/06/23/0406/23 E/06/25/1506/25 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks: INTERPRETATION Locus D ate :Pre-excavation B/06/29/0806/29 Progress of excavation B/07/01/0807/01 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation B/06/30/0706/30 Progress of excavationSoil Sample............ Mudbrick--possible burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil inMudbrick--possible burnt ceiling fragments found. Topsoil in BYZ/IARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 5K97, Locus 2Suimary: Single course with double row, floatingREASONRemarks: Single course with double row, loating iiSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very Clcks, burnt bricky material on surface of this locus.Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit10 898.42 11 898.50 898.40 x10 898.50 898.40 X 17 898.47 898.34 XCount Bskts Loc Preservation44 07/15 7/ 15 23PHOTOGRAPHSNumber • Date Subject Number Date Subject Date S u b je c tB/07/03/0707/03 Progress of excavation B/07/08/1107/08 Progress of excavation B/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavationB/07/06/0607/06 Progress of excavation B/07/09/0707/09 Progress of excavationB/07/07/0607/07 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K97:4-6L/TSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION(J87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 7Surmary: REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION:lusion distribution: Layered; stones, potsherdsSoil inclusion dis Top--Clear•ibution: Layered; stones, potsherds' Bottom--ArbitraryColor: Grayish brown 2.5Y5/2Texture: Clay...... 50% Silt...... 35%Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub*round.. 20% Round..... 80%Consistence: Hardness............ ...3Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/02 to 07/15Fine Sand.. 85% •Wetness................ Moderately OryCompactness............ Moderately GravellyStructure.............. RandomArtifact:Organic:Measurements:Remarks: Surface Mat'l: Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:LEVELSLarge Pebbles.......... 15/m2Medium Cobbles......... 10/m2Flint................... 428Bone................... FrequentLength.................. 2.480 mDepth.................. 0.200 to 0.250 mDegree of Slope......... 2 degSoil inclusion distribution: Layered; stones, potsherds Beaten EarthSoil inclusion distribution: Layered; stones, potsherds and bones are lying in.a basically horizontal pattern with overlapping edges. Lots of flints, some quite large, alsoSmall Cobbles.......... 20/m2Distribution........... LayeredDistribution............ RandomWidth.................. 1.880 mDirection of Slope..... 100 deginclusion disLoc Top Bottom 18 898.46 898. 269 898.50 898..28POTTERYPail. Date Count Bskts40 07/14 10/327 2641 07/14 21/156 2443 07/14 7/ 14 13.46 07/15 13/236 1995 07/28 10/ 83 17103 07/29 10/ 63 13OBJECTSReg no. DescxiptionLayered; stones, potsherds ic Top Bottom Transit 898.47Bottom Transit898.34898.26Comments Reading Few IR bods,1 IR bod, EB 1 LI2, EB LI2, IR1, EBFlintFlintFlint drill Stone morrtar Loom weight inDate Subjectn balk, balk.B/07/03/0707/03 Progress of excavation 8/07/06/0607/06 Progress of excavation B/07/07/0607/07 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONLocus Date: EBField no. Date Pail Loc1 07/14 402 07/14 40. 3 07/14 404 07/28 95 45 07/29 103 2Number Date SubjectB/07/08/1107/08 Progress <1 prob EB4, EB>1 Total Period Material Photo DrawingDate SubjectB/07/09/0707/09 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavationB/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavation B/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 8Sunmary: Arbitrary. Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Arbitrary.Separability: Top--Arbitrary Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 2.5Y5/2Texture: Clay...... 50% Silt...... 35%Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% Round..... 80%Consistence: Hardness.............. . 1Wetness............... . Moderately DryInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets.......... . 2/m2, 10.0 cmDistribution.......... . RandomMeasurements: Length................ . 5.000 mDepth................. . 0.050 to 0.200 mDegree of Slope....... 2 degRemarks: Arbitrary.Remarks: Arbitrary.Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/03 to 07/16Sand...... 15% Fine Sand.. 85%Compactness............ Moderately CrumblyStructure.............. RandomBrick Material......... 1/m2, 5.0 cmWidth.................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope..... 224 degSTRATIGRAPHYUniter: 1Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Arbitrary.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 898.86 898.38 x 16 898.45 X 28 898.24 898.20 X31 898.57 898.19 X 17 898.47 X21 898.41 898.31 X 29 898.43 898.33 XPOTTERYPail Oate Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub18 07/03 2/ 59 9 EB19 07/03 2/ 6 EB20 07/06 14/241 46 Few IR bods, EB21 07/06 6/ 85 28 Few IR bods, EB23 07/07 5/212 32 Few IR bods, EB26 07/08 1/ 21 5 Few IR bods, EB28 07/09 7/174 22 1 LI2, EB29 07/10 3/ 86 .11 Poss Kh. Kerak, EB30 07/10 0/ 11 EB bods32 07/10 0/ 12 EB bods34 07/13 5/229 34 1 LI2, EB38' 07/14 4/139 22 2 IR bods, EB. 45 07/15 7/366 54 EB49 07/16 0/ 40 5 v EB bods63OBJECTS07/21 3/ 25 11 1IR bods, EBReg no. Description Field no.. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Materiall Photo DrawingGrinder fragment 1 07/07 23 26Round stone object 2 07/07 23Flint 4 07/08 23Flint knife. 5 07/10 29 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Hunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/06/0607/06 B/07/06/0907/06 8/07/07/0607/07 B/07/08/1107/08 INTERPRETATION Locus Oate:Progress of Tabun? with Progress of Progress ofexcavation pot sherds excavation excavationEB-1B/07/09/0707/098/07/10/0607/108/07/13/0607/13B/07/14/0607/14Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationB/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0907/21 Show ceiling materialXXINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field D, S urinary: REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTIONSquare 5K97, Locus 9Possible tanur linedPossible tanur lined Probable Tabunrich pot sherds-*from storage ii'th pot sherds--from storageMaterial: Plan:Remarks:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYReused Ceramic......... 50X Hard Stone____CircularPossible tanur lined with pot sherds--from storage CeramicLength................. 0.420 m Width.........Height................. 0.250 to 0.270 m Orientation___Possible tanur lined with pot sherds--from storage jar?--outside flints, and charcoal found in center. Pollen sample takenUnder: 8Over:Equals:Cuts:Cut By:Seals Against:Sealed By:Bonded To:Founda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: Possible tanur lined with pot sherds--from storageLEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitCompleteSupervisor: KAT Dates: 07/06 to 07/1450%........ 0.320 to 0.380 m........ 194 deglined with small to medium cobbles. Ashes,13 898.50 898.28 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments ' Reading Pub22 07/06 3/ 90 139 07/14 11/ 54 1EBEBLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K97:7-9Reg no. Descript:ion Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinder 1 07/06 22 13PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date - Subject Nunber Date Subje Number Date SubjectB/07/06/0907/06 Tabun? with pot sherds B/07/08/1107/08 Progress of excavation B/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavationA/07/06/1307/06 Tabun B/07/09/0707/09 Progress of excavation B/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavationB/07/07/0607/07 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATION Locus Date:ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 10 Supervisor: KATSummary: Wall-like structure.REASONRemarks: Wall-like structure.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Decayed Limestone...... 100%Remarks: Wall-like structure.Masonry:Uall Stones: Cobble................. 20% Small Boulder.......... 80%Chinkstones: Cobble................ 100%Fill Stones: Cobble................ 100%Dressing: Unhewn................ 100%Remarks: Wall-like structure.Mortar: Dry-laid.............. 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................. Boulder & Chink Support. Free'-standingTendencies: Wall-like structure.Remarks: W a l l - l ik e s t r u c tu r e .Courses: 2 to 3Rows: 2 w/rubbleMeasurements: Length................. 1.120 m ' Width.................. 0.400 to 0.500Orientation............ 105 degPreservation: Foundation Only: PartialRemarks: Wall-like structure.Remarks: Wall-like structure. May be tumble,considered Phase 1 of wall,phase 2 is 36.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 8' O ver:Equals:Founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:Sealed Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Wall-like structure.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom T ra n s itComplete Dates: 07/06 to 07/3013 >8.47Bskts Loc Preservation82 07/27 3/ 48 3113 07/30 6/ 74 9PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectEB XEB XNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/07/0607/07 B/07/08/1107/08 B/07/09/0707/09 B/07/10/0607/10 B/07/13/0607/13 B/07/14/0607/14 B/07/15/0607/15 INTERPRETATION Locus Date:Progress, of Progress of. Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress ofe xca va tio nexcavatione xca va tio nexcavatione xca va tio nexcavationexcavationEB .Clean Locus8/07/16/0607/166/07/17/0707/17B/07/20/0607/208/07/21/0807/21B/07/22/1207/22B/07/23/1507/23B/07/24/0707/24Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress ofexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationB/07/27/0707/27 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0807/27 Progress of excavation B/07/28/0707/28 Progress of excavation B/07/29/0707/29 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0707/30 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Summary: Change iiREASONRemarks: Change iiSeparabi l i ty: Top--Cle,Locus 11i color and consistency. Plaster surface.l color and consistency, ir Bottom--ClearCompleteSupervisor: KAT Dates: 07/06 to 07/21DESCRIPTIONColor: Pinkish gray 5YR7/2Consistence: Hardness............................ 3Wetness.............-.............. Very DryMeasurements: Length............................... 4.000 mDepth................................. 0.005 to 0.010 mDegree of Slope............... 3 degRemarks: Change in color and consistency.Surface Mat'l: PlasterRemarks: Change in color and consistency.STRATIGRAPHYCompactness......... '............ Very FriableWidth................................. 3.000 mDirection of Slope......... 142 degUnder: 8Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Change in color and consistency.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transt Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit33 898.23 898.22 X 31 898.17 X 28 898.28 X27 898.30 898.25 X 19 898.33 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatii Cofiments Reading Pub42 07/14 9/ 47 1 EB53 07/16 2/ 17 6 EB X55 07/17 1/ 51 13 EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject- Number Date SubjectA/07/06/1407/068/07/07/0607/07B/07/08/1107/08B/07/09/0707/09INTERPRETATION Locus Date:Door post socket Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationEBClean LocusB/07/10/0607/108/07/10/1307/10B/07/10/1407/10B/07/13/0607/13Progress of excavation Plaster floor/assoc.obj. Plaster floor/assoc.obj. Progress of excavationB/07/14/0607/14B/07/15/0607/15B/07/16/0607/16B/07/17/0707/17Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 12 Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/06 to 07/17Summary: Surounded by worked stones (small cobbles). On same level asREASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Remarks:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:Surounded by worked stones (small cobbles). 0 same level as Probable Doorpost socketHard Stone. 100%RectangularSurounded by worked stones (small cobbles). On same level as NoneLength............................... 0.430 m Width................................. 0.310 to 0.330 mHeight............................... 0.230 to 0.200 m Orientation................ 198 degSurounded by worked stones (small cobbles). On same level as plaster of floor 11.Wear marks as doortop suggest useSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 8Over: .Equals:Cuts:Cut By:Seals Against: ,Sealed 8y:Bonded To:Founda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: Surounded by worked stones (small cobbles)..On same level asLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit26 898.26 897.98 XPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/06/1407/06 Door post socket B/07/07/0607/07 Progress of excavation B/07/08/1107/08 Progress of excavation B/07/09/0707/09 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavation 8/07/10/1307/10 Plaster floor/assoc.obj B/07/10/1407/10 Plaster floor/assoc.obj INTERPRETATIONLocus Date: EB26 898.15 897.98 XNumber Date SubjectB/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavatiionB/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavatiionB/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavatiionB/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavatiionB/07/17/0707/17 Progress of excavatii onB/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavatiionB/07/21/0807/21 Progress of excavatii onNumber Date SubjectB/07/22/1207/22 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1507/23 Progress of excavation B/07/24/0707/24 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0707/27 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0807/27 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K97:9-12INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5X97,Summary: Charcoal,REASONRemarks: Charcoal,TYPE ProbableDESCRIPTIONMaterial: Soft SoilPlan:Remarks: Charcoal,Lining: NoneMeasurements : Length... Height...Remarks: Charcoal, (labelledCompleteLocus 13 Supervisor: XAT Dates: 07/08 to 07/17ash. found frequently--some burnt material (perhapsash found frequently--soroe burnt material (perhaps Pit.............. 100%ash found frequently-some burnt materi;Irregular il (perhaps •1.500 m width................................. 1.250 m0.210 to 0.280 m Orientation...................... 104 degash found frequentlysome burnt material (perhaps soil) also found. Apparent layers of ash A,B,C onSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 8, 5Over:Equals:Cuts:Cut By:Seals Against:Sealed By:Bonded To:Founda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: Charcoal, ash found frequentlysome burnt material (perhapsLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 898.34 898.13 X 20 898.36 898.12 X 25 898.34 898.06 XPOTTERY iPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Reading Pub27 07/08 0/ 6 1 EB bods31 07/10 10/156 14 2 IR bods,35 07/13 9/169 11 2 IR, EB50 07/16 6/ 46 9 EB47 07/15 8/ 49 5 EB52OBJECTS07/16 0/ 21 4 EB bodsReg ho. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSNumberBasalt grinding stone fragment Stone grinderDate Subject12Number07/1007/10Date3131Subject Nunfcer Date SubjectX8/07/09/0707/09 Progress of excavation B/07/10/1307/10 Plaster floor/assoc.obj. B/07/13/0607/13 Progress of excavationB/07/10/0607/10 Progress of excavation 8/07/10/1407/10 Plaster floor/assoc.obj. B/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONLocus Date: EBSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 13'(Supplement) • Supervisor: XAT Oates: 07/08 to 07/17Installation SupplementSummary: Darker so il; evidence of charcoal and ash. Ash pit.REASONRemarks: Darker soil; evidence of charcoal and ash.Separability: Top--Average Bottom-*AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: 10YR5.6/1Texture: Clay,......... 40% S ilt ..'....... 50% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 55%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% • Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 0 Compactness.............. .___ Moderately LooseWetness.......................... . . Very Moist Structure.................. .. . . . RandanInclusions:Stone: Large Pebbles.............. 10/m2 • Medium Cobbles...........___ 4/m2Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length......................... .. . . 1.500 m Width....... .................. . . . . 1.250 mDirection of Slope___. . . 104 deg Degree of Slope......... . . . 2 degINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field D, Summary:REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Remarks:Lining:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYSquare 5K97, Locus 14Soil inside at bottom more hard-packed, very moist. BurnedSoil inside at bottom more hard-packed, very moist. Burned Probable Doorpost socketHard Stone........................ 100%OvalSoil inside at bottom more hard-packed, very moist. Burned NoneLength............................... 0.420 m Width....................Height............................... 0.220 to 0.260 m • Orientation.........Soil inside at bottom more hard-packed, very moist. Burned pottery small cobbles also surrounding this socket.Under: 13Over:Equals:Cuts:Cut By:Seals Against:Sealed By:Bonded To: lFounda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: Soil inside at bottom more hard-packed, very moist. BurnedLEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: KAT Dates: 07/10 to......... 0.400 to 0.420 m......... 94 deg■ Lso found. NW edge of stone broken. Some25 898.21 898.05POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Confronts Reading ~ Pub33 07/10 36 07/13 PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date2/ 85 10/ 24SubjectEBMendable Bods only: 1 ER, few IR, EBNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/13/0607/13 B/07/14/0607/14 B/07/15/0607/15 INTERPRETATION Locus Date:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationEBB/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0807/21 Progress of excavation B/07/17/0707/17 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1207/22 Progress of excavation' B/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1507/23 ' Progress of excavationINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field D, Suimary:REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Remarks:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYSquare 5K97, Locus 15 Surface loci 11/3Surface loci 11/3 Possible TabunReused Ceramic....Surface loci 11/3 Surface loci 11/3 submitted asruns up to edge of runs up to edge of— :. 100%runs up to edge of runs up to edge oflocus 15 and is also locus 15 and is alsoCircularlocus 15 and is also locus 15 and is also iiSupervisor: KAT Dates: 07/13 to 07/29lide at top.All pottery pails in this locusUnder: 4Over:Equals: - .Cuts: 11, 3Cut By:Seals Against:Sealed By:Bonded To:Founda. Trench:Fill Loci:Remarks: Surface loci 11/3 runs up to edge of locus 15 and is alsoLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit2929898.29898.23898.07898.102723898.22 898.04898.1223 898.13LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K97:13-15POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub37 07/13 1/ 52 9 Few IR bods, EB57 07/17 0/ 6 EB bods68 07/23 2/ 16 10 EB83 07/27 0/ 36 EB bods88 07/27 0/ 17 EB91 07/2892 07/28 2/ 45 2 EB97 07/28 1/ 598 07/28 4/ 19102 07/28104 07/29105 07/29106 07/29 7/ 67 EB107 07/29 6/ 18 1LI2, EB 'PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/14/0607/14 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0807/21 Progress of excavation ' 6/07/28/0707/28 Progress of excavationB/07/15/0607/15 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1207/22 Progress of excavation 8/07/28/1107/28 Sherds flat on surfaceB/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1507/23 Progress of excavation A/07/29/1107/29 Pottery in situB/07/17/0707/17 Progress of excavation B/07/24/0707/24 Progress of excavation A/07/29/1207/29 Jug in situB/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0807/27 Progress of excavation8IOOATA SAMPLESPollen Sample Flotation Sample...Remarks: Surface loci 11/3 runs up to edge of locus 15 and is alsoSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION087 Field 0, Square 5K97, Locus 16 Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/16 to 07/17Sunrnary: Soil layer. .. REASONRemarks: Change in consistency.Separabili ty: Top--Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 70X S i l t . . . . . . . 20% Sand........... 10X Fine Sand. . 90%Medium Sand 5% ' Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 25% Round......... 75%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 2 Compactness...........Wetness......................... .. Slightly Moist Structure.............. ......... RandomInclusions:Stone: Large Pebbles............... 10/m2 Small Cobbles....... ......... 3/m2Distribution................ .. RandomArtifact: Flint....... .................... ... 110 Distribution......... ......... RandomMeasurements: Length........................... ... 1.550 m Width...................... ......... 1.000 mDepth............................ ... 0.100 m Direction of Slope ......... 210 degDegree of Slope........... ... 6 degRemarks: Division between locus 8 and 16 basically arbitrary.16 re- vealed surface 28,which equals 5K96:17.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 8Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: bLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 898.38 898.21 X 8 898.31 898.20 X 8 898.30 898.20 XPOTTERYPail Oate Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub48 07/16 7/173 5173 07/23 1OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionEBField no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFlintPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate Subject1 07/16 48Nutiber Date SubjectB/07/16/0607/16 INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Progress of excavation B/07/17/0707/17 Progress of excavationSoil layer, contained some evidence of occupation^lints, sherds). Layer above surface(28).Seals against 10 and 20.Contemporary L. 18. EBSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION .U87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 17Sumnary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:■ Soil layer/rock tumble.Increase in size and number of stones. Top--Unci ear Bottom--Average■ Grayish brown 10YR5/2Clay........... 75% ' S ilt........... 20%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Sub-round.. 30% Round.. 20%Hardness........................... 1Wetness............................. Moderately MoistSupervisor: KAT Dates: 07/17 to 07/22Sand:......... 5% Fine Sand.. 60%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure.......................... RandomInclusions:Soil:Stone:Organic:Measurements:Surface Mat11: Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Nari Pockets............. ___ 1/m2, 15.0 cm Brick Material........... . 2/m2,Ash Pockets............... 1/m2 Distribution................. . . RandomLarge Pebbles........... 5/m2 Medium Cobbles........... . 3/m2Large Cobbles...........Distribution.............Shells........................2/m2___ Random1Small Boulders........... . 1/m2Length........................ . . . . 5.000 m Width........................... .. . . 2.000 mDepth.......................Degree of Slope.......Beaten Earth. . . . 0.070 to 0.290 m ___ 8 degDirection of Slope... . . . 192 degMortar found in location 10 tipped sideways with five possible support stones s t i ll around it. 8Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit16 898.44 898.28 X ' 22 898.22 X23POTTERY898.59 898.30 X 29 898.33 898.26 *Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading58 07/17 5/121 20 EB59 07/20 9/152 24 Poss contam. EB62 07/21 7/158 23 Poss contam. 1 IR bod, EB65 07/22 0/ 5 10 EB bodsOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail. Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingMortar 1 07/17 58 10 898.47 ’Shell 2 07/17 58 11Stone lid? 3 07/17 58 17PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/16/0607/16 8/07/17/0707/17 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation B/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1207/22 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation B/07/21/0807/21 Progress of excavation B/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavationFlotation Sample.............floatation sample taken from ash pit.May have been a surface but broken up by rock tumble.Contains mudbrick, may be part of mudbrick wall fallen on surface below (locus 21). Mortar from location 10 possibly from same surface as locus 9; contemporary?LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 5K97:15-17U iON. SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 18 Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/16 to 07/30Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Change in consistency. Increase in rubble. sherds, flints.Separability: Top--Arbi trary Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 2.5Y5/2Texture: Clay........... SOX v S ilt ........... 35% Sand........... 15% Fine Sand.. 85%Medium Sand 10X Course Sand -5%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 20% Round......... 80%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 3 Compactness................ ... . Moderately GravellyWetness......................... .. Moderately Dry Structure....................... . RandomInclusions:FI inr .. 653 D i st r i but ion................. . RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 2.480 m Width.............................. ..' 1.880 mDepth............................. .. 0.190 to 0.400 m Direction of Slope___... 100 degDegree of Slope........... 2 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: Over:7, 19Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottc5m Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitPub89POTTERYPail898.26- X 898.28 897.93 XDate Count Bskts Loc Preservat15• 7ion898.34 897.94 898.24 897.93Coimients Reading720898.16 898.97 898.20 897.95X51 07/16 9/123 54 EB71 07/23 19/168 22 From prob locat:. 7 EB X75 07/24 18/215 10 EB3 X77 07/24 23/194 15 EB3 X78 07/24 10/229 25 EB X79 07/24 4/ 62 8 EB '80 07/27 17/379 39 EB X84 07/27 5/185 15 EB X112 07/30 24/179 42 EB X117 07/31 314/ 3 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pai l Loc Level Total Per’iod Material Photo DrawingCeramic with stamp? I 07/27 78 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/16/0607/16 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0807/21 Progress of excavation B/07/24/0707/24 Progress of excavationB/07717/0707/17 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1207/22 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0707/27 Progress of excavationB/07/20/0607/20 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1507/23 Progress of excavation B/07/27/0807/27 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Garbage dump? Some flint napping may have occurred here.Stratigraphy: Below locus 7, probably the same. Extends to west balk below locus 28.Contemp. to sur. after 31. Does notappear to have been cut into these surfaces.Locus Date: EB3SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97, Locus 19 Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/16 to 07/17Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Fewer'stones and debris than 7 or 18.Separability: Top--Unclear Bottom-UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 75% S ilt........... 20% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 80X Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness.................... . . . . 2 Compactness.................... .. Moderately LooseWetness...................... . . . . Moderately Dry Structure.......................... RandomMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 2.000 m Width................................. 0.750 mDepth.......................... . . . . 0.050 to 0.070 m Direction of Slope....... . 187 degDegree of Slope....... ___ 2 degRemarks: Removed as seperate locus in attempt to trac e a possible sur face.No such surface was found.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 7Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments . Reading54 07/16 PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date5 /55 17Subject1 112, EBB/07/17/0707/17 INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: • Locus Date:Progress of excavation Soil-layer-f i l l .Probably accumulated soil layer beetween l< EB7 and 18.Very .e evidence of occupational activity.PubINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 5K97,.Locus 20 Supervisor: KAT Dates: 07/17 toSummary: Store jar.REASONRemarks: Extremely large, in N balk rock tumble.TYPE Certain Store jarDESCRIPTIONMaterial: Oven-baked Ceramic... . . . 100JSPlan: CircularLining: NoneMeasurements: • Length.......................... . . . 0.500 m Width.'............................... 0.360 to 0.375 mHeight.......................... . . . 0.310 mRemarks: In balk. Reaches beloiv locus 18.Lowest point inside jar is 898.00.8ase of jar not reached this season.Mayrest on sur- face belt oIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 1 Supervisor: THSummary: Topsoil (dirt/grass surface).REASONRemarks: First soil layer (topsoi l).Separability: Top-*Very Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTION »Color: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 30% S ilt......... . 10% Sand........... 60% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 60%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub*round. . 70%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness................... . . Very CrumblyWetness............................. . Very Dry Structure..................... . . . WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 15/m2 Medina Pebbles............ . . . 6/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2 Small Cobbles.............. 3/m2Distribution.................... . RandomArtifact: Pottery............................. Frequent Flint........................... .. . . 360Distribution.................... . RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Rare Distribution................ . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 6.000 m Width........................... .. . . 6.000 mDepth.................................. 0.040 to 0.220 m Direction of Slope___. . . 236 degDegree of Slope.............. 18 degRemarks: Soil layer included grass sod with rocky tumble and so il.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over: 2, 3, 4, 5CompleteDates: 06/22 to 06/2520%Equals:Contiguous to: Seats against: ' Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit • Loc Top Bottom Transit11 900.40 900.18 7 899.50 899.37 35 899.07 898.9321 899.24 899.28 31 899.04 898.95POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatio Comments Reading1 06/22 Ceramic figurine2 06/23 24/115 60 6YZ, late IR2, IR2, few EB bods3 06/24 40/201 65 LI2, EI2, 11, LB, MB, EB4 06/24 40/305 71 ER bod, LI2 dom, EI2, 11, EB bod5 06/24 9/ 56 10 LI2, prob MB, EB6 06/25 29/199 84 Few BYZ, few ER, 1 HEL, LI2, few EI2, EB bod7 06/25 5/ 56 21 LI2, prob MB65 07/17 12/105 36 East balk LI2, EB66 07/20 8/ 56 18 East balk IR2, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field ino. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFigurine t 06/22 1Grinding stone fragment 2 06/23 2glass . 3 07/20 66PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Oate Subject ' Number Date SubjectA/06/23/0706/23 Pre-excavation A/06/24/0506/24 Progress of excavation- E/06/25/1306/25 Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample...................... Sample of topsoil.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Topsoil collected over time bywind.Stratigraphy: A rocky and grassy soil layer which covered the square, approximately 10 cm in depth and covers the entireARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 2 Summary: Rock tumble.REASONRemarks: Separate from the surrounding topsoil.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone__i ................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................... 507.Dressing: Unhewn...:........................ 100%Facing: UnfacedCourses: Random •Rows: RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 1.900 mHeight............................... 0.200 mDip.................................... 15 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: LittleRemarks: • Included large flat rocks.CompleteSupervisor: TH Oates: 06/25 to 06/26Small Boulder.................. 50%Width.............................. . 0.500 to 1.000 mOrientation...................... 200 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over:Equals:Founda. Trench:Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By:Seated Agnst By:Bonded To:Remarks: Check 6K07.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom17 900.00 899.46 23 899.52 898.98PHOTOGRAPHSNuiber Date SubjectE/06/25/1306/25 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: May have served to shore up part of the slope.Stratigraphy: Contemporary with loci 4 and 5, may have been all part of the same tumble. Possible connection with rockconcentration in square 6K07.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 3 Supervisor: TH Oates: 06/25 to 07/02SuTmary: . A concentration of rocks:REASONRemarks: Concentration of rocks separate from surrounding topsoil.Separability: DESCRIPTION Material:Top--Very Clear . Bottom--ClearLimestone.................. . . . . 80%Masonry:Mari............................ . . . . 10%Wall Stones: Cobble........................ ___ 50%Dressing: • Unhewn........................ ___ 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style.......................... ___ Boulder & ChinkCourses: RandomRows: RandomMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 2.000 mHeight........................ . . . . 0.400 mSTRATIGRAPHYDip............................. ___ 8 degUnder:Over:1Equa ls:Founda. T rench :. C uts:Cut By:Abuts:A b u tted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To:LEVELSLoc Top 8ottom Transit Loc Top 8ottom31 898.98 898.75 32 898.94 898.78POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsChert................................. 10%Small Boulder.................. 50%Width................................. 1.000 to 1.100 mOrientation...................... 180 degTransitReading Pub15 07/01 1/ 47 6 IR bod, EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectE/06/25/1306/25 Progress of excavation B/06/30/0606/30 Progress of excavation B/07/01/0707/01 Progress of excavationB/06/29/0906/29 Progress of excavation 8/06/30/0906/30 Smashed pottery on surf. B/07/02/1007/02. Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESFlint Sample BoneINTERPRETATIONFunction: Rock tumble from surrounding walls (possibly from locus 8).Stratigraphy: Surrounds locus 8, and is above locus 9.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:l-3SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 4 Sumnary: Sub* topsoil.REASONRemarks: Looser soil layer beneath topsoil (locus 1).Separability: Top--Average Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 10% • S ilt ........... 25%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness............................. 2Wetness............................. Slightly DryInclusions:Soil: Chalky limestn................. 3/m2, 12.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles................... 30/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Medium Cobbles................. 5/m2Small Boulders................. 3/m2Artifact: Pottery............................... FrequentFlint................................. 729Organic: Bone.................................... RareDistribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length.-............................. 5.000 mDepth....... .'....................... 0.100 to 0.300 mDegree of Slope............... 16 degCompleteSupervisor: TH Dates: 06/25 to 07/07Sand........... 65% Fine Sand.. 40%Round......... 10%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure........................... WindDistribution.................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 10/m2Small Cobbles.................. 7/m2Large Cobbles.................. 5/m2Distribution.................... RandomTesserae........................... 5Distribution.................... RandomShells.............................. . 3Width.................................. 4.000 mDirection of Slope........ 200 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit11 900.18 899.93 7 899.37 899.09 34 898.82 898.7216 899.60 899.35 25 898.81 898.72POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading8 06/26 19/238 73 1 BYZ bod, LI2, few MB, EB410 06/29 34/405 110 . 1 BYZ, LI2, LB, EB12 06/30 9/ 72 44 1 prob ROM bod, LI2, EB bod16 07/01 6/132 26 ROM bod, IR, prob LB, EB22 07/02 41/423 77 Few BYZ, 1 ROM bod, LI2, EI2, EB28 07/03 20/280 57 Few ROM/BYZ bods, LI2, EI2, MB, EB32 07/06 25/445 40 Few BYZ, LI2, few EI2, 1 11, KB2, EB34 07/06 39/423 88 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 MB, EB35 07/06 1/ 52 11 IR, EB bods38 07/07 4/124 30 LI2, EI2, 1 MB, few EB bods39 07/07 51/392 6 Few ROM bods, LI2, EI2, 11, MB, EB40 07/07 14/233 36 1 UM, BYZ, ROM bod, LI2, EI2, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingFigurine--camel head 1 06/26 8 11 900.10Spindle whorl frag 2 06/26 8Grinding stone frag 3 06/29 10 16Fossi l.ized mold 4 06/29 10 22Smoothed basalt pebble 5 06/29 10Flint blade 6 07/06 34 14 898.83PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Oate SubjectPubE/06/25/1306/25 8/06/29/0906/29 B/06/30/0906/30 BIODATA SAMPLESINTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Smashed pottery on surf,B/07/01/0707/01 Progress of excavation B/07/02/1007/02 Progress of excavation B/07/02/1107/02 Smashed pottery on surf.B/07/03/0907/03B/07/06/0807/06B/07/07/0807/07Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationSoil Sample. Loose brown soil above bedrock.A contaminated soil layer not unlike the topsoil.Beneath locus 1, but over the bedrock (locus 6), and rock tumble of loci 10 and 11. Also covers surface of locus 7.L/1SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 5 Summary: Sub-topsoil.REASONRemarks: Soil change.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay............. 25% S ilt............ 30%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 15% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness............................. 2Wetness............................. Slightly Dry• I nc l us i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 15/m2Large Pebbles.................. 10/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery.............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone.................................... RareMeasurements: Length................................ 1.500 mDepth................................. 0.220 to 0.320 mDegree of Slope............... 16 degRemarks: Soil layer is same as locus 4.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Over:EquaIs:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom35 898.93 898.71 X 29 899.15 898.83POTTERY Pai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments96706/2607/204/ 98 22 10/ 88 22 East balkPHOTOGRAPHSNurber Date SubjectE/06/25/1306/25 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:ConpleteSupervisor: TH Dates: 06/26 to 06/29Sand........... 45% Fine Sand.. 60%Round......... 25%Compactness...................... Very LooseStructure........................... windMedium Pebbles................ 15/m2Small Cobbles.................. 5/m2Flint.................................... 56Distribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 1.000 m •Direction of Slope......... 190 degTransitXReading pubLI2, MB2/LB1, EB few IR2, EBSub-topsoil--contaminated and same as locus 4. Over locus 11 and part of locus 13.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 6 Sunriary: Bedrock.REASONRemarks: 8edrock.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor:Consistence:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc TopWhiteHardness..................Length......................Direction of Slope.4Bottom T ra n s it10YR8/156.000 m224 degLoc TopCompleteSupervisor: TH Dates: 06/29 to 07/09Width. / . ........................... 1.770 mDegree of Slope.......... 18 degBottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 899.93 X 17 899.46 X 16 899.35PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateB/06/29/0906/29 Progress of excavation B/06/30/0606/30 Progress, of excavation B/07/01/0707/01 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION Function:B/07/06/0807/06 Progress of excavation B/07/07/0807/07 Progress of excavation B/07/08/1307/08 Progress of excavation8/07/09/0907/09 Progress of excavationBedrockLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:4-6SOIL LOCUS SHEETL /lN>4^IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 7Summary: Accumulated debri s above surface.REASONRemarks: Debris mixed with smashed pottery above surface.Separabili ty: Top*-Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR7/3Texture: Clay........... 30% S ilt........... 40%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness___ ........... 2Wetness............................. Moderately MoistSupervisor: TH Dates: 06/29Sand........... 30% “ Fine Sand.. 40%Round......... 20%Compactness...................... Very LooseStructure......................... WindIn c lu s io n s :S o i l :Stone:A r t i f a c t :O rgan ic :Measurements:Su rface M a t ' l : Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Ash Pockets.. •ibution.D is t r i Small P e bb les .. Large P e b b le s .. D is t r i b u t io n . ..1/m2, 30.0-40.0 cm Chalky limestn... Random 15/m2 2/m2 . RandomPottery............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomBone................................... FrequentLength............................... 4.000 mDepth................................. 0.000 to 0.100 nLimeMedium Pebbles.. Small Cobbles...5/m22/m2Distribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 2.000 mDirection of Slope......... 130 degPottery all shows signs of burning. Ashy soil containing partially complete pottery vessels.Complete to 07/09Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit28 898.79 898.79 x 33 898.78 x 14 898.83 898.75 X22 898.86 898.81 X 26 898.80 X 20 898.81 898.71 X27 . 898.88 898.79 X 32 898.80 X 21 . 698.81 898.79 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading • Pub11 06/29 3/ 19 34 EB13 06/30 11/ 83 27 EB14 06/30 5/ 31 27 EB17 07/01 5/ 36 26 EB18 07/01 4/ 4 26 EB19 07/01 7/ 52 26 EB20 07/01 6/ 28 26 EB21 07/01 3/ 6 26 EB23 07/02 3/ 14 21 1 L12, EB24 07/02 0/ 9 21 EB bods25 07/02 6/ 26 21 2 LI2, EB, 1 UD27 07/02 6/135 21 EB29 07/03 13/ 83 EB30 07/03 8/ 73 1 IR bod, EB31 07/03 2/ 32 1 ER bod, EB35 07/06 8/ 98 EB37 07/06 4/ -14 EB41 07/08 2/ 5 2 post-EB, EB45 07/09 26/316 29 LI2, EB48 07/09 3/ 40 13 1 BYZ, 1 LI2, EB bodPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Oate Subject Number Date SubjectA/06/29/0906/29 A/06/29/1006/29 B/06/30/0606/30 B/06/30/0906/30 B/07/01/0707/01 A/07/01/1407/01 BIOOATA SAMPLESRemarks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Pottery in situ A/07/01/1507/01 Pottery flat on surface B/07/02/1007/02 Progress of excavation B/07/02/1107/02 Smashed pottery on surf. B/07/03/0907/03 Progress of excavation A/07/03/1607/03 Pottery in situ B/07/06/0807/06P o tte ry in s i t u P rogress o f exca va tio n Smashed p o tte ry on s u r f. P rogress o f exca va tio n P o tte ry sherds on s u r f . Progress o f exca va tio nA/07/06/1507/06B/07/07/0807/07B/07/08/1307/08B/07/09/0907/09Pottery on surface Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationSoil Sample...................... Two samples from inside in-situ pottery vessels.Pollen SampleFour samples from in situ pottery vessels for both pollen and soil sampling.An ashy soil layer which existed inside room-like structure. Appeared to be debris collected above a surface (locus 14).Sealed up against walls 8 and 13, but ran up to rock tumble of locus 10, not wall 18 beneath locus 10. Above a surface (locus 14).Stratigraphy:ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 8 (Supplement) Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/02 to 07/31Installation Supplement Suimary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Line of stones running across SW corner of square.Separabili ty: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone.............. .. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................. 20% Small Boulder............... .. 80%Chinkstones: Cobble............................. .. 100%Fill Stones: Cobble............................... 100%Dressing: Unhewn............................... 100%Mortar: Dry- laid........................ . 90% Mud................................. 10%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................. ... Boulder & Chink Support......................... .. Free-standingCourses: 4 to 5Rows: 2 w/rubbleMeasurements: Length............................. .. 3.200 m Width............................. .. 0.650 to 0.700Height............................. .. 1.080 tci 1.200 m Orientation.................. 130 dePHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/08/1307/08 Progress of excavatu BIOOATA SAMPLESFlint SampleNumber Date Subject B/07/09/0907/09 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 field D, Square 6K06, Locus 10 Summary: Rock tunble.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONSupervisor: THComplete : 07/08 to 07/10Rocks strewn randomly i Top--Very ClearColor: Rrnwn 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 55% Fine Sand.. 20%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Sub*angular 40% Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness___ . . . . 2 Compactness................ . . . . Moderately LooseWetness........ Structure....................___ Randomic l us i ons: Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top30/m215/m210/m25/m2Small Pebbles.......Large Pebbles........Medium Cobbles___Small Boulders___fl in t .................................... 24Bone................................... RareLength................................ 2.750 mDepth.................................. 0.050 to 0.230 nDegree of Slope.................. 20 degMedium Pebbles................. 40/m2Small Cobbles................... . 15/m2Large Cobbles.................. 7/m2Distribution..................... RandomDistribution..................... RandomDistribution..................... RandomWidth................................. 1 .750 mDirection of Slope......... 250 degBottom Transii . Bottom Transit899.13Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation . Comments Reading Pub47 07/09 2/ 37 5 1 LI2, EB50 07/10 14/217 22 1 BYZ bod, LI2, 11, EB51 07/10 6/ 53 8 ROM bods, IR bods, EBReg no. Description Field no. Date Pai l LocBasalt grinding stone fragment 1 07/10 50 9Basalt grinding stone fragment 2 07/10 50 10Flint blade 3 07/10 50 10PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjeTotal Period Material Photo DrawingB/07/08/1307/08 Progress of excavation 8/07/09/0907/09 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible f i l l placed between bedrock (6) and the wall of locus 18.Stratigraphy: Begins above part of bedrock and slopes down over wall 18.Number Date Subject B/07/10/0807/10 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 11Surmary: REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONRock tumble.Rocks strewn randomly. Top--Very ClearSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/08 toDate Subject Date SubjectB/07/08/1307/08 Progress of excavation B/07/09/0907/09 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06.9-11SOIL LOCUS SHEETL /itoONIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, locus 11 Summary: Rock tumble.REASONRemarks: Rocks strewn randomly. •Separability: Top--Very Clear 8ottom; -ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt........... 30%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Sub*angular 40% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness............................. 2Wetness............................. Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 30/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Medium Cobbles............ 10/m2Small Boulders................. 5/m2Artifact: Pottery............................... FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone............................... ’. . FrequentMeasurements: Length......... ....................... 1.000 mDepth................................. 0.210 mDegree of Slope.............. 2 deg- Remarks: Same rock tumble as locus 2.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: possible connection with D.6K07 ArchitecturalLEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitCompleteSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/10 to 07/14Sand........... 55% Fine Sand.. 20%Round......... 10%Compactness........................Moderately LooseStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles.................... 40/m2Small Cobbles...................... 15/m2Large Cobbles...................... 7/m2D i st r ibut ion.................... RandomFlint.................................... 72Distribution...................... RandomWidth.................................. 0.750 mDirection of Slope......... 180 degLocus 1417 899.00 898.79 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments' Reading Pub55 07/13 10/134 10 1 LB, 2 MB2, EB56 07/14 8/ 95 31 1 BYZ bod, IR bods, EB68 07/20 15/205 19 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSNumberFlint bladelet Mortar fragmentDate Subject12Number07/1307/14Date55 2356Subject Number Date Subject'Progress of excavation B/07/09/0907/09 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0807/10 Progress of excavationPossible f i l l placed between bedrock (6) and the wall of locus 18.Begins above part of the bedrock and slopes down over locus 18.B/07/08/1307/08INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:SOIL LOCUS SHEET Page 1IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 12Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Soil layer beneath subtopsoil locus 5 outside wall 13.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--CteaiDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture:' Clay........... 25% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 45%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 15% Sub-round.. 60% Round......... 25%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 2 Compactness.........Wetness....................... Structure.............CompleteSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/08 to 07/09Fine Sand.. 60XModerately Loose WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 15/m2Large Pebbles.................. 10/m2Distribution................ . RandomArtifact: Pottery.............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Rare •Measurements: Length................................ 3.500 mDepth................................. 0.100 mDegree of Slope.............. 15 degMedina Pebbles................. 15/m2Small Cobbles.................. 5/m2Flint.................................... 56Distribution..................... RandomWidth........................... ; . . 3.000 mDirection of Slope......... 226 deg' STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit35POTTERYPail898.71Date898.Count.61 XBskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading43 07/08 7/155 26 . 12, 11, EB46 07/09 0/ 18 5 3 IR bods, E69 07/20 8/143 51 East balk ' one IR2, EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate SubjectB/07/08/1307/08 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil accumulated against wall 13.Stratigraphy: Beneath subtopsoil, but similar, and runs against wall 13.PubARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 13 Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Material:Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/09 toTwo-faced line of rocks. Top--Very ClearHard Limestone..Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble.. Chinkstones: Cobble.. Fill Stones: Cobble..20%100%100%Small Boulder..Oressing:Mortar:Facing:Construction:Courses:Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Founda. Trench: Cuts:Cut By:Abuts:Abutted By: Sealed Agnst By: Bonded To:LEVELS29 898.90PHOTOGRAPHSNumber DateUnhewn........; ..................... 100%Dry-laid.................. ........ 90%UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink Support............................. Free-standing2 w/rubbleLength............................... 3.400 m width..................Orientation......... ......... 226 deg Dip......................Partial Superstructure: Most Lean Direction..Lean Degree...................... 78 degThe excavation process of locus 13 was not completed4, 5,11. 0.850 to 0.900 m 15 deg 122 degBottom Transit Bottom Transit23 898.82Number DateB/07/10/0807/10 B/07/13/0807/13 B/07/14/0807/14 B/07/15/0807/15 B/07/16/0807/16 . B/07/17/0907/17 INTERPRETATION Function:Progress of excavati Progress of excavati Progress of excavati Progress of excavati Progress of excavati Progress of excavation B/07/20/0807/20on B/07/21/0507/21on B/07/22/1307/22on B/07/23/1307/23on B/07/24/1007/24on A/07/24/1207/24Part of large EB3 complex.Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Progress of Wall #30excavationexcavationexcavationexcavationexcavationA/07/24/1307/24 Wall #30 B/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavat ion B/07/30/0907/30 Progress of excavation B/07/30/1207/30 Pavement & threshold B/07/31/0807/31 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:11-13527SOU LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus T4 Suninary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Separate from locusSeparability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brownTexture: Clay........... 20%Medium-Sand 30% Particle Shape: . Sub-angular 40%Cons i stence: Hardness.....................Wetness.....................7 accumulated pottery and material. Bottom-Clear10YR7/3S ilt ........... 45% Sand........... 35%Course Sand 20%Sub-round.. 60%---- 3 Compactness.......... . . . Moderately Dry Structure.............CompleteSupervisor: TH Oates: 07/10 to 07/13Fine Sand.. 50%M od era te ly F irm RandomInclus ions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 15/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery........................... : FrequentMeasurements: Length............................... 4.000 mDirection of Slope......... 130 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Locus consisted only of surface strewnpottery.Medium Pebbles................ 5/m2Small Cobbles.................. 7/m2Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................ 2.000 mthus there was no dephth/bottom to the locus. Flat-lyingSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 7Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSloc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit22 898.81 X 21 898.79 X 14 898.75 x28 898.79 X 20 898.71 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preserverion Comments Reading Pub49 07/10 18/245 34 E653 07/13 2/ 15 1 IR bod, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Periiod Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl fragment 1 07/10 49Basalt grinding stone fragment 1 07/13 53 27 898.79PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/13/08Q7/13 Progress of .excavation .INTERPRETATIONFunction: A surface (possibly a living one) inside the room-like structure; (14 is the surface to loci 15 & 17).Stratigraphy: Like locus 7, sealed against wall 8 and 13, but not necessarily wall 18; but rather rock tunble of locus 10.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field D, Square 6X06, Locus 15 Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/10 to 07/14Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Soil layer beneath surface (locus 14).Separabili ty: Top-Clear 8ottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Palo brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt........... 40% Sand........... 40% Fine Sand.. 40%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness.................. ......... 2 Compactness............. ........ Very LooseWetness..................... ........Moderately Moist Structure................ ....... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles......... ......... 15/m2 Medium Pebbles....... ....... ' 5/m2Large Pebbles......... . ....... 2/m2 Smalt Cobbles......... . . ; . . 2/m2Distribution........... ....... RandomArtifact: Pottery.................... ....... Frequent Flint........................ ....... 136Distribution........... ....... RandomOrganic: Bone......................... ....... Frequent ' Distribution........... ........ RandomMeasurements: Length...................... ....... 2.000 m Width....................... ....... 1.000 mDepth........................ ....... 0.080 to 0.150 m Direction of Slope. ....... 130 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 14Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit21 898.79 898.64 X 22 898.81 898.72 X 27 898.79 898.71 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub57 07/14 6/109 15 IR well worn S small Few IR bods, EBPHOTOGRAPHSHumber Date Subject Number Oate Subject Humber Date .SubjectB/07/10/0807/10 . Progress of excavation B/07/13/0807/13 Progress of excavation B/07/14/0807/14 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Debris layer inside room-like structure deposited over time:Stratigraphy: Seals against walls 8, 13, 18 and covers eastern half of the room.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 16 Summary: Soil layer.Soil beneath rock tumble of Top--ClearREASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:BrownClay........... 15%Medium Sand 30% Sub-angular 40%Compactness.........Structure.. .........locus 10.10YR5/3S ilt........... 30%Course Sand 50% Sub-round.. 50% Moderately Loose RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 30/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Medium Cobbles................. 10/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery.............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone................................... RareMeasurements: Length................................ 2.300 mDirection of Slope......... 210 deg 'Surface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Locus was not completely dug.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit9 899.10 898.86 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/13 toSand........... 55% Fine Sand.. 20%Round......... 10%Wetness............................. Moderately MoistMedina Pebbles................. 40/m2Small Cobbles.................. 15/m2Large Cobbles...................... 7/m2Flint................................. 16Distribution.................... RandomWidth.............................. 1.060 mDegree of Slope............... 9 degReading Pub52 07/13 8/ 80 34 2 prob BY2, 12, 1 MB/LB, EB domOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date- Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSmall flint blade fragment 1 07/13 52PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date SubjectB/07/13/0807/13 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possibly rocky soil used to f i l l in space between bedrock (6) and wall 18.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:14-16SOIL LOCUS SHEETL/1N>o oIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6K06, Locus 17 Surrmary: Ash layer.REASONRemarks:Separabi l DESCRIPTION C o lo r:Tex tu re :Dark fine < Top--Clear Bottom-ClearSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSDark grayish brown 10YR4/2Clay.'......... 20% S ilt............ 50%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 25%Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 60%Hardness........................... 1Wetness.............................. Moderately MoistSmall Pebbles..................... 10/m2Large Pebbles..................... 2/m2Distribution.................... RandomPottery............................. FrequentBasalt frag...................... 2Bone................................... FrequentLength............................... 2.000 mDepth................................. 0.010 to 0.020 m14Supervisor: THRound......... 20%Compactness...................... Very LooseStructure......................... RandomComplete Date: 07/135/m25/m241Flint......................Distribution..................... RandomD i s t r i but ion..................... RandomWidth.................................. 1.000 mDirection of Slope......... 130 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13POTTERYPail898.75Date898.71 XCount Bskts Loc Preservat119ion898.71Comments898.72Reading20 898.71 898.72 X54 07/13 24/184 27 2 LI2, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Matenial Photo DrawingCeramic spindle whorl I 07/13 54 21Basalt loom weight fragment > 07/13 54 21Number Date SubjectB/07/13/0807/13 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Debris layer deposited over time-all inside room-like structure.Stratigraphy: Seals against walls 8, 13, 18, and covers western half of room.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus ‘ Summary: Wall.REASONRemarks:Separabil DESCRIPTION Material:Dates: 07/14 toTw o-faced l in e o f rocks . T op --V e ry C lea rMasonry:Wall Stones: Chinkstones; Fill Stones: Dressing:Mortar:Facing: Construction: Courses:Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Hard Limestone................. 100%Cobble.................................. 20%Cobble............................... 100%Cobble............................... 100%Unhewn............................... 100%Dry-laid............................... 90%UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink42 w/rubbleLength............................... 3.900 mOrientation...................... 314 degPartial Superstructure: MostLean Degree...................... 88 degExcavation of locus 18 was not completed.10Small B o u ld e r ..Width................................ 0.750 to 0.850 mDip.................................... 10 degLean Direction................ 210 degLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit23 898.85 PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject15 898.77 Number Date Subject)< 8 898.97 Number Date SubjectX6/07/14/0807/14 Progress of excavat'ion B/07/21/0507/21 Progress of excavat ion A/07/24/1307/24 Uall #30B/07/15/0807/15 Progress of excavatiion B/07/22/1307/22 Progress of excavat'ion B/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavat'ionB/07/16/0807/16 Progress of excavatiion B/07/23/1307/23 Progress of excavat'ion B/07/30/0907/30 Progress of excavat'ionB/07/17/0907/17 Progress of excavatiion B/07/24/1007/24 Progress of excavat'ion B/07/31/0807/31 Progress of excavat'ionB/07/20/0807/20 Progress of excavat ion A/07/24/1207/24 Uall #30 B/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavat'ionINTERPRETATIONFunction: Part of large EB3 complex.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION' U87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 19 Supervisor: TH Oates: 07/14Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Rocks & pottery on surface.Separabili ty: Top--Ctear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt........... 45% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness.................. ....... 2 Compactness................... . . Moderately LooseWetness.................... ....... Moderately Moist Structure.................... .. . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles......... ....... 15/m2 Medium Pebbles........... 5/m2Large Pebbles......... ....... 5/m2 Small Cobbles............. 7/m2Distribution........... ....... RandomArtifact: Pottery.................... ....... Frequent Flint.............................. . . 101Distribution........... ....... RandomOrganic: Bone........... ............. Shells......................... . 1Distribution........... ....... RandomMeasurements: Length...................... ........ 4.000 m Width........................... .. . . 2.100 mDepth........................ ........ 0.100 to 0.240 m Direction of Slope___. . . 130 degDegree of Slope___ ....... 4 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Flat-lying pottery.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 15, 17Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom T ransi t Loc Top Bottom Transit22 898.72 898.61 x 21 898.64 898.54 x 13 898.71 898.56 X27 898.71 898.58 X 19 898.72 898.56 X 20 898.72 898.48 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments ReadingComplete to 07/16Pub59 07/14 4/ 23 EB60 07/15 19/185 33 EB61 07/15 19/359 29 3 post-EB bods,62 07/15 15/ 79 EB63 07/16 6/ 70 16 2 LI2, EBReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level TotalBasalt grinding stone fragment 1 07/14 59 20Spindle whorl 2 07/15 60 28 898.71Flint bladelet 3 07/15 60 28 898.71Flint scraper 4 07/15 60 28 898.71Spindle whorl 5 07/15 60 27 898.71Flint scraper 6 07/15 60 27 898.71Flint bladelet 7 07/15 61 21PHOTOGRAPHS •*Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectPeriod Material Photo Drawing8/07/14/0807/14 Progress of excavation B/07/15/0707/15 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample...................... Green colored clump of soil.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil layer (possibly a living surface) inside room-like structure.Stratigraphy: Soil layer that seals against walls 8, 13 & 18, and covers entire area inside room.-LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:17-19529SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 20 Supervisor: TH Oates: 07/16 to 07/24Summary: Soil layer.' REASONRemarks: Separate from locus 19 by living surface.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 45% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular.__ 5% Sub-angular 35% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness.................. ........ 2 Compactness........... Moderately FriableWetness.................... ..•___Moderately Moist Structure.............. RandomInclusions:Soi l : Ash Pockets..................... 15/m2, 2.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles......... ........ 25/m2 Mediun Pebbles.. . . 15/m2Large Pebbles.................. 3/m2 Small Cobbles....... 2/m2Artifact: Pottery............................. Frequent Flint...................... 149Burned Stones.................. 4 Distribution......... RandomOrganic: Bone........................... ....... FrequentMeasurements: Length............................... 4.000 m Width...................... 2.100 mDepth......................... ....... 0.090 to 0.290 m Direction of Slope 130 degDegree of Slope....... , . . . . 4 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten. EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 19Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit22 898.61 898.42 X 21 898.54 898.43 X 13 898.71 898.49 X27 898.58 898.49 X 19 898.56 898.46 X 20 898.72 898.43 XPOTTERYPail Date Count 8skts Loc Preservation Comments Reading75 07/23 10/140 20 • EB78 07/24 23/303 52 EB3PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/16/0807/16 Progress of excavation 8/07/17/0907/17 Progress of excavation 8/07/20/0807/20 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:8/07/21/0507/21 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1307/22 Progress of excavation B/07/23/1307/23 Progress of excavationPossibly living surface inside room-like structure. Covers entire "room."B/07/24/1007/24 Progress of excavation A/07/24/1207/24 Wall #30 A/07/24/1307/24 Wall #30SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 21 Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks: Separated from locus 12 by surface.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: C la y ....... 45% S ilt............ 10%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 40%\ Consistence: Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 15/m2Large Pebbles.................. 10/m2Medium Cobbles................. 2/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery.............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone................................... RareMeasurements: Length................................ 2.690 mDepth................................. 0.230 to 0.310 mDegree of Slope............... 4 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/16 toSand........... 45% Fine Sand.. 60%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 20/m2Small Cobbles.................. 3/m2Large Cobbles.................. 1/m2Flint.............'................... 106Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................ 1.210 mDirection of Slope___A 217 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 12Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit . Loc Top Bottom Transit29POTTERYPail898.72 898. Date Count.41 XBskts Loc Preservatio35 898.52 898.29 n CommentsXReading64 07/16 16/128 33 LI2, EB4, EB70 07/21 14/213 57 1 EI2 bod, EB71 07/21 12/ 72 14 EB372 07/22 14/134 11 EB3OBJECTSReg no. Description field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject1 07/22 72Number Date Subject8/07/17/0907/17 B/07/20/0807/20 INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: .Progress of excavation B/07/21/0507/21 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation 8/07/22/1307/22 Progress of excavationSoil layer-’ possible living surface outside EB3 bldg.Equals locus 31, despite being excavated at separable times due to li removal of wall 30.PubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field.D, Summary: REASONSquare 6K06, Locus 22 Soil layer.Dates: 07/17 to 07/22Remarks: Distinguished from locus 9 by reddish/brown colored soil.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay.7....... 15% Silt-........... 50% Sand...Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 40%> Sand.. 40%Consistence:• Artifact: Organic:- Measurements:Surface Mat'l: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSHardness........................... 1Wetness............................. Moderately OrySmall Pebbles.................. 20/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2Distribution.................... RandomPottery............................. FrequentBone.................................... RareLength................................ 2.600 mDepth.................................. 0.110 to 0.170 nDegree of Slope.................. 2 degBeaten EarthDirection of Slope..10/m23/m21.300 m 170 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit32 898.55 898.44 31 898.54 898.37Count Bskts Loc Preservatic73 07/22 7/116OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date• 1 post EB bod, EB3lil Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPart of EB occupation layer.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:20-22U\u>OSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 23 Summary: Soil layer.REASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Soil beneath rock tumble Top--Clear.BrownClay......... 30%Medium Sand 20% Sub-angular 60%Hardness...........................Wetness.............................of locus 11.10YR5/3S ilt ........... 40%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 40% 2Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles...................... 40/m2Large Pebbles.'................. 15/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery............................... FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone..................................... FrequentMeasurements: Length............................... 2.910 mDepth................................. 0.070 mDegree of Slope............... 4 degSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 11Over: »Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top BottomSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/17 to 07/27Sand........... 30% Fine Sand.. 50%Compactness.!................. Moderately FriableStructure.... .................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 50/m2Small Cobbles...................... 3/m2Flint.................................... 55Charcoal............................... 5/m2, avg. 5.0 cmWidth.................................. 1.110 mDirection of Slope........ 235 degTransit12 898.86 898.79 X 17 898.79 898.72 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub79 07/2480 07/27 INTERPRETATION11/190 228/ 62 6Part of a living surface.EBEBARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 24 Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/21 toSinmary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Line of stones.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Hard Limestone................. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble.............................. 38%Medium Boulder................. 2%Chinkstones: Pebble.............................. 10% .Fill Stones: Cobble.............................. 100%Dressing: Unhewn.............................. 100%Mortar: Dry-laid.......................... 90%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkCourses: 2Rows: 2 w/rubbleMeasurements: Length.................................. 2.630 mPreservation: Partial Superstructure: HalfLean Degree...................... 80 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 21LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top35 . 898.51 X 36 898.48PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date . Subject Number DateA/07/24/1207/24 Wall #30 B/07/30/0907/30A/07/24/1307/24 Wall #30 B/07/30/1207/30INTERPRETATION Function:Small Boulder.................. 60%Cobble........... ................. 90%Mud.................................*.. 10%Support............................. Free-standingOrientation.................... 122 degLean Direction................. 222 degBottom TransitSubject Number Date SubjectProgress of excavation B/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavation Pavement & thresholdPart of larger EB3 complex.SOIL LOCUS SHEET. IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6X06, Locus 25 Summary: Soil layer, below IREASONRemarks: New surface.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 45% S ilt ........... 20% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 60%.Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30%- Sub-round.. 50% Round......... 20%Consistence: ’ Hardness........................ .. 2 Compactness............. ........ Moderately FriabhWetness.......................... .. Moderately Moist Structure................ ____ RandomInclusions:.Soi l : Clay pockets................. .. 2/m2, 3.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles............... .. 45/m2 Medium Pebbles....... ........ 15/m2Large Pebbles............... 15/m2 Small Cobbles......... ........ 4/m2Distribution................. .. RandomArtifact:. Pottery.......................... .. Frequent Flint........................ ........ 57Distribution........•.___ .. RandomOrganic: Bone............................... .. Rare Shells...................... ........ 2Measurements: Length............................ .. 2.600 m Uidth........................ ........ 1.300 m •Depth.............................. .. 0.070 to 0.120 m Direction of Slope. ....... 170 degDegree of Slope........... 2 degSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:' 22LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit32 898.44 898.32 X 31 898.37 898.30 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading74 07/23 .8/118 32 EB, one UDPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/23/1307/23 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Part of a living surface (EB occupation layer)Stratigraphy: Seals against locus 8ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6K06, Locus 26 Supervisor: THSummary: Bin.REASONRemarks: Ring of stones corneri ng two walls.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone............. .. 100%Masonry:Uall-Stones : Cobble............................ 90% Small Boulder......... ........ 10%Dressing: Unhewn............................ .. 100%Mortar: Clay............................... 70% ....... 30%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................. .. Boulder Support.................... ........ Free-standingCourses: 3Rows: 3Measurements: Length............................ .. 0.900 m Uidth................................ 0.400 to 0.500 mHeight............................ .. 0.600 m Orientat ion..............Preservation: Partial Superstructure : MostRemarks: This information can aIso be found in 5X96:5STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals: D .5X96:22LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit3 898.62 898.02 XPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/28/0907/28 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Some type of storage bin built right into walls of EB3 complex.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:23-26SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6K06, locus 27 Supervisor: TH Date: 07/23Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Surface--hard-packed diiSeparabili ty: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 45% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness................ .. . . Moderately FriableWetness........................... . Moderately Moist Structure...................... . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ . 30/m2 Medium Pebbles............. . . 50/m2Large Pebbles................ .. 10/m2 Distribution.............. .,. . RandomArtifact: Pottery.. ....................... . Frequent Flint.............................. . . 28Distribution.................. . RandomOrganic: Bone................................... FrequentMeasurements: Length............................. .. 2.600 m Width......... .................... . 1.300 mDepth............................... .. 0.110 to 0.070 m Direction of Slope___. . . 170 degDegree of Slope............. 2 degSurface Mat1l : Beaten EarthSTRAT!GRAPHTUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seats against: Cut by:25LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31POTTERY898.36 898.27 X 32 898.38 898.25 XPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub76 07/23 INTERPRETATION function:4/ 84 40Part of EB occupation layer{Read one day late) EBSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONUB7 field D, Square 6K06, Locus 28 Supervisor: TH Date: 07/24Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Surface hard-packed dirSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 30% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 40% Fine Sand.. 35%Medium Sand 35% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness............. ....... Moderately CrumblyWetness........................... . Moderately Moist Structure................ ....... Random1nclus i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles................ 30/m2 Medium Pebbles....... ....... 50/m2Large Pebbles................ 10/m2 Small Cobbles......... ....... 2/m2Distribution.................. . RandomArtifact: Pottery........................... . Frequent Flint........................ ........ 60Distribution.................. ; RandomOrganic: Bone................................. . Frequent Charcoal.................. ....... 5/m2, avg. 0.5 cmDistribution.................. . RandomMeasurements: Length............................. . 2.600 m Width........................ ........ 1.300 m 'Depth............................... . 0 .1 8 0 to 0 .2 0 0 m Direction of Slope. ........ 170 degDegree of Slope............. . 2 degSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthRemarks: Soil was exceptionally hard packed and inmediate ly over bedrock.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 27LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit. Loc Top Bottom Transit31 898.27 898.09 X 32 898.25 898.05 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati on Comments Reading Pub77 07/24 8/ 89 25 ES3INTERPRETATIONFunction: Original living surface which was in use when walls 8 and 5K96:5 were built.L/1U>SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 29 Sumiary: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Beaten earthSeparability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONDates: 07/23 to 07/31Bottom-ClearColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 45% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 5.0%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular.... 5% Sub-angular 35% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 2 Compactness.................... . Moderately LooseWetness........................ . . . Moderately Moist Structure........................ . RandomInclusions:Soil: Ash Pockets................ 3/m2, 12.0 cm Distribution.................. . RandomStone: Small Pebbles............. . . . 30/m2 Medium Pebbles............... . 20/m2Large Pebbles............. . . . 10/m2 Small Cobbles................ 7/m2Medium Cobbles........... 3/tn2 Distribution.................. . RandomArtifact: Pottery........................ . . . Frequent Flint............................... . 190Distribution................. . . RandomOrganic: Bone............................. . . . Rare Charcoal......................... . 6/m2, avg. 0.5 cmDistribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length......................... .. . . 4.000 m Width............................... . 2.000 mDirection of Slope___. . . 130 deg Degree of Slope............. . 4 degSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 20LEVELSloc Top 8ottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc ' Top Bottom Transi22 898.47 27 898.49898.35 X 898.34 X19 898.46 13 898.49898.37898.36X 20 X898.43 898.35 XCount Bskts Loc Preservation85 07/29 8/ 41 16 EB386 07/30 15/144 75 one'L12 bod, EB‘ 87 07/31 14/ 99 37 one L12, EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject ' Number DateB/07/24/1007/24 A/07/24/1207/24 A/07/24/1307/24 BIOOATA SAMPLESINTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation Walt #30 Uall #30B/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavation 6/07/28/0907/28 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0907/30 Progress of excavationseedsPart of EB3 occupation layer inside room-like structure. Covered the entire "room."8/07/31/0807/31 Progress of excavationARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 30 Summary: WallREASONRemarks: Two parallel lines of. stonesSeparabi l i ty: Top-Clear Bottom- -ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone......................... 90%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble.............................. 30%Chinkstones: Pebble.............................. 30%Fill Stones: Cobble.............................. 100%Dressing: Unhewn............................... 100% .Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 80%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & ChinkCourses: 2 to 3Rows: 2 w/rubbleMeasurements: Length................................ 1.200 mHeight................................ 0.410 to 0.560 mDip.................................... 10 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: Half .Lean Degree...................... 78 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 11LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top BottomSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/23 to 07/24Nari........................... ....... 10%Small Boulder.................. 70%Cobble....................... ____ 70%Mud.................................... 20%Support......................____ Free-standingWidth......................... ____ 0.790 to 0.740 nOrientat ion.............. ....... 130 degLean Direction......... ....... 122 degTransit18 899.27 898.60 XPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject17 899.05 898.59 XNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/24/1207/24 Wall #30 A/07/24/1307/24 Wall #30 B/07/24/1007/24 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: A later phase wall which abuts wall 13.Stratigraphy: Rests upon surface of loci 21 / 32.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:27-30U iSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 31 Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Hard packed surfaceSeparabili ty: Top--Average Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 45% S ilt ........... 20%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness...................... 3Wetness............................. Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 30/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery.................. ; ......... Frequent0i st r ibut ion.................... RandomOrganic: Bone.................................. RareMeasurements: Length............................... 3.300 mDepth................................. 0.030 to 0.800 mDegree of Slope............... • 2 degSurface Mat *l : Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYCompactness...........Structure...............Medium Pebbles.. . . Small Cobbles.......Flint......................Distribution.........Width......................Direction of SlopeUnder: 21, 32Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit30 898.41 898.33 12 898.39 898.3629 898.41 17 898.38POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatio Comments ReadingSupervisor: TH Dates: 07/24 to 07/31Fine Sand.. 30%Moderately Friable Random30/m24/m2120Random 1.770 m 130 degPub88 07/31 6/ 86 21 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawingflint blade 1 07/31 68PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Oate SubjectA/07/24/1207/24 Wall #30 A/07/24/1307/24 Wall #30INTERPRETATIONFunction: Part of EB occupation layer.Stratigraphy: Covers entire area under loci 21 & 32.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 32 Supervisor: TH Dates: 07/24 to 27/27Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Hard packed dirt / flat lying sherdsSeparability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Rrnun 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 45% Silt........... 20% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 30%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness................ ......... 4 Compactness...................... Moderately Firm. Wetness.................. ......... Moderately Moist Structure.. ; .................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Smalt Pebbles........ ......... 30/m2 Medium Pebbles.............. .. 30/m2Large Pebbles........ ......... 15/m2 Small Cobbles................ 4/m2Distribution......... ......... RandomArtifact: Pottery.................. ......... Frequent Flint.............................. .. 345Distribution......... ......... RandomOrganic: Bone........................ ......... Frequent Charcoal......................... 15/m2, avg. 1.0 cmDistribution......... ......... RandomMeasurements: Length.................... ......... 2.910 m Width.............................. .. 1.110 mDepth...................... ......... 0.400 to 0. 340 m Direction of Slope....... .. 235 degDegree of Slope... ......... 4 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Distinguished froni locus 21 because wall 30 iniitially seemed to separate them.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 23LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top 8ottom Transit12 898.79 898.39 X 17 898.72 898.38 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub01 07/27 15/135 58 one IR2 bod, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawingworked stone? 1 07/27 81PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Continuous living surface.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 33 Supervisor: TH Oates: 07/24 to 07/27Surma ry: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Hard packed dirt / flait lying sherdsSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark yellowish brown 10YR4/4Texture: Clay........... 45% S ilt ........... 30% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness............. ....... Moderately CrumblyWetness............................. Moderately Moist Structure................. ........ RandomInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets.................... 8/m2, 2.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles............... .. 30/m2 Medium Pebbles........ ........ 50/m2Large Pebbles............... 10/m2 Distribution........... ....... RandomArtifact: Pottery............................. Frequent Flint........................ ........ 37Distribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone............................... ... Rare Distribution........... ........ RandomMeasurements: Length........................... ... 2.600 m Width........................ ........ 1.300 mDepth............................. ... 0.150 to 0.080 m Direction of Slope. ........ 170 degDegree of Slope........... . 2 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 28Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom31 898.09' 898.01 X 32 898.05 897.90POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub82 07/27 3/ 50 13 EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject.B/07/28/0907/28 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Part of EB occupation layer.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:31-33SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6K06, Locus 34 Summary: SurfaceRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Surface Mat' l :Hard-packed earth Top--AverageDark yellowish brownClay........... 45%Medium Sand 40% Sub-angular 40%Hardness......................Wetness........................Nari Pockets..............Small Pebbles.............Large Pebbles....... : . .Distribution...............Pottery........................Distribution...............Bone.............................Length..........................Depth...........................Degree of Slope.........Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 33Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit10YR4/4S ilt ........... 35%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 60% 2Moderately Moist7/m2, 2.0 cm20/m2 3/m2 Random Frequent Random Frequent 2.600 m0.110 to 0.080 m 2 degLoc Top BottomSupervisor: BBSand........... 20% Fine Sand.. 30%Compactness...................... Moderately FriableStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 10/m2Small Cobbles.................. 3/m2Flint.................................... 40Distribution..................... RandomWidth................................. 1.300 mDirection of Slope........... 170 degTransitOate: 07/2831 898.01 897.90. X 32 897.90 897.82 X 'POTTERYPail Date Count 8skts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub83 07/28 INTERPRETATION Function:2/ 64 19Part of EB occupation layer.IR bod, EB, one UDSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06, Locus 35 Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONSupervisor: THHard packed dir Top--AverageColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay.......... 30% Silt........... 30% Sand....... 40% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 35% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness.................... .. . . . 2 Compactness................ . . . ModeratelyWetness.......................___ Moderately Moist Structure.................... . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............ . . . . 30/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . . . 50/m2Large Pebbles............ 10/m2 Distribution............... . . . RandomArt i fact: Pottery........................ Flint........................... . . . 140Distribution.............. . . . RandomOrganic: Bone............................. ___ Rare Distribution.............. . . . RandomMeasurements: Length......................... . . . . 2.600 m Width........................... .. . . 1.300 mDepth........................... . . . 0.030 m Direction of Slope___. . . 170 degDegree of Slope......... 2 degSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthOver:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom31 897.78 897.77 X 32 897:79 897.65Count Bskts Loc Preservati<84 07/29 17/120 44L /iOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawingflint blade? 1 07/29 84INTERPRETATIONFunction: Part of EB occupation layer.Locus Date: EBSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K06. Locus 36Summary:REASONRemarks: Separabili ty: DESCRIPTION Color:Measurements:BedrockBedrockTop--Very Clear WhiteLength................Depth..................Degree of Slope.STRATIGRAPHYUnder; 35Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitS u p e rv is o r: TH10YR8/11.930 m Width................................ 1.340 m0.210 to 0:100 m Direction of Slope......... 168 deg8 degLoc Top Bottom Transit31 897.77 32 897.65INTERPRETATIONF u n c tio n : used as th e fo u n d a tio n fo r the w a lls o f the EB complex.Date: 07/30SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6K06, Locus 37 Supervisor: TH Date: 07/29Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Beaten earthSeparability: Top-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: day ........... 20% S ilt ........... 45% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness.................. ......... 2 Compactness................___ Moderately FriableWetness.................... Structure.................. ___ RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles......... ......... 30/m2 Medium Pebbles......... . 20/m2Large Pebbles......... ......... 10/m2 Small Cobbles........... . 7/m2Medium Cobbles....... ......... 3/m2Measurements: Length...................... width...........................___ 2.000 mDirection of Slope.. ........ 130 deg Degree of Slope....... ___ 4 degSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthRemarks: This locus was not penetrated.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:29LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit •Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit22 898.35 27 898.34 PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject19 898.37 13 898.36Number Date Subject20 898.35B/07/13/0807/13 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:34-37L/14^SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6KG6, Locus 38 Sunmary: SurfaceREASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Hard-packed earth Top--AverageParticle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:Surface Mat' l : ' Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:LEVELSLoc TopClay........... 45*_Medium Sand 40* Sub-angular10YR5/3S ilt ........... 20*Course Sand 30* Sub-round.. 50*Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately MoistSmall Pebbles.................. 30/m2’Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Distribution..................... RandomLength................................ 3.300 mDirection of Slope......... 130 degBeaten EarthThis surface was not penetrated. .31Bottom Transit Loc Top ESand........... 35* Fine Sand.. 30*Compactness....................... Moderately FriableStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles.................... 30/m2Small Cobbles...................... 4/m2Width................................. 1.770 mDegree of Slope............... 2 deg12 898.36SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 1 Summary: Topsoil.REASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Topsoil layer. Top--Very Clear Bottom --AverageParticle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSPale brownClay...........Medium Sand Sub-angul20*30*40*Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Very Dry3/m22/m2RandomLarge Pebbles.......Medium Cobbles___Distribution.........Glass................................. 2Distribution.................... RandomBone................................... RareDistribution.................... RandomDegree of Slope..Supervisor: GMComplete Dates: 06/23 to 06/30Small Cobbles.. Large Cobbles..2/m22/m2Loc Top Bottom7 900.67 900.3611 901.20 900.82>.000 m1.070 to 0.660 m24 degLoc Top Bottom31 899.00 898.9335 899.44 899.21Flint................................. 213Width................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... -220 degLoc Top Bottom21 900.10 899.7132 899.13 898.47Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Coirments Reading1 06/23 27/132 37 LR bod, late IR2, early IR1,2 06/24 15/220 21 LI2, EB bods4 06/25 0/ 23 13 LI2, EB bods5 06/26 19/369 17 BY2 bod, LI28 06/29 18/158 5. 1 LR bod, 1 ER bod, LI2, EB11 06/30 8/ 58 9 LI2, poss MB bodsOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingF la t s tone o b je c t - f r a g m e n t Date S u b je c t Number06/2406/29Date SubjectE/06/25/1606/25 Progress of excavation . B/06/29/1006/29 Progress of excavationA/06/23/0506/23 Pre-excavation B/06/24/0406/24 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Topsoil.Stratigraphy: Locus 1 is contiguous with locus 2. They cover the entire 5 ;the southeast corner of the square. Locus 1 overlies locus 3 remainder of the square.Nurber Date Subject B/06/30/0806/30 Progress of excavationi m square. Locus 1 occurs in the north half and i the NE corner and overlies locus 4 in theSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 2 Summary: Topsoil.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION.Color:Texture:Topsoil--.large concentration of loose pebbles and pottery. Top--Very Clear Bottom--AverageParticle Shape: Consistence:Dark grayish brownClay........... 20%Medium Sand 20% Angular___ 90%10YR4/2S ilt...........Course Sand Sub-angularHardness............................ 2Wetness............................. Very OryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 300/m2Large Pebbles.................. 30/m2Medium Cobbles................. 3/m2Artifact: Pottery............... '............. FrequentFlint................................. 77Organic: Bone...................... : ...........RareMeasurements: Length............................... A.000 mDepth................................. 0.040 to 0.660Degree of Slope............... 20 degMedium Pebbles___Small Cobbles........Distribution.........Glass......................Distribution.........Distribution.. . . . .Width......................Direction of SlopeSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:CompleteSupervisor: GM Dates: 06/25 to 06/30Fine Sand.. 10%Moderately Gravelly100/m2 5/m2 . Random 1Random Random 5.000 m 240 degOver: 4LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 900.54 900.15 21 900.10 899.71 - 29 899.65 899.5931 899.00 898.93 23 899.91 899.87 32 899.13 898.47POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading3 06/25 28/313 3 1 BYZ bod, LI2, El2, MB bods, EB bods6 06/26 35/327 20 1 BYZ, LI2 dom, 11, MB2/LB17 06/29 50/300 21 1 ROM bod, LI2, MB, EB9 06/29 8/113 . 5 1 ER bod, IR, EB4, EB10 06/30 34/324 30 LI2, IR, LB, MB, EB12 06/30 28/328 22 LI2OBJECTSReg ino. Description Field no. Date' Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPubSoil Inclusion? 1 06/25 3Glass shard 2 06/30 10Stone--possible projectile 3 06/30 10Basalt--grinding stone 4 06/30 11Basalt--grinding stone 5 06/29 7PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectE/06/25/1606/25 Progress of excavation 8/06/29/1006/29 Progress of excavation B/06/30/0806/30 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Topsoil--a possible surface trampling zone. The fanning out of the locus as you proceed westward is probablydue to the natural north-south slope.Stratigraphy: Locus 2 is contiguous with locus 1. Locus 2 forms a narrow path in the east part of the square and fans out tothe west until it occupies the lower 4/5 of the west balk. Overlies locus 4..SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION Complete. U87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 3 Supervisor: GM Dates: 06/30 to 07/01Surma ry: Subsoil layer one.REASONRemarks: More friable, fewer pottery sherds and more clay content versus locus 1.Separability: .Top--Arbitrary Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 30% S ilt........... 10% Sand........... 60% Fine Sand.. 20%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: • Hardness........................... 2 Compactness..................... Very FriableWetness.................... ........ Very Dry Structure......................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Large Pebbles........... 3/m2 Small Cobbles............. ...• 2/m2Medium Cobbles......... 2/m2 Distribution................. . . RandomArtifact: Flint.......................... 10 Distribution............... . . . RandomOrganic: Bone............................ ___ Rare Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 2.000 m Width.............................. . . 3.000 mDepth.......................... ___ 0.010 to 0.290 m Direction of Slope___. . . 178 degDegree of Slope........ . . . . 20 degRemarks: Locus 3 has less pottery and smaller pebbles that locus 1. It is also more friable than locus 1 and containsmore clay.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K06:38 AND 6K07:I-3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 900.82 • 900.78 8 900.42 900.41 10 900.57 900.5017 •900.24 900.22 15 899.86 899.57POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub13 06/30 24/104 2614 07/01 12/132 19PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/01/0907/01 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION 'Function: Sub topsoil horizon.Stratigraphy: Locus 3 is beneath locus 1 and occurs in the NE corner of the 5 x 5 m square. Locus 3 sits directly on locus 4"'and does not appear to have any contact with locus 2.1 BYZ bod, LI2 dom, MB LIZ04/01/91 SOIL LOCUS SHEET Page 1IDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 4 Supervisor: GM Dates: 06/30 to 07/09Summary: Boulder layer or rock fall.REASON • •Remarks: Boulder and cobble layer.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact: Organic: Measurements:Remarks:Light grayAngular___ 80%Hardness..............Wetness................10YR7/1Sub-angular 20% 5Very DryCompactness. Structure...Very Rubbly RandomMediun Cobbles...........Medium Boulders.........Very Large Boulders.,1/m28/m24/m2Small Cobbles.................. 2/m2Large Cobbles.................. 1/m2Large Boulders................. '2/m2Distribution...................... RandomPottery............................. FrequentBone.-........... '..................... RareLength................................ 5.000 mDepth.............1................. 0.030 to 0.570 mDegree of Slope.................. 24 degLocus 4 is a boulder layer or rock fa ll, it is definitely not a talus slope or the result of sheet wash. It is possibly a collapsed wall that was located higher up on the tell. The lack of a ??? outward grain size and the abrubt southern edge suggest this locus is not talus slope.Distribution.................... Random.Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 220 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1, 2, 3Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 900.15 899.86 X 35 899.21 898.91 X 20 899.57 899.00 X7 900.36 900.15 X 11 900.78 900.47 x 23 899.87 899.30 X31 898.83 898.80 X 22 899.64 899.51 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub15 07/01 • 19/120 13 1 BYZ bod, 1 ROM bod, LI2, few EB bods30 07/07 14/124 17 LI2, EI2, EB31 07/08 11/251 31 LI2, El2, 11, EB32 07/08 24/474 29 LI2, EI2, MB2, EB433 07/08 24/204 23 1 BYZ bod, 1 ROM bod, LI2, EI2, 11I bod, LB,34 07/08 22/252 48 1 EPER, L1235 07/08 34/244 17 1 ROM bod, Ll2, £12, MB, EB4, EB36 07/08 22/212 20 LI2, EI2, 11, MB, EB437 07/09 13/139 47 1 BYZ, LI2, E12, MB, 1 EB4, EB38 07/09 5/130 22 1 ROM bod, LI2, EI2, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pait Loc level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt grinding stone 1 07/01 15Mortar 2 07/08 31Tesserae 3 07/08 31Possible pendant 4 . 07/08 33Possible mortar 5 07/09 38Possible pestle 6 07/08- 33Possible figurine 7 07/08 34Spindle whorl 8 07/08 36PHOTOGRAPHSNurber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Humber Date SubjectB/07/01/0907/01 A/07/01/1007/01 BIODATA SAMPLESINTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation 8/07/02/0907/02 Progress of excavation B/07/06/0707/06 Progress of excavationPossible rock fall B/07/03/0807/03 Progress of excavation 8/07/08/1207/08 Progress of excavationSoil Sample...................... Possible ash layer.Rock fall may be a collapsed wall that was in place at a higher elevation on the south bank of the tell.Locus 4 is overlain by loci 1, 2, and 3. It is stratigraphically above loci 5 and 6 in the north half of the square. The boulders and cobbles of locus 4 actually are slightly imbedded in locus 5 (1 or 2 mm). Locus 4 is. equivilant to loci 1,4,5 and 11 in square 6k06.04/01/91 SOIL LOCUS SHEET Page 1IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 5 Summary: Subsoil layer two.REASONRemarks: Soil layer with abundant large pottery sherds.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 30X S ilt........... 5%Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness............................ 2Wetness............................ SIightly MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles....................... 7/m2Large Cobbles...................... 2/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Pottery.............................. FrequentO rga n ic : Bone........................................... RareDistribution................ RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 5.000 mDepth.................... ........... 0.030 to 0.360 mDegree of Slope............... 25 degCompleteSupervisor: GM Dates: 07/02 to 07/10Sand......... : 65% Fine Sand..Compactness..................Structure..................... . . Very Crunbly . . . RandomSmall Cobbles.............Smalt Boulders........... .2/m21/m2Distribution................Shells......................... .. . . Random 4Width.............................Direction of Slope___. . . 1.500 m . . . 220 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4Over:Equa t s :Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 900.16 899.87. X 7 899.86 899.83 x 17 900.00 899.87 X10 900.17 899.93 X 8 900.01 899.85 X10 900.21 899.85 X 17 900.05 899.90 XPOTTERY. Pail Date Count' Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading PubL12, E12, few MB LI2, EI2, MB LI2, EBL12, EI2, M8, EBBYZ bods, ROM bods, LI2, LIT, MB, EB L12, EI2, L11, EB bods Few BYZ, LI2, MB2, EBField no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt grinding stone 1 07/02 16Possible mortar and pestle 2 07/02 17Possible basalt grinding stone 3 ' 07/02 17Possible ceramic bead 4 07/03 21Possible stone rim 5 07/03 22Possible pendant fragment 6 07/03 22Possible reused mortar 7 07/03 24PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/03/0807/03 Progress of excavation B/07/06/0607/06 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION . .Function: Sub topsoil layer.Stratigraphy: Locus 5 is stratigraphically equivalent to locus 6 which is present only in the NE corner of the square. Itsits directly on the bedrock (locus 7) in the NW corner of the square. The rock fall (locus 4) is partially imbedded in locus 5.16 07/02 40/210 1017 07/02 17/177 1218 07/02 16/126 1119 07/02 22/202 1321 07/03 42/262 3222 07/03 21/211 2024 07/06 17/137 30OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:3-5U lO n -IDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 6 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/02 to 07/10SOIL LOCUS SHEETSummary: Subtopsoil pebble layer with small sherds.REASONRemarks: Pebble layer with smalt pottery sherds covered with limestone powder.Separabili ty : Top--Unclear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 30% S ilt........... 5% Sand........... 65% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 10% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness........................... . 2 Compactness.................... . Moderately GravellyWetness.............................. Very Dry Structure........................ . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 60/m2 Distribution.................. . RandomArtifact : Pottery.............................. Frequent Distribution.................. . RandomOrganic: Bone.................................. . Rare Distribution.................. . RandomMeasurements : Length................................ 2.000 m Width............................... . 1.100 mDepth................................ . 0.330 to 0.810 m Direction of Slope....... . 220 degDegree of Slope.............. 5 degRemarks: Locus 6 is a subsoil layer with abundant smalt pebbles and small pottery sherds (2-5 mm). This locus is verypoorly consolidated. Almost all the pebbles and sherds are covered with a white lime powder.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over: 13LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom T rans i t11 900.47 899.95 X 10 900.21 899.40 X10 900.17 899.84 X 17 900.05 899.41 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservaticm Comments Reading I20 07/02 27/157 10 1 ROM bod, LI2, EI2, 1141 07/09 19/199 10 LI2, 11, EB42 07/09 31/231 32 1 BYZ bod, LI2, EI2, MB243 07/10 11/130 33 LI2, 11, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Peri'od Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl 1 07/09 41PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/06/0707/06 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0707/10 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible pottery sherd garbage dump.Stratigraphy: Occurs beneath locus 4 in the NE corner and is contiguous with locus 5 which is situated to the west andsouth. Locus 6 overlies locus 13 and locus 7 (bedrock).SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87'Field 0, Square 6K07, Locus 7 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/03 toSummary: 8edrock.REASONRemarks: Bedrock.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: 7YR7/1Consistence: Hardness........... ............... 5 Compactness......... ........... Very F i rmWetness...................------ Very Dry Structure............. ........... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 5.000 m Width.................... ........... 1.250 mDirection of Slope........ 248 deg Degree of Slope.. ........... 14 degRemarks: Locus 7 is bedrock. Fairly typical light grey crytocrystalline limestone.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5, 6, 8, 9LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit - Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 899.97 8 899.79 9 899.78 •8 900.33 11 899.957 899.82 11 899.56PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/06/0707/06 Progress of excavarion B/07/09/0807/09 progress of excavation B/07/14/0707/14 Progress of excavationB/07/07/0707/07 Progress of excavarion B/07/10/0707/10 Progress of excavation B/07/15/0707/15 Progress of excavationB/07/08/1207/08 Progress of excavarion B/07/13/0707/13 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0607/21 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATIONFunction: Bedrock. In locations 9, 10 and 11 the bedrock may be cut, although there are no observable cutting marks.Stratigraphy: Locus 7 is the same bedrock described as locus 6 in square 6K06. It is present in the entire north balk. Thebedrock is overlain by locus 5 in location 7, locus 6 in locations 10 and 11, locus 8 in locations 8 and 9,and by locus 9 in locations 7 and 13.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 8 Supervisor: GM Oates: 07/03 to 07/10Summary: Subsoil layer three.REASONRemarks: Change in c o lo r and re d u c tio n in amount o f p o t te ry .S e p a ra b ili t y : Top--A ve rage 8o ttom --A ve rageDESCRIPTIONColor: Brownish yellow 10YR6/6Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 5% Sand........... 75% Fine Sand.. 10%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 70%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 35% Sub-round.. 65%Consistence: Hardness............................ 2 Compactness.................... ., Moderately CrumblyWetness............................. Moderately Moist Structure.......................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Cobbles.................. 2/m2 Large Cobbles.................. 3/m2Small Boulders................. 3/m2 Distribution..................... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 4.000 m Width.................................. 1.500 mDepth................................. 0.140 to 0.570 m Direction of Slope......... 200 degDegree of Slope............... 19 degRemarks: Locus 8 is delineated by its color. 11 has a defiimitc brownish yellow color compared to the brown color oflocus 5. There is a noti ceable decrease ini pottery sherds when compared wiith locus 5.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc. Top Bottom Transit8 899.93 899.79 X 14 899.80 899.23 x9 899.93 899.79 X 17 899.87 899.31 XPOTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Cocments Reading Pub233940OBJECTS •Reg i07/0307/0907/09no. Desc16/146 14 5/130 37 1/ 3 1ription Field no. Date PailLI2, EI2, EB 1 BY2 bod, LI2, EB EBLoc Level Total Period Material. Photo DrawingBasaIt grinding stone 1 07/03 23PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date S u b je c t Number Date S u b je c t Number D ate S u b je c tB/07/06/0707/06 Progress of excavation B/07/08/1207/08 Progress of excavation 8/07/08/0907/08 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample...................... Required soil sample.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Sub topsoil.Stratigraphy: Locus 8 seals against locus 6 in the NE corner of the square. It overlies locus 7 in locations 8 and 9 and. overlies locus 13 in locations 8-11 and 14-17.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 9Complete 07/06 to 07/10Summary: Rock fall layer twoREASONRemarks: Cobble and boulder layer.Separability: Top-Average Bottom-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light gray 10YR7/1Particle Shape: Angular.. . . 80% Sub-angular 20%Consistence: Hardness................... ....... 5 Compactness...................... Very RubbWetness...............•... ........ Slightly Moist Structure......................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Cobbles......... ....... 2/m2 Medium Cobbles................. 1/m2Large Cobbles......... .............. 1/m2 Medium 8oulders.............. 8/m2Large Boulders........ ........ 2/m2 Very Large Boulders....... 4/m2Distribution........... ........ RandomMeasurements: Length.................. .. ........ 3.750 m Width................................. 1.000 mDepth........................ ........ 0.010 to 0.150 m Direction of Slope......... 220 degDegree of Slope___ ........... 24 degRemarks: A second cobble and boulder layer that is very si milar to locus 4 in descr iption.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 899.80 899.70 X 13 899.67 899.66 X 31 898.96 898.94 X7 899.85 899.70 X 25 899.12 899.00 X 31 898.97 898.87 XINTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Rock fall layer, that may be part of the locus 4 wall collapse.Locus 9 is equal to the upper part of Locus 4. This locus overlies ' 11, 12, and 10.i descending stratigraphic order loci 7,LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:6-9537SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 10 Suimary: Soil surface 1.REASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Dates: 07/06 toParticle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:STRATIGRAPHYUnder*:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:LEVELSF i rst fi rm soil si Top--AverageYellowish brownClay........... 30%Medium Sand 20% Sub-round.. 70%rface. Ash pits randomly dis10YR5/A20%Course Sand 30% Round...... 30%• Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately MoistCompactness...................... Very CrumblyStructure.............. ..........RandomDistribution..................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 1/m2D i s t r i but ion..................... RandomDistribution..................... RandomWidth.............. ................. 3.000 .mDegree of Slope.................. 10 dogAsh Pockets...................... 1/m2, 2.5- 6.0 cmSmall Pebbles.................. 2/m2Large Pebbles.................. 1/m2Bone.................................... RareLength................................ 5.000 mDirection of Slope........ 195 degAsh pits are about A cm deep. They occur randomly thoughout this locus and appear to surface of locus 16. Two 2mm in diameter pieces of mudbrick were present in this locus, randomly distributed surface horizons. They were too ephemeral to trace.A, 5, 11, 12Equals upper part of D.5K97 locus 5.: in depressions on the There are a number ofLoc Top Bottom Tr.ansit LOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 898.80 898.65 X 25 898.8A 898.81 x 23 899.30 898.82 X31 898.81 898.66 X 19 898.87 898.80 X 21 899.09 898.85 X31 898.77 898.63 X 35 898.91 898.61 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments ReadingA9 07/1A 9 /5 9 15 12, EB51 07/15 18/183 5A LI2, few MB, EB53 07/15 15/135 A5 1 ER bod, LI2, EB55 07/16 16/216 66 LI2, EB56 07/16 13/182 39 EB57 07/16 9/ 77 19 Few I Age bods, ESOBJECTSReg no. Desc ription Field no. Oate Pai l Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingRounded flat stone 1 07/15 53PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date S u b je c t Number Date Subject Number Date S u b je c tB/07/13/0707/13 Progress of excavation B/07/1A/0707/1A Progress of excavation B/07/15/0707/15 Progress of excavationB/07/08/1207/08 Progress of excavation 8/07/16/0707/16 Progress of. excavation B/07/09/0807/09 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0707/10. Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: . Possible occupational layer but not a living surface becaus of the hard surfaces are too few and thin.Thepresence of ash also suggests an occupational surface.Stratigraphy: Locus 10 seals against locus 13 to the North.This locus is equivilent to locus 12 in square 6K06.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07,Summary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: • Consistence:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Subsoil layer A.Subsoil layer beneath boulder surface. Color change. T op--Average Bottom--AverageBrownish yellow 10YR6/6Clay........... 20% S ilt............ 5%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 70%Sub-angular 35% Sub-round.. 65%Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Moderately MoistSmall Cobbles.................. 2/m2Small Boulders................ 3/m2Length............................... 1.000 mDepth................................. 0.020 to 0.090 mDegree of Slope............... 19 degVery similar in description to soil locus 8.Supervisor: GMComplete Dates: 07/06 to 07/10Large Cobbles..'.............. 3/m2Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................. 0.500 mDirection of Slope......... 200 degLEVELSLoc Top Bottom •T ransi t Loc Top Bottom Transit7 899.70 899.68 X 13 899.66 899.57 X13 899.62 899.59 X 8 899.74 899.72 XPOTTERYPail Oate Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading25 07/06 4 /6 4 1528 07/07 8/ 58 6PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/07/0707/07 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Subsoil layer.Stratigraphy: L.4 is probably a lateral equivalent to one of the multiple layers in locus 4.1 BYZ bod, IR bods, EB L12, EBPubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field 0, Sunmary:REASONRemarks: Separabili ty: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Square 6K07, Locus 12 Subsoil layer 5.Soil layer with abundant Top--AverageLight yellowish brownClay........... 30%Medium Sand 10% Sub-angular 40%Hardness...........................Wetness.............................pottery sherds, distil Bottom--Average10YR6/4S ilt ........... 5%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 60%2Moderately MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ 7/m2Large Cobbles...............'.. 2/m2Artifact: Pottery.............................. FrequentMeasurements: Length................................ 2.750 mDepth................................. 0.090 to 0.380 mDegree of Slope............... 25 degRemarks: This soil locus is very similar in descriptionSupervisor': GM Dates: 07/06 to 07/10Sand........... 65% Fine Sand.. 60%Compactness....................... Very CrumblyStructure......... ............... RandomSmall Cobbles.................. 2/m2D i s t r i but ion.................... RandomD i s t r i but ion.................... RandomWidth................................. 1.000 mDirection of Slope........ 220 dogto soil locus 5.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 9, 11Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 899.13 898.91 X 31 898.94 898.85 x 13 899.52 899.23 X19 899.30 898.97 X- 13 899.59 899.24 X31 899.15 898.77 X 13 899.57 899.23 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub26 07/06 19/ 89 31 ' LR bods, LI2, EB27 07/07 6/113 21 BYZ bods, LI2, EI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBottle top 1 07/06 26Basalt grinding stone 2 07/06 27PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Oate SubjectB/07/07/0707/07 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Subsoil layer.Stratigraphy: Maybe a lateral equivalent to one of the multiple layers of locus 4.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:10-12L /lU>00SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus.13 Sunriary: Soil surface 2 ..Dates: 07/07 to 07/15Remarks: Surface with pottery imbedded in surface.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 50% S ilt........... 40% Sand....... •.. 10% Fine Sand.. 96%Medium Sand 2% Course Sand 2%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 60% Round......... 40%Consistence: Hardness........................ . . 3 Compactness........... Very FirmWetness......................... .. Moderately Moist Structure............... RandomInclusions:Stone: Large. Pebbles............... 1/m2 Small Cobbles....... 2/m2Mediixn Cobbles............. .. . 1/m2 Small Boulders___ 6/m2Medium Boulders........... 1/m2 Large Boulders___ 2/m2Distribution................ .. RandomArtifact: Pottery.......................... .. Frequent Distribution......... RandomOrganic: Bone............................... .. Rare Shells.................... 1Distribution................. .. RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 5.000 m Width...................... 1.500 mDirection of Slope___ .. 184 deg Degree of Slope... 10 degRemarks: Pottery sherds imbedded on the surface.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6, 8, 11Remarks: Locus 13 forms a seal. for locus 10.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 899.24 899.03 X 17 899.23 899.16 x - 14 899.06 899.79 X13 899.21 899.20 X 16 900.31 899.21 x 14 899.23 898.77 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion , Comments Reading29 07/07 3/ 26 5 1 BYZ, IR bods, EB bods44 07/13 16/246 60 Few MB2, lEB45 07/13 3/183 41 Few IR, EB4, EB48 07/14 14/141 30 IR sherds intri sive IR, EB50 07/14 10/120 32 1 BYZ, IR bods, EB52 07/15 2/ 31 4 12, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPoss ible mudbrick 1 07/07 29PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/08/1207/08 Progress of excavation B/07/08/0907/08 Progress of excavationBIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:B/07/10/0707/10 Progress of excavation 8/07/13/0707/13 Progress of excavationB/07/14/0707/14 Progress of excavatic B/07/15/0707/15 Progress of excavaticSoil Sample...................... Required soil sample.Possible ash.Fill layer with many types and ages of pottery sherds.Locus 13 is stratigraphically higher than locus 10 and probably acts as < sealing locus for locus 10.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 14 Supervisor: GM • Dates: 07/10 to 07/13• Summary: Architectural locus.REASONRemarks: Possible pit wall retainer.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone......................... ' 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................... 100%Brick:Dressing:Mortar:Facing:Construction:Tendencies:Courses:Rous:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Remarks:10% Length........... .................. 7.0 to 8.0 cmWidth.................. . . . . '___ . 7.0 to 8.0 cm Depth............. ............ 4.0 to 5.0 cmUnhewn............................. . 100%Dry-laid......................... 100%UnfacedStyle............................... .. Rubble Support......... .................. Free-standingThree rubble limestones aligned in a row.Length............................. .. 0.900 m Width............. .................. 0.200 to 0.350 mHeight............................. .. 0.300 to 0.350 m Orientation..................... 290 degDip.................................... 16 degMudbrick is a fragment. Very similar archi tecture to stone wall architecture found in squares13Possible connection with 6K06:11.Loc . Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit13 899.20 PHOTOGRAPHS899.03 X 13 899.16 899.05 X 13 899.18 899.05- XNumber Date Subject8/07/13/0707/13 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible pit wall retainer. Might have been a retainer for pieces of pottery, organic material, etc.,- thatwere dropped by someone cutting or shaping pottery for their own use. •Stratigraphy: Locus 15 is contained behind locus 14. Locus 14 abuts against locus 7. Locus 13 is'situated on the south side.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 15 Supervisor: 6M Dates: 07/13 to 07/14Surmary:REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material:Plan:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHY Under:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitPossible pit behind pit retainer wall (locus 14).Possible PitS oil................................... 100%CircularNoneLength............................... 0.650 m Width.................... ........... 0.250 to 0.850 mOrientation...................... 180 degThis questionable pit was filled with a fairly normal light, yellowish brown (10YR6/4) so il. THere was some pottery but it was not abundant. The soil was very friable with at least SOX clay content. There was a reasonable amount of flint (21 fragments), which considering its size is a significant amount. This locus is laterally equivalent to the soils to the north which continue under the bedrock (locus 7).1313 899.03 13 899.05POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub46 07/13 4/ 59 1047 07/14 6/ 76 9OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionEBEBField no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPossible pendant 1 07/13 46PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/14/0707/14 Progress of excavation BIODATA SAMPLESFlotation Sample...-........ 100% Flint SampleRemarks: Also one no-float sample taken.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible pit f i l l but there are very few pottery to suggest a pottery pit. All the pottery was EB.Stratigraphy: Seals against locus 7 to the N and E, is sealed to the south by loci 14 and 16 and to the west by the balk in6K06. Removal of the balk suggests sealed against bedrock in 6K06. •LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:13-I5SOIL LOCUS SHEET.IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 15 Summary: Soil pit.REASONRemarks:DESCRIPTIONSupervisor: GH Dates: 07/13 to 07/14Pit f i l l behind locus 14.Color: Light yellow ish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 50% S ilt ........... 10% Sand........... 40% Fine Sand.. 90%Medium Sand 5% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Angular..'.. 10% Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence:Inclusi ons: Artifact: Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:- Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELS•Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Very DryLength................................ 0.650 mDepth................................. 0.320 to 0.320 rDegree'of Slope............... 5 deg •Compactness...................... Moderately CrumblyStructure....... .-___ ___ ; RandomDistribution....................• RandomWidth....................'........... 0.850 mDirection of Slope......... 180 degD .6K06:13, 0 .6K06:14Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 899.03- 898.75 13 899.05 898.77 XCount Bskts Loc Preservation46 07/13 4/ 59 10' 47 07/14 6/ 76 9OBJECTSReg no. DescriptionPossible .Pendant.PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectField no. Date 1 07/13Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingRemarks:• INTERPRETATION Function:Alsii Sample...:___ 100%> no float sample taken.Possible soil pit,but there were very few pottery fragments to suggest a pottery pit.The number of flints was ‘ large for.a locus this size,so it may have functioned as a flint f i l l pit.Seals against locus 7 to the North and East and locus 14 to the South. Removal of East balk in D:6K06 suggests it is sealed against the bedrock to the N.W. sratigraghically above locus 30.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 16 Supervisor: GM Oates: 07/15 toSunuiary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Surface color change, fllat cobbles and boulders.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--Uncl earDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 45% S ilt........... 10% Sand........... 45% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness......................... .. 2 Compactness.............. ___ Very CrumblyWetness........................... .. Very Dry Structure.................. . . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ . 12/m2 Medium Pebbles......... .___ . 5/m2Large Pebbles................ 10/m2 Medium Cobbles......... . . . ; 2/m2Large Cobbles................ . 1/m2 Small Boulders......... 2/m2Distribution..................... RandomArtifact: Flint................................. 51 Distribution............. . . . . RandomMeasurements:• Length................................ 3.750 m Width.............: .......... .. . . . 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 180 deg Degree of Slope....... .---- 5 degRemarks: This locus is even with the boulders shown on the topo map.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:.Remarks: Does not seal against 17 because it overlies 19. Equals lower part of locus 5 in D:5k97.LOVOLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 898.65 27 898.73 26 898.7035 698.61 13 898.80 34 898.6129 898.82 27 898.82POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatio Comments Reading58 07/16 0/ 12 3 EB bods59 07/17 9/ 65 49 ROM bod, few IR, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date- Pail Loc Level Total Per iod Material Photo DrawingGaming piece? 1 07/17 59PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/17/0807/17 Progress of excavation B/07/20/0707/20 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: May be a continuous occupational surface or a f i l l layer.Stratigraphy: The flat lying cobbles and boulders are all at the same stratigraphic level that the soil layer of locus 16 isat. Locus 18 is contiguous with this locus. Locus 16 is cont- igous with locus' 30 which is situated in the N.U. corner of the square.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 17 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/15 to 07/21Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks: More compact surface than locus. 13. .Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR7/4'Texture: Clay....... .-. 50%Medium Sand 10%S ilt ........... 40%Course Sand 80%Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 10% Sub-round.50% Round......... 40%Consistence: Hardness........................... 3 Compactness. ___ Very FriableInclusions:Wetness............................. Very Moist Structure... ___ RandomStone: Small Pebbles.................. 15/m2 Distribution . . . . RandomArtifact: Flint................................. 21 Distribution ___ RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 1.400 m . Width........... . . . . 2.500 mDepth.................................Degree of Slope...............0.100 to 0.440 m 15 degDirection of Slope... . . . . 192 degRemarks: Friable, compact surface considerably higher claythat requires very fir content than in locus•m troweling in < 13.order to remove. Very lit t le stone content,STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 13Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Locus 16 does not seal against locus 17, because it is stiLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit10 • 899.30 899.15 X 23 898.99 898.95 X11 899.34 898.90 X 22 899.00 898.99 XPOTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n CornnentstigraghiiReadingilly lower than locus 17.andPub60 07/17 10/160 73 IR age worn Few IR, EB61 07/17 1/ 6 3 EB bods63 07/20 13/ 91 •46 EB XOBJECTSReg no. Description . Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt grinder 1 07/17 60PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Oatc SubjectB/07/15/0707/15 Progress of excavation B/07/20/0707/20 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: May be an occupational surface. It is not a living surface because when the surface dries out it becomes verycrumbly.Stratigraphy: Locus 17 seals against the bedrock (locus 7) in the north balk, but it also covers locus 7 in the NE portionof the square, because the bedrock curves underneath.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:15-17OINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 18 Supervisor: GM Oates: 07/15 toSummary: Installation.REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Plan:'Lining:Measurements:Remarks:Circular installation with circular depression in center.Possible Door socketPlaster............................. 70% . Hard Stone........................ 30%CircularNoneLength............................... 0.460 m' Width................................. 0.420 to 0.430 mUncovered a circular installation that might be a door socket or a mortar. The inside depression is worn but it is not as smooth as the circular installations uncovered in square 5K97. The installation is made of a mixture of plaster and limestone pebbles. The inside depression is .2 to .23 m in diameter and about .08 m deep.The plaster in- stallation is about 25cm in height and is built onto a rock and plaster base.There are also three chink stones which are 5cm thick and 13cm long.These chink stones occur at the base of locus 18.The base of the installation and the chinkstones occurs on locus 29.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit25 898.70 898.45 XPOTTERYP a il Date Count B sk ts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments • Reading54 07/15 1 No potteryPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectPubB/07/15/0707/15 B/07/20/0707/20 BIODATA SAMPLES'Remarks:INTERPRETATIONFun c tion :Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation 8/07/24/0907/24 Plaster install, in situProgress of excavation 8/07/27/0907/27 Progress of excavationFlotation Sample............. 100%Taken inside the installation.It is not a mortar because of the lime pebble mixture which would not tolerate pounding. Other possibilities are a door post or a post for a wooden beam.This installation along with locus 31 and the highest flat lying boulder (location 26) of locus 32 all form a straight line and might have been a continuous set of post for wooden post.Locus 18 is stratigraphically equivalent to locus 16. Loci 20, 21-, and 26 all seal against locus 18.Locus 18,locus31, and the highest flat lying boulder of locus 32 (grid locat- ion 26) all appear to be contiguous and form a nice straight NW-SE line.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 19 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/17 to 07/21Suimary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Color change.Appearance of flat boulder in locatiion 16.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: 10YR6.4/4Texture: S ilt........... 10% Sand........... 50% Fine Sand.. 10% Medium Sand 30%Course Sand 60%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 70% Round......... 30%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness.............. ....... Moderately FriableWetness.............................. Very Dry Structure......................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 10/m2 Distribution............ ....... RandomArtifact: Flint................................. 13 Distribution............ ....... RandomOrganic: Bone.................................. . Rare Distribution............ ....... RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 2.000 m Width......................... ....... 2.500 mDepth.................................. 0.050 to 0.210 m Direction of Slope......... 180 degDegree of Slope.............. 2 degRemarks: Color .change from locus 17 (10YR7/4) to locus 19 (10YR6/4). Drier cons.istence with a more rounded particleshape.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 13, 17Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitC Loc Top Bottom' Transit21 898.85 898.81 x 15 898.88 898.80 x 16 898.90 898.74 X15 898.91 898.85 X 23 898.95 898.74 XrTERYPail Date Count 8skts Loc Preservatio Comments Reading65 07/20 37 26 3 1 8YZ, 1 LI2, EB66 07/21 2/ 73 14 1 L12, EBDate SubjectB/07/21/0607/21 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:Possible continuous occupational layer or f i l l layer.Seals against locus 23, but is also over and seals against locus 7. It seals against 7 to the NE and E and is over locus 7 in the north part of the square.Flat lying boulder in grid location stratigraphially equal to locus 19.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6X07, Locus 20 Supervisor: GMSummary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Appearance of chink stones around boulder in location 34.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Cloy........... 45% S ilt ........... 10% Sand........... 45% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 2 Compactness....... ... ........ Very CrumblyWetness............................ . Very Ory Structure................. ....... RandomInclusions:Stone: Medium Cobbles............... 6/m2 Distribution..'.___ ....... RandomOrganic: Bone................................. . Rare Distribution........... ....... RandomMeasurements: Length.............................. . 3.500 m Width........................ ........ 5.000 mDepth........... : .................. . 0.200 to 0.600 m Direction of Slope. ........ 180 degDegree of Slope............. 2 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 16, 19Dates: 07/20 to 07/21Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:LEVELSEquals top of loci 7,8 in D:5>C97.Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit loc Top Bottom31 898.62 898.60 x ' 35 898.58 898.55 x 21 898.62 898.6013 898.76 898.73 X 29 898.60 898.58 X 15 898.70 898.64Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati<62 07/20 17/10464 07/20 9/ 52INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy14 EBSubsoil surface. Possible continuous occupational layer or f i l l layer.Locus 20 is equal to the surface of chink stones that surround a boulder in location 34. It is an arbitrary locus that is not different from locus 16. The top of the chink stones are stratigraphically equivalent to locus 20.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 21 Summary: Surface.REASON- Remarks:.Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Supervisor: GM Oates: 07/21 to 07/22Appearance of more flat lying boudlers in south half of square.Top--Average Bottom--Average 10YR6/4Light yellowish brownClay........... 45% S ilt...........' Medium Sand 20% Course SandParticle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round..Consistence: Hardness............................ 2 'Wetness............................. Very DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 25/m2Large Pebbles.................. 4/m2Artifact: Flint................................. 202Organic: Bone.................................... RareMeasurements: Length................................ 3.500 mDirection of Slope......... 180 degCompactness....................... Very CrumblyStructure........................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 11/m2Distribution..................... RandomDistribution..................... RandomDistribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 5.000 mDegree of Slope.................. 5 degLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:18-21STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 20, 25Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:Remarks: Equals the lower part of loci 7,8 in D:5K97.LEVELSLoc Top Bottom 1fransit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 898.60 898.56 X 13 898.73 898.69 X 16 898.70 898.59 X35 898.55 898.53 X • 15 898.72 896.60 X 23 898.62 898.55 XPOTTERYPail. Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat'ion Comments Reading72 07/22 9/ 94 22/EB73 07/22 27/127 46 EB88 07/29 10 ES387 07/28 5/ 55 9 EB '08JECTSReg no. Descxiption Field no. Oatc Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingCeramic object? 1 07/22 73PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/21/0607/21 Progress of excavation B/07/22/1107/22 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible occupational layer or f i l l layer.Stratigraphy: Locus 21 was assigned because of the appearance of more flat lying boulders in grid locations,31 and 33.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 22 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/21 to 07/22Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks:DESCRIPTIONAppearance of chink stones around boulder in grid location 16.Color:' Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 40% S ilt........... 10% Sand........... 50% Fine Sand.. 10%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 60%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 70% Round......... 30%Consistence: Hardnes's......................... . 2 Compactness................ . . . Moderately FriableUetness........................... . Moderately Moist Structure.................... . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ 5/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . . . 30/m2Large Pebbles................ 2/m2 Small Cobbles............. 3/m2Distribution.................. . RandomArti fact: Flint. . . . . : .................. 9 D i stribut ion...............Organic: Bone.. . ; .......................... . Rare Distribution.............. . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................. . 2.000 m Width........................... . . . 2.500 mDepth............. '................ . 0.020 to 0.'050 m Direction of Slope... . . . 180 degDegree of Slope............... 5 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 19Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc • Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit21 898.80 898.75 x 15 898.80 898.75 X23 898.74 898.70 X 16 898.79 898.77 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Corrments Reading Pub67 07/21 6/ 66 33 EBINTERPRETATIONFunction: Continuous occupation layer or f i l l layer.Stratigraphy: Locus 22 is contiguous with the chink stones around boulder in grid location 16. Suggest chink stones were putin at the same time as the surface of locus 22 existed.LnSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 23• Summary:REASONRemarks: S e p a ra b ili t y : DESCRIPTION C o lo r:T ex tu re :P a r t ic le Shape: C ons is tence:In c lu s io n s :S o i l :S tone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Rock surface.Stone and cobble rock Top-AverageLight yellowish brownClay........... 4 5%Medium Sand 5%Angular___ 10%Hardness........................Wetness.........................Nari Pockets................Medium Pebbles.............Small Cobbles..............Distribution................Flint.............................Bone...............................Length...........................Depth.............................Degree of Slope.. . ___17fa ll.Bottom—Average 10YR6/4S ilt ........... 45%' Course Sand 5% Sub-angular 50%Moderately Moist4/m2, 0.7 cm25/m2 19/m2 Random 2Rare 0.750 m0.270 to 0.360 m 20 degSupervisor: GM Date: 07/21Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 90%Sub-round.. 40%Compactness....................... Moderately FriableStructure.......................... Random0 istr i but ion.................... RandomLarge Pebbles...................... 7/m2Medium Cobbles..................... 3/m2Distribution.................. '. RandomDistribution.................... RandomWidth................................. 0.750 mDirection of Slope......... 220 degContiguous to: Seals against: . Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit • Loc Top Bottom Transit17 900.04 898.83 X 17 899.90 898.74 X 23 900.03 898.77 XPOTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading Pub68 07/21 2/ 46 675 07/22 0/ 1 1INTERPRETATIONFunction: Rock or boulder fall.Stratigraphy: Locus 23 both seals against and overlies locus 7 (bedrock).2 IR bods, EBBods only: IR, prob LB, EBSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 24 Surrmary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Sruface below base of boulder in location 15.Separability: Top--Arbitrary Bottom-ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: 6YR6/4Texture: ' Clay........... 40%Mediun Sand 30% Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 70%Consistence: Hardness................Wetness................Inclusions: . Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYSmall P e b b le s ... Large P e b b le s ...D is t r ib u t io n ___F l in t .................... .Bone........................Le ng th ....................D ep th ......................Degree o f S lope.S ilt . . ....... 10%Course Sand 60%Round......... 30%2Moderately Moist15/m24/m2Random35Frequent .2.000 m0.030 to 0.140 m 5 degS u p e rv is o r: GMSand........... 50% Fine Sand'.. 10%Compactness.................... Moderately FriableStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles.................... 27/m2Small Cobbles...................... 2/m2Distribution..................... RandomDistribution..................... RandomWidth.................................. 2.500 mDirection of Slope......... 182 degUnder: 22Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc . Top. Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit LOC Top Bottom Transit21 898.75 898.65 X ' 15 898.75 898.72 x .16 898.77 898.59 X23 898.70 898.56 X 15 898.76 898.69 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub69 07/21 INTERPRETATION7/149 55Fill or continuous occupation layer.EBLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:21-244^K)SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6KD7, Locus 25 Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Some flat lying pottery on surface. Top--Average Bottom--AverageLight yellowish brownClay........... 40%Medium Sand 30%Sub-round... 70%Hardness........................Uetness.........................10YR6/4Silt........... 10%Course Sand 60%Round......... 30%2Moderately MoistSmall Pebbles................. 16/m2Large Pebbles.................. 3/m2Distribution................ ;. RandomFlint................................. 53Bone.................................... RareLength................................ 2.000 mDepth.................................. 0.010 mDegree of Slope.................. 5 deg24Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/21 to 07/22Sand........... 50% Fine Sand.. 10%Compactness............Structure................Medium Pebbles____Small Cobbles....... .Distribution.Distribution...........Width.......................Direction of Slope.Moderately Friable Random26/m23/m2Random Random 2.500 m 182 degLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom21 898.65 898.64 X 15 898.69 698.68 X 16 898.59 898.5823 898.56 898.55 X 15 898.72 898.71 XPOTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading Pub70 07/21 2/ 40 14 EB71 07/22 6/ 76 22 EBINTERPRETATIONFunction: Fill or continuous occupational layer.Stratigraphy: Locus 25 is stratigraphically above locus 21 and seals against the bedrock .(Locus )to the N and E.SOIL LOCUS SHEET-IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 26 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/22 to 07/24Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks: Surface in which boulder in grid location 34 is situated.Separability: Top-Average 8ottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Light yellowish brownClay........... 30%Medium Sand 20% Sub-angular 60%Hardness........................Uetness.........................10YR6/4S ilt........... 5%Course Sand 10% Sub-round.. 40% 2Moderately MoistSmall Pebbles.................. 31/m2Large Pebbles.................. 3/m2Flint................................... 2508one................................... FrequentLength................'.............. 4.000 mDepth.................................. 0.010 to 0.160 mDegree of Slope........ . .. 5 degSand........... 65% Fine Sand.. 70%C o m p a c tn e s s .. ..! ................. V e ry CrumblyS t ru c tu re ................................. RandomMedium Pebbles................ 14/m2D is t r ib u t io n .......................... RandomD is t r ib u t io n .......................... RandomD is t r ib u t io n .......................... RandomWidth.................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 180 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 0 .5X07:21Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top • Bottom Transii: Loc Top .Bottom Transit35 898.53 898.52 • x 13 898.59 898.47 x 23 898.55 898.49 X31 898.56 898.48 X 15 898.60 898.56 x 21 898.55 898.50 X25 898.56 • 898.54 X 16 898.59 898.43 XPOTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading Pub74 07/22 2/ 14 2 EB76 07/23 10/ 90 49 Few LI2.EB X77 07/23 15/135 48 EB X80 07/24 9/ 88 10 EB XPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/23/1407/23 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Continuous occupational layer or f i l l layer.Surface upon which possible pavement surface (location 33) mayhave been buiIt.Stratigraphy: Locus 26 is the surface that the possible installation (grid 34) that was found contiguous'with locus 16 mayhave been set down upon.Locus 31 base is contiguous with top of locus 26.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 27 Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/23 toSummary: Rock soil surface.REASONRemarks: Appearance of flat boulders and cobbles in locations 25+31.Separabili ty: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 10% Sand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 2 Compactness........... . . Very CrumblyWetness............................ . Very Dry Structure................ . RandomInclusions:Stone: Large Pebbles................. 17/m2 Small Cobbles.. . . 8/m2Medium Cobbles............... . 4/m2 Small Boulders....... 1/m2Distribution.................. . RandomArtifact: Pottery............................ . Rare Flint........................ . 35Distribution.................. . RandomOrganic: Bone................................. . Rare Distribution........... . RandomMeasurements: Length............................. . 1.500 m Width........................ . 1.700 mDepth............................... . 0.020 to 0.130 m Direction of Slope. . 220 degOegree of Slope............. . 10 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 26LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 898.48 898.38 X 31 898.40 898.38 x 25 898.47 898.40 X31 698.48 898.38 X 25 898.47 898.40 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading78 07/23 1/ 43 5 EB '81- 07/24 0/11 1 EB86 07/28 11/512 500 7 EBOBJECTSReg no. Description F.ield no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Peri od Material Photo DrawingStone object 1 07/23 78 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/24/0807/24 Progress of excavationINTERPRETATION _Function: Rock and soil surface.Appears to be a cobble stone feature, maybe part of a collapsed wall structure-.Stratigraphy: Locus 27 is contiguous with locus 28,and is confined to the SW corner of the square .It is equal to locus 21in D:6K07.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 28 Supervisor: Date:DESCRIPTIONInclusions:Artifact: Pottery.............................. RarePOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments . Reading Pub790 07/23 10/360 7 EB X82 07/24 161/ 56 52 EB83 07/24 7/ 98 22 EB !UD84 07/27 9/ 76 14 EB X93 07/30 22 EB96 07/31 2/ 82 17 EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber - Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/24/0807/24 Progress of excavation 8/07/30/0807/30 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION •Function: Fill Layer or a cntinuous layerStratigraphy: Locus 28 is continuous with locus 27.Both under Locus-26. Locus 28.is equal to the lower part of locus 21 insquare D:6X06.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:25-28SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field 0, Square 6K07, Locus 29 Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks:Separabili ty:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Supervisor: GM Dates: 07/24 toParticle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHY Under: LEVELSColour change. Top--Average7YR6/8Clay........... 10%Medium Sand 40% Sub-angulaiS i l t ..............Course Sand S u b-rou nd ..Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Very OryNari Pockets... Small Pebbles.. Large Pebbles.. Flii16/m2, 0.5- 1.0 cm 40/m2 2/m2 30013/m2, avg. 0.5 cmCharcoal................Length............................... 0.750Direction of Slope......... 180 degThis locus is separated from locus 28 by a col' of nari, brick-material and charcoal.There0 .5X07:28, D .5K07:18Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 40% •Compactness........................... M od era te ly CrumblyStructure......................... Random8rick Material....... . 21/m2, 0.5- 1.0 cmMedium Pebbles................ 7/m2Distribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomWidth................................. 0.750 mDegree of Slope.............. 5 degchange and by the presence of small but abundant fragments Iso an increase in the pebble content.Loc Top • Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Loc Top Bottom Transit31 898.38 X 15 898.46 x 23 898.45 X35 896.40 X 15 898.50 X 33 898.42 X13 • 898.42 X 27 898.40 XTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading89 07/29 55 EB91 07/29 12 E692 07/30 55 EB95 07/30 31 EB3OBJECTSReg no. Descriptioi iil Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPossible glass bracelet.PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject1 07/29 89 02Number Date Subject Number Date S u b je c tB/07/27/0907/27 Progress of excavation 8/07/29/0807/29 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavationB/07/28/0807/28 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0807/30 Progress of excavation •INTERPRETATIONFunction: • Possible living surface with abundant charcoal, nari and brick like material.Most of the inclusions are smallpebble size.Stratigraphy: Locus 29 is equal to locus 18 in D:5K97 and locus 31 in D: 6K06. This locus seals against the flat lyingboulders in the southeast corner of 6K07.Did not reach base of locus 29.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6K07, Locus 30 Supervisor: GM • Oates: 07/27 toSummary: Surface.REASONSeparabili ty: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Texture: Clay........... 45% Silt........... 10% Sand........... 45% Fine Sand.. 70%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 60% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness................ . . . Very CrumblyWetness........................... . Very Dry Structure.................... . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ . 12/m2 Medium Pebbles........... 5/m2Large Pebbles................ 10/m2 Medium Cobbles........... 2/m2Large Cobbles................ . 1/m2 Distribution.............. . . . RandomArtifact: Flint............................... . 34 Distribution.............. . . . RandomOrganic: Bone................................. . Rare Distribution.............. . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................. . 0.800 m Width........................... . . . 0.900 mDepth......................... ; . . . 0.030 to 0.040 m Direction of Slope... . . . 180 degDegree of Slope............. 5 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 15-P^LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 898.75 898.71 X 13 898.80 898.76 X13 898.79 898.75 X 13 898.77 898.73 XPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation- Garments Reading Pub85 07/27 4/PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date11 3SubjectEBB/07/27/0907/27 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Continuous occupational layer or f i l l layer.Stratigraphy: Contiguous to locus 20 and is stratigraphically equal to the basal part of locus 23 in 0:61(06.XINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6X07, Locus 31Summary: InstallationREASONRemarks: Possible post support.DESCRIPTIONRemarks: This installation is 100% dry laid limestone.lt i standing. There are five chinkstone that surroundSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: D .5X06:10LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: GM Dates: 07/27 to 07/28s a single rectangular block that is unhewn and free the boulder at a lower level(.01-.03).34 898.65PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date898.55SubjectXNumber Date S ub jectB/07/27/0907/27 Progress of excavation B/07/28/D807/28 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Possible post support that is part of a three part possible post support system that includes locus 18 andthe highest standing boulder (location 26) in locus 32.Stratigraphy: Locus 31 is sealed at its surface by locus 16 and lies on the surface of locus 26.The surface of thechinkstones are sealed by locus 21.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6X07, Locus 32 Supervisor: GM Date:Surmary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Possible NE-SW running wall.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone............................ 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble................................. 40% Small Boulder. 50%Medium Boulder.................... 10%Dressing: Unhewn............'................... 100%Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100%Construction: Style.................................. Boulder & Chink Support............................. Free-standing .Tendencies: Wall stones are made of boulders .there are no chinkstones.Courses:Measurements: Length............................... 2.300 m Width................................. 0.900 to 1.300 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSloc TopOrientation................10Bottom Transit Loc230 deg TopDip...............:Bottom Transit Loc Top10 degBottom Transit25 898.61 X 31 896.40 X 26 898.70 X32 898.65 X 31 898.61 X 32 898.63 XPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject. Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/27/0907/27 Progress of excavation B/07/28/0807/28 Progress of excavation 8/07/29/0807/29 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: . . Possible wall that runs SW-NE. Might form a 90 deg. left angle with the wall in square D:6k07.(locus 24)Stratigraphy: Locus 32 is sealed at its surface by locus 16 and is sealed by consecutively stratigraphically lower loci20.21,26,27, and 28.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD D 6K07:29-324^4^INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field D, Square 6X07, Locus 33Suimary: REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Plan:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Remarks:LEVELSSupervisor: GM Dates: 07/27 to 07/28lying) in grid locaticFlagstone pavement.Exposure of large boulder (flr simply thus aARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 3A Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/iSummary: West wall of well - -highest part.REASONRemarks: Assign wall own locus.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone................ ....... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones : Cobble...................... ....... 100%Dressing: Unhewn...................... ....... 100%Mortar: Cement...................... ....... 100% ' Average Thickness. ......... 3.0 cmFacing: UnfacedConstruction: Style........................ ....... Small stone Support.................. ......... Free-standingCourses: RandomMeasurements: Length...................... ....... 2.650 m Height.................... ......... 0.100 to 0.200 mPreservation: CompleteRemarks: Construction style: Stones used were smal 1, fitted tightly together and plastered.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top . Bottom Transit17 868.81 868.74 23 868.79 868.77 35 868.84 868.78PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/01/0807/01 Progress of excavat ion A/07/03/1107/03 Progress of excavationA/07/02/0907/02 Progress of excavat ion A/08/03/1208/03 End of seasonDRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:E a st, South» 3a were placed on top of theTo insure that the concrete would be nearly level,the small stones from l larger bould- ers of locus 3b. . •Because the concrete used to hold the stones is the same as in the well cap, the two loci date to the same time period, i.e . first half of the 20th century.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 3A (Supplement)Installation SupplementSummary; Mortar in highest layer of west wall of well.REASON 'Remarks: Analyze wall mortar.DESCRIPTIONColor: White 2.5T8/2Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness............................. 2Wetness............................. Slightly OryInclusions: .Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 300/m2• Large Pebbles.................. 1/m2Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/01 to 07/03Compactness...................... Moderately Firm/Slightly GravellyStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ S0/m2Distribution.................... RandomARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 3B Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/08 to 07/10Summary: Second highest phase in west wall of well.REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Material:Distinguish between parts of well wall that have mortar and those that do not. Top--AverageLimestone......................... 100%Masonry:Wall StonesChinkstonesDressing:Mortar:Facing: Construction: Rows:Measurements: ' Preservation:Cobble............................... 15% Small Boulder..................... 25%Medium Boulder................ 60%Pebble............................... 40% Cobble............................... 60%Semi-hewn......................... 5% Dressed............................. 60%Ashlar............................... 35%Dry-laid........................... 90% Plaster............................. 10% .UnfacedStyle.................. '............. Bouider & Chink Support.................... , ----- Free-standing2Length............................... 3.500 m Height............................... 0.700 to 0.840 mComplete • Top Foundation Level___ 867.85 mRemarks:STRATIGRAPHYRows: Due to non-excavation and covering by previous layer, best guess is 2.Under: 3ALEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit' 23 868.77 868.07 XOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingChink stone 1 07/08 29 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/08/0607/08 A/07/09/1007/09 BIODATA SAMPLESProgress of excavation A/07/23/1707/23 Probe exploration. Progress of excavation A/08/03/1208/03 End of seasonRemarks:DRAWINGSMortarParticle size analysis.Balks:INTERPRETATIONSoutheastfunction:Stratigraphy:Provide second row of support for modern-day reconstruction of well top.Oue to the scrap metal,modern china and shot gun shells found in its foundation trench,Locus 3b also dates to the first half of the 20th century. It is likely that loci 2, 3a, and 3b were constructed at the same time.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 3B (Supplement) Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/09 to 07/10Installation SupplementSummary:REASONMortar in second phase of west wall of well.Remarks:DESCRIPTIONOescribe mortar.Color:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:White 10YR8/1 Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Hardness........................... 3 Compactness.................. Moderately FirmWetness............................. Slightly Dry Structure....!................ RandomStone:STDAT 1 r.PAPUVSmall Pebbles.................. 200/m2 Medium Pebbles................. 75/m2Distribution.................... RandomUnder: 3A 'R IGR HYLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD E.2:2-3U lOARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 3CSummary: Stones of well as seen from outside through excavation.REASONSeparabili ty: Top*-Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone.......................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:: Cobble............................... 100%Dressing: Unhewn............................. . 100%Mortar: Dry- laid......... .........: ___ . 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................... .. RubbleCourses: RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 3.500 m Height.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit23 867.88 867.49PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/23/1707/23 Probe exploration A/08/03/1208/03 End of seasonDRAWINGSBalks: SoutheastINTERPRETATIONFunction: Cobble-sized stones in well itself.Supervisor:. BC Dates: 07/22' to 07/28ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 3D REASONSeparability: Top--Cl earDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone...................... 100%. Masonry:Wall Stores: Medium Boulder................. 100%Chinkstones: Cobble................................ 100%Dressing: Semi-hewn.......................... 100%Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style.................................. Boulder & ChinkSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3CPHOTOGRAPHSNuntoer Date Subject Number Date SubjectSupervisor: BC Dates: 07/28 toB/07/23/1707/23DRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Probe exploration A/08/03/1208/03 End of seasonSouth,WestBoulder sized stones under 3c in well itself,as seen throug h our excavation(to retain well water).SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 4 Summary: Sub topsoil.REASONRemarks: Separabi l i ty: DESCRIPTION Texture:-Particle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:New locus assigned for depth greater than 50 Top--ArbitraryClay........... 5% * S ilt........... 15%Mediun Sand 30% Course Sand 60%Angular---- 6% Sub-angular 35%Hardness........................... 1Wetness............................. Slightly HoistDepth................................. 0.500 to 1.000 mDegree of Slope......... . 3 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: BC Dates: 07/07 toSand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 10%Sub-round.. 45% Round......... 10%Compactness. Structure... Direction of Slope___. . . Slightly Crumbly/Moderately Gravelly . . . Random . . . 62 degReading Pub4 07/07 . 605 07/08 158PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectWornNumber Date Subject1 MOD, ROM bods, IRNumber Date SubjectA/07/06/1107/06 Progress of excavati' A/07/07/1107/07 Progress of excavation A/07/08/0607/08 Progress of excavationINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION' U87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus ASummary: Foundation trench for upper portion of W w:all of well.REASONRemarks: Describe foundation trench.TYPE Probable Foundation TrenchDESCRIPTIONMaterial: S oil........................ ......... 100%Plan: Semi-circularLining: NoneMeasurements: Length.................... ......... 3.500 m Width...............Height.................... ......... 0.100 to 0.600 m Orientation...Remarks: Foundation trench for loci 2,3a and 3b of the west wall of theSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/07 to 07/101 .300 to 2.300 ni 80 degLEVELSLoc Top Bottom- Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit23POTTERY868.53 867.87 X 35 868.46 867.85 XPail. Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading. Pub4 07/07 16/116 60 35 Worn 1 MOD, ROM bods, IR5 07/08 24/ 57 158 1 EB4 rim published BYZ, Ll2, EI2, 1 EB X6 07/09 61/148 175 1 prob AY/MAM, BYZ, ROM, LI2, EI2, 11, EB4, EB7 07/09 2/ 12 .5 17 ROM, IR8 07/10 31/ 64 150 34 1 BYZ bod, LI2, EI2, EB9 07/10 58/ 82 150 1 BYZ, LR, ER, EPER, LI2, EI2, 11, 1 MB2, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBangle frag.gla:PHOTOGRAPHSNumber- Date Subject07/10 8Number Date Subject Number D ate S u b je c tA/07/06/1107/06 Progress of excavation A/07/07/1107/07 Progress of excavation DRAWINGSTop Plans: #1, #2.Balks: SouthINTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:A/07/08/0607/08 Progress of excavation A/07/09/1007/09 Progress of excavationoci 2,3a,3bFoundation trench for lBecause of the rifle shells,scrap metal and modern china ware.it product of early 20th century technology.A/07/10/1007/10 Progress of excavation A/08/03/1108/03 End of seasonis obvious that the foundation trench is aSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 4 (Supplement) Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/07 to 07/10Installation SupplementSummary: Foundation trench f i llREASONRemarks: Describe soil for foundation trench.DESCRIPTIONColor: Dark reddish gray 5YR4/2Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt ........... 15% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand..- 10%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 60%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 35% Sub-round.. 45% Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 1 Compactness........... .Wetness........................... . Slightly Moist Structure................ ......... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................. . 250/m2 Medium Pebbles....... ......... 100/m2Large Pebbles................. 40/m2 Small Cobbles.................. 9/m2Medium Cobbles............... 3/m2 Large Cobbles......... . . . . . . 2/m2Small Boulders............... 1/m2 Medium Boulders............. 1/m2Distribution___.•........... . RandomArtifact: Glass............................... 3 Distribution........... . ........ PatternedRemarks: All glass was found in locations 10 and 11.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Trench and associated f i l l of modern period.Stratigraphy: Filled against large ash-? for levelling up procedure to re build ver Date S ub ject ' Number Date S u b je c tA/07/09/1007/09A/07/10/1007/10DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation •A/07/17/1107/17 Progress of excavation A/07/20/1007/20 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation A/07/17/1007/17 Progress of excavation#1. #2,North,westProbable Iron Age pottery dump.Since material is not directly above later Early Roman pot- tery but s t ill physically higher in elevation.lt appears that the pottery was cleared out at a later date.It is, however, possible that the Romans dug below the layer,thus the pottery may have been in a pool and deposited flatly over time.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 6 Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/10 to 07/23Summary: Sub-foundation trench layer.REASONRemarks: Assign layer earlier than foundation trench own 1.ocus.Separability: Top--UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark yellowish brown 10YR4/4Texture: Clay.......... 5% Silt........... 15% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 10%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 60%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 1 Compactness................ . . . Moderately CrumblyWetness....................... . . . Slightly Moist Structure.. ................. . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles__-........ . . . 250/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . . . 150/m2Large Pebbles............. 40/m2 Small Cobbles............. 10/m2Medium Cobbles........... 3/m2 Large Cobbles............. 2/m2Small Boulders........... 1/m2 Distribution............... . . . RandomFI inf 7 D i st ribut ion......... .̂.Measurements: Length....................... . . . 5.000 m Width........................... .. . . 4.650 mDepth........................... . . . 0.500 to 2.000 m Direction of Slope... . . . 62 degDegree of Slope......... 3 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1 ,4LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc • Top Bottom Transit23 867.87 867.62 33 868.60 867.3135 867.85 867.09 34 868.30 867.35L/1POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub10 07/10 2/ 22 2 35 Possible contamination IR11 07/14 67/123 210 1 Jar stopper BYZ, ER bod,.112, EI2, EB4, EB12 07/14 49/ 70 55 32 Possible potters stamp Few ER, 1 EPER, LI2, E12, 11, MB2, EB13 07/15 53/107 95 ER,LI2,EI,EB14 07/15 39/ 56 55 ER bods, EI2, LI121 07/20 8/ 22 20 31 Few ER, LI24 07/20 18/ 36 55 Uadi washed pottery 1 Rom bod, LI2, MB26 07/21 8/ 34 20 23 2 BYZ bods. Iron bods, E B29 07/21 51/132 85 Few BY2, LR, ER, 11, EB X30 07/22 . 75/142 120 ' 1 EB rim published Few BYZ, ER, LI2, EB X31 07/22 40/ 69 40 27 ER, few LI2, 2 UD X32 07/22 12/ 17 ER, 1 E Per, LI2, E BAC, EB33 07/23 6/ 13 120 ER, Iron bods, 1 EB30 07/22 28/ 58 120 8YZ, ER, LI2, 11, EB 4c35 07/23 10/ 23 150 Iron Age, EBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/10/1007/10 A/07/13/1007/13 A/07/15/1007/15 A/07/16/1007/16DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation • A/07/17/1107/17 Progress of excavation A/08/03/1108/03 End of seasonProgress of excavation A/07/20/1007/20 Progress of excavation A/08/03/1208/03 End of seasonProgress of excavation A/07/21/1007/21 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation B/07/22/1607/22 Progress of excavation#2.#3North, East, South, WestLocus 6 with its wadi washed pottery most likely represents the soil that accumulated after the Byzantine period and before the foundation trench for the latest portion of. the West wall of the well. Archaeologically it has litt le impor tance and could thus be best termed as sub-topsoil.Everything imaginable, with Byzantine being the latest.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 7 Summary: Early Roman wallREASONRemarks: Wall encounteredSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone... '.................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................... 10%Mediim Boulder................. 30%Chinkstones: Pebble............................... 10%Dressing: Unhewn................................ . 80%'Mortar: Dry-laid............................ 100%Facing: UnfacedMeasurements: Length............................... 3.600 mHeight................. 0.850 to 1.300 mPreservation: Partial Superstructure: HalfSupervisor: BC Dates: 07/14 to 07/24 -Small Boulder................... 60%Cobble............................... 90%Ashlar............................... 20%Width................................. 0.300 to 0.700 mTop Foundation Level___ 867.93 mRemarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc TopDegree of super structure remaining is really unknown. Robbing out may be possible, because loci 9 and 11 are both higher.6.Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom • Transit32 868.2133PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date867.43Subject37 867.7421 867.90Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/15/1007/15 A/07/16/1007/16 A/07/17/1107/17 DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation A/07/20/1007/20 Progress of excavation ' 0/72/41/1172/41Progress of excavation A/07/21/1007/21 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation B/07/22/1607/22 Progress of excavation#3,#4,#5SouthThe wall may have joined with the surface,locus 16,to form a domestic dwelling or some type of approach to • the spring., the wall may origionally been as high as locus 9 and 11 and the stones may have been used in the West wall of the well when the foundation trench,locus 21, was dug.Early Roman pottery was latest found on top of locus, how- ever some late Roman sherds were found beneath it .I t ap- pears that the wall was put into place at the beginning of the late Roman period.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD E.2:5-7SOIL LOCUS SHEETLAL At oIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 8 Dates: 07/28 toSummary: Continuation of Iron Age f i l l .REASON iRemarks: Reached depth of 1 meter.Separability: Top--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 4% S ilt........... 9% Sand........... 85% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 50% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Angular___ 20% Sub-angular 45% Sub-round.. 25% Round.........Consistence: Hardness.................... ___ 1 Compactness.................... . ModeratelyWetness..............•___ ___ Slightly Dry Structure....................... . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles........... ___ 300/m2 Medium Pebbles.............. . 100/m2Large Pebbles........... ___ 75/m2 Small Cobbles................ 10/m2Medium Cobbles......... ___ 8/m2 Large Cobbles................ 2/m2Distribution............. . . . . PatternedMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 2.550 m Width............................... . 2.000 mDepth......................... . . . . 1.050 m Direction of Slope....... . 62 degDegree of Slope....... ---- 3 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5LEVELSLoc • Top iBottom Transit13 868.05POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading41 07/28 30/ 33 35 00-09 LI2, Few EI245 07/28 28/ 31 35 00-09 LI2,Few EI2, Prob 11PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/20/1007/20 Progress of excavati on A/08/03/1408/03 End of seasonA/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavati on A/08/03/1508/03 End of seasonDRAWINGSTop Plans: #4,#5Balks: North, WestINTERPRETATIONFunction: A fi 11 layer mostly with sandy inclusions probably meaning it was depos i ted over tinas a dump for well- c lean-out at the top of the locus.Stratigraphy: Late Iron 2 and ear lier.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 9 Summary: Iron 2 wall.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Material:Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/07 toWall cutting Locus 5. Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearMasonry:Wall Stones: Cobble..............Medium Boulder.Chinkstones: Cobble..............Dressing:Mortar:Facing:Construction:Measurements:Limestone..................... 100%25%100%Small Boulder.Preservation:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc TopUnhewn............................... 8% Semi-hewn.Dry-laid........................... 100%UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink Support...Length............................... 1.400 m width........Height............................... 0.550 to 1.350 m OrientaticPartial Superstructure: Most Preservation may not be complete-due to tumbling.165%20%. Free-standing . 0.400 to 0.700 m 260 degBottom Transit19 868.33 867.36PHOTOGRAPHS' Number Date SubjectA/07/20/1007/20 Progress of excavation A/07/21/1007/21 Progress of excavation A/07/24/1107/24 Final locus 7 photo DRAWINGSTop Plans: #3,#4,#SBalks: WestLoc Top Bottom Transit20 868.17 867̂ 31Number Date SubjectA/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavation A/07/28/1107/28 Progress of excavation A/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavationNunber Date SubjectA/08/03/1108/03 End of season A/08/03/1408/03 End of season A/08/03/1508/03 End of seasonWalls use is very unclear. If it haws a connection to Locus 11,the only surface that is associated at the bottom of both walls is so il.It didn't appear to have been used as a sur- face.It may indeed be associated with Locus 8 ,since the bot- tom of the well has not been excavated on that side during t he 1987 excavation.Late Iron 2 pottery found on both sides of the wall,altho .the forms vary widely from one side to the other.The wall then almost certainly'dates to the Late Iron 2 period.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 10 Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/20 to 07/27Remarks: Tumble layer encountered below flat-lying sherds of locus 5Separabili ty: Top--Ctear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Dark brown 7.5YR4/4Texture: Clay........... 5% S ilt ........... 15% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.-. 20%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 50%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 40% Round......... 10%Consistence: Hardness.......................... . 1 Compactness........... Slightly LooseWetness............................ . Moderately Moist Structure............... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................. . 200/m2 Medium Pebbles___ 75/m2Large Pebbles................. 50/m2 Small Cobbles........ 30/m2Medium Cobbles............... . 30/m2 Large Cobbles........ 20/m2Small 8oulders............... 2/m2 Medina Boulders__ 1/m2Distribution.................. . RandomMeasurements: Length............................. . 1.500 m Width....................... 1.500 mDepth............................... . 0.700 to 1.400 m Direction of Slope 67 degDegree of Slope............. 3 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit25 867.93 867.50POTTERYPail Date . Count Bskts Loc Preservati on Comments Reading36 07/24 4/ 14 10 20 ER, Ir39 07/27 34/130 25 19 few LIr2, EIr240 07/27 11/ 23 LIr2PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/20/0107/20 Progress of Excavation A/07/27/0107/27 Progress of ExcavationDRAWINGSTop Plans: 4Balks: WINTERPRETATIONFunction: Tumble layerStratigraphy: Under the hypotheses that the area was used as a dump for cleaning pottery out of well, locus 10 tdescribed best as a tumble layer that accumulatedI between the well cl eanings of locus 5 and locusARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 11 Super•visor:. BC Dates: CSumary: Iron II wallREASONRemarks: Wall running perpendicu lar to locus 7Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Limestone........................ . '100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble............................. 10% Small Boulder......... 20%Medium Boulder............... 40% Large Boulder......... 30%Chinkstones: Pebble.............................. 10% Cobble...................... 90%Mortar: Dry-laid.......................... . 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................... . Boulder & ChinkCourses: 2 to . 4Rows: 1 to 2Measurements: Length............................. . 1.800 m Width........................ 0.500 to 0.800 m. 0 600 to 1 750 m Or i entat ion............. 298 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: MostRemarks: Preservation may not be complete due to tumblingSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD E.2:8-llLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit32 868.53PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date867.45SubjectXNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/21/0107/21A/07/28/0107/28DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of Excavation A/08/03/0098/03 Progress of Excavation A/08/03/01Q8/03 End of SeasonProgress of Excavation A/08/03/0198/03 End of Season A/08/03/01B8/03 End of'Season3, 4, 5 UNo surface was found at the bottom of the wall, thus it appears that the wall was associated in use with locus 12. However, since there is no trace of locus 12 in square E1, it is quite unclear what the function of the wall could be. There is little reason to link it to locut-9 for use, except the orientation is nearly the same as well as the height.C om ple te ly la te Iro n I I p o t te r y to th e n o rth and E a rly Roman a t th e to p o f w a ll to th e sou th .SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 12 Summary: Tumble layer.REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION •Measurements:-Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc TopDescribe tumble layer between wall and South balk.Top--Clear Bottom--ClearLength............................... 1.600 m Width.......................Depth................................. 0.970 m Direction of SlopeDegree of Slope............ 3 degBasically un excavated in 1987 due to unmanueverability without fii6Bottom TransitSupervisor: BC. . . 1.150 m . . . 62 degremoving Locus 1.Oates: 07/2031 867.98POTTERYP a il Date Count B skts Loc P re s e rv a tio n Comments Reading Pub38 07/24 1/ 21 3 32 Few Roman bods , iron bods, EB42 07/24 1/ 2 31 Iron Age Bods.PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date S u b je c t Number Date S ub ject Number Date S u b je c tA/08/03/0908/03 Progress of excavation A/08/03/1108/03 End of season . A/08/03/1508/03 End of seasonDRAWINGSBalks: #4, #5Sub*balks: South,WestARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 13 Sunmary: Early Roman wall.REASONRemarks: Designate wall separating Locus 6 and Locus 14.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble.. Fill Stones: Cobble.. Dressing: Unhewn..Mortar: Dry-laidFacing: UnfacedConstruction: Style...Tendencies: SupportSTRATIGRAPHY45% Medium Boulder... 100%.70% Semi-hewn.......... 100%.. Boulder & Chinkthis time ,but leans against Locus 14.Under: 6Supervisor: BC85%20%Dates: 07/21 toU lU iLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit22 867.97PHOTOGRAPHSHumber Date Subject . Number Oate S ub ject Humber . Oate SubjectB/07/25/1607/25A/07/28/1107/28DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:A/08/03/1208/03 End of season A/08/03/1408/03 End of seasonProgress of excavation A/08/03/1308/03 End of season#4,#5East1. Buttressing for west wall of well-wall too scattered to lend much support. 2. Support for Locus 14 as foundation trench being dug.To the North, basically Early Roman,with some Byzantine right at the top level of the wall.To the South, also Early Roman with a few Late Roman sherds. This would suggest the wall was placed in either the Early or Late Roman periods.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field E, Summary: REASONSquare 0002, Locus 14Byzantine or probably Early Roman dump.Dates: 07/21 toRemarks: Locus seperated by wa1t.Locus 13.Separabili ty: Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay___; . . 10% S ilt........... 25% Sand........... 65% Fine Sand.. 50%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 45% Round......... 15%Consistence: Hardness........................ .. 3 Compactness........... ......... Moderately FirmWetness.......................... .. Slightly Moist Structure............... ......... Water (Puddling)Inclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 150/m2 Medium Pebbles.. . . ......... 70/m2Large Pebbles............... .. 40/m2 Small Cobbles....... ........... 25/m2Medium Cobbles............. 10/m2 Large Cobbles....... 7/m2Arti fact: Pottery.......................... .. Frequent Distribution......... ......... LayeredMeasurements: Length........................... .. 2.400 m Width...................... ......... 1.400 mDepth............................. .. 1.000 m Direction of Slope ......... 62 degDegree of Slope........... 3 degRemarks: Mostly flat lying sherds deposited layer after layer in a very ddense fashion.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 0ALEVELSLoc Top lBottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 868.08 17 867.97POTTERY•Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading27 07/21 68/ 69 25 00-17 Byz, Few ER, EB28 07/21 8/ 8 25 17 ER, Ir41 07/27 19/ 74 Very worn. . ER, Ir, MBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Oate Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/28/1107/28 Progress of excavation A/08/03/1408/03 End of season A/08/03/1508/03 End of iDRAWINGSTop Plans: #4, #5Balks: North, EastINTERPRETATIONFunction: Since sherds were very worn,it is probable that they were also clearvout material from the w«in place for some time., This would be understandable if there hadn't any use or cleanout fromthathad been Late Roman until Byzantine times, as is suggested by the other dump loci in square.THe latest pottery found was Byzantine,however,since it was found only in the first bucket,it is possible that the lower part of the is Early Roman,although no interface was found.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD E.2:I1-14L/tU i4^SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 15 Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/21 to 07/28Summary: Angular shaped nari layer.REASONRemarks: Designate nari layerSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pink 5YR8/3Texture: Clay........... 50% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 20% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular.... 90% Sub-angular 10%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 2 Compactness............. ........ Moderately LooseWetness........................ . . . Moderately Moist Structure................ ........ RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............. . . . 1200/m2 Medium Pebbles........ ........ 300/m2Large Pebbles............. . . . 250/m2 Small Cobbles......... ........ 50/m2Medium Cobbles........... 10/m2 Large Cobbles......... ........ 3/m2Distribution.............. __ LayeredArtifact: Pottery........................---- RareMeasurements: Length......................... . . . 3.000 m Width........................ ........ 2.100 mDepth........................... . . . 1.000 to 2.700 m Direction of Slope. ........ 150 degDegree of Slope......... . . . 31 degSurface Mat’ l : Crushed NariRemarks: Rocks a re o f a l l s iz e s ,b u t a re g e n e ra lly h o r iz o n ta l in o r - ie n ta t io n .STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 867.42 23 •867.62 866.37POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub34 07/23 1/ 1 1 00-23 1ron bods37 07/24 13/ 28 250 LR and EB Published. LR, ER bods. Iron Age, EB X38 07/27 20/ 67 250 1 UD base Few ER, 12, EB, 1 UD X43 07/28 6/ 22 ER, E Per, Iron bodsOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date . Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingWorked stone,basalt. 1 07/27 38 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Oate Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/23/1707/23 A/07/24/1007/24 DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation A/07/24/1107/24 Final locus 7 photo A/08/03/1108/03 End of seasonProgress of excavation. A/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavation A/08/03/1208/03 End of season#4South,East Pit f i l l .Mostly Early Roman, but with a few Late Roman diagnostics This suggests that the foundation trench was dug not long after the installation of Locus 16 and Locus 7.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field E,Seminary:REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Lining:Measurements:Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under: . LEVELSLoc TopSquare 0002, Locus 16 Plaster surface.Surface lying under wall-Locus 7. Certain PavementSoft Plaster.................... 100%TriangularNoneLength............................... 3.000 m Width.........Height............................... 0.001 to 0.060 mLocus 16 traces under the wall of locus 7 and stops.6. 7Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom. TransitSupervisor: BC Dates: 07/22 to0.100 to 1.000 mLoc Top Bottom Transit33 867.93 867.87 27 867.74 867.72 27 867.90PHOTOGRAPHSNumber ' Date Subject Number Date Subject Number DateA/07/24/1107/24 DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Final locus 7 photo A/07/27/1007/27 Progress of excavation A/07/28/1107/28 Progress of excavation#4SouthSurface does not appear impervious enough to have been used for holding water.Rather it may have been used for domestic purposes along with the wall, Locus 7, associated with it, or as a paved approach to the well.Mostly Early Roman pottery both on top and undeerneath the surface.However a few Roman (late) sherds under the surface hint that it was built right at the end of the Early Roman beginning of Late Roman periods.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 16 (Supplement) Installation SupplementSummary: REASONRemarks: .Separability: DESCRIPTION Remarks:Surface Inclusions.Describe pavement. Top--Very ClearPavement has small black flakes about 1 well used.Bottom--Very Clearnly present where the pavement appearsSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 17A Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/22.to 27/29Summary: Early Roman dumpREASONRemarks: Flat-lying sherd layer below pavementSeparability: Top--Very Clear . Bottom--UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt ................10% Sand........... 80% Fine Sand.. 40%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 30% Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness........................ ... 2 Compactness................. __Slightly FirmWetness............................. Slightly Moist Structure.................... __WindInclusions:Stone: • Small Pebbles.................. 200/m2 Medium Pebbles........... 75/m2Large Pebbles............... .. 40/m2 Small Cobbles............. 2/m2Medium Cobbles............. . 1/m2 Distribution............... . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 3.250 m Width...................... . . . . 0.900 mDepth................................. 1.200 to 1.900 m Direction of Slope... . . . 62 degDegree of Slope........... . 3 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 16LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit33 867.72 867.31 21 867.71 867.45POTTERYPail Date Count lBskts Loc Preservatior1 Comments Reading Pub46 07/29 104/143 20 ER, few LI2, EB47 07/29 59/ 70 60 few LR, ER, 2 Ir2, few EIr2, EB48 07/30 13/ 74 30 27 few LR, Er dom, Lir2, Ir1, EB X50 07/30 5/ 43 15 22 EROBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Oate Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingStamped pottery handle 4 07/29 46 17PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/24/0107/24DRAWINGSTop Plans:. Balks: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Final Photo Locus 7 A/07/29/0107/29 Progress of ExcavationProbable dump material, possibly from a well clean-outAlthough Early Roman pottery is obviously dominant by a large, ratio, there are . be found. This would suggest a date at the beginning of the Late Roman period, cut through by locus 21 in the Late Roman period.couple of Late Roman rims to The locus was then presumablySOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 17B Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/28 to 07/30Sunmary: Iron Age dumpREASONRemarks: Flat-lying sherds in a more clay like matr ix than 17ASeparabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very CleaDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt........... 15% Sand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 60%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 40% Round......... 20%Consistence: Hardness................. ......... 3 Compactness................... . . Moderately FirmWetness................... ......... Moderately Moist Structure.................... .. . . RandomI nc l us i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles........ ......... 300/m2 Medium Pebbles........... .. . . 100/m2Large Pebbles........ ......... 50/m2 Small Cobbles.............. 3/m2Medium Cobbles___ ......... 2/m2 Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length.................... ......... 3.250 m Width.............................. . . 0.900 mDepth...................... ....... 1.900 to 2.000 m Direction of Slope___. . . 62 degOegree of Slope... ......... 3 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 17ALEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit33 867.31 867.21 21 867.45 867.15LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD E.2:15-17ReadingPOTTERYPail Date Count Bskts loc Preservation Comments Pub49 07/30 80/130 50 27 LIr2, few EIr251 07/30 45/ 51 30 22 Ur2, 6Ir2 XOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGlass 999 07/29Figurine 4 07/29DRAWINGSBalks: SINTERPRETATIONFunction: Probable dump material from a well cleanoutStratigraphy: Entirely Iron Age, with late Iron II being dominant and the latest.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION1UC 1 iraNI JUU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 18Summary: More Iron II dumpREASONRemarks:' Flat-lying sherd layer encountered below tumbleSeparabili ty; Top--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Yellowish brown 10YR5/4 -Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt........... 15%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 30%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2Wetness........................... .. Moderately MoistInclusions:Soil: Ash Pockets...................... 1/m2, 10.0 cmStone: Small Pebbles.................. 250/m2Large Pebbles.................. 75/m2Medium Cobbles.............. 2/m2Small Boulders...:....... 1/m2Measurements: Length........................... ... 1.500 mDepth................................. 1.250 to 2.000 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 10LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: BC Dates: 07/27.to 07/31of Locus 10Sand........... 75% Fine Sand.. 40%Round......... 20%Compactness................ .Structure................ .........RandomMedium Pebbles................. 100/m2Small Cobbles.................. 10/m2Large Cobbles.................. 1/m2Width................................. 1.500 m25 867.50 867.06POTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub52 07/30 49/ 94 25 26 LIr2 only X53 07/30 43/143 29 26 LIr2, few EB54 07/30 26/ 99 50 26 LIr2, one EB55 07/30 20/145 30 25 LIr256 07/30 32/ 40 70' 25 Llr2, 1 Ir1OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing1508 Fibula pin 3 07/30 52 26 867.40PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number . Date SubjectA/07/28/0107/28 Progress of Excavation A/07/31/0107/31 Progress of ExcavationDRAWINGSBalks: WINTERPRETATIONFunction: Additional Late Iron II f i l l layer. Possibly well cleanout at the top 5 cm of locus, but remaining materialseems to have been deposited over time. Since there was no surface found at the bottom of walls 9 and 11, not foundation trenches, it .is doubtful that the locus was used for domestic purposes.Stratigraphy: Almost entirely Late Iron II, with a few Early Bronze potsherds.SOIL LOCUS.SHEETty:IDENTIFICATION U87 Field E Summary: REASON’Remarks:SeparabiDESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Measurements:Surface Mat1l: Remarks:^ TIGRAPHY Under:LAEnd of angular Top--AverageNari materi;Strong brownClay........... 10%Medium Sand 30%Angular.........10%Compactness......... .Structure........................... WindLength....... ....................... 2.650 mDepth......................1......... 2.700 mDegree of Slope.................. 3 degCrushed NariLocus not excavated in 1987 157.5YR4/6S ilt ........... 20%Course Sand 30% Sub-angular 20% ghtly FirmSupervisor: BC Dates: 07/28 toSand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 40%Sub-round.. 50% Round.......... 20%Wetness.............. .............. Slightly MoistWidth................................ 2.100 mDirection of Slope......... 24 deg- LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit35 866.43 PHOTOGRAPHS23 866.46Number Date Subject Number. Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/07/28/0107/28 Progress of Excavation A/07/31/0107/31 Progress of Excavation A/08/03/0108/03 End of SeasonA/07/29/0107/29 Progress of Excavation A/08/03/0108/03 End of Season A/08/03/0108/03- End of SeasonDRAUINGSTop Plans: 5Balks: S, ESOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 20 Supervisor: 8C Dates: 07/28 toSummary: Unexcavated rock tumble/pit liningREASONRemarks: Tumble layer under dense sherd layerSeparability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Brown 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt ........... 20% Sand........... 70% Fine Sand. . 60%Medium Sand 30% Course-Sand 10%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 30% Round........ . 40%Consistence: Hardness................ •.......... 2 Compactness...........Wetness............................. Moderately Moist Structure............... ......... Wind1 nc l us i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 100/m2 Medium Pebbles___ ......... 75/m2Large Pebbles.................. 50/m2 Small Cobbles....... ......... 15/m2Medium Cobbles................. 5/m2 Large Cobbles....... ......... 4/m2Small Boulders................. 4/m2 Medium Boulders... ......... 1/m2Large Boulders................. 1/m2Measurements: Length............................... 3.250 m Width...................... ......... 1.500 mDepth................................. 2.000 m Direction of Slope ......... 62 degDegree of Slope............... 3 degRemarks: Extent not totally known because not excavated in 87STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 17, 23LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit33 867.21PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/08/03/0098/03 Progress of Excavation A/08/03/0108/03 End of Season A/08/03/0108/03 End of Season •A/08/03/0108/03 End of Season A/08/03/0108/03 End of SeasonDRAUINGSTop Plans: 5Balks: SINTERPRETATIONFunction: Stones were used to make surface for locus 23, so that water(?) could be held.Stratigraphy: Late Iron II is latest pottery directly on top of stones.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 22 Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/31 toSummary: Continuation of.Iron II dump(?)REASONRemarks: Change from a more clayey soil to a more granular soilSeparability: Top--UnclearDESCRIPTIONMeasurements: Direction of Slope......... -10 degRemarks: Unexcavated in 1987STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 18LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit25 867.06PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectA/08/03/0098/03 Progress of Excavation A/08/03/0108/03 End of Season A/08/03/01B8/03 End of- SeasonDRAWINGSTop Plans: 5Balks: ULOCUS SHEETS: FIELD E.2:17-22LALAONSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 23 (Supplement) Supervisor: BC Oates: 07/30 toInstallation Supplement REASON •Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONRemarks: Not excavated in 1987.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 23 (Supplement) • SupplementSurmary:REASONRemarks:TYPE-DESCRIPTION M a te r ia l:Designation: Iron2 plaster surface.Pavement under sherd surface. Certain PavementSupervisor: BC Oates: 07/30 toPlan:L in in g :Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:PHOTOGRAPHSCurvilinearNoneLength........................... 1.000 m Width................................. 0.580 to 0.410 mHeight............................... 0.060 to 0.090 m Orientation...................... 20 degPlaster surface seems to even out stones of ouus 20 at varios places. There are several stones on the west side of the locus that are vertical oriented.The plaster also curves up to include these rocks.Not excavated in 1987.17BNumber Date S u b je c t Number Date SubjectA/08/03/1108/03 DRAWINGSTop Plans: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:End of- season A/08/03/1408/03 End of season#5.Possibly a water channel or pool used in association with the well, or even as a cistern.Late Iron 2 pottery was the latest material found directly on top of the surface in locus- 17b.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field E, Square 0002, Locus 29 (Supplement) Supervisor: BC Dates: 07/21 toFloor SupplementSummary: Pit or foundation trench cutting through loci 16,17, and 20TYPE Possible Pit -DESCRIPTION 'Plan:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:C uts:Cut By:Seals A g a in s t: Sealed By:. Bonded To: Founda. T rench: F i l l L o c i: Remarks: INTERPRETATION Fun c tion :S tra t ig ra p h y :R ecta ng u la rFor foundation trench f i l l see locus sheets for 15 and 6. Not clear if bottom of foundation trench reached during.87 season.16, 20, 17, 174Foundation trench, possibly for the bottom courses of the west wall of the well. Because the pottery in 17a i just a litt le before the pottery found in the trench f i ll ,o r even contemporary,it is presunable that locus 21 cut down through loci 7, 16, and 17a not tong after they were put into use.The latest pottery found in any of the loci already excavated has been Late Roman, however, Early Roman is predominant and Iron Age and Early Bron2e pottery is presentSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 1 Sunmary: Topsoil.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Dates: 07/21 to 07/27Particle Shape: Consistence:A r t i f a c t :Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:LEVELSTopsoil. Top--Clear8rownClay...........Medium Sand 45% Sub-angular 60%10YR5/3S ilt...........Course Sand Sub-round..Hardness............................ 2-Uetness.............................. Very DryCompactness...................... Slightly Loose- Structure.......................... WindSmall Pebbles................... 50/m2Large Pebbles.................. 20/m2Distribution.................... RandomPottery.............................. FrequentDistribution.................... RandomLength.............................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 84 degDug too deep in Loc 19,partially Loc 2 in pottery pail 9Medium Pebbles.. Small Cobbles...Flint..40/m25/m2Width................................. 2.000 mDegree of Slope............... 18 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit78POTTERYPail906.76906.27. Date Count3132Bskts Loc Preservation906.98906.12Comments •20 906.77Reading1 07/21 2/ 58 5 IR bods2 07/22 24/240 73 Few BYZ, LI2, LB3 07/23 18/346 26 LI2, 1 EI2, 11, 1 LB4 07/23 10/ 99 32 1 LR, LI25 07/24 23/ 86 70 Few LI2, EI2 dom,1I16 07/24 25/ 90 37 LI2 dom, El 2 ,1 1 , 1MB7 07/24 16/ 97 24 1 PER, LI2, EI2, 118 07/27 15/ 75 43 LI2, few EI2, 119 07/27 20/ 55 67 11, prob LB, EB12 07/31 35/203 BYZ, LI2 dom,Few EI2OBJECTSReg no. Descriptiori Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBallistic missile Cosmetic PaletteNumber Date Subject B/07/22/0307/22 Pre-excavati<07/2407/24Number Date Subject B/07/23/0307/23 Progress of excavationNumber Date Subject B/07/24/0407/24 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 2 Summary: Surface.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:A compact surface. Top--ClearParticle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Surface Mat‘ l : Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:B o tto m --C le a r2.5Y6/2S ilt........... 30%Course Sand 40% Sub-round.. 50%Supervisor: KM Dates: 07/27 to 07/28Light brownish grayClay...........• 10%Medium Sand 20%Sub-angular 50% .Hardness............................3Uetness................................Moderately DrySmall Pebbles................... 150/m2Large Pebbles..................... 75/m2Medium Cobbles..................... 4/m2Small Boulders..................... 2/m2Flint.................................. 3Length............................... 5.000 mDepth.........•....................... 0.150 to 0.880 mDegree of Slope............... 2 degBeaten EarthFound lit t le bits of charcoal with pottery.1Compactness...................... Moderately CrumblyStructure.......................... WindMedium Pebbles................. 100/m2Small Cobbles................... 10/m2Large Cobbles, i ............... 2/m2Width.................... ............ 2.000 mDirection of Slope......... 2 degLOCUS SHEETS: FIELDS E.2:23-29 AND F 6L89:l-2Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc . Top Bottom TransitLEVELS7 906.38 31 906.21 19 906*278 906.33 32 906.33POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub10 07/27 3/ 27 20 1 LI2, 11111 07/28 23/ 97 53 LI2, EI2, 11, 1EI19 07/31 6/ 60 9 1EPer, LI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBallistic missile 2 07/28 11 • 1Ballistic missile. 2 07/28 11 1PHOTOGRAPHSJavelin head. 3 07/28 11 1Number Date Subject Number Date Subject /8/07/27/0407/27 Progress of excavation B/07/28/0407/28 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 3 Summary: Exp. surface.REASONRemarks: Exposure surface.Separabili ty: Top--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Light brownish grayTexture: Clay............ 10%Medium Sand 40% Particle Shape: Angular.... 20%Consistence: Hardness....................., Uetness......................Bottom --Average10YR6/2Silt........... 30% Sand........... 60%Course Sand 10%Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 30%3 Compactness. Structure__Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Surface M at' l : Remarks: STRATIGRAPHYSmall Pebbles.. Large Pebbles.. Small Boulders. Distribution...Flint................Bone..................Length..............Depth................100/m210/m26/m2Patterned9Rare 5.000 m0.320 to 0.930 m 2 degMedium Pebbles____Small Cobbles..*... Medium Boulders..;.Distribution......... .Distribution...........Width......................Direction of Slope.Degree of Slope.Beaten EarthAsh pocket loc 19, ash pocket and plaster on the surface onUnder: 2Supervisor: KMFine Sand..Round.........AWi nd50/m22/m21/m2Random Random 2.000 m 84 degDates: 07/28 to 07/2950%20%LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Loc Top Bottom Transit7 906.16 31 906.17 20 906.188 906.21 32 906.12POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc-Preservation Comments Reading12 07/28 50/ 44 23 ' LI213 07/22 6/ 82 27- I ron 120 07/31 2/ 17 5 North Balk rem.21 08/03 0/ 4 2 North 8aIk rem. I age bodsPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/29/0407/29 Progress of excavationUtSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 4 Supervisor: KM Date: 07/29Summary: SurfaceREASONSeparability: Top*-Clear Bottom-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 2.5Y5/2Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt ........... 55% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand. .5 0 %Medium Sand 20% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Angular___ 10% Sub-angular 20% Sub-round.. 50% Round.......... 20%Consistence: Hardness....................... . . . 3 Compactness........... ......... CrumblyStructure....................___WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.............. . . . 100/m2 Medium Pebbles..... ......... 20/m2Large Pebbles............ 10/m2 Small Cobbles....... ......... 4/m2Medium Cobbles.. _ __ 5/m2 Large Cobbles........ ......... 1/m2Small Boulders...........---- 5/m2 Distribution......... ......... RandomArtifact: Flint........................... 3 Distribution......... ......... RandomMeasurements: Length......................... . . . 3.700 m Uidth...................... ......... 2.000 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Ash pockets.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7POTTERYPail906.21Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatioi8 906.20 i Comments20 906.15Reading Pub142207/29 7/ 83 40 ‘ 08/03 20/134 8 North BalkFew LI2, Iron 1 ■ LI2, Few El 2, 11, 1 MB bod X23OBJECTS Reg i08/03 20/ 21 id. Description Field no. Date PailLI2, 11, LB bod, EB bodsLoc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl 1 07/29 14 04 1Spindle whorl 2 08/03 22• ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 5 Supervisor: KM Dates: 07/21 toSumnary: WallREASONRemarks: Wall-two rows of rocks pointing South-EastSeparability: Top-ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone................ . 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:: Medium Boulder................ 60% Large Boulder___. ........... 40%Chinkstones:: Cobble.................... .......... . 100%Dressing: Unhewn............................... 20% Semi-hewn.............. ........... 10%Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 90% Clay................................. 10%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder & Chink Support......... .. . ........... Free-standingMeasurements: Length.............................. 1.500 m Width.................... ........... 1 .0 8 0 to 1 .1 6 0 mHeight............................... 0.080 to 0.520 m Orientation......... ........... 110 degD'P.................................... 2 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: LittleSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit25 906;52 26 .906.24LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L89:2-5LALAO OSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 6 Supervisor: KMSummary: Fill behind a wall.REASONRemarks: Fill behinda wall.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: 2.5 5/2Texture: Clay........... 5X S ilt........... SOX Sand........... 45% Fine Sand.Mediim Sand 30X Course Sand 30XParticle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50XConsistence: Hardness........................ .. 1 Compactness........... ......... AWetness......................... Structure............... ......... WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............... .. 150/m2 Medium Pebbles....' ......... 30/m217/m2 Medium Cobbles •? fadLarge Cobbles............... 7/m2Organic: Bone............................... .. Rare Distribution......... ......... RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 1.000 m Width...................... ......... 1.000 mDepth............................. .. 0.800 to 0.940 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:3POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments ReadingDate: 07/29Pub15 07/29 3/ 38 10 ' 1 prob LR bod, Iron 2OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Oate Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl 07/29 15 1SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 7 Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks:Separabil DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:A compact surface. .Top--ClearLight brownish grayClay___. . . 15XMedium Sand 40XAngular___ 20XHardness......................Wetness........................10YR6/2S ilt........... 65%Course Sand 30X Sub-angular 30X 4Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 100/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2Measurements: Length............................... 3.700 mDepth................................. 0.480 to 0.920 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Several large tabun fragments and brick materialSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top BottomSupervisor: KM Dates: 07/30 toSand........... 20XSub-round.. 40XCompactness.........Structure.............Medium Pebbles...Small Cobbles___Width....................Fine Sand.. 30XRound......... 10XSlightly Firm Wind50/m2 5/m2 2.000 min Locus 2 0.Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 906.12 108 906.11 26POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation •906.13906.09Conments32 906.07Reading Pub16 07/30 11/ 92 29 Few LI2, EI1, 11, 1MBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/30/0407/30 Progress of excavation B/08/03/0408/03 Progress of excavati' B/08/03/0408/03 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L89, Locus 8Sunnary: Fill with rubble beh i nd a wall..REASONSeparability: Top-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: 25YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt ........... 60%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 20%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub*round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness......................... . . 2Structure....................... . . WindInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.............. .. . 150/m2Large Pebbles.............. .. . 20/m2Measurements: Length........................... .. . 1.000 mDepth............................. .. . 0.920 to 1. 160 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 7Over:Equals:Contiguous- to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLOC Top Bottom Transit31 906.05POTTERYP a il D ate Count 8 s k ts Loc P re s e rv a tio n CommentsSupervisor: KM Date:Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.. 50%Compactness...................... Slightly LooseMedium Pebbles........; . . . . 50/m2Small Boulders................. 6/m2Width................................. 1.000 m- Reading Pub17. 07/31 3/ 6 2 LI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field f, Square 6L98, Locus 1 Summary: Topsoil.Remarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture: •Particle Shape: Consistence:Topsoil. Top--Very ClearGrayClay........... 5%Medium Sand 15% Sub-angular 30%Hardness...............Wetness.................Bottom--Average 10YR5/1S ilt ........... 80%Course Sand 5% Sub-round.. 60% 2Moderately DrySupervisor: DH Dates: 06/22 to 06/29Sand........... 15% Fine Sand.. 80%Round......... 10%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure.......................... WindInclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Remarks:35/m2 ' 4/m2 3/m2 2/m2 1/m2Small Pebbles................... 60/m2Large Pebbles................... 15/m2Medium Cobbles................. 3/m2Small Boulders................. 3/m2Large Boulders................. 2/m2D is t r ib u t io n ........................... RandomTesserae................................ 3Distribution...................... RandomBone.................................. RareDistribution...................... RandomLength............................... 5.000 mDepth................................. 0.080-to 0.160 mDegree of Slope.................. 17 degFlints and shells found over locus 2; bones (4) found over locus 3. Top plan levels may seem strange when compared to locus 2 which is.supposed to be under locus 1. However, levels on locus 1 were taken on soil; levels on locus 2 were taken on rocks.Medium Pebbles...........Small Cobbles.............Large Cobbles.............Mediun Boulders.........Very Large Boulders..F l in t . . . . ....................Shells.........................Width...................... '......... 5.000 mDirection of Slope......... 139 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over: 2, 3, 9, 10, 4, 46Equals:Contiguous .to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELS •Loc Top ’ Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom. Transit7 909.38 909.31 35 907.55 907.39 21 908.42 908.3731 908.49 908.39 11 907.95 907.87LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L89:6-8 AND 6L98:1559POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading1 06/22 7/ 33 Surface cleaning. 1 LR.LI2 DOM.EI22 06/22 4/ 14 Surface cleaning. BYZ, 123 06/23 23/133 23 1 PROS UM,BYZ,LR,ER,LI2,1 UO4 06/24 36/227 60 BYZ,ROM,LIR2,IR1,UD5 06/25 49/389 99 BYZ bods, ER, HELL, LI2 dom, 11, LB, MB, UD6 06/26 29/243 55 BYZ bods, ER, LI2, EI2, 1 prob EB, UD7 06/29 1/ 3 3 Bods only: BY2, 1ROBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSurface cleaning--flint 1 06/22 1Stopper 2 • 06/22 1Bead 3 06/23 3 SIObject--stone (axe head?) 4 06/24 4 909.25Spindle Whorl 5 06/24 4Basalt 6 06/24 4Grinding stone 7 06/25 5 907.96Roman glass 8 06/25 5Cosmetic palette 9 06/26 6Stopper 10 06/25 51/2 glass bead 11 06/26 6PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectA/06/22/0406/22B/06/23/0306/23DRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Pre-excavation B/06/24/0106/24 Progress of excavationPre-excavation E/06/26/0906/26 Progress of excavationNESWTopsoil.Over surface 3 and rubble 2. This is the final phase of the square. BYZSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus .2 Supervisor: DH Dates: 06/26 to 07/14Summary: Rock rubble and associated topsoil.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Remarks.:More rocks than in just topsoil.Top--Unclear Bottom--AverageGray 10YR5/1Clay........... 5% S ilt........... 80% Sand........... 15% Fine Sand.. 80%Medium Sand 15% Course Sand 5%Sub-angular 30% Sub-round.. 60% Round......... 10%Hardness.................. ......... 2 Compactness................ __ Moderately CrumblyWetness.: ................ ......... Moderately Dry Structure.................... __WindSmall Pebbles......... ......... 15/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . . . 20/m2Large Pebbles......... ......... 18/m2 Small Cobbles............. . . . 15/m2Medium Cobbles....... ......... 3/m2 Large Cobbles............. 1/m2Small Boulders....... . ........ 2/m2 Medium Boulders......... 1/m2Distribution........... . ........RandomPottery.................... . ........ Frequent Tesserae..................... . 1Flint........................ ........ 33 Roof Tiles.................. . 2Distribution........... . ....... RandomBone.......................... ....... Rare Shells............................ . . 133Distribution........... ....... RandomLength...................... ........ 4.000 m Width............................... . 5.000 mDepth........................ ........ 0.360 to 0.620 m Direction of Slope___. . . 139 degDegree of Slope___ ........ 17 degFrequent pottery found only at location 8.. Top plan levels may seem strange when comparing this to locus 1; however, levels for locus 1 were taken on the soil, and levels for locus 2 on the rocks.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transi!t Loc Top Bottom711POTTERYPail909.41908.10Date908.79907.74Count Bskts Loc Preservation3422907.21907.38Comments23Reading909.278 06/29 34/287 40 BYZ, LR, ER, 1 early PERS, LI2, LI19 06/29 29/246 35 Few BYZ bods, LR, U2, 1 LB10 06/30 38/274 58 BYZ, LR, LI211 06/30 20/155 9 8 Perhaps from location 9 BYZ, LJ2, 1112 06/30 23/189 9 8 Perhaps from location 9 1 BYZ, Few ROM bods, LI2 dom13 06/30 19/129 19 1 BYZ, ER bod, 2 HELL, LI2, EI214 07/01 39/369 24 Few ROM bods, LI2, 1 UD15 07/01 26/281 24 BYZ bods, 1 LR, L1216 07/01 ' 36/502 34 BYZ bods, LIZ, EI2, 1117 07/01 25/256 30 few BYZ, EPER, LI2, EI218 07/02 9/ 75 26 From E end LI246 07/14 15/161 25 2 HELL, 1 EPER, LI2, EI2, 1 1149 07/14 13/129 21 1 BYZ, 1- LR, LI2, EI250 07/14 8/178 23 BYZ, L1251 07/14 16/208 32 2 BYZ, L12, few EI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingGrinding stone fragmentJar stopperStone beadCeramic handleGrindstoneGrindstoneGrindstoneMortarGrinder fragment 1/2 spindle whorl Grinder fragment Pipe/lamp fragment?Grinder fragmentBasalt grinder fragmentBasalt cosmetic palette fragmentGrinder fragmentLoom weightMending bobPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject1 06/29 8 112 06/29 93 06/30 104 06/30 105 06/30 10 86 06/30 10 87' 07/01 14 238 07/01 14 239 07/03 18 . 1710 07/03 18 1711 07/03 18 1112 07/03 1813 07/14 49 22. 14 07/14 49 23 ■15 07/14 5016 07/14 51 2817 07/14 4818 07/14 . 48Number Date . Subject Number Date SubjectPubB/06/30/0406/30 DRAWINGS Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Locus Date:Progress of excavation B/07/01/0407/01 Progress of excavation B/06/29/0306/29 Progress of Excavation NESUFill due to wind deposition and rock tumble. Unknown origin of rocks for the tumble.Since locus 2 is on top of the exposure surface (locus 3), and locus 3 seals up against wall 4, it is obvious that locus 2 was deposited after the (possible) terrace wall 4 was built.BYZy\ QOOLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L!560SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 3 .Surmary: REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color: Texture:Surface Mat' l : Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:EquaIs:C ontiguous to : Seals a g a in s t: Cut by:Exposure surface.Different soil texture and color; flat lying sherds. Top--Average 8ottom--ArbitrarySupervisor: DH Dates: 06/29 to 07/1315%100%Nari Pockets.......Distribution........ Small Pebbles___Distribution.......Tabun Fragments.. Brick Fragments.. Bone......................S ilt ....... .. . 80% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand.4 Compactness................... . . Slightly fSlightly Dry Structure.................... . . . Random1/m2,Random5.0 cm Brick Material......... .. 1/m2,7/m2RandomMedium Pebbles........... 3/m23 Flint........................... .. . . 336 Distribution................. . . RandomFrequent Distribution................. . . Random3.000 m Width........................... .. . . 3.000 m0.520 to 17 deg0.640 m Direction of Slope___. . . 110 deg1.0- 2.0 cmDegree of Slope...Beaten EarthThe surface was well-compacted along S balk and became more tenuous as it approached wall 4. Patches in the west that were lacking the surface had been under large rocks (locus 2). Surface is very deep and reappears under the rubbly areas that had been under the large rocks. The lower part of 3 should have been dug as 17 and some as 15.Remarks:LEVELSLocus dug too deep in locations 19-21, 25-27, 31-Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom31 908.39 907.75 19 908.4226 907.65 21 907.64Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading29 07/08 21/311 68 Contam from wall 6 2 BYZ, 2 EPER, LI2, EI2, 1131 07/08 33/213 50 Prob ROM bods, LI2, EI233 07/09 25/270 39 2 BYZ, LI234 07/09 20/210 40 Few EPER, LI235 07/09 20/160 32 LI236 07/10 22/262 43 BYZ, L12, 11, LB37 07/10 22/154 20 1 LR, EPER, LI238 07/10 21/161 25 LI2, £1239 07/10 18/153 25 1 EPER, LI2, EI240 07/10 15/ 83 17 Some from 13 LI2, EI241 07/13 34/199 20 EPER, LI242 07/13 •38/188 21 LI2, EI2, 1 LB43 07/13 36/196 30 1 ROM/BYZ bod, few ER, LI2,' 44 07/13 23/158 22 Few LR, LI2OBJECTSReg no.. Descriptioni Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period MaterialStone bowl with feet (fragment) Metal weight/coin?Pestle fragment Small grinders Spear point CoinGrinder fragment Mortar fragmentPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject1 07/09 35 332 07/10 363 07/10 374 07/10 38 275 07/13 416 07/13 417 07/13 43 218- 07/13 44 25Number Date SubjectB/07/09/0507/09 Progress of excavat BIODATA SAMPLESDRAWINGSB a lks:INTERPRETATION Fun c tion : S t ra t ig ra p h y : Locus D ate:B/07/10/0407/10 Progress of excavation Soil Sample...................... Strange inclusion. Desired identificationNumber Date Subject 8/07/13/0407/13 Progress of excavationExposure surface running up to wall 4 or its tumble in SW part of square.Seals against walls 4 and 14, so used'(or created) in relationship with them, but younger than they are.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION . . .U87 Field F, Square 6198, Locus 4 Supervisor: DH Dates: 06/29 to 07/29Surenary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Several stones in a line, as opposed to rubble around it.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Hard Limestone................. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder................... 60% Medium Boulder.................. 25%Large Boulder................... 15%Chinkstones: Pebble................................ 25% Cobble................................ 75%Dressing: Semi-hewn......................... 100%Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 100%Facing: ' UnfacedConstruction: • Style................................. Boulder & Chink Support.....................: ___ Free-standingTendencies: Larger boulders in lower course.Courses: 2 to 3Rows:Measurements: Length................................ 3.200 m Width.................................. 0.390 to 0.550 mHeight................................ 0.630 to 0.900 m Orientation...................... 82 degDip..................................... 18 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: LittleRemarks: We cannot be sure about preservation since we really don't know how high it might have originally been, butthink a lot has gone due to large amount of tumble in square.Many large animal bones and pieces of pottery found inunder walKprob. contamination from 24).STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 909.05 908.42 14 908.81 907.91 15 908.45 907.85POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading32 07/09 9/ 85 18 1 BY2 bod, 1 EPER, L1270 07/17 196 07/21 291/ 83 10 Same as from 23. LI2, 1 ER bod94 07/21 16/ 97 6 Few EPer, L12 Few EPer, LI25 07/29 14/ 97 4 Prob from 29. LI2147 07/21 18/149 8 Prob from 29. LI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Materiial Photo DrawingPounder. 1 07/29 147 14 !Gri nder. 2 07/29 147 17 • 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Numbei Date SubjectB/07/02/0407/02 B/07/03/0407/03 BIOOATA SAMPLESDRAWINGSArchi tectural: INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation B/07/06/0407/06 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation A/07/07/1407/07 Docunentation of wall#4Pollen Sample Flint SampleBones6L98 L4.A terrace wall, probably source of much of our tumble.The most major terrace wall, used in conjuction with walls 6 and 14 19. This wall was built after 14 19 and at least one of 1419's stones was removed to build 4. The stone was re- placed by a Ig. boulder.At juncture of walls,courses (and becomes 46) perhaps to compensate for dropoff caused by the origional wall,1419.LI2?4 has moreLocus Date:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L98:3-4SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 5Stnmary:REASONRemarks:S e p a ra b i l i ty :DESCRIPTIONC o lo r:T ex tu re : P a r t ic le Shape: C ons is tence:In c lu s io n s :Loose soil layer.Change in soil color on north side of wall 4. Top*-Average Bottom--Unci earPale brown 10YR6/3Clay........... 25% S ilt........... 70%Sub-round.. 100%Hardness........................... 2Wetness............................. Slightly DryDates: 06/30 to 07/06Fine Sand.. 100%Compactness.................. . Moderately CrumblyStructure......................... RandomStone: Small Pebbles............... .. 53/m2 Medium Pebbles....... ........ 18/m2Large Pebbles............... 11/m2 Small Cobbles......... ........ 4/m2Large Cobbles............... 1/m2 Small Boulders....... ........ 1/m2Medinn Boulders........... 1/m2 Distribution........... ........ RandomArtifact: Pottery......................... .. Frequent flin t ........................ ......... 1Roof Tiles.................... 1 Distribution........... ....... RandomOrganic: 8one............................... .. Rare Shells...................... ........ 15Distribution................ .. RandomMeasurements: Length........................... .. 4.500 m Width....................... ........ 2.000 m. Depth............................. .. 0.210 to 0.250 m Direction of Slope. ........ 96 degDegree of Slope........... .. 18 degRemarks: Frequent pottery found at location 7 (c f. frequent pottery at location 8 in locus 2).STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc . Top Bottom Transit13 908.79 908.58 10 908.08 907.88POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservatiion Comments Reading19 07/03 27/187 11 BYZ, 1 ROM bod, LI2, E1220 07/03 25/208 21 BYZ, LI2, EI221 07/03 18/ 98 6 ■ 3 lamp bases Few ROM, 1 EPER, LI222 07/06 20/158 19 1 ROM bod. 1 EPER bod, LI2 iDRAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 3.8alks: NWINTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil, either a later deposition or used for farmiing. behind the terrace wall (locus 4),Stratigraphy: This is later than wall 4 and seals against it, so it was used with the wall and with iseals against.Locus Date: BYZARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 6 Supervisor: DHSummary: Terrace wall.REASONRemarks: Several stones in a rouSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone.............. . 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:: Small Boulder................ 90% Medium Boulder....... ....... 10%Chinkstones: Pebble............................. . 50% Cobble...................... ....... 50%Dressing: Unhewn............................. . 100%Mortar: Dry-laid......................... . 100%Courses: 2 to 3Rows: 1Measurements: Length............................. . 2.400 m Width........................ ....... 0.200 to 0.:Hei ght.................. ........... Or i ont at i r\n LRPreservation: Partial Superstructure: HalfRemarks: Don't know original height of wall, so we're not sure how much has been preserved.Dates: 07/03 tU \ONLEVELS LLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom11POTTERY908.15 10 908.25 907.83Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub30 07/08 PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date1/ 16 1 SubjectL12A/07/07/1507/07 DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Locus Date:Documentation of wall#6Locus 3.N •Possible terrace wall, very small as it appears in the square.Used in conjunction with wall 46. Filled by several loci (5, 7) which seal against it . Earlier than the soil layers. Also ssealed against by 8 ,an 12 soil layer. This is over 31, a Ll2 exposure surface.LI2Clean LocusSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 7Summary: Consolidated soil layer or exposure surface.REASONRemarks: More consolidated than locus 5 which is aboveSeparability: DESCRIPTIONTop*-Unclear' Color: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 25% S ilt ...........Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 100%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 3Wetness........................___ Slightly DrySupervisor: DH Dates: 07/03 to 07/07Sand........... 5% Fine Sand.. 100%Compactness...................... Slightly FriableStructure.......................... RandomInclusions:Stone:Artifact:Measurements:Surface Mat11: Remarks:Small P e b b le s .. Large P e b b le s ... Medina C o b b le s .. D is t r i b u t io n . . . .40/m2 . . 4/m21/m2 . RandomMedium Pebbles.. Small Cobbles.;. Small Boulders..Flint..................10/m22/m21/m216 'Width................................. 2.000 mDirection of S lop e ...... 96 degLength............................... 4.500 mDepth................................. 0.050 to 0.520 mDegree of Slope............... 16 degBeaten EarthVery uneven exposure surface greatly deformed by rock fa ll. Hardness varies from 2*3. Pottery concentration is especially high in locations 8, 14 (mendable fragments?).STRATIGRAPHY '. Under: .5Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit13 908.58 908.06 10 907.88 907.83POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati< Comments Reading25 07/06 28/264 22 Few BY2 bods, few ROM bods, LI2 dom, few EI226 07/07 22/150 19 1 potter 's mark LR, ER, LI227 07/07 26/258 22 1 ER bod, LI2, EI2, LB, MB228 07/07 20/210 23 1 LR, LI2, EI2, 1 MB, 1 EBOBJECTSReg iio. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing1 07/06 25 82 07/07 26 143 07/07 27 144 07/07 28 14Grinding stone Mortar fragment Mortar fragmentPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectPub8/07/07/0407/07DRAUINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Progress of excavationLocus 4.NWProbably garden soil for farming in the farmstead we are postulating in use with walls 4 and 6. Fill between walls 4 and 6, later than the walls since it seals against both.BZ/LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L98:5-7ONt oSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F,.Square 6L98, Locus 8 Supervisor: DH Date:Sunmary: Soil layer on SE of wall 6.REASONRemarks: Soil on opposite side of wall 6.Separabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom-AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown ■ 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 25% S ilt........... 70% Sand___. . . 5% Fine Sand.. 100%Particle Shape: Sub-round.. 100%Consistence: Hardness........................... 2 Compactness................ .. . . Moderately CrumblyWetness............................. Slightly Dry • Structure...................... . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 53/m2 Medium Pebbles........... . 18/m2Large Pebbles.................. 11/m2 Small Cobbles............... . . 4/m2Large Cobbles.................. 1/m2 Small Boulders........... 1/m2Medium Boulders............... 1/m2 Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 2.400 m Width.................. . . . . . . . . 0.300 mDepth................................. 0.070 to 0.050 m Direction of Slope__ .. . 96 degDegree of Slope............... 18 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc . Top Bottom Transit11 907.74 16 908.08 17 907.67POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading23 07/06 6/ 91 15 Lf2 dom, few EI2DRAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 3.Balks: EINTERPRETATIONFunction: • Soil for use with terrace wall.Stratigraphy: Terrace in use.with walls 6 and 8, later than both since it seals against both.Locus Date: LIRSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 9 Summary: Pi t f i 11.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:. Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc TopFound in balk--suspected due to high incidence ofT o p --C le a rPale brownClay........... 23%Medium Sand 15% Sub-angular 46%Hardness...............Wetness................10YR6/3S ilt ........... '68%Sub-round.. 54%' 2Slightly Drypottery there.Sand........... 9%Compactness.........Structure.............Small Pebbles................... 152/m2Large Pebbles.................. 20/m2Medium Boulders................... 2/m2Pottery............................. FrequentLength............................... 2.500 mThe fit f i l l consists of pottery and cobbles surface.Medium P e b b le s .. Small C o b b le s ... D is t r ib u t io n . . . .D is t r ib u t io n ___D epth............... .near th e bo ttom w ithBottom T ra n s it Loc Top Bottom . T ra n s itSupervisor: DH Date:Fine Sand.. 85%___ Moderately Rubbty........ Random........ 23/m2....... 44/m2....... Random........ Layered....... 0.250 to 0.500 mill boulders (lying somewhat flat)7 909.35 909.25 8 908.85 908.55POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading24 07/06 0/ 15 1 1 ROM bod, IR bodsINTERPRETATIONFunction: Pit fill.O r just coollurial deposits.lt is not certain that this is an actual cut pit, or i f its justaccumulation of junk.Stratigraphy: . "Cut" from Locus 2.Locus D ate : ROM07/06Pub07/06at thePubanINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field F, Summary: REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material:• Plan:Lining:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:DRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Square 6198, Locus 10Found in balk--much different fi Possible PitSupervisor: DHl from surrounding material.NoneLength............................... 2.500 m. Found in balk; width unavailable.Height............................... 0.050 to 0.640 nvings for shape (etc .) of pit.Pit. Function unknown. From what has been discovered, it doesn't seem to be a garbage dump. This cuts through loci 2 , and thus should be dated to no earlier than the Byz period.Date: 07/06SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 10 (Supplement) Installation Supplement Summary: PitDESCRIPTION •Color: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 23X S ilt ........... 68%Mediun Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 46% Sub-round.. 85%Consistence: Hardness....... . . . . 2Wetness;....... ___ Slightly Moi StInclusions:Stone: Smal l Pebbles........... .. . . . 20/m2Measurements: Length........... . . . . 2.500 mSupervisor: DH Date: 07/06Sand........... 9% fine Sand.. 85%Compactness...................... Slightly CrumblyStructure.......................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomDepth................................. 0.250 to 0.500 mSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 11 Dates: 07/07 to 07/15Surma r y :REASONRemarks: S e p a ra b ili t y : DESCRIPTION C o lo r:T ex tu re :P a r t ic le Shape: C on sis ten ce:In c lu s io n s :S o i l :S tone:Measurements:Surface Mat11 Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:EquaIs:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by: Remarks:Exposure surface.Much more consol Top-AveragePale brownClay........... 15%Medium Sand 20% Sub-round.. 100%Ash Pockets___Small Cobbles..Tabun Fragments..Distribution..idated than soil above.Bottom--UnclearS ilt ........... 75%Course Sand 50%Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 30%3 Compactness................... . . Slightly FriableSlightly Dry Structure....................... . . Random1/m2, 5.0 cm Distribution................ . . . Random8/m2RandomMedium Cobbles........... . 2/m22RandomFlint........................... .. . . 50FrequentRandomCharcoal................ ; . . . . . . 50/m2, avg. 0.4.20D m Width........................... .. . . 1.500 m0.000 to 12 deg0.540 m Direction of Slope.'.i . . . 158 degDegree of slope...Beaten EarthSoil was 3-4 for hardness by N balk, and was c. 15-20 cm deeper (higher) than the loo the N side of wall 4 which was about 2 for hardness. There was more consolidated soil under the loose material. Small charcoal bits- throughout this locus.6, 7.;e part of this locus on (perhaps 2-3) lower down. After removal of 6, the latter is favored, but s t ill notLEVELSBottom T ra n s it Bottom Transil Bottom Transit7 908.44 907.90 10 907.83 13 908.06LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L98:8-11POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservationi Comments Reading53 07/15 23/215 21 ROM bods; EPER, LI2, El254 07/15 31/217 16 1 HELL, LI2, few EI255 07/15 28/203 15 EPER, LI256 07/15 24/144 14 EPER, LI2, EI257 07/15 22/117 16 EPER, LI258 07/15 17/ 92 15 LI2, 1 EI2OBJECTS Reg iio. Description \Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period MaterialGrinder fragment 1 07/15 54 8Ballistic 2 . 07/15 58PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectB/07/08/0407/08 Progress of excavation B/07/16/0407/16 Progress of excavation DRAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 14.Balks: NUINTERPRETATIONFunction: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Exposure surface in use with terrace wall.Seals against 4 which is Byz, s'so this must be , too. BYZPhoto DrawingPubSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 12Summary:REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Exposure surface,EastFound a wall and need Top-ArbitraryPale brownClay........... 1554Medium Sand 2054 Sub-round.. 100%Hardness........................Wetness..........................ofto19.establish a new locus. Bottom--Clear10YR6/3S ilt........... 7554Course Sand 50%3Slightly MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 4/m2Medium Cobbles................. 2/m2Artifact: Pottery........................ FrequentDistribution.................... RandomOrganic: Bone................................... Frequent •Measurements: Length................................ 2.000 mDepth................................. 0.000 to 0.240 mDegree of Slope............... 6 degRemarks: This is just a deeper part of 11.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 11Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: DHSand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 30%Compactness......................Moderately FirmStructure........................... RandomSmall Cobbles.................. 8/m2Flint.................................... 11Distribution...................... RandomWidth......................... 1.500 mDirection of-Slope......... 116 degDate: 07/1611 907.88 907.64POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub59 07/16 . 43/193 6 Poss cont from 1 & 24 2 ROM bods, LI2 •60 07/16 10/143 8 Poss cont from 21 & 24 LIZ, few EI261 07/16 20/130 7 Poss cont from 21 & 24 LI263 07/16 26/161 9 Poss cont from 21 & 24 1 ROM bod, LI264 07/16 21/141 8 Poss cont from 21 & 24 LI2 XLAONDescription Field no. Date Pail LocFigurine? 1 07/16 60 16Ballistic missile 2 07/16 60Basalt, worked 3 07/16 60Figurine? 4 07/16 61Level TotalDRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATION Function: Strati graphy: Locus Date:NExposure surface in use with terracing.Seals against A and 19 so is later than these-thus the BYZ date. • BYZPeriod Material Photo DrawingSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 13Sunmary: Prob. pit f i l l .REASONRemarks: Much more pebbly. Later found stones surrounding it.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 12% Silt........... 85% Sand........... :Particle Shape:. Sub-angular 5% Sub-round.. 95%Consistence: Hardness............... ........... 2 Compactness___Wetness................. ........... Moderately Dry Structure.........Inclusions:Stone:; Small Pebbles___ ........... 175/m2 Medium Pebbles.Large Pebbles.. . . ........... 98/m2 Small Cobbles..Medium Cobbles... ........... 2/m2 Distribution...Artifact: Pottery.................Distribution................... Frequent........... RandomFlint................Organic: Bone...................... ........... frequent Distribution...Measurements: Length...................Depth............................... 1.000 m........... 0.660 to 0.270 mWidth................Remarks: Tumbled rocks is o la te th is locu s . Large p ie ces o f p o t te ry in he re .STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equa t s :Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top16Bottom Loc Top Bottom T ra n s itSupervisor: DH Dates: 07/13 to 07/24Fine Sand.. 100%Moderately Rubbly Random131/m26/m2Random6Random 0.500 m19 908.02 907.75 '1 3 908.17 907.51POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading45 07/13 10/146 17 L12, 1 EI2, 1 EB46 07/14 5/ 57 6 1 BYZ bod, LI2105 07/22 19/129 17 LI2, few EI2116 07/23 5/ 90 5 1 Rom bod; 1LI2; EI2121 07/24 2/ 35 1 Few ROM bods, I Age bodsOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingSpindle whorl fragment 1 07/14 46Round object 2 07/14 46GrinderDRAWINGSBalks: W INTERPRETATION3 07/23 116 19Function: This one I can't figure out. Perhaps f i l l around a tree that stood in a circle of stones.Stratigraphy: Seals against 16.Fill of that installation.Locus Date: BYZPubLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L98:11-13ON4^ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 14 Supervisor: DH Dates:Suninary: Wall.REASONRemarks: Stones in a line.Separabili ty: Top--Clear Bottom--Clear •DESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone............. .. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:: Small Boulder............... .. 80% Medium Boulder___ ......... 20%Chinkstones:: Pebble........................... . . 1 0 % Cobble.................... ......... 90%' Dressing: Unhewn............................ .. 100%Mortar: Dry-laid........................ .. 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................. .. Boulder & Chink Support.................. ......... Free-standingCourses:Rous: 1Measurements: Length........................... .. 3.000 m Width...................... ......... 0.300 to 0.450 mHeight........................... .. 0.520 to 0.700 m nripnfatinnPreservation: Partial Superstructure : LittleRemarks: This is a snakey wall- -it does not run straight.STRATIGRAPHY .Under: 3, 4LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit34 908.03 907.33 22 907.86 907.32POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading77 07/20 15/ 64 9 LI2, 2 LBPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject6/07/15/0407/15 Progress of excavationDRAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 11.Balks: SArchitectural: 6L98 L 14.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Terrace wall.Stratigraphy: Under 4, so earlier than 4,sealed against by 15 and 18,EPer and LI2 soil layers.Locus Date: LI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 15 Supervisor: DH Dates:Surmary: Under 3; compact exposure surface.REASONRemarks: Had gone down e. 30 cm below locus 3.Separability: Top--Arbitrary Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3.Texture:• Clay........... 15% Silt........... 55% Sand........... 30% Fine Sand.. 15%Medium Sand 70% Course Sand 15%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 43% Sub-round.. 52% Round......... 5%Consistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness........... ......... Slightly CrumblyWetness........................... . Slightly Dry Structure............... ......... RandomInclus i ons:Soi l : Plaster........................... . 5/m2, 5.0-40.0 cm Distribution......... ......... RandomStone: Small Pebbles................ . 25/m2 Medium Pebbles___ ......... 6/m2Large Pebbles................ 2/m2 Small Cobbles........ ......... 1/m2Distribution.................. . RandomArtifact: Flint............................... . 91 Distribution......... ......... Random 4Measurements: Length............................. . 2.500 m Width...................... . . . . . . 3.000 mDepth............... ............. . 0.170 to 0.320 m 'Remarks: No slope given because this was dug arbitrarily.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3, 17Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit3133907.75907.60907.57907.432621 907.65907.64 907.32 14 907.51POTTERYPail. Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Reading80 07/20 24/214 33 Few EPER,87 07/20 26/141 38 LI2, EI292 07/21 17/ 88 11 U2, EI2,113 07/23 33/194 21 Few EPER,114 07/23 34/162 15 1 ER bod,115 07/24 2/ 18 13 From looser soil LI2111 07/22 14/76 5 LI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level TotalLI2, EI2, 1 EB11LI2L12, few £12Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt grinder 1 07/20 87 28Grinder 2 07/20 87 25Grinder (pounding stone) 3 07/21 92 25Spindle whorl fragment 4 07/22 92PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/21/0407/21DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Progress of excavation B/07/22/0407/22Locus 15.SUExposure surface used with terrace system. Seals against 14 and 16.EPerProgress of excavationPubXINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field F, Sirmary: REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTIONSquare 6L98, Locus 16 Possible pit.S u p e rv is o r: OH Dates: 07/13 to 07/21Material: S oil................................. 80% Hard Stone............. 20%Plan: Semi-circularLining: NoneMeasurements Length............................. 3.500 m Width.................. '.. . 0.200 to 0.500 mHeight............................. 0.270 to 0.660 mRemarks: I assume that this is a circular installation but half of it is in the balk.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 3LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit25 908.17 907.65 20 908.05 907.75 13 908.23 907.51POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub47 07/14 15/ 91 12 Two lamp bases L12, EI2DRAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 13.Balks: wINTERPRETATIONFunction: Unknown. Possibly a circle of stones around a tree.Stratigraphy Filled by .13. Sealed against by 13 and 15 so earl ier than these. Prob at least EPer, though the Late 12reading may be correct.Locus Date: LI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 16 (Supplement) Supervisor: DH Dates: 07/13 to 07/21InstalLai ion SupplementSummary: Possible pit.DESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR7/3Texture: Clay___. . . 20% S ilt........... 70% Sand........... 10% Fine Sand.. 5%Medium Sand 15% - Course Sand 80%Consistence: Hardness........................... 4 Compactness............. . Very FirmWetness.............................. Slightly Moist Structure................. . RandomInclusions:Soil: Ash Pockets...................... 1/m2, 1.0 cm Distribution........... . RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 1.750 m Width........................ . 0.700 mDepth................................. 0.300 mRemarks: This clay-like ridge under the stones was found only on the S side of 4; on the N side of 4,16 was much moresolid rock and there is no clay ridge.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:DRAWINGSTop Plans:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 6L98:14-16ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 16 (Supplement) Supervisor: DH Dates: 07/13 to 07/21Installation SupplementSummary: Possible pit.REASONRemarks: Pebbly soil in th is; rocks and consolidated soil around it.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONMaterial:Hard Limestone... ........... 10QXMasonry:Uall Stones: Small Boulder____........... 5 OX Medium Boulder....... ....... 50XDressing: Unhewn.................. ............ 100XMortar: Dry-laid................ ........... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder Support.................... ....... Free-standingCourses: 1Rous: 1Measurements: Length.................... . ......... 3.500 m Width........................ ....... 0.200 to 0.500 mHeight............................... 0.200 to 0.500 mPreservation: CompleteRemarks: We cannot be sure about preservation.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 6L98, Locus 17 Supervisor: DH Dates:Summary: Soil (surface) under wall 4.REASONRemarks: To account for soi l under ual l 4. •.Separability: Top-Arbitrary Bottom--ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 15X S ilt........... 80% Sand........... 5% Fine Sand..Medium Sand 5% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 30%' Sub-round.. 70XConsistence: Hardness.................. ....... 3 Compactness............... ___ Slightly FrWetness............................ Slightly Dry Structure.................. . . . . RandomInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets................... 3/m2Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 8/m2 Medium Pebbles......... ___ 4/m2Small Cobbles.................. 1/m2 Distribution............. . . . . RandomArtifact: Pottery...................... Frequent Tabun Fragments....... 2Flint......................... ....... 27Measurements: Length....................... ....... 2.200 m Width......................... .___ 2.500 mDepth......................... ....... 0.290 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 4, 11Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit07/14 to 07/2221 907.64 20 907.94POTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading52 07/14 5/ 63 7 1 BYZ, LI2100 07/22 28/108 20 1 prob EPER, LI2101 07/22 14/129 12 LI2102 07/22 • 4/ 25 3 From harder soil LI2, EI2BIODATA SAMPLESSoil Sample......................INTERPRETATIONFunction:' This may well be an exposure surface or just packed wind- blown colluvia.Stratigraphy: • Over 16 and under 4 ,so later thab 16 and earlier than 4. I don't think the BYZ could be considered a fluke since the soil was not rubbly at all.Locus Date: BYZSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION U87 Field F, Summary: REASONRemarks: Separabili ty:Had gone down c. 25 cm. Top-Arbitrary Bottom--Arbi trarySupervisor: DH Dates: 07/14 to 07/17•O sDESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc TopLight brownish grayClay........... 534Medium Sand 2534 Sub-angular 5034Hardness....................Wetness......................10YR6/2S ilt........... 25%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 50% 2Slightly DrySmall Pebbles.................. 200/m2Large Pebbles................. 30/m2Large Cobbles.................. 3/m2Flint............................. . 20Bone............................... .'. FrequentLength............................... 3.200 mDepth................................. 0.025 to 0.070 mContamination would have been very easy in this lc2Bottom Transit Loc Top BottomSand........... 70% Fine Sand.. 45%Compactness...................... Slightly LooseStructure......................... WindMedium Pebbles................ 100/m2Small Cobbles.................. 5/m2Distribution................ RandomDistribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomWidth................ ............... 1.450 m)cus ,and probably accounts for the BYZ sherds.Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit22 907.36 23 907.27 907.25 35 907.20 907.18POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub73- 07/17 31/15075 07/17 7/ 57INTERPRETATIONFunction: A ;Stratigraphy: Se?Locus Date: LISOIL LOCUS SHEETGrinding stone 14 06/30 14Grinding stone frag 15 07/01 20Basalt grinding stone frag • 16 07/01 26Grinding stone frag 17 07/01 35Etched bone fragment 18 07/01 SISmall mortar stone? Door pivot? 1 00/00 7Black basalt pestle 2 00/00 7Grinding stone 3 00/00 16Grinding stone 4 00/00 28Grinding stone ' 5 00/00 34Grinding stone 6 00/00 26Large mortar fragment 7 00/00 16Quern fragment 8 00/00 33Grinding stone fragment 9 00/00 28Basalt grinding stone fragment 19 07/02Stone mortar fragment 20 07/03 25 15Quern fragment 22 07/06 27 28Pestle 23 07/06 32 34Basalt grinding stone fragment ' 24 07/08 34Small round stone, w/flat side 25 07/07 35 SIPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/06/29/0406/29 Progress of excavation 6/07/01/0107/01 Progress of excavationB/06/30/0106/30 Progress of excavation B/07/02/0107/02 Progress of excavationINSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 3 Supervisor: UB Dates: 06/30 to 07/01Summary: Burial cyst. #1 •REASONRemarks: We found human bones in a stone lined grave.TYPE Certain BurialDESCRIPTIONMaterial: Soil............................. : . . 70% Stone................ ............... 30%Plan: RectangularMeasurements: Length.......................... . . . 0.500 m Width................ ............... 0.250 mHeight.......................... . . . 0.250 mSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1LEVELSLoc Top Bo?tort) Transit21 908.80 908.55PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/01/1007/01 Recording burial INTERPRETATIONFunction: This was a burial cyst.BURIAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Burial 1 Associated Installation Locus:' REASONty:Remarks Separab CONTAINERMeasurementsSKELETAL REMAINS . Accessibility: Type:Disposal:Articulation:Position:Measurements:Found bones. Top-*Arbitrary Stone-1ined PitLength..................Width....................Age:. Sex: 'Orientation:Location in Tomb:Photo Taken Grave Goods: NoneSTRATIGRAPHYWithin Locus: F .7:1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber . Date SubjectTotally in Square HumanPrimary Inhumation Completely DisarticulatedBody................................. UnknownRight Leg......................... UnknownRight Arm..........................UnknownLength............................... 0.000 mWidth................................. 0.000 m18 Months to 3 Years UndeterminedSupervisor: WB ' Dates: 06/30 to 07/01 Osteologist: RLHeight.Left Leg........................... UnknownLeft Arm.................... . . . . UnknownHeight............................... 0.000 mSketch Plan MadeB/07/01/1007/01 Recording buri.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 5 • Supervisor: UB Oates: 06/30 to 07/08Summary: Northern half of wall.REASONRemarks: Uall.Separability: Top-*Very Clear. Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 100%Wall Stones: Cobble............................!.. 20% Small Boulder........ ......... 80%Chinkstones: Pebble............................. 25% Cobble.................... ......... 75%Dressing: Unhewn............................ .. 20% Semi-hewn.. . : ........ ......... 80%Mortar: Dry-laid........................ ... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style............................... .. Boulder & Chink •Support.................. ......... Free-standingCourses: 1Rows: 2Measurements: Length............................. .. 2.240 m Width...................... ......... 0.480 to 0.570 m'Height............................. .. 0.200 to 0.520 m Orientation........... ......... 25 degDip................................... 15 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure:: LittleSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 909.13 909.04 19 909.43 909.02POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati on Comments Reading Pub41 07/08 14/121 5 Few BYZ, 1 EPER, LI237 07/08 1 ER bod. 1 EPER, LI2OBJECTSReg no. Desc ription Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPlaque fragment 1 07/08 37 SIPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date ' Subject Date Subject Number Date ' Subject8/07/03/0107/03B/07/03/0507/03INTERPRETATIONFunction:Progress of excavation B/07/06/0107/06 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation E/06/25/1006/25 Progress of excavationThis was probably a terrace wall.B/06/30/0106/30 Progress of excavation B/07/01/0107/01 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 6Suimary: Packed soil surface west of wall (NW corner of square).Remarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Stone:Measurements: Surface Mat11: STRATIGRAPHYSoil fe lt much more compact.Top*-Clear Bottom--AverageLight brownish grayClay........... 35%Medium Sand 50% Sub-angular 30%Hardness....................Wetness......................10TR6/2S ilt ........... 30%Course Sand 5% Sub-round.. 65% 3Moderately DrySmall Pebbles................... 200/m2Distribution.................... RandomLength................................ 2.050 m.Beaten EarthSand........... 35%Round......... 5%Compactness.........Structure.............Medium Pebbles...Width....................Under: 2Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: WBFine Sand.. 45%Moderately Friable Random50/m20.700 mDate:7 908.81 13 908.86LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:2-6Supervisor: WB Oates: 07/09 to 07/14U87 Field F, Square 7108, Locus 7Sumnary: Packed soil surface east of the wall (loci 5 & 8).REASONRemarks: Soil fe lt much more compact.Separabili ty: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light brownish gray 10YR6/2Texture: Clay........... 35% S ilt........... 30% Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 45%Medium Sand 50% Course Sand 5%Particle Shape: Sub*angular 30% Sub-round.. 65% Round......... 5%Consistence: Hardness....................____3 Compactness......... ........... Moderately FriableWetness......................----- Moderately Dry Structure............. ........... RandomInclusions:Soil: Ash Pockets............ 1/m2 Distribution....... ........... RandomStone: Small Pebbles...........___ 200/m2 Medium Pebbles... ........... 50/m2Distribution............. ___ RandomArtifact: Glass......................... ___ 1 Tabun Fragments.. ........... 50Flint......................... ___ 60 Distribution.................... RandomOrganic: Charcoal.................... . . . ; 10/m2, avg. 0. 2 cm Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length........................ . . . . 4.900 m Width.................... _ ____ 0.600 mDepth......................... . . . . 0.120 to 0.200 mSurface Mat11: Laminated Surface - 4 observableRemarks: As we dug into this locus we seemed to not ice significantly fewer r ibbed Byzantine body sherds.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2, 5, 8Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit31 908.82 908.70 ' 8 908.84 908.47 7 908.60POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub70 07/10 11/344 1 7 Few ROM bods, LI271 07/10 22/526 7 BYZ, EPER, LI239 07/10 4/ 92 Few BYZ, LI2. 40 07/08 4/ 24 1 BY2, EI273 07/09 56/509 BY2, ER, LI244 07/09 24/264 BYZ bods, 1 ER bod, LI2, 1 poss 1145 07/10 25/313 18 Few BYZ, LIZ, EI2, 1147 07/13 8/ 62 6 Fewer BYZ BYZ, LR, ER, EPER, LI253 07/13 34/119 15 BYZ, LI2, EI254 07/14 1755 07/14 2156 07/14 1657 07/14 28/231 14 Few ER, few EPER, LI2, EI258 07/14 24/294 12 1 ROM bod, EPER, LI254 07/14 14/164. 17 2 BYZ, EPER, LI2, EI255 07/14 18/254 21 2 BYZ bods, 1 ER bod, EPER, LI2, EI256 07/14 24/206 16 Few ER, EPER, LI259 07/14 24/153 6 1 ROM bod, LI2, few EI2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingBasalt bowl 5 07/14 59Bit of glass 1 07/13 52 26Arrowhead? 2 07/13 52 26Sling stone 3 07/14 57 16Quern (le ft in field)PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject4 07/13 16XB/07/14/0107/14 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONStratigraphy: This surface definitely predates walls 5 and 8.ARCHITECTURAL'LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 8 Summary:REASONRemarks: Wall.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone__Masonry:Wall Stones: Cobble Chinkstones: Pebble Dressing:Mortar:Facing:Construction:Courses:Rows:Measurements:Southern half of wall.Bottom**Very Clear. 100%50%55%Unhewn.................................. 50%Dry-laid.............................. 100%UnfacedStyle.................................. Boulder & Chink2 to 3Dates: 06/30 to 07/08Small B o u ld e r..Cobble..................Semi-hewn...........50%45%50%P re s e rv a tio n :Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:LEVELSLoc TopLength............................... 2.500 mOrientation...................... 25 dPartial Superstructure: Little The wall angles into the balk so that two rows.Support............................. Free-standingHeight............................... 0.300 to 0.550 mDip..................................... 8 degt is d ifficult to tell how wide the wall is and whether there is one or31 • 909.30 POTTERYP a il DateBottom T ra n s it l908.82Count B sk ts Loc P re s e rv a tio nTop Bottom Trai909.36 908.85ConmentsEPER from loc 5 pot43 07/10 42/36952 07/09 16/16972 00/00 4/ 92OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail LocCoin 1 07/09 39 19Fresco fragment? 2 07/08 43 SIBYZ, ER, EPER, LI2 BYZ, LI2.Few BYZ bods, LI2:l Total Period Material Photo DrawingNumber ' Date Subject B/07/03/0507/03 Progress of excavatitARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 9 Supervisor: WB Oates: 07/06 toSummary: Ephemeral wall in N.E. corner of square. 'REASONRemarks: WallSeparability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone......................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Small Boulder.................. 100%Dressing: Unhewn.................. ............ 100%Mortar: Dry-laid.............. ............ 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style.................... ............ Boulder & Chink Support.................. ......... Free-standingCourses: RandomRows: 1Measurements: Length.................. ......... 1.580 m Orientation........... ......... 328 dtDip......................... ........... 13 degRemarks: Wall and surrounding f i l l . Decided that as a partial terrace wall not worth worrying about as separate locus.ceramics=2STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub108 07/21 22 few Byz, ER, EPer, LI2109 07/21 23 -Byz, few LR, LI2114 07/22 24/224 - 12 Byz, ER, EPer, LI2, 1EI2LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:7-9ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETL /to o■4̂IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 10 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/06 toSummary: Ephemeral wall in SE corner of square.REASONRemarks: Wall.Separability: Top--ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone......................... 100%M aso nry :•W all S tones: C h inkstones: D re ss ing :M o rta r:Facing:C o n s tru c tio n :Rows:Measurements:Preservation:Remarks:Small Boulder......... ....... 100%Cobble...................... ....... 100%Unhewn...................... ....... 80% Semi-hewn.Dry-laid................... ....... 100%UnfacedStyle........................ ....... Boulder & Chink1Length............................. 1.600 m Width................................. 0.780 to 0.850 mHeight........................... .. 0.450 to 0.650 m Orientation...................... 49 degDip..................................... 12 deg-Partial Superstructure: LittleThis wall had the capstones from the double burial (burials 2 and 3) anchored into the wall, under the top course.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 11 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/07 to 07/08Sunmary: Burial pit.REASONRemarks: Found human bones.Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light brownish gray 10YR6/2Consistence: Hardness............................ 2 Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure......................... RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 0.400 m Width................................. 0.230 mDepth................................. 0.180 mRemarks: Except for the wall on the SE side.and the cap stones across the top there was no distinction between the pit,. its f i l l and the soil of locus 14 around it.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top • Bottom T ra n s it28 908.35 908.17POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Corrments Reading Pub38 07/08 0 / 8 1 28 ' BY2, !R bodsINTERPRETATIONFunction: • Grave.Stratigraphy: This grave seems to be quite late and thus an intrusion into the neighboring loci.BURIAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 field F, Square 7L08, Burial 2 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/07 toAssociated Installation Locus: 11 Osteologist:REASONRemarks: Burial. Separability:CONTAINER Unlined PitSKELETAL REMAINS •Accessibili ty: Totally in SquareType: HumanDisposal: Primary InhumationArticulation: ArticulatedPosition: Body................................... 8ackRight Leg.......................... Unknown Left Leg........................ UnknownRight Arm.................... . .. Unknown Left Arm........................ .. UnknownMeasurements: Length............................. .. 0.400 m Height........................... ... 0.000 mWidth... ............................ 0.230 mAge: 4 to 6 YearsSex: UndeterminedOrientation: Location in Tomb Grave Goods: NoneRemarks: Tangential touall 10. This is part of a double burial (see burial 3).STRATIGRAPHYUnder Burial(s):Over Burial(s):Cuts Burial(s):Cut By Burial(s):Within Locus: F .7:2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit28 908.39 908.32PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectA/07/07/1607/07 Burial #2SOIL LOCUS SHEET- IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 12 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/07 to 07/08Summary: F ill in grave #2REASONRemarks: Found human bonesSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--UncleaiDESCRIPTIONConsistence: Hardness........................... 0 Compactness____.............. Moderately LooseStructure......................... RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles....... ........... 500/m2 Distribution... . . ............. RandomOrganic: Bone........................ ......... Frequent Shells................ .............. 4Measurements: Length.................... ........... 0.400 m Width.................. . ............. 0.230 mDepth...................... . ..........0.150 mSurface Mat11: no surfaceRemarks: This is part of a (burial #3).double burial. A few centimeters beneath these bones we found the bones of an adult maleSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:2LEVELSLoc • Top Bottom Transit28 908.41 908.26POTTERYPail Date Count 8skts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub36 07/07 7/ 13 all bods, 1LR, IrBURIAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION xU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Burial 3 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/23 toAssociated Installation Locus: 0 Osteologist:REASON.Remarks: Found human remainsSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearCONTAINER Stone-lined PitLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:10-12SKELETAL REMAINSAccessibility: Totally in SquareType: Human .Disposal: Primary InhumationArticulation: ArticulatedPosition: Body............................. .. . . ight SideRight Leg.................. . . . Extended-Right Arm.................... .. . . Arm ExtendedMeasurements: Length............................ 1 . 6 0 0 mWidth.............................. . . 0.350 mAge: Middle-aged AdultSex: MaleOrientation:Location in Tomb:Grave Goods: NoneSTRATIGRAPHYUnder Burial(s): F .7:3 •Over Burial(s): Cuts Burial(s): Cut By BurialCs): Within Locus:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom34 908.17 OBJECTS908.04 35 908.25 908.18Reg no. Descr i pt i on Field no. Date PailLeft Leg. Left Arm. Height...TransitLoc LevelExtendedArm Across Abdomen0.200 mTotal Period Material Photo DrawingArrow point within pelvis girdle 1' 07/23 125PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/23/2207/23 Document burial #3 B/07/23/2307/23 Document burial U3 B/07/23/2407/23 Arrowhead in pelvis areaSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 13Summary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Soil under wall 8.Found hard surface under Top'-Very ClearGrayish brownClay........... 15%Medium Sand 30% Sub-angular 70%• Hardness..........................Wetness......... .'..................Bottom--Average10YR5/2Silt........... 50%Course Sand 40% Sub-round.. 30% 4Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 30/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2Organic: Bone.................................... RareMeasurements: Length................................ 0.400 mDepth................................. 0.120 to 0.140 mRemarks: Surfaces 6 & 7 may have been originally as highprotected surface 13.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 8Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom TransitSupervisor: WB Date: 07/08Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 30%Compactness...................... Moderately CrumblyStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................ 12/m2Distribution.................... RandomDistribution.............; . . . Random• Width....... •........................ 0.170 mas surface 13. They seem to have worn down while the wall25 908.94 908.82POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub43 07/08 42/314 BYZ, ER, EPER, LI2, EI2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 field F, Square 7L08, Locus 14 * Supervisor: WB Date:Summary: Loose, dusty, pottery-rich rubble in eastern half of squareREASONSeparability: Top--Unci ear Bottom--AverageU \o oL /lDESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Light yellowish brown Clay........... 10%10YR6/4 S ilt ......... . 70% Sand........... 20%Inclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ . 10/m2 Medium Pebbles............ 10/m2STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:Large Pebbles................Medium Cobbles...............Small Boulders...............2. 10/m2 3/m2 1/m2Small Cobbles..............Large Cobbles..............Mediun Boulders...........10/m25/m21/m2POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading39 07/08 12/ 73 2 Byz bod, LI r248 07/13 46/342 20 Byz, LR bods, ER bods, few EPer,, Llr249 07/13 23/268 13 Byz, LR, Hel, LIr2, EIr250 07/13 17/261 7 few Byz, LR, few ER, Ir bods51 07/13 21/181 13 Byz, 1ER, Llr2, EIr252 07/13 33/148 14 Byz, few ER, LIr2104 07/21 9 IByz bod, LIr2105 07/21 9 Byz, ER, LIr2110 07/21 10 Byz, few LR, EPer, LIr, 1LB111 07/21 9 Byz, LR, Llr2120 07/22 4 EPer, Ur2120 07/22 18/ 18 21 few EPer, LIr2121 07/22 15/161 10 1Byz, EPer, LIr2126 07/24 20/186 31 few Byz, lEPer, LIr2 dom, LIr1-, few EIr2127 07/24 18/186 37 few Byz, few EPer, LIr2, EIr2128 07/24 23/204 22 IByz, 1EPer, LIr2, 1EIr2129 07/24 23/201 17 Byz, Iprob Hel, few EPer, Llr2, lEIr2130 07/24 17/135 14 few EPer, LIr2, Elr2, Ir1131 07/24 17/163 16 LIr2, few EIr2132 07/24 18/168 13 LIr2, 11r1133 • 07/24 14/109 5 1EPer, Llr2124 07/23 20/185 23 Not'much Byz Byz, few LR, LIr2125 07/23 11/ 68 10 Byz, LIr2OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Oate Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawingbronze spear point ' 1seal on pottery (lion) 21/2 stone oval/round center hole 3PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Nurber07/24 132 07/24 131 07/24 130Date SubjectB/07/08/0107/08 Progress of excavation 8/07/10/0107/10 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 15Suimary: Small lens of surface under locus 7REASONRemarks: Found hard soil surface-exposure surfaceSeparability: Top-Clear Bottom—UnclearDESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:Yellowish brownClay........... 10%Medium Sand 40% Sub-angular 35%Hardness...............Structure.: .........10YR5/4S ilt ........... 40%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 65% 4•RandomMeasurements: Surface Mat' l Remarks: ISTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 7Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:POTTERYPail Date CountSmall Pebbles.................. 100/m2Large Pebbles.................. 20/m2Length............................... 0.500 mBeaten Eartht is possible we dug through this surfaceBskts Loc PreservatiiSupervisor: WB Dates: 07/10 toSand........... 50% Fine Sand.. 30%Compactness...................... Moderately FriableMedium Pebbles................. 50/m2Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................ 0.300 mlithout noticing on the southern end.Reading PubByz, LIr246 07/10 12/144 7LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:12-15SOIL LOCUS SHEETU to oONIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 16Summary: REASONRemarks: Separability: DESCRIPTION Color: Texture:Soil surface in western half of squareFound yet another surface--beaten earth Top--ClearYellowish brownClay........... 10%Medium Sand 40% Sub-angular 35%10YR5/4S ilt........... 40%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 65%Hardness........................... 3Wetness:........................... SI ightly MoistInclus i ons:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 100/m2Distribution.................... RandomArtifact: Flint................................. 50Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length............................. •. 5.000 mSurface Mat11: Beaten Earth STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 7, 15Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by: .POTTERYSupervisor: WB Dates: 07/14 toSand........... 50% Fine Sandl. 30%Compactness...................... .Moderately FriableStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles.................' 18/mZBrick Fragments............... 7Width................................. 1.500 mPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub60 07/14 17/102 Now out of Rom & Byz EPer, LIr2, few EIr2 X62 07/15 37/298 15 2LR, few EPer, LIr264 07/15 21/211 8 2Rom bods, EPer, LIr2, few EIr265 07/15 18/229 20 Llr2, 1EB, 2UD66 07/16 27/307 20 2Byz, few EPer, Ltr267 07/16 19/249 6 lEPer, LIr2OBJECTSReg no. Descriptiori Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawingmetal thing 1 07/16 67PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/15/0107/15 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 1 Summary: Pit f i l l .REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/14 to.Organically enriched pocket on plaster installation. Top--Unclear Bottom--Very Clear 'Particle Shape: Consistence:Surface Mat11: Remarks: STRATIGRAPHY Under:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc TopYellowish brownC lay...___ 5%Medium Sand 40% Sub-angular 20%10YR5/4S ilt...........Course Sand Sub-round..Hardness........................... 2Wetness...................'......... Slightly MoistSmall Pebbles.................. 30/m2Distribution.................... RandomCharcoal........................... 20/m2, avg. 0.1Length............................... 0.300 mDepth................................. 0.030 to 0.100 mBeaten EarthThis soil seems to be organically enriched i>Bottom TransitMedium Pebbles..Distribution......... .......... RandomWidth................................. 0.200 m>th many small fragments of bone.20 908.41 908.40POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation61' 07/14 63 07/151/ 37 0/ 18SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 19Summary: REASONRemarks:S e p a ra b i l i ty :P la s te r s u r fa c e .Ue found a w h ite la y e r Top *-V e ry C lea r B o tto m -C le a rDESCRIPTIONColor: White 10YR8/1Consistence: Hardness............................. 3Wetness..............................Moderately DryInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 100/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2Measurements: Length................................. 0.750 mDepth................. i 0.005 to 0.010Degree of Slope............... 11 degSurface Mat'l: PlasterRemarks: This plaster is broken into several pi: yellowish, dark grey, etc. It seems that there is moreEquals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation ' Comments Reading Pub80 07/16 12 LIr2, 1MB83 07/16 10 LIr2, few EIr284 07/16 11 LIr2, few Eir2, 2MB85 07/16 12 LIr2, few EIr2 X86 07/16 12 LIr2 X87 07/16 15 LIr2, 1UD X88 07/16 12 LIr2 X93 07/20 43/344 Llr2, few EIr2, 1Ir194 07/20 22/259 feu EPer, LIr2, Elr2100 07/20 30/165 few EPer, Ltr2 X101 07/20 25/140 LIr2, Elr2 X102 07/20 23/135 few EPer, LIr2 XOBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingStone bowl fragment 1 07/16 85FiguriPHOTOGRAPHS .ine fragment 2 07/16 87Number Date Subject Number Oate . SubjectB/07/20/0207/20 Progress of excavation B/07/21/0207/21 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 22 Supervisor:. WB Dates: 07/16 to 07/17Summary: Another group of laminated surfacesREASONRemarks: ArbitrarySeparability: Top—Arbi trary Bottom—Arbi traryDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Consistence: Hardness......................... . 4 Compactness......................Moderately F riableWetness........................... . Slightly MoistMeasurements: Length............................. . 2.000 m Width.. ............................. 1.000 mDepth............................... . 0.100 mSurface Mat11:: Laminated Surface 5 observableLEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transi t17 907.88 23 907.85POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati'on Comments Reading Pub90 07/17 26 1Rom bod, EPer, LIr282 07/16 LIr2106 07/21 8 EPer, LIr2, 1EIr2, 11r1 X107 07/21 9 LIr2 X112 07/21 9 1EPer, LIr2 X113 07/21 9 Llr2 Xo oSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 23 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/17 toSuimary: Cultural surface in 2 x 1 probe under 22REASONSeparabi l i ty: Top--Arbitrary Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Gray 10YR6/1Texture: May 1(1* S ilt ........... 65% Sand........... 25% Fine Sand.Medina Sand 35% Course Sand 25%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 45% Round......... 15%Consistence: Hardness............... .. 3 Compactness............... ___ Slightly F•riableWetness......................... .. Slightly Moist Structure.................. . . . . RandomInclusions:Artifact: Tabun Fragments........... .. 20 Distribution............. . . . . RandomOrganic: Bone............................... . . Rare Olive Pits................. ___ 8/m2Charcoal........................ .. 20/m2, avg. 0.5 cm Distribution............. . . . . RandomMeasurements:: Length........................... .. 5.000 m Width......................... . . . . 2.500 mDepth............................. .. 0.050 to 0.150 mSurface Mat' 1.: Beaten EarthRemarks: Within our 2m probe everything between the bottom of 22 and the top of 24 was dug as locus 23. But as wetraced 23 southward we discovered another surface between 23 and 24 which we have cal led 33.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 22LEVELSloc Top- Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit.17 907.88 907.80 23. 907.85POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservat ion Comments Reading Pub91 07/17 18 EPer, LIr2 X115 07/22 10151 07/28 24 Llr2152 07/28 21 ,1pos Rom bod, LIr2153 07/29 6/ 25 3 LIr2SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 24' Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/17 toSummary: Surface in bottom of NW probeREASONRemarks: Found hard soil surface with organic matter.Separability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Gray 10YR6/1Texture: Clay........... 10% S ilt........... 75% Sand ......... 15% Fine Sand.. 40%Medium Sand 30% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50% Round____ 5%Consistence: Hardness........................... 4 Compactness............. ....... Moderately FriableWetness............................. Slightly Moist Structure................ ....... RandomInclusions:Stone: ' Smalt Pebbles.................. 100/m2 Medium Pebbles........ ........ 50/m2Large Pebbles.................. 10/m2Art i fact: Tabun Fragments............... 5 Flint........................ ........ 35Organic: Bone................................... Rare Olive Pits............... ........ 12/m2Charcoal........................... 50/m2, avg. 0.1 cni Distribution........... ........ RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 5.000 m Width........................ ........ 2.500 mDepth........................... ... 0.050 to 0.130 m Direction of Slope. ....... 16 degDegree of Slope............... 9 degSurface Mat*l: Beaten EarthRemarks: This locus consists of a yellowish surface and the gray ashy material between it and the next yellowishsurface.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 37Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 907.80 907.67 7 908.18 908.13POTTERY• Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub161 07/30 28/258 22 LIr2OBJECTSReg no. D e s c r ip t io n F ie ld no. Date P a il Loc Level T o ta l P e rio d M a te r ia l Photo Draw ingFlint blade Figurine fragment1 07/17 92 7 908.4207/30 161LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:21-24L /iooooSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 25 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/22 toSummary: Hard rubbly soil between surface 23 and dusty rubble 14REASON ■Separability: Top--Clear Bottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Light yellowish brown • 10YR6/4Particle Shape: Sub-angular 45% Sub-round.. 55%Consistence: Hardness............................ 4Wetness............................. SI ightly MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................... 100/m2Large Pebbles.. ........... 10/m2Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length.............................. . 1.000 mDepth................................. 0.300 mDegree of Slope............... 6 degRemarks: As we worked eastward on locus 23 the surfaceand more sherds. About a meter from the west this locus was dug yesterday as part of locusCompactness...................... Slightly FirmStructure......................... RandomMediun Pebbles................. 30/m2Small Cobbles.................. 6/m2Width................................ 0.500 mDirection of Slope..___ 2 deggradually became harder to trace because there were more rocks - side of the square we gave up on 23 and called it 25. Some of 14.Under:Over: 41Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by: •LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit9 .907.71 907.36POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub116 07/22 23/172 11 few EPer, LIr2, EIr2 X117 .07/22 23/235 17 LIr2 X118 07/22 4 /54 3 prob EPer, LIr2 X115 07/22 34/184 10 EPer, Llr2 X160 07/30 41/290 19 LIr2, few Ir 1177 08/03 19SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 26 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/22 toSunmary: Pit f i l lREASONRemarks: We found a pocket of very loose, slightly different colored soilDESCRIPTION ' Color: Light yellowish brown 10YR6/4Consistence: Hardness......................... . 2 Compactness............. ....... Moderately LooseInclusions:Wetness........................... . Slightly Moist Structure................ ........ RandomStone: Small Pebbles........... . . .Distribution................... 100/m2 . RandomMedium Pebbles........ ....... 30/m2Measurements:LEVELSLoc TopLength.............................Bottom Transit. 0.500 m • Width......................... ....... 0.200 m21 907.93 907.62POTTERYPail.Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Reading ' Pub119 07/22 30/202 6141 07/27 43/185 7few EPer, L!r2 28yz, LIr2INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 27 Supervisor: WB Dates:Sunmary: Burial cyst.REASONRemarks: Found human remains within a stone-lined cyst.-TYPE Certain BurialDESCRIPTIONMaterial: Stone......................... ....... 100%Plan: RectangularLining: StoneMeasurements: Length............................... 1.900 m Width............ ................ 0.190 to 0.330 mHeight............................... 0.400 to 0.500 m Orientation.. .................. 70 deaThe cap stones on this cyst were built into wall 10. This same cyst also contained burial #2 lying on top of the legs of burial #3.Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 1INTERPRETATIONFunction: Burial cyst.Stratigraphy: This appears to be a late intrusion into locus 14.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 34Summary: SurfaceREASONRemarks: Found a surfaceSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom-ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Grayish brown 10YR5/2Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 45%Medium Sand 35% Course Sand 30%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness.................... .. . . . 3Wetness...................... ___ Slightly MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles........... . . . . 50/m2Large Pebbles........... . 10/m2Distribution.............., . . . RandomArtifact: Tabun Fragments....... . 10Measurements: Length.................. -.... . . . . 3.000 mDepth........................... ___ 0.050 to 0.100 mDegree of Slope.........___ 9 degSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: Many laminationsSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 23Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom31 908.24 908.20 33 908.08 908.05POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation CommentsSupervisor: WB Dates: 07/28 to 07/29Sand........... 35% Fine Sand.. 35%Compactness...................... Moderately FriableStructure.......................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 20/m2Small Cobbles................... 50/m2 :Distribution.................... RandomWidth................................. 2.550 mDirection of Slope......... 14 degTransit Loc Top Bottom Transit19 908.09 908.01Reading Pub154 07/29 20/131 25 LIr2OBJECTSRegno. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawingfigia tsic] fragments • 1 07/29 154PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/29/0207/29 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: Living surfaceSOIL LOCUS SHEET• IDENTIFICATION U87 Field F,, Square 7L08, Locus 36 Supervisor: WB Date: 07/29Summary:DESCRIPTIONPOTTERYPail DateFill in small irregular bioturbation pits in locus 34 Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub. 155 07/29 2/11 6 1ER bod, LIr2LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:25-36SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 37Surmary: REASONRemarks: Separabil DESCRIPTION Color: Texture:Surface under locus 34Found one more surface Top--ClearGrayish brownClay........... 20%Medium Sand 35% Sub-angular 40%Hardness...........................Wetness.............................Bottom-'Clear10YR5/2S ilt ........... 45%Course Sand 30% Sub-round.. 60% 3Slightly MoistInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.......... . 200/m2Large Pebbles.................. 10/m2■ Artifact: Tabun Fragments................ 20Organic: Olive Pits................... 30/m2Distribution.................... RandomMeasurements: Length............................... 3.000 mDepth............................... '. 0.050 to 0.100 mSurface Mat'l: Beaten EarthRemarks: This surface suffers from some bioturbation.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 34Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top BottomSupervisor: Dates: 07/29 toSand.......... 35% Fine Sand.. 35%Compactness......................Moderately FriableStructure......................... RandomMedium Pebbles............ 50/m2Distribution.................... RandomDistribution___'............. RandomCharcoal........................... 45/m2, avg. 0.3. cmWidth................................. 2.550.m •T ra n s it Loc Top Bottom T ra n s it31 908.20 908.15 33 908.05 19 908.19POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Reading Pub156 07/29 17/165 26 Llr2, few EIr2159 07/30 2808JECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingIron slag 1 07/29 156Copper or bronze pendant frags 2 07/30 159Basalt grinding stone frag 3 07/30 1594XSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 39 Supervisor: WB Dates: 07/30 toSummary: Hard rubbly soil iin southern side of squareREASONRemarks: It became hard to trace surfaces because of so much rock, pottery, and bone inclusions.Separability: Top--Clear 8ottom--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor:Texture:Pale brown Clay........... 10%10YR6/3S ilt ........... 40% Sand........... 50% Fine Sand.. 25%Particle Shape:Medium Sand 35% Angular___ 10%Course Sand 40% Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 40%Consistence: Hardness................ ......... 4 Compactness................___ Slightly FriableWetness.................. ......... Slightly Moist Structure....................___ RandomInclusions:Soil: Ash Pockets........... ......... 1/m2, 99.9 cm Distribution.............. ---- LayeredStone: Small Pebbles........ ......... 1D0/m2 Medium Pebbles............ . . . 75/m2Large Pebbles........ ......... 25/m2 Small Cobbles............. 10/m2Medium Cobbles___ ......... 5/m2 Large Cobbles............. 3/m2Organic:Measurements:Distribution.........Olive Pits...................... Randomrharrna1Distribution.........Length............................. Random. . . ; . . 2.000 m Width.................. ...... . . . 0.800 mDepth...................... ......... 0.090 to 0.150 m• Surface Mat’ l: Beaten EarthRemarks: The bottom of this locus was clearly defined by a soft ashy layer, the same one that was under loci 40 and 25.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 33Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:.Cut by:Remarks: Probably equal to 25 but locus 26 cuts between them making it hard to te ll.L /lOOVOPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub164 07/31 20/273 18 Prob contam from 14 1Byz, LIr2165 07/31 8/ 68 8 ,LIr2, EIr2OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPOTTERYScarab 1 07/31 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject8/07/31/0007/31 A/07/31/1207/31 Scarob in situSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 40 Oates: 07/30 to 08/03.Summary: Surface below locus 24 in western sideREASONRemarks: Found another yellowish beaten earth surfaceSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottonv-Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3 .Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 50% Sand........... 30% Fine Sand.. 40%Medium Sand 35% Course Sand 25%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 40% Sub-round.. 60%Consistence: Hardness........................... . 4 Compactness................. __ Slightly FriableWetness.............................. Slightly Moist Structure.................... . . . RandomInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles.................. 50/m2 . Medium Pebbles........... 10/m2Large Pebbles.................. 5/m2 Small Cobbles............. . . . 2/m2Distribution..................... RandomArtifact: Tabun Fragments.............. 10 Flint........................... .. . . 50Distribution..................... RandomOrganic: Shells............................... 1 Olive P its .................. 5/m2Charcoal........................... 15/m2,- avg. 0.3 cm Distribution................. . . RandomMeasurements: Length................................ 5.000 m Width........................... .. . . 2.000 mDepth................................. 0.230 to 0.400 m Direction of Slope..... . . 17 degDegree of Slope............... 12 degSurface Mat11: Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHY Under: . Over:The bottom of .this thick locus was clearly marked t 10YR4/1 dark gray.ith a general layer of fine, soft, dark ash. The ash wasEquals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Tr•ansitPub107POTTERYPail907.74907.68. Date907.36907.40Count Bskts Loc3134Preservation908.08 907.67 908.06 907.72Comments Reading175 08/04 32/228 23 EPer, LIr2176 08/04 39/227 26 EPer, LIr2 X177 08/04 37/182 19 LIr2, 1UD166 07/31 32/187 13 21 136 LIr2, few EIr2167 08/03 50 57 316 LIr2, feu EIr2,. Ir1168 08/03 39 54 387 lEPer, LIr2, few EI2, Ir1169 08/03 55 33 289 LIr2, 1EIr2, 11r1170 08/03 22/145 26 22 142 LIr2, EIr2, 1EB171 08/04 29/105 45 29 105 EPer, 1 LIr2 X172 08/04 31/241 14 few EPer, LIr2 X173 08/04 41/231 44 EPer, LIr2174 08/04 40/175 26 EPer, LIr2 XOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Drawing1 rori nail I 08/03 169PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject8/08/03/0208/03 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATIONFunction: This is a clear occupational surface and the f i l l used to level the site after the fire represented by the ashlayer that marks the bottom of the locus.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:37-40UY\QOSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONUS7 Field F, Square 7L08, Locus 41Cultural surface under ash layer under locus 40Oates: 07/31 to CRemarks: .Found another survace with the top clearly defined by a thin black ash layer over it.Sep8rability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 10% SI It RflV. Sand........... 10% Fine Sand. . 20%Medium Sand 40% Course Sand 40%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness........................... i, Compactness.........Wetness......................... ... Slightly Moist Structure............. ........... RandomMeasurements: Length........................... . . . 5.000 m Width.................... ........... 4.000 mDegree of Slope........... 15 degSurface Mat ’ l : Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:40LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit10 907.36 31 907.677 907.40 34 907.72PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject' Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/08/04/0308/04 End of season finals 8/08/04/0408/04 End of season finals 8/08/04/0508/04 End of sINTERPRETATIONFunction: This seems to be an occupational surface. It is impossible to tell without architecture whatfunction must have been in the late Iron 2 period. This is the last occupational surface before the general destruction' represented by the ash layer over nearly all of locus 41.This surface seem to have been truncated along its eastern edge by locus 14’ s erosion down the h ill.SOIL. LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 1Sunmary: Topsoil of newly opened square.REASONRemarks: Initial square excavaticSeparability: Top:-Very Clear Bottom-ArbitraryDESCRIPTIONColor: Broun 10YR5/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt........... 80%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%' Consistence: Hardness........................... . 2Wetness.............................• Moderately MoistCompleteSupervisor: JRF Dates: 06/22 to 06/26Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%Compactness......... ......... Moderately LooseInclusions: Soi l : Mari Pockets............. 1/m2, 6.0- 8.0 cm Distribution................. . . RandomStone: Small Pebbles........... . . . . 250/m2 Medium Pebbles............. . . 150/m2Large Pebbles........... ----- 80/m2 Small Cobbles............. . . . 20/m2Medium Cobbles......... ----- 15/m2 Large Cobbles............. 1/m2Small Boulders......... ----- 1/m2 Distribution................. . . RandomArtifact: Roof Tiles................. ___ 1 Worked Stones............. 13Organic:Distribution.............Bone............................ ---- Rare. Shells......................... .. . . 101Measurements:Distribution.............Length......................... . . . Random • ----- 5.000 m Width...'........................ . . 5.000 mDepth.......................... ___ 0.010 to 0.100 m Direction of Slope...... . 90 degDegree of Slope........ ----- 22 degSTRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over: 2, 3, 4Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom7 907.86 907.76 11 906.21 906.11 21 907.24 907.1431. 907.79 907.69 35 906.24 906.14Pail. Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading1 06/22 3/ 4 20 surface sherds LI22 06/24 38/321 30 many small LBYZ,LR,ER(INAB),LIR2,EIR2,MB23 06/24 28/263 23 BYZ.LIR24 06/25 51/380 40 BYZ, ER bods, LI2 don, prob EB bods5 06/25 41/316 25 BYZ bods, ER bods, LI2, EI2, 116 06/26 20/148 15 1 LR, LI2, few E12OBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrUpper millstone frag - basalt. 1 06/22 1Upper millstone frag - basalt. 2 06/24Upper milIstone frag - basalt. 3 06/24One half of grinding imortar. 4' 06/24Ceramic game piece. 5 06/24Upper millstone frag - basalt. 6 06/24Upper milIstone .frag - basalt. 7 06/25Hand grinder frag. 8 06/25Basalt grinder frag. 9 06/25 4Basalt millstone frag 10 06/25 4Basalt grinder frag. 1 06/25 4Basalt grinder frag. 12 06/25 . 5Ballistic missile. 13 06/25 5Grinder frag. 14 06/25 5Stone game piece. 15 06/26 6'Hand grinder. 16 06/26 6Upper millstone frag. 17 06/26 6PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectPubB/06/23/0606/23 Pre-excavat i on DRAWINGSBalks: N, S, E, U.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 2 (Supplement) 'Installation SupplementS u p e rv is o r: JRFComplete 06/25 to 07/03Sunnary:REASONRemarks: S e p a ra b ili t y : DESCRIPTION C o lo r:T ex tu re : P a r t ic le Shape: C ons is tence:I nc l us i ons: S o i l :Stone:A r t i f a c t :O rga n ic :Measurements:STRATIGRAPHYTumble and s u b - to p s o i l .Rock tum b le e v id e n t. T o p -V e ry C lea r Bottom—Clear 10YR5/3S ilt ........... 8(Sub-round.. 5(Clay........... 15%Sub-angular 50%Hardness.................... . 2Wetness.............................. Moderately MoistPebble Pockets................. 1/m2, 3.0 cmSmall Pebbles................... 250/m2Large Pebbles................... 100/m2Medium Cobbles................. 20/m2Small Boulders................. 2/m2Flint.......................................84S h e lls .............................. 288.Length................................. 5.000 mDepth.................................. 0.400 to 0.950 mDegree of Slope.................. 22 degThis locus includes tumble and associated soil. After removal it was noticed that a color change to 10YR7/3 (very pale brown) indicating a reduction in organic matter was evident after a depth of approximately 30 cm. Large cobbles and small boulders concentrated west of wall 3 and east of wall 3 in areas 27, 33, 34. Pebble pocket noticed in area 35.Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%Compactness...................... Moderately LooseStructure........................... TalusDistribution.................... RandomMedium Pebbles................. 150/m2Small Cobbles................... 40/m2Large Cobbles................... 2/m2Distribution.................... PatternedDistribution.................... RandomDistribution.................... RandomWidth.................................. 5.000 mDirection of Slope........ 90 degUnder: 1Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit7 907.97 907.06 31 907.95 907.00 34 906.7427 907.25 906.45 17 906.46LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L08:41-7L09:2Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Conments Reading7 06/26 11/ 52 4 ROM bods, LI2 dom, few EI28 06/29 55/363 20 25 Heavily encrusted BYZ, ROM bods, LI29 06/29 37/296 16 31 Heavily encrusted few 8YZ/ROM bods, 1L12 dom, few EB10 06/29 45/282 23 Heavily encrusted ER, LI21 06/29 13/ 98 10 W of wall' ROM bods, LI212 06/30 33/201 21 W.of wall Few LR, L1213 06/30 40/302 19 W of wall Few 8Y2, LI2 dom, l MB14 06/30 37/248 18 W of wall Few BYZ bods, HELL, LI2, 1 poss LB15 06/30 36/342 23 W of wal l BYZ, LI2, 1116 06/30 4/ 33 4 W of wall LI217 07/01 20/160 20 22 Many large thick Few LBYZ bods, LI2 dom18 07/01 30/158 25 1 LBYZ bod, LI219 07/01 31/215 23 1 ROM bod, 1 EPER, LI2, EI2, 11, 120 07/01 40/243 20 • LI2, EI2, 1 1121 07/01 20/124 8 LI2, EI222 07/02 ' 40/357 18 Few ERCH, L12 dom, few EI223 07/02 25/150 14 W of wall 3 LI2, few EI224 07/02 14/165 . 14 W of wall 3 1 LR, 1 EPER, LI225 07/02 31/149 14 W of wall 3 Few LR, EPER, LI2 dom, EI226 07/02 20/102 31 W of wall 3 LI2, few EI227 07/03 33/164 20 - 1 BYZ, LI2, 11, UD28 07/03 25/234 37 Lots of swept dust LI2, few EI2, 1 UDOBJECTS Reg r Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level TotalMetal/modern/knife. 18 06/26 7 14 1Basalt upper millstone frag. 19 06/26 7 1Ceramic stopper 20 06/26 7 1Ballistic missile 21 06/29 8 15 1Ceramic .stopper 22 06/29 8 31 1Stone with indentation 23 06/29 10 13 1Basalt fragment 24 06/29 10 14 1Ballistic missile 25 06/30 12 8 1Large ceramic stopper 26 06/30 12 20 1Comolete stone mortar 27 06/30 13 20 1Small stone mortar 28 06/30 13 8 1Small piece of Roman glass 29 06/30 13 8 . 1Stone grinder 30 07/01 18 22 1Upper mill stone 31 07/01 19 28 1Oblong (small morter?) 32 07/01 19 28 1Metal (pin for fibula?) 33 07/01 19 SI 1Broken basalt grinder 34 07/01 21 28 1Broken ceramic spindle whorl 35 07/01 15 1Ballistic missile 36 07/02 23 23 1Worked stone (harrmer?) 37 07/02 23 17 1Stone mortar fragment 38 07/02 23 17 1Upper mill stone fragment 39 07/02 26 29 1Broken ballista 40 07/02 26 29 1Ceramic fragment 41 07/02 26 SI 1Ballistic missle (at balk line) 42 07/03 28 23 1Loom weight . 43 07/02 26 1Date Subject Number Date Subject Period Material Photo DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Number. Date SubjectPubE/06/25/1106/25 Progress of excavation 8/06/30/0206/30 Progress of excavation 8/07/02/0207/02 Progress of excavation8/06/29/0106/29 Progress of excavation B/07/01/0207/01 Progress of excavation B/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavationDRAWINGSBalks: N, S, E, W.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Many of the large cobbles and small boulders were likely tumble from wall 3. and possibly wall 4 although the'latter is s t ill conjectural.Stratigraphy: ' Locus 2 covered walls 3 and 4 as well as tumble from them which made up the many stone inclusions in locus 2.Locus 2 also covered surface 5 and loci 6 and 7 located W and E of wall 3, respectively.ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 3 Supervisor: JRF Dates: 06/26 toSummary: N-S two row wall.REASONRemarks: Stones aligned as probable wall.Separability: Top--Very ClearDESCRIPTION Material:Hard Limestone................. 100%Masonry:Wall Stones:. Small Boulder.................. 35% Medium Boulder... ........... 65%Chinkstones: Cobble............................... 100X •Dressing: Semi-hewn.......................... 100%-Mortar: Dry-laid........................... 100%Facing: UnfacedConstruction: Style................................. Boulder 8 Chink Support................ ........... Free-stand ingRows:Measurements: Length............................... 1.870 m Width.................... ........... 1.030 to 1.070 mOrientation...................... 12 degPreservation: Partial Superstructure: I.ittleRemarks: ' 370 cm long (up to juncture with katis)STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit16 906.53 21 906.45PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectB/06/29/0106/29 Progress of excavation B/07/07/0207/07 Progress of excavation 8/07/15/0207/15 Progress of excavationB/06/30/0206/30 Progress of excavation . B/07/08/0207/08 Progress of excavation B/07/16/0207/16 Progress of excavation• B/07/01/0207/01 Progress of excavation B/07/08/1407/08 West view of wall 4 B/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavationB/07/02/0207/02 Progress of excavation B/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavation B/07/20/0307/20 Progress of excavationB/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavation B/07/10/0207/10 Progress of excavation 8/07/21/0307/21 Progress of excavationA/07/03/1507/03 Documentation of surf #5 8/07/13/0207/13 Progress of excavation B/07/22/02Q7/22 Progress of excavationB/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavation B/07/14/0207/14 Progress of excavationDRAWINGSBalks: ' S.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 3 Supervisor: JRFDESCRIPTIONInclusions:Artifact: Pottery............................. Rare Tabun Fragments.. ........... 114Brick Fragments............... 4Organic: Bone................................... RarePHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Nunber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectB/07/23/0207/23 Progress of excavation B/07/28/0307/28 Progress of excavation B/07/31/0307/31 Progress of excavationB/07/24/0307/24 Progress of excavation B/07/29/0307/29 Progress of excavationB/07/27/0307/27 Progress of excavation B/07/30/0307/30 Progress of excavationLOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L09:2-3ARCHITECTURAL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 4 Supervisor: JRF Dates: 06/29 to 07/09Summary: Possible wall in NW balk.REASONSeparability: Top--Very Clear Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTION Material:Limestone.......................... 100%Masonry:Wall Stones: Chinkstones: Dressing:Mortar:Facing:Construction:Courses:Rous:Measurements:Small Boulder.................. 100%Cobble....... ............. : . . . . 100%Semi-hewn......................... 100%Dry-laid......................... . 100%UnfacedStyle................................. Boulder & Chink Support.................2 to 4 1Length............................... 2.300 m Width....................Height............................... 0.920 m Orientation......Dip.................................... 8 degPartial Superstructure: HalfRather well hewn stone, but incomplete state of preservation along determine original extent of the actual wall structure itself; i.e. top plan later shown to be tunble.Free-standing0.300 to 0.500 m 25 deglith associated tumble make it d ifficult to number of courses, etc. Stones # 1*4 ofSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transiit Loc Top Bottom7POTTERYPail907.78Date906.79 Count Bskts Loc Preservat13ion907.28 906.79 Comments19Reading907.91 906.7939 07/08 14/ 76 3 7/13 1 EPER, LI242 07/09 44/222 15 7/13 BYZ, 1 EPER bod. LI2, feu EI2PHOTOGRAPHSNunber Date Subject Number Oate Subject Number Date SubjectPubB/07/01/0207/01 8/07/02/0207/02 B/07/03/0207/03 BIODATA SAMPLESDRAWINGSBalks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Locus Date:Progress of excavation Progress of excavation Progress of excavationA/07/03/1507/038/07/06/0207/068/07/07/0207/07Documentation of surf #5 Progress of excavation Progress of excavation8/07/08/0207/088/07/08/1407/088/07/09/0307/09Progress of excavation West view of uall 4 Progress of excavationFlint SampleThe lack of a foundation and rather haphazard construction seem to indicate use as a terrace wall.Since wall 4 was found to be sitting on surface 8 which clearly runs beneath it , it is later than that surface (8) which seals against wall 3 (at its upper courses). Thus wall 4 is later than surface 8 which in turn is later than uall 3.BYZ?SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION ConpleteU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 5 Supervisor: JRF- Dates: 07/01 to 07/10Sumnary: Ephemeral surface at N end of wall 3 & S of uall 3.REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTIONColor:Texture: Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Stone:Artifact:Organic:Measurements:Surface Mat11: Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Increase in soil compactness and flat tying pottery. Top--Average Bottom--UnclearVery pale brownClay........... 25%Sub-angular 50%Hardness...............Wetness................10YR7/3S ilt........... 70%Sub-round.. 50% 3Moderately MoistSand....... 5%Compactness.........Structure.............Medium Sand 100%Moderately Friable RandomNari Pockets___.............. 1/m2, 2.0- 4.0 cm Distribution.................... RandomSmall Pebbles................. 80/m2 Medium Pebbles................ 25/m2Large Pebbles................. 10/m2 Small Cobbles.................. 2/m2Distribution___.............. RandomTabun Fragments. Distribution___.............. 1. ...........RandomFlint....... .•....................... 3Shells................ .............. 7 Distribution.................... RandomLength................ .............. 3.000 m Width................................. 1.200 mDepth.................. .............. 0 .1 6 0 to 0.250 m Direction of Slope......... 90 degDegree of Slope. Beaten Earth.............. 22 degSurface appears to seal against waill 3 but its E and S extremities are unclear. (Later is uas discovered thatuall 3 had tuo phases and the later phase was designated wall 12 with the result that surface 5. also sealedagainst uall 12.2LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit8 906.79 906.54 16 906.53 906.37 21 906.45 906.27POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading Pub30 07/03 2/ 2646 07/10 9/47 07/10 27/14848 07/10 21/231OBJECTSReg no.. Oescriptior3 Mend Surface, poss mend8 27-38ig pieces Poss mend18 Large pieces 26Field no.- Date Pail LocL12EPER, LI2 LI2, E12, 11, LB LI2, few E12Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingUpper grindstone (with #2) 1 07/10 47 33Lower grindstone (with #1) 2 07/10 47 33PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/03/0207/03 A/07/03/1507/03 B/07/06/0207/06 DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:Progress of excavation Documentation of surf #5 Progress of excavationLocus 8.N, S.B/07/07/0207/07 8/07/08/0207/08 B/07/08/1407/08Progress of excavaf Progress of excavate West view of wall 4B/07/09/0307/09 Progress.of excavation B/07/10/0207/10 Progress of excavationSOIL LOCUS SHEET• IDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Squa Summary:REASONRemarks:Separabili ty: DESCRIPTION Color: •Texture:Particle Shape: Consistence:re 7L09, Locus 6Soil beneath locus 2 W of wall 3.Change of soil color and consistence. Top--Clear Bottom--Very ClearVery pale brownClay.......... 15XSub-angular SOXHardness...............Wetness.................10YR7/3S ilt ........... 80XSub-round.. 50X 2Moderately MoistInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets..................... 1/m2, 4.0- 6.0Distribution...................... RandomStone: Small Pebbles............... 25/m2Small Cobbles................... 15/m2Artifact: Flint................................. 14Organic: Bone.................................... FrequentMeasurements: Length.'.................■........... 1.500 mDepth.................................. 0.050 to 0.280 mDegree of Slope.................. 20 degRemarks: Continuation of sub-topsoil with a decrease iiSTRATIGRAPHY .Under: 2Supervisor: JRF Dates: 07/03 to 07/06Sand........... 5X Medium Sand 100XCompactness.................... . Moderately LooseStructure........................ . RandomPlaster............................ . 3/m2, 6.0-10.0 cmMedium Pebbles............... . 20/m2Distribution.............. . RandomShells............................. . 22Width............................... . 1.000 mDirection of Slope....... . 90 degorganic matter and change in color compared to locus 2.Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom TransitReading78POTTERYPail907.97906.Date Count.79Bskts Loc Preservatioi14 907.04 906.99 31 907.00 906.72i Conments29 07/03 15/ 68 7 31 LI231 07/06 40/333 1 31 1 BYZ bod, LI2 dom, EI2, 1 11, 1 prob LB bod,32 07/06 32/201 13 31 LI2, few EI233 07/06 33/217 13 31 Few LR, LI2 dom, EI234 07/06 4/ 57 1 31 LI240 07/08 42/357 16 7/ 8 BYZ, ROM bods, LIZ, 1 11 bod, 1 UD41 07/08 27/209 7 7/ 8 Poss mend 1 BYZ bod, LI2, 2 UDOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingHalf of spiindie whorl ( i n s i ft) 1 07/06 32 25 1Upper millstone fragment 2 07/08 40 8 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectPub1 EB8/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavation A/07/03/1507/03- Documentation of surf #5 B/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavation DRAWINGSBalks: N, S, W.INTERPRETATIONFunction: Soil buildup between terrace wall 4 and wall 3 with plaster inclusions from some structure no longerdiscernable.This locus is buildup f i l l subsequent to surface 8 and thus later than both walls 3 and 4.Stratigraphy:LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L09:4-6SOU LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 7 Supervisor: JRF Dates: 07/03 to 07/13Summary: Large stones obliquely set in f i l l along E balk and f i l l .REASONSeparability: Top--Clear Bottom--ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR7/3Texture: Clay........... 15% S ilt ........... BOX Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness......................... .. 1. Compactness---- _____ ___ Moderately LooseWetness........................... . Moderately Moist Structure...................___ TalusInclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles................ 25/m2 Medium Pebbles........... 10/m2Large Pebbles........... ... 3/m2 Small Cobbles.............___ 8/m2Medium Boulders............. 1/m2 Distribution.............. . . . . RandomArtifact: Pottery........................... . Frequent Flint........................... . . . . 3 7Distribution.................. . RandomOrganic: Shells............................. . 55 Distribution.............. . . . . RandomMeasurements: Length............................ . 5.000 m Width........................... . . . . 2.200 mDirection of Slope....... . 90 deg Degree of Slope.........___ 22 degRemarks: Not a wall.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 2Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:Cut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom . Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit11 905.7017 906.1123 906.2228 906.3633 906.6735 905.74Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments Reading49 07/10 65/301 30 23/29 Few BYZ, ROM bod, EPER, LI2,50. 07/13 24/264 30 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 LB51 07/13 21/169 26 LI2, 1152 07/13 11/191 14 EPER, LI2, 11 bod, 1 LB bodEI2, 11 1 LB bodReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingUpper grindstone 1 07/10 49 29 1Sling stone 2 07/10 49 22 1PHOTOGRAPHSSpindle whorl fragment. 3 07/13 51 33 1Number Date Subject Nimber Date Subject Number Date SubjectPubB/07/03/0207/03 Progress of excavation B/07/07/0207/07 Progress of excavation 8/07/10/0207/10 Progress of excavationA/07/03/1507/03 Documentation of surf #5 B/07/08/0207/08 Progress of excavation B/07/13/0207/13 Progress of excavationB/07/06/0207/06 Progress of excavation B/07/09/0307/09 Progress of excavation0RAWINGSTop Plans: Locus 6.Balks: N, S, E.VOLOsoil LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 8ity:S urinary:REASONRemarks: Separabi i DESCRIPTION Color:Texture: Particle Shape: Consistence:Inclusions:Soil:Measurements:STRATIGRAPHY . Under:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSSurface U of wall 3.Supervisor: JRFComplete Dates: 07/07 to 07/16Compactness of soil Top--Clearlayer, plaster inclusions.10YR7/3Medium Sand 100%Very pale brownClay........... 20% S ilt........... 75%Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Hardness...................... . . . 3Wetness............................. Moderately MoistNari Pockets.................. 1/m2, 3.0- 6.0 cm Ash Pockets...................... 1/m2, 4.0- 6.0 cmPlaster............................. 5/m2, 6.0-10.0 cm Distribution.................... RandomSmall Pebbles.................. 75/m2 Medium Pebbles................. 30/m2Large Pebbles.................. 15/m2 Small Cobbles................... 3/m2Distribution.................... RandomPottery..............., ............ FrequentFlint................................. 32Bone................................... FrequentCharcoal........................... 28/m2, avg. 0.2 cmLength............................... 4.000 mDepth...'...........................' 0.250 to 0.580 mDegree of Slope.............. 10 degBeaten EarthThis locus was noticeable because of its clumps of plaster inclusions and a portion of surface in location 8 which has a plaster consistence and which sealed over the W edge of the northwesternmost stone of wall 3 for a distance of approximately 25 cm (later found to be a later phase designated wall 12). A zoomorphic figurine head was found in locus 8 beneath wall 4 (after its removal) in location 7. Large cooking pot body sherd in pa il 60.4, 6. RandomTabun Fragments..Distribution.......Shells............................... 14Distribution......... . RandomWidth. ............................. 1 .400 mDirection of Slope......... 90 degLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom14 906.99 906.41 26 906.91 906.58 8 906.79 906.54POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation35 07/07 47/324 16 BYZ, LI2, 1136 07/07 13 Majority of pail lost Pre-ROM bods43 07/09 40/286 19 1 BYZ, 1 ER, L1244 07/09 35/287 16 1 EPER bod, LI2, EI2, 1 1145 07/09 18/132 5 LI2, EI2, 1 EB58 07/15 50/377 19 7/ 8 2 ROM bods, LI2, 1 EB59 07/15 34/164 17 8/ 9 LI260 07/15 51/272 21 Probe around hump LI2, EI2, 1 11, 1 MB61. 07/15 17/179 19 13 LI2, few EI262 07/16 50/253 23 13 Quite a few 11 LI2, EI2, 11, 1 KB, EBOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingMetal weight or pendant ! 07/07 36 20 1Spindle whorl 2 07/07 35 SI 1Zoomorphic. figurine head 3 07/09 43 7 1Upper millstone fragment 4 07/09 43 7 1Stone weight? 5 07/09 44 31 1Basalt hand grinder fragment 6 07/15 59 9Basalt bowl fragment 7 07/15 61 13 . 1Ballistic missile 8 07/16 62 19 1PHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date Subject Number Date Subject Number Date SubjectB/07/07/0207/07 B/07/08/0207/08 B/07/09/0307/09 BIODATA SAMPLESRemarks:DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation B/07/10/0207/10 Progress of excavation B/07/15/0207/15 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation 8/07/13/0207/13 Progress of excavationProgress of excavation B/07/14/0207/14 Progress of excavationFlotation Sample............. PlasterPlater sample--two layers, decorative architectural function.Locus 16.N, S, W.This surface was likely contiguous to locus 9, a possible hearth area, and because of its narrow width (approx. 1.5 m) between walls 3 and 4 may have been a protected area from wind. Possibly roofed over as evidenced by many plaster inclusions (although none showed evidence of reed impressions, e tc .). Some pieces (about 15 cm square and oriented at 195 deg and slanted at an angle of 22 deg) were, however, from location 13 and showed two layers laminated together, the finer about 1.5 cm thick and the courser about 3 cm thick.Seals against top existing course of wall 3 and clearly runs beneath wall 4 which, upon its removal, was shown to be built upon it without any foundation. Likely contemporary with locus 10.LOCUS SHEETS: FIELD F 7L09:7-8L /lVOSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATION CompleteU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 9 Supervisor: JRF Oates: 07/07 to 07/08Surma ry: Hump of marbeted soi 1.REASONRemarks: Increase in hardness and charcoal, soil color change.Separability: Top--Average Bottom--AverageDESCRIPTIONColor: Very pale brown 10YR7/3Texture: Clay........... 20% Silt........... 75% Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness.................... . . . . 3 Compactness......... ........... Moderately FirmWetness...................... ___ Moderately Moist Structure............. ___•__ TalusInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets............. ___ 2/m2, 2.0- 5.0 cm Ash Pockets......... ........... 1/m2, 8.0-10.0 cmPlaster...................... . . . . 4/m2, 6.0-10.0 cm Distribution....... ........... RandomStone: Small Pebbles........... . . . . 25/m2 Medium Pebbles... ........... 20/m2Large Pebbles........... ___ 6/m2 Small Cobbles---- ........... 5/m2Distribution............. ___ RandomArtifact: Flint................. ...... 9 Distribution....... ........... RandomOrganic: Bone........................... .'... Frequent Shells.................. ........... 5Charcoal.................... ___ 12/m2, avg. 0.2 cm Reddish so il....... ........... 2/m2, avg. 8.0 cmDistribution............. ___ RandanMeasurements: Length........................ ___ 0.800 m Width.................... ........... 0.600 mDepth.......................... . . . . 0.630 mSurface Mat' l : Hearth?Remarks: . Top level was taken from.the W balk after the "hump" was noticed. More friable soil surrounding locus 9 andintervening between it and locus 8 may be due to cobbles which were randomly surrounding the parameters oflocus 9. Two clumps of reddish soil (5YR5/4 reddiish brown) were not iced each about 8 cm in diameter.STRATIGRAPHYUnder: 6Over:Equals:Cont iguous to:Seals againstCut by:LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit25 907.23 906.60POTTERYPai l Date Count Bskts Loc Preservati37 07/07 24/152 1238 07/08 9/ 91 15OBJECTSReg no. Description FieldComments Reading .1 poss ROM bod, L12, few EI2 LI2, EI2Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPubSpindle whorl fragmentPHOTOGRAPHSHumber Oate Subject07/08 38 25 1B/07/08/0207/08 BIODATA SAMPLESTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATION \ Function:Stratigraphy:Progress of excavationSoil Sample...................... Organic inclusions and color change.Flotation Sample.............Locus 8.W.Ashy material, charcoal inclusions, bones, and reddish soil inclusions (two above 8 cm in diameter) are possible indications of its use as a hearth or at least a surface upon which considerable burning took place. Appears to be contiguous to surface 8.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 9 (Supplement) • Inclusion--Reddish soilREASONSeparability: DESCRIPTION Color:Texture: Particle Shape: Consistence:Top--AverageReddish brownClay........... 15%Sub-angular 50%Hardness...............Wetness................Bottom--Average5YR5/4Silt........... 80%Sub-round.. 50% 1Moderately MoistCompleteSupervisor: JRF Dates: 07/08 toSand......... . 5% Medium Sand 100%Compactness...;............... Moderately Crumbly.Structure......................... RandomSOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 10 Supervisor: JRFSurmary: Surface E of wall 3.REASONRemarks: To separate from locus 5 which was possibly contaminated from upper locus 2.Separability: Top--AverageComplete Dates: 07/13 to 07/17DESCRIPTIONColor:• Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 20% S ilt ........... 75% Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% . Sub-round.. 50%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 3 Compactness............... ___ Moderately FriableWetness....................... . . . Moderately Moist Structure................... . . . . Talusinclusions:Stone: Small Pebbles............. . . . 20/m2 Medium Pebbles......... . 15/m2Large Pebbles............. . . . 8/m2 Small Cobbles........... 3/m2 •Medium Cobbles........... . 2/m2 Large Cobbles........... 1/m2Distribution................. . . RandomArtifact: Flint............................ . . . 51 Distribution............. . . . . RandomOrganic: Bone.............................. . . . Frequent Shells...'................... ___ 14Charcoal. 1................... . . . 26/m2, avg. 0.2 cm Distribution............. . . . . RandomMeasurements: Length.......................... . . . 5.000 m Width.......................... ___ 2.750 mDirection of Slope... . . . 90 deg Degree of Slope........ . . . . 26 degSurface Mat' l : Beaten EarthSTRATIGRAPHYUnder: 5, 7Over:Equals:Contiguous to:Seals against:• Cut by:LEVELS-Loc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit16 906.37 21 906.27POTTERYPail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation Comments ' Reading53 07/13 26/286 22 27/33 Few EPER, LI2, 2 MB54 07/14 24/175 14 Few EPER, LI255 07/14 25/182 28 2 LR, 1 ER, LI2, EI2, 1156 07/14 12/165 20 1 LR bod, L12, 11, prob LB bodOBJECTSReg no. Description Field no. Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo DrawingPHOTOGRAPHSStone mortar frag left in 1:ield 1 07/13 53 33 • 1Number Date Subject .Nunber Date Subject Nunber Date SubjectPub8/07/14/0207/14B/07/15/0207/15DRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATIONFunction:' Stratigraphy:Progress of excavation B/07/16/02Q7/16 Progress of excavation B/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation Progress of excavation B/07/16/1007/16 Documentation of wall 12Locus 16.N, S, E.Occupational surface.Likely contemporary with locus 8 and thus (since both seal against wall 3 and its later extension wall 12) is later than both walls.INSTALLATION LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 11Surmary: Small plaster surface.Sealing over NW corner of wall 12.REASONRemarks:TYPEDESCRIPTION Material: Plan:Measurements:Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYSharp incears in hardness. Possible Plaster surfacePlaster............................. 100%Length............................... 0.900 mNature of this plaster unclear. At times diffi Pub63 07/16 PHOTOGRAPHS Number11/ 62 3Date Subject13B/07/16/1007/16 BIODATA SAMPLESDRAWINGSTop Plans: Balks:INTERPRETATION Function: Stratigraphy: Locus Date:Documentation of wall 12Flotation Sample.............Locus 12.Possible hearth (c f. numerous olive pits nearby in locus 17).If truly a pit then later than locus 17, but perhaps this is onty-an unusual LI2fusion within locus 17.SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 16 Supervisor: JRF Date: 07/17Summary: Soil directly beneath wall 12.REASONSeparabili ty: Top--Very Clear Bottom-Very ClearDESCRIPTIONColor: Pale brown 10YR6/3Texture: Clay........... 20% Silt........... 75% Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%Particle Shape: Sub-angular 50% Sub-round..' 50%Consistence: Hardness...................... . . . 3 Compactness................ . . . Moderately FriableWetness........................ . . . Moderately Moist Structure.................... ...T a lusInclusions:Soil: Nari Pockets............... . . . 1/m2, 3.0 cm Distribution................. . . RandomStone: Large Pebbles............. 3/m2 Small Cobbles.............. 1/m2Distribution............... . . . RandomArtifact: Pottery........................ . . . Rare Distribution................. . . RandomOrganic: Bone............................. . . . Frequent Charcoal........................ . . 26/m2, avg. 0.3 cmDistribution............... . . . RandomMeasurements: Length.......................... . . . 1.750 m Width........................... .. . . 1.200 mDepth............................ . . . 0.220 to 0.280 m Direction of Slope___. . . 12 degDegree of Slope......... . . . • 10 degSurface Mat1l : Beaten EarthRemarks: Virtually no plaster ■chunks as in locus 8. Very few rocks.STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:12LEVELSLoc Top Bottom Transit Loc Top Bottom Transit15 906.53 906.31 20 906.73 906.4566 07/17 9/162 25OBJECTSReg.no. Description FiSpindle whorl fragmentPHOTOGRAPHSNumber Date SubjectB/07/17/0307/17 Progress of excavation INTERPRETATION Function:Stratigraphy:Pail Date Count Bskts Loc Preservation1 LI2, 11, 1 UD). Date Pail Loc Level Total Period Material Photo Dr. 07/17 66 1Comments ReadingFoundation buildup of soil for support of later phase (wall 12} added to wall 3.Although locus 16 contains no plaster chunks as loci 8 and 17 (which might be explained due to the fact that it was-located beneath wall 12) and since the plaster fragments appear to be tui±>le and/or destruction material, locus 16 could s t ill possibly be contemporary with loci 8 and 17.12SOIL LOCUS SHEETIDENTIFICATIONU87 Field F, Square 7L09, Locus 17 Summary:REASONRemarks:Separability:DESCRIPTION Color:Texture:Particle Shape:Consistence:Occup.surface below locus 8 cont.ash,charcoal and olive pitsArbitrary at first but later confirmed by increase in oc- cupati' Top--Arbitrary Bottom--AverageSupervis ial debris.Dates: 07/20 to 07/22Very pale brown 10YR7/3Clay........... 20% S ilt............ 71Sub-angular 50% Sub-round.. 5(Hardness............................ 3Wetness.............................. Moderately HoisArtifact:Organic:Measurements:Surface Mat' l : Remarks:STRATIGRAPHYUnder:Over:Equals:Contiguous to: Seals against: Cut by:LEVELSBrick MateritPlaster.........Flint.............1/m2, 8.0 cm 10/m2, 8.0 cm 81Sand........... 5% Medium Sand 100%.Compactness......................Moderately FriableStructure.......................... RandomAsh Pockets...................... 1/m2, 12.0 cmDistribution.................... PatternedDistribution.................... RandomOlive Pits........... '........... 30/m2Distribution.................... PatternedWidth................................. 3.000 mBone................................... FrequentCharcoal............................ 10/m2, avg. 0.5

Monte Palazzi Excavation:

Abstract

Extracted data

Related items

Related items