The Pottery of Tyre

THE POTTERY OF TYRE

Patricia Maynor Bikai

ARIS & PHILLIPS Ltd. WARMINSTER, WILTS, ENGLAND.

Patricia Maynor Bikai 1978. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the publishers. ©

ISBN 0 85668 108 3

Published by ARIS & PHILLIPS LTD, Warminster, Wilts, England.

Printed in England by BIDDLES LTD, Guildford, Surrey.

CONTENTS

List of Plates . . . . . . . . . List of Tables ... ... Bibliographic Abbreviations INTRODUCTION . . . . . . I. ARCHITECTURE AND STRATIGRAPHY II. THE LATE BRONZE AND IRON AGES: POTTERY TYPE SERIES Lamps and Other Non-Diagnostics Plates Fine Ware Plates Deep Bowls Jugs . . . . . . Juglets Storage Jars Cooking Wares Imports Miscellany . . . Conclusions III. CHRONOLOGY: STRATA XVIII TO I IV. THE POTTERY OF STRATA XXVII TO XIX V. THE EXCAVATION AND THE HISTORY OF TYRE

iv v vi 1

5 17 18

20 26 30 33 41 43 50 53 56 56 64 69 72

Appendix THE CYLINDER SEAL by Edith Porada A B THE EGYPTIAN OBJECTS by William A. Ward C NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS by Alan Bieber, Jr. D EXAMINATION REPORT ON SAMPLES FROM A FAIENCE-BEAD FACTORY AT TYRE by Robert H. Brill

91

Plates

95

77 83 88

LIST OF PLATES

Drawings of Pottery and Objects Plate

I Stratum I II Stratum II III Stratum II IV Stratum II V Stratum III VI Strata II-III VII Strata II-III VIII Stratum III IX Strata II-III X Strata II-III XI Strata II-III XII Strata II-III XIII Stratum III XIV Stratum IV XV Stratum lV XVI Stratum IV XVII Stratum IV XVIII Strata V, VI, VII XIX Strata VIII-IX XX Strata VIII-IX XXI Strata VIII-IX XXII Strata VIII-IX XXIII Stratum X-1 XXIV Stratum X-1 XXV Stratum X-2 XXVI Stratum X-2 XXVII Stratum X-2 XXVIII Stratum X-2 XXIX Stratum XI XXX Strata XI-XII XXXI Stratum XII XXXII Stratum XII XXXIII Stratum XIII-1 XXXIV Stratum XIII-1 XXXV Stratum XIII-1 XXXVI Stratum XIII-1 XXXVII Stratum XIII-2 XXXVIII Strata XIII-2, XIV XXXIX Stratum XIV XL Stratum XIV XLI Stratum XIV XLII Stratum XV XLIII Stratum XV XLIV Stratum XV XLV Strata XIV-XVI Beads XLVI Stratum XV XLVII Stratum XVI XLVIII Stratum XVI XLIX Stratum XVII L Stratum XVII Ll Stratum XVII LII Stratum XVIII

Site Photographs Stratum XVIII Stratum XIX Plate LXXXIX 1. General view Stratum XIX of the excavation Stratum XX area at the start of Strata XXI-XXV the work. Strata XXVI-XXVII 2. IC-6 A, facing west, walls 2 and Plans 28. 3. IC-6 D, facing Plate LIX Plan of Tyre with northwest, area 1, location of the floor of Stratum excavation VII, walls 6, 7 and LX Roman Strata 8. LXI Strata V-1 4. IC-6 D, Stratum LXII Strata VII-VI V pavement, showLXIII Strata X, IX, VIII ing edge left when LXIV Strata XII-XI wall 1 was robbed. LXV Stratum XIII 5. Wall 3, west LXVI Strata XV-XIV face. LXVII Strata XVII-XVI 6. Wall3, east face. LXVIII Stratum XVIII XC 1. IC-6 D, detail LXIX Strata XXII-XXI view of the Stratum XV pithos kiln, Sections facing south. 2. IC-6 D, facing Plate LXX Location of sections north, walls 26 and key to section and 39 to the left, drawings Stratum XVI workLXXI Section A-A' table to the right. LXXII Section B-B' 3. IC-6 A, Stratum LXXIII Section C-C' XVIII, Grave 2. LXXIV Section D-D' 4. IC-11 A, facing LXXV Sections E-E' and west, Stratum F-F' XVIII, Grave 3; LXXVI Section G-G' 5. IC-11 A, facing LXXVII Section H-H' south, section F-F: LXXVIII Section 1-1' White area is LXXIX Section J-J' Stratum XVIII sand. 6. IC-11 A, facing Photographs west, walls 44 and 45 and bedrock. Plate LXXX Stratum III LXXXI Figurines Type Series Examples LXXXII Figurines LXXXIII Pottery, Strata IIPlate XCI Plates and Fine III Ware Plates LXXXIV Pottery XCII Jugs and Deep LXXXV Scarabs, ivory, Bowls beads XCIII Krater, Pithos, LXXXVI Cypriote sherds Juglets, Cooking LXXXVII Stratum XVIII Wares pottery XCIV StorageJars LXXXVIII Pottery XCV Bases LIII LIV LV LVI LVII LVIII

iv

LIST OF TABLES

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Analysis of Total Sherds Excavated Lamp Types: Strata I to V Plates Fine Ware Plates and Miscellaneous Plates Deep Bowls, Krater and Pithos ... Jugs Red-Slipped Handles: Strata IX to II Jugs 8, 9, 10 and Base 14 Juglets ... Storage Jars Bases Cooking Pots Imports ... Comparative Frequency of Selected Types Relative Pottery Chronology

19

20 21 27 31

34 37

38-9 42 44

48-9 51 54 58 59

v

ABBREVIATIONS

Cypro-Geometric Pottery: Refinements in Classification. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 47. Goteborg. A New Scheme for the Sub-Division of the Iron Age in Palestine. Israel ExploraAharoni, Y. - Amiran, R. 1958 tion JournalS, 171-184. 1933 The Excavation of Tell Beit Mirsim IA: The Pottery of the Fourth Campaign. Albright, W. F. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 13. 1937 The Egyptian Correspondence of Abi-Milki, Prince of Tyre. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 23, 190-203. 1941 The Land of Damascus between 1850 and 17 50 B.C. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 83, 30-36. 1942 A Third Revision of the Early Chronology of Western Asia. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 88, 26-36. 1961 The Role of the Canaanites in the History of Civilization. Wright, 328-362. 1965 Some Remarks on the Archaeological Chronology of Palestine before about 1500 B.C. Pp. 47-57 of Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (R. W. Ehrich, ed.). Chicago. 3 1966 The Amarna Letters from Palestine; Syria, the Philistines and Phoenicia. CAH , fasc. 51. Amiran, R. 1960 The Pottery of the Middle Bronze Age I in Palestine. Israel Exploration Journal 10, 204-225. Tombs of the Middle Bronze Age at Ma'ayan Barukh. Atiqot 3, 84-92. 1961 The Pottery of the Middle Bronze Age I [Hebrew]. Qadmoniot II.2 (6), 45-49. 1969 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. New Brunswick, N.J. 1970 James B. Pritchard (ed.) Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old TestaANET3 ment. Princeton, 1969. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition IV: ID: The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Lund. Astrom, L. - Astrom, P. 1972 Red on Black Ware. Opuscula Atheniensia 5, 59-88. Astrom, P. 1965 1972a The Swedish Cyprus Expedition IV: 1B: The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age. Lund. 1972b The Swedish Cyprus Expedition IV: IC: The Late Cypriote Bronze Age, Architecture and Pottery. Lund. 1967 Bass, G. F. Cape Gelidonya: A Bronze Age Shipwreck. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, n.s. 57:8. Philadelphia. van Beek, G. W. 19 55 The Date of Tell Abu Huwam, Stratum III. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 138, 34-38. 1971 A New Crusader Church in Tyre. Bulletin du Musee de Beyrouth 24, 83-90. Bikai, P. 1963 The Chronology of Some Early and Middle Iron Age Cypriot Sites. American Birmingham, J. Journal of Archaeology 67, 15-42. Brown, J.P. 1969 The Lebanon and Phoenicia I: The Physical Setting and the Forest. Beirut. CAfi3 Cambridge Ancient History. Campbell, E. F. 1964 The Chronology of the Amarna Letters. Baltimore. Campbell, E. F.- Freedman, D. N. (eds.) 1970 The Biblical Archaeologist Reader III. Garden City. Carpenter, R. 1958 Phoenicians in the West. American Journal of Archaeology 62, 35-53. Catling, H. W. 1973 A Pendent Semicircle Skyphos from Cyprus and a Cypriot Imitation. Report of the Department of Antiquities Cyprus. Challot, M. 1973 Perspectives d'archeologie sous-marine au Liban. Cahiers d'archeologie subaquatique 2, 147-153. 1972 A Catalogue of the Iron Age Pottery from the Cemeteries of Khirbet Silm, J oya, Chapman, S. V. Qraye and Qasmieh of South Lebanon. Berytus 21,55-194. CMhab, M. Chronique. Bulletin du Musee de Beyrouth 18, 111-125. 1965 Ceramique Punique. Paris. Cintas, P. 1950 Coldstream, J. N. Greek Geometric Pottery: A Survey of Ten Local Styles and their Chronology. 1968 London. Contenau, G. 1920 Mission arcMologique Sidon (1914). Syria 1, 108-154. Courtois, J. - C. Le sanctuaire du dieu au lingot d'Enkomi-Alasia. Pp. 151-362 of C. F.- A. Schaeffer, 1971 Alasia I. Mission arcMologique d' Alasia IV. Paris. Crowfoot, J. W.- Crowfoot, G. M. 1938 Early Ivories from Samaria. Samaria-Sebaste II. London. Crowfoot, J. W.- Crowfoot, G. M.- Kenyon, K. M. 1957 The Objects from Samaria. Samaria-Sebaste III. London. Adelman, C. M.

197 6

a

vi

1959-60 Aspects of Phoenician Settlement in the West Mediterranean. Abr.Nahrain 1, 36-55. The First Merchant Venturers: The Ancient Levant in History and Commerce. 1966 London. Quelques apen~us sur les ateliers phenicians. Syria 45, 275-293. 1968 1970a Phoenician Oil Bottles and Tripod Bowls. Berytus 19, 5-18. 1970b Almuiiecar, Assur and Phoenician Penetration of the Western Mediterranean. Levant 2, 28-36. The Graves at Tell Er-Reqeish. Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology 11.2, 1973 66-105. Protogeometric Pottery. Oxford. Desborough, V. 1952 A Group of Vases from Amathus. Journal of Hellenic Studies 77, 212-219. 1957 The Last Mycenaeans and their Successors. Oxford. 1964 The 'Middle Bronze I' Period in Syria and Palestine. Pp. 132-163 of Near Eastern Dever, W. G. 1970 Archaeology in the Twentieth Century (J. A. Sanders, ed.). Garden City, N.Y. 1971 The Peoples of Palestine in the Middle Bronze I Period. Harvard Theological Review 64,210-226. 1973 The EB IV- MB I Horizon in the Transjordan and Southern Palestine. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 210, 37-63. Dikaios, P. 1969-71 Enkomi: Excavations 1948-1958. Mainz. Dothan, M. 1976 Akko: Interim Excavation Report, First Season, 1973/4. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 224, 1-48. Dothan, M. et al. 1971 Ashdod II-III: The Second and Third Seasons of Excavations, 1963, 1965. Atiqot 9-10. Dothan, M. ·Freedman, D. N. 1967 Ashdod 1: The Season of Excavations, 1962. Atiqot 7. 1967 The Philistines and their Material Culture. Jerusalem. Dothan, T. Dunand, M. 1954 Fouilles de Byblos II. Paris. EFM L'espansione fenicia nel Mediterraneo. Relazioni del colloquio in Roma, 4-5 Maggio 1970. Consiglio nazionale delle Ricerche, 1971. Eissfeldt, 0. 1948 2 Tyros. Pauly-Wissowa, Realenzyklopaedie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft Fisher, W. B. 1971 6 The Middle East: A Physical, Social and Regional Geography. London. Fleming, W. B. 1915 The History of Tyre. Columbia University Oriental Studies 10. New York. Franken, H. J. Excavations at Tell Deir 'Alia 1: A Stratigraphical and Analytical Study of Early 1969 Iron Age Pottery. Lei den. 1971 The Development of Mycenaean Terracotta Figurines. Annual of the British School French, E. at Athens 66, 101-187. Hama: L' Architecture des periods pre-hellenistiques. Copenhagen. Fugman, E. 1958 1972 Mycenaean Pottery. Stockholm. Furumark, A. Gars tang, J. 1933 Jericho: City and Necropolis. Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology 20, 3-42. 1948 The Swedish Cyprus Expedition IV:2: The Cypro-Geometric, Cypro-Archaic and Gjerstad, E. Cypro-Classical Periods. Stockholm. Goldman, H. (ed.) 1963 Excavations at Gozlti Kule, Tarsus III: The Iron Age. Princeton. Guy, P. L. 0. ·Engberg, R. M. 1938 Megiddo Tombs. Oriental Institute Publications 33. Chicago. 1933 Tall Abii Hawam. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 3, Hamilton, R. W. 74-80. 193 5 Excavations at Tell Abu Hawam. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 4, 1-69. Four Tomb Groups from Jordan. Palestine Exploration Fund Annual6. 1953 Harding, G. L. 1970-1971 Chronology: I. Egypt - to the End of the Twentieth Dynasty. CAH3 , 1.1. Hayes, W. C. Chronological Tables. CAH3 , 1.2. 1967 The Foreign Relations of Palestine during the Early Bronze Age. London. Hennessy, J. B. 1935 Note on Fragments of Two Thessalian Proto-Geometric Vases Found at Tell Abu Huertley, W. A. Hawam. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 4, 181. 1975 A Contribution to the Comparative Study of Hama J Pottery. Unpublished M.A. Hopper, A. thesis, American University of Beirut. 1975 Archaeology and Early Israel: The Ecene Today. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Huesman, J. E. 37, 1-16. The Iron Age in Beth Shan. Philadelphia. 1966 James, F. W. Tyre through the Ages. Beirut. Jidejian, N. 1969 Excavations at Pilgrims' Castle, 'AtHt (1933): Cremated Burials of Phoenician Johns, C. N. 1938 Origin. Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 6, 121-152. Culican, W.

vii

1973 Excavations in the Necropolis of Salamis III. Salamis 5. Nicosia. 197 6 Kition: Mycenaean and Phoenician Discoveries in Cyprus. London. 1973 The History of Tyre. Jerusalem. Katzenstein, H. J. 1960 Excavations at Jericho I: The Tombs Excavated in 1952-4. London Kenyon, K. M. 1964 Excavations at Jericho II: The Tombs Excavated in 1955-8. London. Kitchen, K. A. 1973 The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt. Warminster. Kraiker, W.- KUbler, K. 1939 Kerameikos 1: Die Nekropolen des 12. bis 10. Jahrhunderts. Berlin. Lamon, R. S.- Shipton, G. M. 1939 Megiddo I. Oriental Institute Publications 42. Chicago. 1966 The Dhahr Mirzbaneh Tombs. New Haven. Lapp, P. W. liver, J. 1953 The Chronology ofTyre at the Beginning of the First Millenium B.C. Israel Exploration Journal 3, 113-120. The Megiddo Ivories. Oriental Institute Publications 52. Chicago. Loud, G. 1939 Megiddo II. Oriental Institute Publications 62. Chicago. 1948 A travers les necropoles sidoniennes. Revue biblique 13, 547-572. Macridy, T. 1904 Evidence for Mycenaean Settlement at Old Paphos. Acts of the International Maier, F. G. 1973 Symposium: The Mycenaeans in the Eastern Mediterranean. Nicosia. 1951 The Stratifications of Tell Abu Hawam on the Bay of Acre. Bulletin of the Maisler, B. American Schools of Oriental Research 124, 21-25. A propos de la decouverte d'une inscription Chypriote syllabique aKition en Masson, 0. 1971 1970. Report of the Department of Antiquities Cyprus, 49-52. 1967 The Philistines and the Rise of Israel and Tyre. Proceedings of the Israel Academy Mazar, B. of Sciences and Humanities 1.7, 1-22. 1965a Review of Stephania: A Middle and Late Bronze Age Cemetery in Cyprus by Merrillees, R. S. J. B. Hennessy. Palestine Exploration Quarterly, 94-96. 1965b Reflections on the Late Bronze Age in Cyprus. Opuscula Atheniensia 5, 139-148. 1968 The Cypriote Bronze Age Pottery Found in Egypt. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 18. Lund. 1974a The Cypriote Bronze Age Pottery Found in Egypt: A Reply. Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Cyprus Studies (15-21 Sept., 1974). Nicosia. 1974b Fine and Imported Wares. Appendix III of Tell el 'Ajjill by J. R. Stewart. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 38. Goteborg. Homer and the Phoenicians. Berytus 19, 19-64. Muhly, J.D. 1970 Munsell Color Company. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Baltimore. Munsell 1954 Myres, J. L. Excavations in Cyprus in 1894. Journal of Hellenic Studies 17, 134-1 73. 1897 1976 The Historical Topography of Kition. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 43. Nicolaou, K. Goteborg. 1974 The Phoenician Cities and the Assyrian Empire in the Time of Tiglath-Pileser III. Oded, B. Zeitschrift des deutschen PaHistina-Vereins 90, 38-49. Oppenheim, A. L. et al. 1970 Glass and Glassmaking in Ancient Mesopotamia. Corning Museum of Glass Monographs 3. Corning, New York. 1969 Cypriote Imports in the Palestinian Late Bronze I. Opuscula Atheniensia 9, 127Oren, E. D. 150. Oren, E. D. 1973 The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shan. Leiden. Petrie, W. M. F. 1914 Amulets. London. Pieridou, A. 1973 0 Protogeometrikos Rythmos en Kypro (Greek]. Athens. Posener, G. 1940 Princes et pays d' Asie et de Nubie. Brussells. Posener, G.- Bottero, J.- Kenyon, K. M. 1971 Syria and Palestine c. 2160-1780 B.C. CAH3 , 1.2, 532-594. Prag, K. 1974 The Intermediate Early Bronze-Middle Bronze Age: An Interpretation of the Evidence from Transjordan, Syria and Lebanon. Levant 6, 69-116. Notes and News. Israel Exploration Journal12, 143. Prausnitz, M. 1962 The Phoenicians in their Homeland. Expedition, Fall, 1970, 14-23. Pritchard, J. B. 1970 The Phoenician City of Sarepta. Archaeology 24, 61-63. 1971 Sarepta: A Preliminary Report on the Iron Age. Philadelphia. 1975 Riis, P. J. Hama: Fouilles et Recherches 1931-1938: Les Cimetieres a Cremation. 1948 Copenhagen. Fouilles de Khalde. Bulletin du Musee de Beyrouth 19, 51-90. Saidah, R. 1966 Schaeffer, C. F.-A. Ugaritica II. Mission de Ras Shamra V. Paris. 1949 1971 Shepard, A. 0. Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication 609. Washington, D. C. Karageorghis, V.

viii

Sjoqvist, E. Taylor J. du P. Thompson, W. M. Tufnell, 0. et al du Vaux, R

1940 1959 1882 1953 1958 1952

1971 du Vaux, R.- Steve, A.M. 1948 Ward, W. A. ( ed:)

1968

Wilson, V.

1975

Wright, G. E.

1937

Wright, G. E. (ed.) Yadin, Y.

1961 1972

Yadin, Y. et al.

1958 1960 1961

Problems of the Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Stockholm. The Cypriot and Syrian Pottery from al Mina, Syria. Iraq 21, 62-92. The Land and the Book. New York. Lachish III: The Iron Age. London. Lachish IV: The Bronze Age. London. La quatrieme campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far'ah, pres Naplouse. Revue biblique 59, 551-583. Palestine in the Early Bronze Age. CAH3 , I. 2, 208-23 7. La seconde campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far'ah, pres Naplouse. Revue biblique 55, 544-580. The Role of the Phoenicians in the Interaction of Mediterranean Civilization. Beirut. The Iconography of Bes with Particular Reference to the Cypriote Evidence Levant 7, 77-103. The Pottery of Palestine from the Earliest Times to the End of the Early Bronze Age. New Haven. The Bible and the Ancient Near East. Garden City. Razor: The Head of all those Kingdoms. The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy (1970). London. Razor 1: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955. Jerusalem. Razor II: An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956. Razor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Seasons of Excavations, 1957-8. Jerusalem.

ix

INTRODUCTION

The Phoenicians are among the least known of the ancient peoples, and yet it is at least partly due to them that the culture of the Mediterranean basin came to be unified. The trading web spun by the Phoenicians has long been known and many of the Phoenician colonies and trading posts of the Western Mediterranean have been under excavation for years, but it is only relatively recently that a serious attempt has been made to learn something of the Phoenicians in their homeland. Excavations begun inTyre in 1947 by the Department of Antiquities of Lebanon uncovered extensive and relatively well preserved Crusader, Byzantine and Roman cities lying over the older levels, and the necessity to excavate these more recent levels put off any attempt to reach the Phoenician city. Meanwhile interest in the Phoenicians was rising. The excavation at Sarafand (ancient Sarepta), begun in 1969 and directed by James B. Pritchard of the University of Pennsylvania, uncovered a pottery manufacturing area and 1 made clear the central role of pottery studies in any attempt to deal with the Phoenician question. The pottery is central because the lack of written records makes it the only viable chronological index for the earlier periods. The Phoenician pottery uncovered showed that the Phoenician repertoire was quite distinct from but related to the relatively well known Cypriote and Palestinian groups. In Tyre, quantities of Phoenician pottery from very disturbed levels were recovered after 1970, and on the basis of that pottery I developed a basic type series for Tyre. The pottery from disturbed levels would not, however, produce a chronological sequence and in 1973, under permit from the Emir Maurice Chehab, Director General of Antiquities of Lebanon and director of the Tyre excavation, I undertook to do a small controlled excavation to establish that sequence. The area chosen for this excavation was IC-6/ 11, 2 which lies just north of the road separating the "Crusader Church" excavation area 3 from the modern cemetery. The level of the modern road is ca. twelve meters above sea level, just about the highest point in the city. This meant that the excavation area probably lay within the perimeter of the original island of Tyre. 4 Square IC-6 had already been excavated to a level of nine meters above sea level; at this level there was a large late Roman marble pavement (see pl. LXXXIX.1). This pavement was relatively 5 intact which meant that it was likely that the earlier levels were undisturbed. The adjoining square to the east, IC-11, had already been excavated to six meters above sea level and Phoenician material had already been uncovered there. The total area excavated was about 150 meters square, less than one percent of the whole island area. While the original excavation plan called for the whole area to be cleared to bedrock, the necessity to preserve some of the walls uncovered prevented this. In addition, a second, and greater obstacle to complete excavation appeared during the course of the work. It was discovered that there was a stratum of sterile sand about one meter thick lying approximately two meters above bedrock and eight meters below the modern level. Two attempts to excavate below the level of this sand ended in failure, for as soon as the sand dried it began to sift down, endangering the earth balks above it and the workmen below it. As it was, one five-meter by five-meter square was cleared to bedrock by using scaffolding to reinforce the balks. Excavation began at the late Roman level; there was a second Roman level just below this, and Iron Age 6 remains directly below that. The excavated area was found to be on a terraced hillside-a hill apparently leveled by the Romans in preparation for a road. The Roman work obliterated the Persian and Hellenistic remains. Other than this gap, an undisturbed sequence of remains from the Early Bronze Age to the Byzantine period was found. Except for a large and deep Roman foundation which cut the square diagonally, the Iron Age and Bronze Age levels were· relatively intact, and most of the medieval and modern pits which were visible on the surface at the beginning of the work went down only a meter or two. Chapter I details the stratigraphy and architecture of the excavation. Chapter II is a presentation of the pottery of the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age in terms of a pottery type series. The pottery of the Early Bronze Age was found to be too fragmentary for the type series methodology and is presented separately in chapter IV. Chapter III deals with the chronology of the later levels and chapter V relates the findings of this excavation to the history ofTyre.

1

Mechanics of Excavation Work began in August 1973, and continued until the end of July, 1974, with a break during January and February of 1974 due to rain. During this time a core group often workmen worked in the field; these included one pickman, one balk man and one foreman who organized the work. Work went on eight hours a day, six days a week. No excavation was ever undertaken without my presence. As noted above, Tyre excavation works on a ten-meter by ten-meter grid system. As a ten-meter grid is too large for an excavation of this type, each ten-meter square was divided into four five-meter squares, with one-meter wide balks. The northwest square is "A" (IC-6 A, IC-11 A, etc.), the northeast square is "B," the southwest "C," and the southeast square is "D." Within each square, when a room or area appeared, it was assigned an area number which was recorded on the master list with the wall numbers and working strata designations. During the excavation each earth layer within each working area was assigned a level number, and during the writing of this report these were converted into stratum designations. All earth was sifted, making it likely that the majority of artifacts were recovered. The system used for handling the pottery is described in chapter II. All complete objects and other artifacts of intrinsic value were catalogued, and objects for the catalogue were assigned running numbers and are thus registered for the Tyre excavation object log, kept for the National Museum of Lebanon. The objects from this excavation have the National Museum numbers Tyre 74/11/1 to Tyre 74/11/648, meaning that they were registered for the National Museum at Tyre in November of 1974. These objects are at present housed at the museum in Beirut. In addition to the objects which were catalogued, there were 937 pieces of pottery, as well as some flints, that were drawn but which had no intrinsic value. These were assigned a number series of their own, prefixed with an "A"; the "A" is an arbitrary symbol meaning "drawn, not catalogued." These pieces remain inTyre.

The Plates The pottery drawings show the section and interior of the vessel to the right and the exterior to the left. Diagonal hatching indicates a red, or near red surface. Solid black lines indicate black or another color as noted in the description. The sections are solid black for pottery, diagonal lines for stone, vertical lines for bone and ivory, and cross-hatching for metal. In general, the pottery is presented at a uniform scale; large storage jars are to half this scale, while small objects are on a larger scale. Small imported sherds are drawn at a scale slightly smaller than ordinary pottery. All plates have the appropriate scale added, and where necessary all variations in scale on one plate are clearly indicated.

The Descriptions Each plate of drawings is accompanied by descriptions. The first column gives the number of the object on that plate and in the second column is the name of the object and the number of the type, if the object is an example of a category in the type series (see chapter II). The third column gives the register number of the piece according to the register systems described above. The fourth column gives the square and area where the object was found. Where a plate contains objects from two different strata, the stratum of the particular piece is noted in the next column. Finally comes the description itself. For all pottery objects the description of the color of the ware, the color immediately under the exterior surface, 7 according to the Munsell system is given first. If the exterior surface of the vessel was not a single color (patchy or mottled), this is noted as "uneven," If the firing of the vessel was inadequate for full oxidation, 8 and the vessel thus has a dark color within the vessel wall, this is noted as "gray core."If the vessel was burnished, that is, polished before firing, it is noted. Unless a vessel was slipped with a colored slip, that is of a color other than that of the vessel itself, the slip cannot be seen without the aid of a microscope. 9 Thus, except in the case of some Cypriote imports, only red slips are designated. These were noted as "RB" for red-slipped-and-burnished if the vessel was burnished also - or as "red

2

paint" if it was not burnished. "Paint" means any decoration applied to the surface without reference to the chemical composition or method of application of that decoration. If there was red or near-red decoration on the vessel, the Munsell number for that color is given. It was not the purpose of this study to determine the technical features of the manufacture of Tyrian pottery. Thus, for example no attempt was made to give grit content or clay composition, or to describe the pottery as 10 "hard" or "soft." Descriptions such as "metallic," shiny," etc, were avoided whenever possible.

A few abbreviations are used in the descriptions: burn. CP DB ext. FWP Imp. int. RB SJ

burnished Cooking Pot Deep Bowl exterior Fine Ware Plate Import interior red-slipped and burnished Storage Jar

Parallels to the pieces which fell into one or another category of the type series are discussed in chapter II, while parallels to other objects are noted at the bottom of the page of descriptions after the number corresponding to the drawing.

The Sections , A key to the differentiations used for the section drawings is found on Plate LXX, along with the key to the location of the sections. A description of all levels is found in chapter I. 11 On each section, the wall numbers are given preceded by a "w." For each layer of earth, two numbers are given to designate the "Area" number and the stratum number (e.g., "4-XII" means Area 4, Stratum XII). The numbers in small circles are the original excavation numbers. For the reasons given in chapter I, the Roman levels are treated as a separate entity and the strata of this level are marked by numbers preceded by an "R." The numerous robber trenches are marked "Arab Pit" or "Roman Pit," and are so designated because Roman or glazed medieval pottery, and in some cases coins, were found in them. On either edge of the section drawings the elevation in meters above sea level is shown. The double hatching at the bottom of the section drawing indicates the limits of excavation.

The Plans Plates LX to LXIX are plans; on each of these plates the stratum number is given and true north is indicated. A "w" followed by a number is a wall number, and the absolute height of a point on a wall is given as "+" followed by a number; this is the elevation in centimeters above sea level. The elevation of the base of the wall foundation is given as "F" (for fini) followed by a number. The "Area" numbers are for location or find-spot of individual objects; some of the area numbers were carried through for the whole excavation even though the boundaries of that area did, in fact, change somewhat in successive strata." Thus, for example, Area 2 remained relatively constant during the whole excavation, but the boundaries of Areas 1 and 4 shifted constantly. The plans show exactly what boundaries are meant for the area designations in a particular stratum. Dotted lines are used for wall projections only when a robber trench was present, or when the projection was almost certain, as discussed in chapter I.

Acknowledgements The pottery and objects were drawn by Dib Sultani and Mohamed Khanafer; architecture and sections were drawn by Pierre Bikai, Rabia Zarzour and Yacoub Samaha. Holly Hartquist and Norma Sfeir assisted with the photographs of objects. The cost of excavation was completely underwritten by the Department of Antiquities of Lebanon, and I would like to thank the Emir Maurice Chehab for his interest in, and support of, this project. Thanks are also due to

3

Dr. Samir Chami and Antoine Chadid of the Department of Antiquities for their assistance with various aspects of the excavation. Support for this project was received from the American Association of University Women, in the form of the Kittie Mae Grove- May Gardner Hall Fellowship, for which I am very grateful. Many helpful suggestions were made by Dr. RobertS. Merrillees, Ms. Ellen Herscher, Dr. Charles Adelman, Mr. Vincent Desborough, Dr. Leila Badre, and Lady Gloria Dale, and the contributions made by Drs. Alan M. Bieber, Jr., Robert H. Brill, Edith Porada, and William A. Ward are much appreciated. The project was originally undertaken as a dissertation for the Graduate Theological Union at Berkeley, and I am particularly grateful to the chairman of my committee, John E. Huesman, S. J., who first introduced me to Phoenician studies and who saw the project through from the formative stages to the conclusion. Valuable suggestions were made by the other members of my committee, Professors Jack Finegan, Victor R. Gold, Crawford H. Greenewalt, and James B. Pritchard. What errors there are are entirely my own, and it should be noted that many things which might have been done, re-done, or done differently were rendered impossibilities by the tragedy in Lebanon; the material is perhaps important enough to warrant publishing it now rather than delaying until the situation in Tyre returns to normal. I would also like to thank Mr. and Mrs. John L. Cecil and Mr. and Mrs. Edward Rizk who, at various stages of the project, offered help which allowed it to continue. I am grateful to Mr. and Mrs. Artemis Joukowsky for many things, but here especially to Martha Joukowsky for initiating me into the mysteries of pottery typologies, and to both of them for providing a "safe house" in Byblos where the manuscript was written at the height of the war: Finally, to my husband Pierre who has been a part of this project from the,day when we first chose the location of the excavation, thank you.

Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Pritchard 1975. See pl. LIX, general plan of Tyre; the city of Tyre is divided for excavation purposes into ten-meter squares, each designated by a letter or two letters and a number; the whole of IC-6 was excavated, while only the eastern half of IC-11 and a small section of IC-1 were excavated. So called because of the large Crusader church of St. John lying within this excavation field. Tyre was of course originally an island but was joined to the mainland by the mole of Alexander the Great; except for a small portion near the southern harbor, the original bedrock of the island had not been seen since antiquity; the extent of the original island is therefore unknown. The excavation grid of Tyre is 45° off of true north, so that a point referred to as "north" is actually northeast, and "east" is really southeast. Except in contexts where it is clear that true north is meant, all references in this text to points of the compass are based on "excavation north," that is, northeast. True north is indicated on the plans. The terms "Iron Age," "Bronze Age," etc., are used in this presentation in a general way only; this is particularly true in chapter I on the stratigraphy where they are used simply to orient the reader as to which general period is under discussion. Eventually the question of whether Phoenician chronological terminology should be related to Palestinian or Cypriote terminology, or have its own system, must be taken up. Munsell 1954. For a complete discussion, see Shepard 1971, 102-107. Shepard 1971, 191-3. There are exceptions to this among the descriptions of the Greek wares and the Early Bronze Age pottery. See also the List of Related Deposits, pl. LXX.

4

CHAPTER I ARCHITECTURE AND STRATIGRAPHY

Since the primary purpose of this excavation was to study the chronology of the pottery of Tyre, the stratigraphy was approached in a manner which would produce as many small units as possible. Thus, where possible, floor material was kept separate from both the fJ.ll under the floor and the fill above the floor. In any general stratigraphy of Tyre, these small distinctions would be unworkable and the word "Stratum" would have to be reserved for major architectural periods.

Early Bronze Age

Strata XXVII to XXIII These five strata consist of the first five earth layers above bedrock in square IC-11 A. No architecture was found with these levels. Stratum XVII was the earth immediately on bedrock; it was mixed with many small stones and was about 30 em deep. Pottery was found immediately on bedrock; this indicates that the first occupation of this immediate area was an occupation on rock. Further excavation may reveal that the original "rock in the sea" which was Tyre was partially covered with a layer of virgin soil but at this location no such level was found. Plate XC.6 shows the bedrock, and shows how uneven it was, seemingly deformed by the action of the sea. The rock is sandstone and the sandstone visible near the southern (so-called "Egyptian") port of Tyre is identically weathered. Bedrock was reached at levels of 60 em to 100 em above present sea level. There are indications from other excavations inTyre that present sea level at Tyre is higher than it was in antiquity, or that Tyre is settling, perhaps due to earthquake action. 1 It is possible that when Stratum XXVII was occupied, the "rock" was somewhat higher above sea level than it presently is; however, even if it was two or three meters higher, during a winter storm it could not have been a hospitable location. 2 Further, since it is known that the island part of Tyre has become gradually larger because of land ftlls, 3 the size of the "rock" (or "rocks") in antiquity must be presumed to be considerably smaller. It is therefore possible that this location was then just at the seashore, and that there was no permanent occupation here during the period in question. It is now certain, however, that there was at the least a transient occupation on the island during this period. 4 Stratum XXVI consisted of a layer of small stones and earth with a thin layer of red clay at the base of it; this red clay separated it from Stratum XXVII. Stratum XXV was packed brown earth with only a few stones in it. Stratum XXIV was an occupation level with a great deal of black carbon and ash in it. It was very firmly packed and had a thin layer of windblown sand above it. Stratum XXIII was brown sand and earth with, again, a level of windblown sand above it. These two sand layers were less than one centimeter in thickness and may represent a brief period of abandonment of the area. As well as the sand, a layer of carbon and ash, sometimes five centimeters thick, separated Stratum XXIII from Stratum XXII.

Strata XXII and XXI Plan: Plate LXIX. Stratum XXII was brown sandy earth, above the carbon and ash level. This earth went to wall 44 but under wall 45. Walls 44 and 45 were built oflarge stones ftlled with rubble. It was not clear why the two walls were not of the same depth (see pl. XC.6) but it is possible that wall44 served as a retaining wall and the level to the north was lower than the area between walls 44 and 45. It is equally possible that wall 45 was built after wall 44, perhaps because wall45 was an interior partition for a previously constructed building of which wall 44 was a major wall. In either case the stratigraphic evidence indicated that wall 45 was built during the period of Stratum XXL At the same time a plaster floor was laid down; only some traces of this remained in the area between the two walls. Above this floor an occupation layer containing black carbon and ash measuring up to fifteen centimeters in thickness was found. This layer is Stratum XXI; remains of a tannur fireplace found at the top of this stratum seemed to confirm the interpretation of the Stratum XXI carbon and ash as occupational rather than as evidence of destruction. Further excavation may reveal that the present interpretation is incorrect.

5

Four large stones were ranged along walls 44 and 45 and may have served as bases for roof supports. The corresponding levels in square IC-6 C were not reached; however, the top of a wall (wall 27) of identical dimensions and construction as walls 44 and 45 was found in IC-6 C. Wall 27 had been broken at either end by Late Bronze Age pits. If further excavation had been possible, perhaps a floor corresponding to the Stratum XXI floor in IC-11 A would have been found. As it is, the dimensions of the walls, as well as the orientation of wall 27, indicate that wall 27 probably belongs to the same complex as walls 44 and 45. 5 In addition, the size of these walls (ca. 75 em wide) also indicates a rather substantial building; indeed, if wall 27 belongs to the same building as walls 44 and 45, then the building is at least fifteen meters long. Nothing was found, however, which would give any idea as to the function of the building.

Strata XX and XIX Stratum XX, consisting of a reddish earth with many sea pebbles in it completely covered walls 44 and 45. Stratum XIX was a very dark black earth with many rocks, some of them measuring up to 40 em in diameter, in it (pl. XC.5). The earth of Stratum XIX was not ashy, but it was very dark in contrast to the red earth of Stratum XX. If there was ever any architecture in these strata, no evidence of it was left. However, the quantity oflarge stones would seem to hint at some sort of architecture nearby. Stratum XIX itself represents the last period of occupation of the area before a long period of abandonment. What caused the abandonment is not at all clear; it may be that there was some sort of violent happening here but the evidence is sparse. It was noted above that the dark earth of Stratum XIX was not ashy, i.e., there was no evidence of fire. It may be that the island was abandoned and weeds grew up; these then were carbonized as the sand deposit of Stratum XVIII covered them. The rocks immediately below the sand are difficult to account for; perhaps they fell from derelict buildings nearby over a long period of 6 time, or perhaps they fell all at once. It is at least possible that some natural disaster, a tidal wave or an earthquake, caused the abandonment. Only further excavation will clarify this.

Late Bronze Age

Stratum XVIII That there was an abandonment and that it was complete seems clear from the archaeological evidence. Immediately above the rocks of Stratum XIX there was a layer of sterile sand; pl. XC.5 shows this level in square IC-11 A. This sand, in the areas where it had not been disturbed by later pits, varied in depth from 90 to 140 em. The wind usually comes from the southwest and this perhaps accounts for the fact that on the western side of the excavated area, the top of the sand was at 350 em above sea level, while on the eastern side, the top of the sand was at 390 em above sea level. 7 Thus in the period of the first occupation after the sand level, a slight sloping of the site is already present. This sloping to the east was gradually exaggerated by terracing until, in the late Iron Age, two levels of the same stratum have an absolute level difference of almost three meters. Dug into this sand, from the top of it, 8 were three graves:

Grave 1 was in square IC-6 C, and consisted of an unlined pit dug into the sand and containing three persons. The position of the bones indicated that they were buried in the flexed, or knees-up position. This grave was covered with discolored, rather than sterile sand. See the plan, pl. LXVIII; the objects are on pl. LII.5-ll. Grave 2 was also a pit dug into the sand, in square IC-6 A, but in this case a crude rectangle of stones was put at the bottom of the pit. One body was laid face up, arms folded over the breast. Three other bodies, which must have been dismembered, were put in around this; see pl. XC.3. Various grave goods were distributed around the grave; see pl. LII.12-19, pl. LIII, and pl. LXXXVII.3, 5, 7-10. This grave, like grave 1, was covered with discolored sand. Grave 3 was found in square IC-11 A and consisted of a double infant jar burial. Each infant was in a jar (the rim and upper section of the jar having been removed) and each jar was covered with the base section of another jar. These, along with the offerings (pl. LII.l-4; pl. LXXXVII. I, 2) were covered by sterile clean white sand (see pl. XC.4).

Stratum XVII Plan: Plate LXVII; objects: Plates XLIX to Ll. This stratum, consisting of dirty brown sand and pottery is the first evidence of human habitation after the Stratum XVIII sand. As noted above, graves 1 and 2 were not covered with sterile sand, but with dark sand similar to

6

that of Stratum XVII. This means that the discoloration of the sand began before the period of these graves, but to 9 judge from the pottery of Stratum XVII, this discoloration continued for rather a long time after the period of the graves. There was pottery in this level, but not in any great quantity. The sand of Stratum XVIII was as soft as any beach sand; this probably accounts for the number of pits or storage bins found in the first few strata above the sand deposit. These bins varied in size and construction: Bin 5 in IC-6 D was the only rectangular one; bins 1, 2; 3, 4, 6, and 8 were circular. All of the bins in Stratum XVII, with the exception of bin 1 were lined with small stones on the sides only; that is, the bins went straight down to clean sand (see pl. XC. 5). No evidence that these bins were used for fires was found; the stones of the bins were not blackened and there was no ash associated with them. It would seem that they were used for storage, much as a large pithos jar might be used. The picture which emerges of this stratum then is one of a long period of sporadic visits to the area by people coming either from the mainland, or from a part of the island where there was a permanent village. These visitors constructed stone-lined bins for an indeterminate purpose, left a trace of their visit in the form of the discolored sand and a few sherds, and then departed.

Stratum XVI Plan: Plate LXVII; objects: Plates XLVII to XLVIII. In this period there seems to have been a more or less permanent occupation at this location. Wall fragments 41, 42, and 47 are all that remain of the architecture, but they do show that at least two rooms (areas 2 and 5) were already established. The western wall of area 2 was probably destroyed when wall 21 was built in Stratum XV. The western edge of wall 27 was also broken by wall 21 indicating that this wall fragment predates Stratum XV. The strat,um itself consisted of a layer of mixed earth and sand; that is, ft was much less sandy than Stratum XVII. Except for area 1, however, no real floors were found between Strata XVII and XVI and the division was made solely on the basis of the change in the quality of the earth and the evidence of building activity at the beginning of Stratum XVI. Therefore, the stratum includes the material in the area 1 floor and the flll above it, and the layer of mixed sand and earth over the rest of the excavation area. In area 1, that is outside of the presumably enclosed room of area 2, a "work table" was found. It was built of small stones, and rose a few centimeters above the associated floor. It was partially destroyed but what remained showed that it was once a three-sided "basin," open on the south side, and with a rectangular stone set in the southwest side; see pl. XC.2. The top surface of this stone was very polished and appeared to have been used for grinding. Inside the "basin" was a layer of white chalky paste, and the "basin" seems to have been used for the grinding and/or mixing of the white material. 10 Immediately to the south of the "basin," on the east and west sides, there were two thick deposits of carbon; see pl. XC. 2. The reason for these was not clear. The floor associated with this "work table" was in some areas up to five centimeters thick and was very blackened.

Stratum XV Plan: Plate LXVI; objects: Plates XLII to XLIV; Plate XLVI. During this period a complete wall system was built - a system which defines the various areas in a way that continues through the Late Bronze Age and into the Iron Age. In IC-6 A, wall14 was built and, on either side of this wall, in areas 9 and 10, there were packed-earth floors with a quantity of carbon in them. In area 6, the equivalent floor was not reached, as excavation to that level was not possible. In area 2, walls 21, 39, 26, and 25 were built and the southern part of wall 26 had a doorway and threshold in it. Itis likely that area 1 in this period was an open courtyard between the enclosed rooms 2 and 4, but bounded on the south by wall 25. Area 4 had a doorway in it, but no threshold, opening to the south. Area 3, bounded by walls 50, 34 and 43, and perhaps wall48, had a doorway to the north, opening into area 14. Packed earth floors were found over the whole area. The stratum itself consisted of a layer of firmly-packed yellowish clay mixed with many small pebbles and some pieces of white chalkstone and carbon which had built up over the floors; the stratum therefore consists of the occupation associated with the use of the wall system. During this period a number of pithos jars were sunk into the floors of the rooms; one of these, in area 1, seems to have been used not for storage, but as a kiln. The pithos itself (pl. XLVI) was dug into the floor of Stratum XV, 7

the pit for it cutting the Stratum XVI floor associated with the "work table." A second pit was dug to the south of the pithos, probably for use as a firing chamber; a "door" was cut into the pithos to connect it to the pit (pl. XC. I). The bottom of the southern pit was covered with a layer of ash and the pithos was fllled with rubble containing large pieces of charcoal. 11 In the area just west of the pit there was a small pile of very smooth sea pebbles. In Strata XVI, XV and XIV were found a great quantity of beads (pl. XLV), including about fifteen "kiln wasters," beads which had been crushed during or before firing (pl. XLV.2). The quantity of beads would indicate that the area, during the periods of Strata XVI and XV, and probably XIV, was given over to the manufacture of beads; the presence of other objects, pendants, scarabs, etc., indicates that jewelry was also put together here. The pebbles noted above may have been the result of the sifting of the sea sand to be used in the preparation of the paste for the faience beads. 12 The "work table" of Stratum XVI was used in the preparation of the paste. The pithos-kiln of Stratum XV was probably used to fire faience beads. 13 The presence of great quantities of clean sand would make this an ideal location for such a manufacturing area. Sometime toward the end of Stratum XV, the section of wall 26 south of the wall 25 line was destroyed; thus areas 18 and 7 became one before the end of the period.

Stratum XIV Plan: Plate LXVI; objects: Plates XXXVIII to XLI. Over much of the excavation area between Strata XV and XIV, a black floor was found. The round fire pit in the center of the room in area 2 and a tannur oven (see pl. LXXIII) on the floor in area 1 suggest that the blackness is the result of domestic cooking activity and not of destruction. A number of stone-lined bins were cut into the floors: Bins 9, 12, 13 and 14. Unlike the bins in the earlier strata, these bins were rounded and lined on the bottom with small stones but, again, no trace of fire was found in them. They were probably used for storage; indeed during the period of Stratum XIV, Bin 14 was partially destroyed and a pithos jar put into the pit Gar: pl. XL; location: section G-G: pl. LXXVI). , The stratum itself consisted of a layer of earth with quantities of chalk in it. 14 By the end of the period represented by this deposit of chalky earth, several of the walls were robbed; in fact, only the room of area 2 seems still to have been "under roof' at the end of the period. The section of wall 35 south of the wall 34 line was destroyed, perhaps to create a doorway connecting areas 7 and 11. Wall 34 remained standing as did at least part of wall 33 (there were some indications that the southern section of wall 33 was opened up for use as a doorway in this period). Wall 52 was destroyed, as was the wall in the north of area 4. 15 About 1886 red faience beads (pl. XLV.1, 2; pl. LXXXV.9) were found in this stratum, including the "kiln wasters" noted above (pl. XLV. 2). It is likely, therefore, that the manufacture of beads, apparently begun in this area at the time of Stratum XVI continued through Stratum XIV. The fire pit in area 2 may have been used for firing beads.

Strata XVIII to XIV Summary If the interpretation of the stratigraphic evidence outlined above is correct, the following picture emerges: A period of sporadic visitors to the area beginning with the persons who constructed the graves of Stratum XVIII (Stratum XVII), followed by the beginnings of permanent occupation and the first use of the area for the manufacture of beads (Stratum XVI). Then there was a great deal of building activity resulting in a full complex of rooms which, however, seem still to have been centered on the manufacture of beads (Stratum XV). This was followed by a period during which there were some modifications made to the basic architecture of Stratum XV, and during which the manufacturing of beads continued (Stratum XIV). During the period of Stratum XIV many of the walls seem to haye been destroyed; it may be that the area was abandoned for some time, but this appears not to have been a long or a complete abandonment for no evidence of such an abandonment, in the form of wind-blown sand or sterile earth, was found.

Iron Age

Stratum XIII Plan: Plate LXV; objects: Plates XXXIII to XXXVIII.

8

At the beginning of this period, area 3 was rebuilt: wall 34 was either still standing or was rebuilt on its original lines, wall 20 was built almost exactly over wall 50 but along part of its distance separated from wall 50 by several centimeters of earth. The new walls, 49 and 19, complete this new room. In area 11, there was a pit of sterile white sand, indicating that some activity necessitating this commodity was going on in the area. A clear roadway, evidenced by the firmness of the earth and the horizontal position of the pottery as well as the worn and discolored nature of that pottery, is established east of wall 49 (area 14). A row of irregularly placed stones, called a wall (wall13), but perhaps a platform, is set down in area 7. As noted above, walls 21, 25, 26 and 39 were still standing at the end of Stratum XIV. Wall25 still extended over to wall35; during this period walls 12 and 38 were built, enclosing area 1, seemingly an addition to the "house" of area 2 (and probably area 10). Wall38 had been partially destroyed by the later Roman construction, but it is likely that wall38 extended across to wall 20. There was no solid evidence for this, however, in this period, as the whole area was disturbed by a medieval pit. Stratum XIII itself consisted of a layer of pottery, fifty centimeters thick in places, over a good part of the excavation area. This pottery, most of which was very large pieces, was lying loosely over areas 4, 5, 7 and 10. The equivalent levels in areas 1, 2 and 3 were not so thick with pottery, again confirming that these areas were "under roof," and that (probably) the rest of the area was an open court. The reason for this massive deposit of pottery is unclear. None of the pottery showed any signs of being "kiln wasters." Nor was there any other evidence of pottery manufacture - kiln remains, clay balls, etc. At some point during this period, Bin 15 was built. This bin, lined with small stones on the sides only (not on the bottom), was the largest uncovered in the excavation. Since the material in this bin was a large group (6,579 sherds), and a closed group, it is designated Stratum XIII-2. The rest of the pottery from this level is called Stratum XIII-1; it should be noted that ·the stratigraphic connection between the area 5 floor for Stratum XIII and Bin 15 was broken by a later wall and this is a second reason for separating the two groups as XIII-1 and XIII-2. 16 After the deposit of pottery in area 7 and the layer or pit of sterile sand in area 11, area 11 seems to have also become a road or passageway; again there was a layer of firmly packed earth containing worn, horizontally placed pottery.

Stratum XII Plan: Plate LXIV; objects: Plates XXX to XXXII. Stratum XII consisted of a layer of reddish earth with pieces of white cMlkstone in it. This is the occupation level for the buildings built after the deposit of pottery, although it is likely that a good part of this deposit consists of fill brought in for the filling of the area before the building activity of the next period (Stratum XI). The new buildings of Stratum XII include a new area created by the building of walls 31 and 55 and by the extension of wall 25 across to w·all 20. Wall 51 is built and is the new western boundary of area 7. Area 2 continues to be used; west of it wall18 and wall23 are built (area 5). A doorway in the eastern end ofwall18 connects area 5 with the area to the north of it. It is likely that Bin 15 was fllled with deposit XIII-2 just before wall 18 was built. Sometime during this period the section of wall 25 which lay between walls 26 and 12 was also destroyed. This created a passageway between areas 2 and 4. Wall 46 may have been built during the period of Stratum XIII or during the period of Stratum XII; the evidence was not clear on this point, and only part of the wall was excavated. At the end of this period walls 10 and 11 were built in IC-6 A/B and the alignment of wall 10 indicates that it was built to extend wall 12 on the eastern side of the new central passageway. At about the same time, wall 51 was destroyed and wall 26 re-extended south of the wall 25 line, as evidenced by a robber trench, trench 26B (see pl. LXXIV). The plan on pl. LXIV shows the situation both at the beginning of Stratum XII and the modifications which took place during the period of Stratum XII. At the end of this period, the area is already somewhat terraced. The western side (area 5) has an absolute level of 450 em above sea level; area 2 was at about 500 em above sea level and the passageway, newly established, has its base at 550 em. East of this, the level is also at 550 em; but in area 14, the level must have been over 600 em above sea level at this time. Thus, already there is a one-meter-and-one half level difference between the eastern and western sides of the excavated area. From Stratum XI onwards much of the

9

activity which took place in this area apparently had to do with the various levelings and fills brought in because of this terracing.

Stratum XI Plan: Plate LXIV; objects: Plates XXIX to XXX. This stratum consists of the material in levels just below the major fills of the next periods. During this period, areas 1, 7, and 10 are firmly established as a long passageway. The material in these areas was very sandy and contained a quantity of pebbles. In IC-11, it would seem that areas 3, 11, 13, and 17 continued to be used as they were, but during the period covered by Stratum XI, a reddish rocky fill was brought in, further raising this side of the area; but most of this stratum in these areas had been previously excavated and no balks remained to judge the extent of the stratum. Area 5 continued to be occupied, as did area 2. At the end of this period, the passageway in areas 1/7 had built up so that the level of the alley was some 70 em higher than the area east of it. This undoubtedly explains the necessity for the great fill which was brought in during the next period.

Stratum X Plan: Plate LXIII; objects: Plates XXIII to XXVIII. This stratum consists of two large fi1ls. The first, designated X-1, was made up of an ashy, greenish-colored earth. The position of this flll indicates that wall 12 was destroyed just before it was put in (see pl. LXXIII, Section C-C'). Wall 12 was evidently pulled away from the street build-up to the west of it; most of the stones of this wall were probably carried away, but a quantity of stones at the base of flll X-1 indicated what had happened. Then the fill was put in - covering the area from the line of the passageway to wall 20 in the east, and to the line of the wall 25 trench on the south. The northern limit seems to be the projected wall 38 noted above. No equivalent to this material was found in the small excavated area south of wall 11 in IC-6 B, so there has to have been a wall at a point just on the edge of the Roman foundation, and destroyed by that foundation and the subsequent robbing of the foundation during the medieval period (see pl. LX). After this fill was put in, the whole area from wall 26 to wall49 and north of wall 25 was level. At about this same time, to judge from the pit on that line, wall 25 was extended across to wall49. The pottery from this fill constituted the single largest group of the excavation, over sixty thousand sherds; most of the pieces were quite small and worn and they were badly discolored, greenish-gray like the earth of the stratum. There was nothing within the f:tll such as hard-packed "walked-on" levels or wind-blown sand to suggest that it built up gradually; it seems rather to have been f:tll brought from some other location to raise the level of the area. Stratum X-2 consists of a second f:tll- this, however, was of very large pieces of pottery. This f:tll was found south of wall 18 and north of wall 40; a corresponding fill was found south of wall 46 (on the other side of the Roman foundation). The purpose of this fill seems to have been to raise area 16 (the area from wall 46 to wall 40) to the level of area 10. Wall 40 must have been a retaining wall against area 16 and separating it from the lower level area 5. The two fills have been placed together in Stratum X because of the similarity of the material they contained that is, on other than stratigraphic grounds and so the material from each is presented separately.

Stratum IX Plan: Plate LXIII: objects: Plate XIX to XXII. In this period the modifications continue: walls 10 and 11 and the projected wall discussed above under Stratum X continued to be used, as well as walls 55, 25, 31, and 49. Most of the area ofiC-6 D and IC-11 A seems to have been one open court, but now the western side of the square is rebuilt. Wall 26 is robbed along its whole length. This robber trench was odd in that the robbers seem to have taken all of the smaller stones from the wall and then filled the trench with earth and the larger stones from the robbed wall. Wall 36 was then built just west of the line of wall 26; this was probably done because the builders wanted to widen the passageway (wall 5 was still in use, as was wall10, even though wall12 had been destroyed). The old passage was only one meter wide, the new passage is nearly two meters wide. At the same time walls 25 (western section) and 39 are destroyed and walls 22 and 37 replace them; wall 21 goes into a new phase.

10

The floor of the new area 2 is at ca. 550 em above sea level and the area east of wall 36 is now at ca. 650 em above sea level. The western sector, area 5, is now at ca. 450 em. Walls 23 and 40 were probably destroyed at this time, and area 5 fllled so that the whole area south of the line formed by walls 36 and 3 was at about 500 em above sea level. The area to the east then is one-meter-and-one-half higher. Wall 3 itself illustrates this level difference; pl. LXXXIX.5 shows the western face of wall 3 and pl. LXXXIX.6 shows the eastern face. Wall 3 is a typical 17 Phoenician pier and rubble wall, but it is obvious that it is in this case a retaining wall- only the western face was meant to be seen. During the construction of this wall, the area west of wall 10 was cut into and then held back by wall3. For this reason, Strata XII and XI were lacking in area 10 -they were removed by the cut into the hillside. Area 10 is in this period bounded by walls 3 and 32. Wall32 was broken when the later wall2 was built, and the whole of areas 5, 10, and 16 was disrupted when the complex of Stratum V was built so that the relationship between areas 5 and 10 in this period is not clear; but there is at least the possibility that they were together an open court. This would depend on whether there is a southern (east-west) wall like wall 3 for area 10 in the area of the Roman foundation.

Stratum VIII Plan: Plate LXIII; objects: Plate XIX to XXII. This stratum consists of three fills connected both by the material they contained and by the quality of the earth. The earth was red/brown and it contained pieces of chalk up to five centimeters across and was thus very distinctive. The fill itself seems to have been another attempt to level the area. As noted above, by the end of Stratum IX, the area east of the line of walls 36 and 3 was at ca. 650 em above sea level; the area west of it at ca. 500 em. Now as also noted above, under the discussion of the Stratum X-1 ftll, the northern limits of this ftll were not found; it would seem that the area both north and south of wall11 remained at the lower level after the X-1 fill -again indicating that there must once have been another east-west wall north of area 4. Presumably the level was 650 em above sea level south of that wall and ca. 600 em north of that wall at the period just before the Stratum VIII flll. The Stratum VIII flll brought areas 2, 10, and 15, as well as the area south of wall 11 up to the new level. In the process, wallll was covered by the fill (wall10 was not). Wall 21 was also covered and with this the last of the wall system begun in Stratum XVI disappears. Above this flll, a new complex of buildings appears. The phase is characterized by the large size of the stones used in the building. Wall 8 is built above wall38, wall 5 above wall 22, and wall 7 is built above wall39. Walll6, built above wall49, completes this group of older walls going into new phases. At the start of the excavation a previously excavated wall, wall 30, was visible in IC-11 C. The absolute level of the wall and the method of construction make it probable that wall 30 was also constructed at this time. A new wall, wall 6, evidenced by a trench and a few stones (pl. LXXXIX.3) is built in IC-6 D, so that areas 1 and 7 are again really separate. A wall fragment and trench were found to the east of area 1 (wall 9). What formed the northern boundary of area 1 in this period is not clear. Further, it is possible that the leveling of area 5 discussed above under Stratum IX took place at this time; however, .since the Stratum VIII fill was clearly one unit as evidenced by the quality of the earth used for the fill, Stratum VIII was reserved for this fill only, and the material associated with the destruction of area 5 was put with Stratum IX.

Stratum VII Plan: Plate LXII; objects: Plate XVIII. Found in association with the large walls described under Stratum VIII were thick floors in areas 1, 6, 7, and 10. The corresponding floor in area 2 was not as thick as the other floors, but since the majority of the floors produced a quantity of pottery, this group of 4,438 sherds was kept as a separate unit.

Stratum VI Plan: Plate LXII; objects: Plate XVIII. This stratum consisted of a red earth and rubble fill which in some cases was nearly a meter in thickness. It was found above the Stratum VII floors in areas 1, 2, 6, 7, and 10. The fill eventually covered all the walls of the preceeding period.

11

Strata XIII to VI Summary During the period of Stratum XIV many of the walls begun at the time of Stratum XVI were robbed and a new system, incorporating the remaining walls, was built during the time of Stratum XIII. Strata XU and XI see the use and modification of that wall system, a use which eventually causes the area to become very uneven. Stratum X consisted of fills brought in to level the area and Stratum IX sees the use of the new buildings in the western sector. Stratum VIII covers the last of the old wall system, and a new wall system using large stones and having Stratum VII as its floor, is built. Stratum VI is the fill which covers that wall system. Little was found to tell us what the area was used for during this long period. It should be noted that from Stratum XIII to Stratum VI, not a single tannur or any other kind of fireplace was found, even though there were cooking pots; that is, no clear kitchen area was found. This might indicate that the area was used for some industry though what industry it would be is not clear. There did seem to be, in these strata, an unusual number of spindle whorls and pierced pottery pieces which might have been used for weaving 18 but since there is no way of ascertaining whether such objects are common in all areas of Tyre, it must be said for the present that the purpose of the buildings of Strata XIII to VI in this excavation is not known.

Stratum V Plan: Plate LXI; objects: Plate XVIII. This stratum consists of the material associated with the construction of a completely new architectual complex. In IC-6 D, above the Stratum VI fill, 19 there was, over the whole area, a layer of sandstone chips, eyidence that the masonry blocks for the new building were being dressed on the site. An identical layer of chips, which contained very little pottery, was found in areas 5, 8, and 9 and in area 1, above this layer of chips, there was a fill of reddish earth. In areas 5, 8, and 9, above the layer of chips, there was a layer of sandy earth and then a layer of red clay. The red clay was apparently the floor of the new building in areas 5, 8, and 9. The building itself consisted of beautifully dressed ashlar blocks. As was the case with wall 3, wall 2 was finished on the west face only; the east face was not finished (see pl. LXXXIX.2, the east face of wall 2). Again the builders seem to have cut into the hillside to construct their building, destroying in this case all traces of Strata VII and VI in the area west of wall 2. The main wall uncovered, wall 2, was well preserved in area IC-6 A. The section between IC-6 A and IC-1 B had been robbed down to the foundation course in the medieval period. Wall 28 was equally well preserved, and had at the end near wall 2 a doorway joining areas 8 and 9. In IC-6 C wall 2 was visible under the Roman foundation, but the rest of it had been robbed, as had most of wall 15. As noted above, there was a layer of red clay over the whole area; this red clay must have been the floor of the building as it went flush to the threshold in wall 28, and it was the level immediately above the foundation trenches for the building. This clay is exactly what one would expect to be used for the making of pottery. However, no other evidence of pottery making was found in this stratum. One would not expect such fine masonry to be used for a pottery-making enclosure, but perhaps further excavation to the west will clarify this problem. In IC-6 D only a floor made of baked red clay and pebbles (as hard as cement and ca. 25 em thick) marked this stratum. However, to the north of this floor a trench was found, and it seemed from the edge of the remaining area 7 floor that a wall similar to those found to the west once existed here. Plate LXXXIX.4 shows the edge of this floor and the trench (called wall 1); it would seem that only a wall of well dressed ashlar blocks could halVe fit against that floor. North of the wall 1 trench, above the Stratum V fill were found two courses of well dressed sandstone blocks (called wall4). These are all that is left of what may have been a large pavement covering area 1. Stratum V itself consists of the material which was found immediately below the area 7 floor, under the sandstone pavement in area 1, and the material in the foundations trenches and floors of areas 5, 8, and 9. Note that there was at this time a level difference of nearly three meters between the two areas on either side of wall 2.

Stratum IV Plan: Plate LXI; objects: Plates XIV to XVII. This stratum consists of a sandy rubble which was above the red clay floor in areas 5, 8, and 9. The corresponding levels in the rest of the excavation were destroyed by the Roman building activity. In area 5, the level was almost

12

pure sand, but with some pottery. Again, the presence of sand here may indicate that pottery was being manufactured in this area.

Stratum Ill Plan: Plate LXI: objects: Plates V to XIII. This stratum was also limited to areas S, 8, and 9. During this period, the southern section of wall 2 seems to have been robbed (see pl. LXXIV, section D-D; wall 2 trench). This trench contained material from Stratum IV and Stratum III and was covered by Stratum II, i.e., the wall was robbed before the time of Stratum II. At the same time walliS was robbed; walliS was also covered with Stratum II material. There was a second indication that the building was already falling into disuse during the period of Stratum III: the doorway in wall 28 was completely blocked with Stratum III material. Stratum III itself contained a large quantity of pottery, including many complete or semi-complete pieces. The largest group was found in the northeast corner of area 8; here stacks of plates and a group of jugs and juglets were found (pl. LXXX 2_:_S). In all about two hundred complete or nearly complete pieces were found in this area. Many of the pieces were very poorly made, had large inclusions (up to one em), were irregularly fired and otherwise gave the appearance of being "rejects." Furthermore, although no kiln was found (there may be one in the unexcavated area to the west), it would seem that pottery was being manufactured here during this period; this is evidenced by the twenty balls of clay, 20 unfired and measuring about IO em in diameter, found mixed in among the plates and jugs in the corner of area 8. Similar deposits of plates were found in the southern sector of area 8, and in area 9, though these groups were not as large as the group near the juncture of walls 2 and 28. The earth of the stratum was sandy rubble which, however, was much less sandy than that of Stratum IV. Just at the top of this level, in the northeastern section of area 8, and just above the deposit of plates and jugs, an urn fragment bearing a hieroglyphic inscription was found(pl. XIII and pl. LXXX. I).

Stratum II Plan: Plate LXI; objects: Plates 11-IV, VI-VII, IX-XII. This stratum contained a large number of storage jar kiln "wasters," as well as other material, but most of the over 45,000 sherds collected were storage jar body sherds. Many of these sherds had large explosion marks or bubbles: they may be the remains of jars which exploded in a nearby kiln. At the base of this level (above Stratum III), there was a "walked-on" level of earth, indicating that at least a little time passed between the time of the Stratum III deposits and Stratum II; but the rest of the material mixed in with the storage jar fragments was similar to the pottery from Stratum III so there was probably no great lapse of time between the two strata.

Stratum I Plan: Plate LXI; 21 objects: Plate I. In area 9, above the deposit of storage jar fragments, a small section of another stratum was preserved (see pl. LXXI, section A-N..). Again, a "walked-on" level separated it from Stratum II. A very small section of this same stratum was found in IC-6 C and consisted of a deposit of yellow clay and red clay. In addition there was pottery similar to the IC-I B deposit in the walll trench in IC-6 D and in a pit in the south-west corner of area 1. The bulk ofthe I,894 sherds collected, however, came from IC-I B. All that was preserved of this stratum were these small deposits of sherds; there was no architecture related to these deposits. The next strata above these were Roman; thus no Persian or Hellenistic material was found. Such material had been found previously in nearby areas so that particular gap is certainly just local.

Strata V to I Summary During the period of Stratum V, a new building was erected in this area; in the early part of the period, the area was leveled and the stones for the new building were prepared. A thick floor was put down in area 7 and (perhaps) a stone-paved courtyard was built in area 1. The red clay floor and deposit of sand (Strata V-IV) in areas

I3

5, 8, and 9 may indicate that the western side of the building was being used for the manufacture of pottery. By the time of Stratum III, the western area was covered with "kiln wasters," mostly plates and jugs; then parts of walls 2 and 15 were robbed and the area covered with storage jar "kiln wasters." The clay deposit at the top of Stratum II and the pottery deposit of Stratum I may show that the area continued to be used for the manufacture of pottery. That pottery was being manufactured on the island at all is a surprise, as it undoubtedly meant that clay had to be brought from the mainland in ships; one would have expected that pottery would be made on the mainland and the finished pieces shipped out to the island.

Roman Levels Plan: Plate LX. The remains of the Roman levels which were found in this excavation form parts of very large buildings, and detailed analysis of these levels belongs with the publication of those buildings; so for our present purposes, a few notes will suffice. The area seems to have been leveled for a roadway or a large pavement. Of this pavement or road, some of the limestone blocks remained in IC-6 C/D and in IC-1 D. The levels associated with this road are marked on the section drawings as R-1 (first Roman level). Sometime after this, the limestone pavement was broken and a trench four meters deep, two-and-one-half meters wide and at least fifteen meters long was dug on an east-west line from IC-6 C through IC-11 A. The western limit of the trench was found in IC-1 D but the eastern limit of the trench was not found. Into this trench were put six courses of rectangular chalkstone blocks. It is not clear what the purpose of this foundation was, but whatever it was, the remains of it are the largest foundation of the type yet uncovered in Tyre. The present evidence indicates that whatever the purpose of this foundation was, the project was never completed; there were six courses of the foundation, but there should have been six to eight more courses in order to bring the level of the foundation up to the Roman level. It seems not to have been completed and then robbed: In IC-6 B, a section of this foundation was robbed during the medieval period and the robber trench fll.l contained many fragments from chalkstone blocks which apparently broke during the robbing process. Further, during the course of this excavation it was necessary to remove some of these blocks for safety reasons; we found that when we were moving them, nearly every other block broke. Yet the rubble fill where the upper courses should have been did not contain a single fragment of these blocks. The conclusion would seem to be that the trench was dug for a massive foundation and the first six courses of the foundation were put into the trench and that then the project was abandoned. The rest of the trench was fll.led with a rubble of marble, mosaic fragments and earth (called "Roman Pit" on the section drawings). After this the area was used as part of a massive building of the post-Constantinian period (two coins of Constantine were found in the "Roman Pit" fill under the pavement of the large building). 22 A sub-pavement of earth, small stones and then cement was found under the marble pavement of this building. These levels are marked R-2 on the section drawings. Between levels R-1 and R-2 was found a layer of white chalk over much of the excavation area; this probably is to be associated with the construction of the chalkstone foundations 23 of the great marble-paved building. The latest remains found in this area consisted of Arab or medieval pits and the floor of a cistern, also medieval, found in IC-6 C (see pl. LXXIV).

Summary On stratigraphical and architectual grounds, there are seven major levels in this excavation (excluding the Roman and later remains). The first of these, Strata XXVII to XIX, can be divided into three sub-phases: (a) the occupation on and just above bed-rock; (b) the building and use of walls 27, 44, and 45 (Strata XXII-XXI; and (c) the period after the abandonment of that building (Strata XX-XIX). The second major period is the occupation break evidenced by the layer of sterile sand (Stratum XVIII sand). In the third major period, the area is reoccupied, transitorily at first (Stratum XVIII graves and Stratum XVII), and then permanently as evidenced by the architecture of Strata XVI, XV, and XIV, a complex apparently devoted

14

at least partially to the manufacture of beads. There may have been some disruption toward the end of this period. The fourth major period sees the reuse of a few of the earlier walls but major modifications are gradually made in the architecture (Strata XIII-XI); at the end of this period large land fills are brought in to level the area for the building activity of the next period (Stratum X). The fifth major period includes the use of the new buildings of Stratum IX and the introduction of "pier and rubble" walls to the area; above this a new fill was put in (Stratum VIII) in preparation for the next building period. The sixth major period sees a change in the architecture to walls built of very large stones (Stratum VII) and includes the fill above the floors of these buildings (Stratum VI). The seventh major period sees yet another change, this time to ashlar masonry (Stratum V) used in a building which may have been used partially for the manufacture of pottery (Stratum IV). During the rest of this period, the Stratum V building is gradually destroyed but the manufacture of pottery continues (Strata III-I).

Notes 1.

2. 3.

4. 5.

6.

7.

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

The writer's excavation under the Greek Catholic church inTyre (Bikai 1971) reached construction (probably Roman) at .7 5 m below present sea level; the floor of the Crusader church uncovered in that excavation is presently under several centimeters of water but this can perhaps be accounted for by a rise in the ground water level. Squares IC-6/11 are about one hundred meters from the present beach and were presumably closer to the beach in antiquity. Winter storms raise waves two and even three meters high on that side of Tyre. See Josephus Ant. 8.147 and C Ap. 1.113 on the enlargement of the island by Hiram, and on the fact that Tyre was originally two islands. By the Roman period Tyre had a circumference of twenty-two stadia, about its present size (Pliny Hist. Nat. 5. 76). Eissfeldt (19482, col. 1880) estimated the size of the island city to have been 57,600 m 2 before Alexander. Early Bronze Age; see chapter IV. The orientation of the buildings remains constant through all periods and the modern housing at the edge of the excavation has the same orientation. This is to be explained by a desire to take advantage of the breeze from the southwest in summer. Marc Chollot(1973, 147) computed in 1971 and 1972 that the wind came from the southwest 85% of the time and usually reached Beaufort 4 (13-18 m.p.h.). That the city is prone to earthquakes is well documented; see Brown 1969, ch. 4. The most vivid description is given by Thompson (1882, II, 570): "We rode into Tyre at midnight over prostrate walls, and found some of the streets so choked up with fallen houses that we could not pass through them. I retain a vivid recollection of that dismal night. The people were living in boats drawn up on the shore, and in tents near them, while half suspended shutters and doors were banging and creaking, and the wind, which had risen to a cold and furious gale, howled through the shattered walls and broken arches of ruined Tyre." Some 25 meters to the east of the excavated area, the top of this same sand level can be seen at 435 em above sea level; that is, the level appears to be sloping up to a point somewhere near the center of the island and seems to confirm that the sand was brought by the southwest wind, and was therefore piling up before the wind. This same wind has piled up six and seven meters of sand in the Bass area of Tyre since the seventh century A.D.; this would be about one meter of sand every two hundred years. The Bass area lies on the peninsula created by Alexander's mole, i.e., between the old mainland and the old island areas. The sand of the IC-6/11 deposit was extremely fme and very unlike the ordinary beach sand at Tyre and could not be explained as a single deposit caused, say, by a tidal wave. The phenomenon of wind-blown sand is well known; Fisher (1971 6 , 57), speaking of the winds in this area says that they "frequently reach gale force ... The most prominent effects are ... driving sand and dust, which can cover roads and penetrate into houses." Since the sand was sterile, both the sterile sand and the graves dug into the top of it are called Stratum XVIII; but since there is some evidence of overlap between Strata XVIII graves and Stratum XVII (see chapter III), the graves could have been put with Stratum XVII. · See chapter III. An analysis of this and related material is found in Appendix D. The objects found in the kiln and pit are shown on pl. XLII.1, 2; pl. XLIV.4, 5; pl. XLV.24, 31, 41, 42. Or they may have been collected for use in jewelry. In the rubble of the southern pit, a small, crude, very poorly-fired juglet was found (pl. XLII.2); it may represent an attempt to fire pottery in the pithos-kiln. There are large deposits of chalk at Beiyada, a few kilometers to the south of Tyre, and the virgin soil in the mainland area of Tyre is very chalky. It may be that there is a layer of chalky virgin soil on the island part of Tyre which explains the chalky earth in these strata, but the evidence of Strata XXVII to XIX in which there was no chalk would seem to indicate that the earth was brought to the island for use as fill, or perhaps that chalk was brought from Beiyada to the island for use in the construction of lime-plastered cisterns; on the use of lime in Phoenicia see Brown 1969, 80-82; on the lime-plastered cisterns, see Albright 1961, 341

15

15. 16. 17. 18.

19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

and n. 72, and Katzenstein 1973, 15 and 7 5: "At the beginning of the Iron Age the revolutionary invention of plastering cisterns with lime to prevent the seepage of stored water ... facilitated the development of Tyre. Hitherto the city had depended on Ushu, on the mainland for its water supply." The objects shown on pl. XLI.l-5 come from this robber trench. Because of the later wall (w. 40), there was no way to judge whether the pit for the bin cut the area 5, Stratum XIII floor or whether it predated the floor. Similar walls, called "ashlar-ribbed" by the excavator were found at Tell Abu Hawam (Hamilton 1933, 78); Pritchard 1970, 19-20 cites examples from Sarafand, Motya, Carthage and Nora. The weaving and dyeing of expensive textiles was, of course, the most important local industry at Tyre. See Jidejian 1969,92 and 143-159. It might be noted that in all strata of this excavation from Stratum XVII on, whole murex shells (both Murex brandan·s and Murex trunculus) were found, a few to each stratum; uncrushed and in such small numbers. they do not contribute any information about the activities in this particular area. The presence of three such shells in the bins of Stratum XVII would seem to indicate that the shellfish itself, if not its commercial potential, was known as early as ca. 1600 B.C. (see chapter III on the dating of Stratum XVII). It is possible that the Stratum VI f:t.ll was itself part of the preparation for the new construction of Stratum V. See Appendix C. Note that for Strata I and II there is no architecture on which to base area numbers, so the area numbers used for Strata V and IV were carried through to Stratum I. Tyre nos. 74/11/12 and 74/11/39, not illustrated. This chalkstone foundation, which lies outside the limits of this excavation is not to be confused with the chalkstone foundation discussed above.

16

CHAPTER II THE LATE BRONZE AND IRON AGES: POTTERY TYPE SERIES

The central concern of this project was to identify the basic pottery repertoire of Tyre. The method chosen was a type series geared to dealing with small fragments, but which was based on a large number of complete jars or plates having clearly recognizable elements. The type series attempts to isolate those elements of the pottery of Tyre which can be used as indicators of a specific historical period. This approach does not deal primarily with manufacturing techniques or with the development of the pottery of Tyre as pottery. Rather, the goal of the method is to produce a chronological guide to the excavator, a guide which allows him to say that any stratum at Tyre which produces a statistically high proportion of a certain element or complex of elements must be dated to a specific historical period. It is necessary to state at the outset what the basis for the types was. As noted in the Introduction, there was at Tyre, before this excavation began, a quantity (ca. 30 million sherds) of pottery from disturbed layers available for study, including a great number of complete or semi-complete vessels. In terms of the type series, this meant two things: First, that it was possible to see a number of complete examples of a given vessel and note what variations in size, ware, decor, etc., were possible within the range of what seemed to be one group. For example, the common ' plates here called Plate type 2 (see pl. VIII) seemingly have no common denominator. In isolation, pl. VIII.25 is quite different from pl. VIII.31; but a closer examination of the examples on pl. VIII shows that these two are simply extremes of one type, with, in this case, pl. VIII.ll and pl. VIII.18 being in form between the two extremes. What defines the category "Plate type 2" is not rim stance or diameter (though the large examples are rare) byt the articulation point on the interior, the crude finish, poorly levigated clay, and the string-cut base. An early attempt to make several types out of this group, based on "objective" criteria such as diameter, rim stance, surface color, etc., proved unworkable in practice; for, as an example, sometimes a single plate would be irregular and one side of the plate would belong to one type and the other side to a second type. It is obvious that the potter, when he began to work, had a general idea or mental model of what he was going to produce, but various factors, the wetness of the clay, firing conditions, etc., and perhaps just whim, inevitably meant that there were variations in the final products. The task of the type series and, more, of the one doing the typing, is first of all to .try. to see what the potter had in his mind, and then to see whether the excavation fragments belong to that picture-to see beyond the variants and errors, and only finally to objectivize that picture as much as possible. The criteria for the categories or types were varied. Sometimes ware and decoration were more important than form (e.g., Fine Ware Plate 8, pl. XIX.l-9); in other cases, a particular feature of the form was determinative (e.g., the dishing of the interior of the rim of Cooking Ware type 7 or the stance of Cooking Ware type 2). The large number of complete and semi-complete pieces at Tyre also permitted a second feature of the type series to develop: the factor of "clearly recognizable elements." It will be noted that the examples of the type series to which the reader is directed in the plates at the end of this text are usually complete, but that the statistics presented in this chapter were compiled on the basis, not of complete pieces, but of fragments, treated not as fragments having a certain objective form, ware, or color, but in most cases as parts of known vessels. The type series concentrated on those fragments which could be said to belong to vessels of a distinctive and known form. For example, while Jug type 5 is defined as a jug with a carinated shoulder, depressed base, red slip and a mushroom lip, what was actually being counted for the statistics were tiny red-slipped rim fragments, it being presumed on the basis of the complete pieces at Tyre that when one encounters one of those fragments, one is in fact dealing with a vessel such as that shown on pl. VI.S. Among all the complete pieces at Tyre, such a rim occurred only once on any vessel not of that type (it occurred on a juglet identical to pl. VI.2). So the type series attempts to deal with fragments as indicators of known types. There are exceptions to this, particularly among the Late Bronze Age storage jars in the type series because no complete examples were available for these types, and in types here called Jugs 8, 9, and 10, where similar elements are found on three or four different vessels. In this last case, it is not possible to know which vessel a given fragment originally belonged to; on the other hand, it is possible to say that the' fragment belonged to one or the other of the known vessel forms.

17

Where possible, general or broad categories were eliminated from the type series; for example, a category defined as rims from trefoil-rim or pinched-rim jugs having no decoration was early eliminated from the type series as such rims occur in every period and on a variety of vessels. Now, while the final picture might present itself to some as an attempt to be objective and scientific, particularly as it includes such things as graphs and statistics, the reader should be aware that there are a great number of variables involved and that it is viewed by the excavator as merely supplemental to the more traditional presentation of architecture and complete objects. It is an attempt to move a step beyond such excavation report language as "Plate X was common in Stratum Z" or "There were a quantity of such storage jars in RoomY," and no more. Under ideal conditions, it might be possible to produce objective and certain statistics of excavation pottery, but excavation conditions are rarely those of the laboratory: sherds fall from balks, objects get misplaced, stratigraphy is seldom simple and clean, and the typing procedure outlined above contains many possibilities for error. Thus, while we owe a great debt to the anthropologists and pre-historians who have forced these methods on Middle Eastern archaeology, the certainty of the results of these methods (and indeed which method is appropriate) as used in a complicated Middle Eastern site containing enormous quantities of pottery is still to be tested. The type series is divided into the following categories: plates and bowls (called plates for short), fine ware plates, deep bowls, kraters, pithoi, jugs, juglets, storage jars, cooking wares, bases, imports, lamps, handles, storage jar shoulder fragments, plain body sherds, red-slipped and burnished body sherds, and painted body sherds. Forms such as wall plaques, incense stands, etc., because they are rare, are not included in the type series. 31,039 sherds (diagnostics) from this excavation were subjected to special study. Of this number, about 77% fell into one of the 110 type categories, and the other 23% into one of the "miscellany," or "non-typable" categories. It should be noted that in the later Iron Age strata an average of only 13% of the sherds were miscellaneous, meaning that the vast majority of the sherds were identifiable as belonging to a known type. In the earlier Iron Age strata about 28% were miscellaneous. In the Late Bronze Age levels this figure rose to over 45%; this means that nearly half of the material is not presented in the statistical charts as known types. This was partly due to the fact that much less material was recovered from these levels. Only 4009 diagnostic sherds or 13% of the total material subjected to special study came from Strata XVII to XIV; this meant in practice that when a form appeared there were only two or three examples of that form and these did not warrant the creation of a category. It is also possible that the earlier material is less suited to this kind of study; that is, it may be that in this period more forms are in actuality miscellaneous or varied. For example, in Strata XVII and XVI, about 25% of the diagnostic sherds fell into the category "miscellaneous plates." Now either the plates of Tyre for that period were in fact quite varied, for lack of mass production, or not enough material was available to identify a common local plate. Only further excavation will clarify this. The pottery was handled as follows: Each basket of pottery was given a ticket with the square, area, level, basket number and date; at the pottery area, a register card was made for each basket giving the numbers of the major groups in the basket. The diagnostics were marked in indelible ink and at the end of the excavation these were sorted into types; the locus number and number of occurences of a type per locus were recorded in a log. When the strata had been identified, a master card for each stratum was made, giving the totals of each type in that stratum; the statistics were compiled from the master cards. Table 1 gives the totals for each level of the lamps, red-burnished sherds, body sherds, etc., based on the total number of sherds in each level. The statistics of Tables 3 to 6 and 8 to 14 are based on the diagnostics only; thus on Table 3, the percentage of plates for Stratum II is based on the number 3, 726 rather than the number 45,817. Table 1 gives the actual number of diagnostics for each level on which the other statistics were based. Tables 3 to 6 and 8 to 13 are accompanied by bar graphs (e.g., Table 3B) which use the convention "X'; each "X" represents a unit of 0.25% (Tables 5B, 6B, 9 and 12B), 0.50% (Tables 4B and 8B) or 1% (Tables 3B, lOB, liB and 13B); the statistics have been rounded to the nearest unit for the graphs.

Lamps and other Non-Diagnostics The lamps were eliminated from the diagnostics on the basis that in fragmentary form, one Iron Age or Bronze Age lamp is nearly identical to any other one. The only exception to this occurs in the later Iron Age, when the more severe lines of the lamp rim make a fragment recognizable; a similar miniature lamp and the red-burnished lamp are also distinguishable as types. Multiple spouted lamps, known to occur at Phoenician sites and which do occur at Tyre, did not appear in recognizable form in this excavation. Thus for the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age there were only four lamp types:

18

Lamp type 1 (for examples, see pl. XIV.9; pl. XXVI.9, 10; pl. XXXI.9; pl. XLVII.18). This is the ordinary Iron Age or Late Bronze Age lamp. Lamp type 2 (not illustrated): these were red-burnished lamp fragments, otherwise undifferentiated, except that they were of the form of lamp type 1, not of lamp type 3. Lamp type 3 (pl. VII.6): this lamp is quite low in profile, the rim being quite sharply formed and it is often burnished; it is based on a form similar to Plates 3 and 4. 1 Lamp type 4 (pl. VII.S): this is a miniature version of lamp type 3 and is similar in manufacture.

Table 1: Analysis of Total Sherds Excavated Body Sherds Stratum Red Burn. Painted I II III IV

v

VI VII VIII IX X-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

2.30% 3.30 6.90 8.30 2.00 2.00 2.90 l.iO

.so

.23 .11 • 34 .17 .09 .32 .08 .23 .17 .23

0.05% • 77 .25 .45 .62 .72 .40 .55 .37 .25 .99 .35 .35

.so .62 .43 .20 .56 .45

Misc. 80.76% 83.58 75.17 74.92 86.59 85.78 84.26 89.22 89.69 89.97 87.51 91.49 91.57 91.68 86.54 93.70 92.51 92.43 93.57

Diagnostics

SJ Lamps Handles Shoulders

Number Percentage

0.95% .34 .56 .82 .56 .50 .51 .51 .57 .47 1.10 .46 .61 .55 1. 06 .47 .55 .36 .26

216 3,726 2,603 2,182 699 505 429 1,813 1,897 4,045 1,048 1,875 2,859 2,558 574 1,502 1,242 507 758

2.10% 1. 48 .96 1.12 1. 95 3.37 1. 76 1.71 1. 64 1. 67 1. 58 1. 56 1. 33 1. 42 1. 90 1. 09 1. 54 1.11 1.12

2.80% 2.40 1. 00 .57 .57 .31

.so

.47 .48 .71 .79 .53 .46 • 59 .84 .39 .25 .13 .06

11.04% 8.13 15.16 13.82 7. 72 7.32 9.67 6.34 6.70 6.70 7.92 5.27 5.51 5.17 8. 72 3.83 4. 72 5.23 4.30

31,039 Totals Misc. sherds from Arab and Roman Pits . . .•.. Body sherds and diagnastics from Strata XIX to XXVII. TOTAL SHERDS EXCAVATED

Total Sherds 1,894 45,817 17;l69 15,776 9,057 6,900 4,438 28,580 28,322 60,360 13,237 35,560 51,900 49,524 6,:;79 39;203 26,309 9,688 17,640 467,953 31.055 64,319 563,327

Table 2 shows the numbers of these lamp types in Strata I to V. All of the rest of the lamps listed on Table 1 for Strata VI to XVII are of type 1. It is clear that a new type of lamp appears in Stratum III; the appearance of the red-burnished lamp seems to precede this development slightly, but the evidence is small. If, however, the red-burnished lamp was characteristic of the period of Stratum IV, this would be in keeping with the high proportion of redburnished sherds from this period. Column 1 of Table 1 indicates this; this column gives the proportion of red-burnished body sherds (not rims or bases) in each stratum. This category might, in some future study be refined to give a more detailed analysis of the exact nature of the sherds (red-burnished by hand or wheel; interior and exterior, etc.). About 1.22% of all the pottery of this excavation fell into the class red-burnished body sherds, but these are relatively rare in the earlier strata, rising in number gradually until the period of the very fine red-burnished ware of Stratum IV and then decreasing. The proportion of miscellaneous body sherds remains almost constant through all levels, as does the proportion of handles. The handles could have been presented within the context of the type series, but the information derived from a handle type series is more readily available from a study of rims; but it might be mentioned that the vast majority of the handles of Strata II and III are of the type shown on pls. II-IV, very short round storage jar handles. The occurence of storage jar shoulder fragments is equally a non-significant category except as regards the relative absence of these in the earlier levels. This is due to the fact that the much more rounded storage jar shoulders of the Late Bronze Age usually make these elements unidentifiable as such. The high count of storage jar shoulders in

19

Table 2: Lamp Types: Strata I- V

Stratum

Lamp Types 1 2

3

4

17

I

1

II

22

2

124

8

III

35

2

59

1

IV

114

5

11

v

50

1

Strata I-III is due to the fact that the storage jar shoulder of this period is very angular and therefore easily identifiable, even if the fragment is tiny. The body sherd count gives no information other than the relatively meaningless total of sherds collected, or as a basis for computing the frequency of red-burnished and painted sherds. The amount of time involved in this effort, however, is not justified by the results. The frequency of red-burnished and painted sherds could be computed on the basis of the total diagnostics.

Plates By far the most useful indicator of the whole type series is the plate. This is because a plate is small enough that when it breaks, a relatively large piece is left of it; this is to be contrasted with the large storage jar which can break into over one hundred pieces. In the following presentation of the plates and of the rest of the type series, the format is as follows: First, the "total number of fragments," which is the actual count of fragments of the type which occurred in this excavation. This should give the reader some sense of the certainty of the category; a category for which hundreds of examples were available for study is obviously more certain than a category which is based on only ten examples. There are exceptions to this: for example, Plate type 5 and Storage Jar type 3 are relatively rare but are so distinctive that they are still useful indicators. Secondly, "examples": this refers the reader to the plates at the end of the text for drawings of complete or semi-complete examples of the type. 2 Then, under "parallels" are listed the parallels to the type from other excavations; these are by no means exhaustive, and generally only well-stratified and dated parallels are listed. For some types, no parallels are given. Each section concludes with a description of the type. The base type series is not discussed separately; rather, each base known to be associated with a certain plate (or storage jar, etc.) is discussed following the appropriate rim type.

Plate 1 Total number of fragments: 71 Examples: Plate 1.7-11 Parallels: AI Mina, Levels VII-VI and V 3 Tell Abu Hawiim, Stratum 11. 4 Sarepta 5 Cyprus, Period VII 6 Ash dod, Stratum 2 7

20

Table 3A: Plates

2

1

Stratum

3

4

5

6

8

7

9

10

11

12

13

14

8.33% 7.87% 4.63% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.46% 4.17% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.46% 0.46% 0.00%

I II

.62 13.76

6.28

1.40

.21

.05

1. 34

3.33

.35

.67

.24

III

.35 27.97

8. 72

1.54

.35

.31

2.61

7.57

.69

.69

.04

.46

.82

.05

.73

8.98 17.83

3.44

.96

.41

.08

.19 .27

2.11

.87

v

1.43

8.44

7.15 11.02

4.01

.29

.43

VI

.20

2. 77

6.93 15.45

1. 98

.40

3.17

IV

.23

VII

2.10

3.03 19.35

6.06

.93

.93

VIII

4.25

2.70 12.52

7.72

.28

2.26

IX

1.05

.95 10.65

8.86

.53

3.37

X-1

.12

.10 10.80 12.36

.20

3.34

.17

X-2

.67

.48

8.59 11.64

1.43

5.44

.10

XI

.53

.16

6.67

7.79

.96

7.20

.32

XII

.28

.21

4.62 11.82

1.22

7.10

.38

XIII-1

.27

.23

6.88

2.42

7.86

.23

XIII-2

.17

.70

2.61 11.15

3.83

7.14

XIV

1.20

4.59

1.20

6.53

.53

1.77

.48

1. 37

.64

.39

1.58

2.17

.40

.26

.63

XV

1.69

XVI

.59

.9.9

XVII

.79

1.45

.26

Percentages based on total diagnostics per stratum

Table 3B: Plates Stratum I II III IV

v VI

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx X

1

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

X X

p

1

R..2_

X X

xxxx xxxx XX

XX VII VIII IX X-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

XXX XXX

p X

xxxxxx X xxxxxxxx p 11 I xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxx XP xxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxxxxxx X XX xxxxxxx XX XX XXX XX xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx X

I

XX XXX XX XX X X X X

X

12

xxxx xxxx

XX XXX

X X

X X

XX XX

. xxxxx XXX XXX xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx p

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxx XXX

1:_]_ XXX

3

X

XXX xxxxxxxxxxx XXX xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx 10 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXX 9 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXP X-xxxxxxxxxxxxx X xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXX XXXX XX XXX XXX XX X

X

XXX XXX X X

XX XX

X X

X X X X

X

XX _E__!j

X X

XX

X

21

XXX XXX

X X

p 8

XXX XXX X

XXX XXX

X XX XX

XX

XXX XXX XXX XXX _p 13

xxxxx=--xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXX XXXX XXX XXX X X X

XX XX

XX

xxxx xxxx X X

I

X X X X

_xxxxx xxxxx

5 %-

This plate is characterized by a ridge about half-way down the interior wall. The ridge was probably formed by folding over the rim towards the interior and then pressing the fold together and making it somewhat concave between the ridge and the outer edge of the rim. The clay and firing varies, being either a well-fired but soft ware or a brittle but poorly fired ware. It is usually rather crudely finished, rarely burnished and never decorated. The base is always string-cut and flat (Base type 7). It is interesting that the storage jar which appears in the same stratum as this plate has the same "dishing" of the rim (see pl. 1.15 and 16). The rim appears sporadically in Strata IV-II and may be intrusive in these strata (to be accounted for by the number of robber trenches); it is the most frequent plate in Stratum I (see Table 3). The parallels from al Mina and Ashdod would seem to indicate that the type starts around the end of the eighth century, but the Cypriote and Abu Hawam parallels show that the type has a rather long life.

Plate 2 Total number of fragments: 1,267 Examples: Plate VIII Parallels: Megiddo, Strata II-1 8 Sarepta 9 Al Mina 10 Hazor, Stratum V 11 Salamis, Tomb 79 12 Khalde, Tomb 3, Level III

13

Plate 1 occurs in such numbers inTyre that it must have been the mass-produced standard plate of its period. Of the 1,267 fragments collected in this excavation, 803 were measured and showed a diameter range of from 12 to 37 em, with an average diameter of 15 em. The base of this plate is always the flat, string-cut Base type 7. As can be seen on pl. VIII, the rim treatment varies widely; when inverted, the plate can sit on the interior edge of the rim, on the exterior edge, or flat on the rim itself. The ware of Plate type 2 is usually in the reddish-yellow/brown range and it is well-fired; again the finish is crude and the plate is only rarely burnished. Dish covers were made from this plate by attaching a handle to the base and cutting what must be vent holes in the wall of the plate (see pl. X.3, 6). The Megiddo, Hazor, Salamis and Khalde parallels appear to place the type in the second part of the eighth century, with a possible extension into the seventh.

Plate 3 Total number of fragments: 481 Examples: Plate IX.3, 4, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18 Parallels: Akhziv, Tomb 24 14 Khalde, Tomb 121, Level III 15 This plate is almost always burnished and very well finished. It occurs with either Base type 1 or 2, that is, a stepped and slightly convex base. 16 The rim of Plate 3 is usually wider than that of Plate 2 and it usually sits flat on the rim when inverted, although there are exceptions to this. 215 fragments of this rim were measured and found to have a diameter range of from 14 to 36 em with an average of 21 em. The large version of this plate shown on pl. IX.9 seems to have broken in antiquity and on'either side of the break small holes were drilled into the pottery, presumably so that the break could be repaired by wiring.

Plate 4 Total number of fragments: 110 Examples: Plate IX.5, 6, 12, 15 Parallels: Al Mina, Level VIII 17 Plate 4 is a variant of Plate type 3, characterized by a "step" or articulation point below the rim. It is usually found broken along this ridge. The rim itself is either horizontal or "drooping," and the plate is always well finished and burnished. Unlike Plate type 3, there are examples of this plate with a red-burnished slip. 31 examples

22

of the plate were measured· and it was found that the diameter range of these was 20 to 30 em, with an average of 21 em. A similar small plate in very thin burnished ware also occurs (see pl. IX.7, 8; pl. XVI.l); these are not counted as belonging to the type.

Bases 1 and 2 Total number of fragments: Examples:

Base 1: 237 Base 2: 22 Base I: Plate IX.3-6, 11-14, and 16-18 Base 2: Plate IX.lS

These two bases are associated with Plates 3 and 4. They are both stepped, often slightly convex and, like the plates, well finished and highly burnished. Base 1 is plain and Base 2 has a circle incised with a sharp instrument around the base. Both of these bases were finished with a knife or other sharp instrument on the wheel. There were 214 examples of Base 1 which were burnished and 23 examples which were red-slipped and burnished. There were only 22 examples of Base 2; it probably is only a variant of Base 1. The red-slipped and burnished examples of Base 1 are called Base 1a and the burnished examples called 1b on Table 11.

Plate 5 Total number of fragments: 18 Examples: Plate X.1 7, 18, 19 This is actually a small bowl rather than a plate; it does not occur very often but it is quite distinctive. The rim is usually vertical and rises from a ridge about one-third of the way down the vessel. The base is always the string-cut Base type 7. The bowl is usually poorly finished, never burnished, and always has red paint or wash on the rim. Only 18 examples of this rim type were collected, 17 of them in Strata 11-111.

Plate 6 Total number of fragments: 26 Examples: Plate X.23-25; Plate XV.l9, 20 This is also a small bowl; it has a plain incurving rim. The surface of the bowl is sometimes red-burnished, sometimes plain, and sometimes decorated with bichrome paint. The base again is the plain flat string-cut Base type 7. Of the 26 examples collected, 16 were found in Stratum IV.

Plate 7 Total number of fragments: 326 Examples: Plate XV.9; Plate XVI.13-17; Plate XVIII.2 Plate type 7 is probably the predecessor of Plate type 2. It differs from Plate type 2 in being better made, having a larger diameter and a narrower ridge at the rim. Like Plate 2, the base is flat and string-cut. Plate type 7 is sometimes burnished and two examples of this plate with a burnished red slip occurred (one of these is shown on pl. XV.9). 211 pieces were measured and showed a diameter range offrom 12 to 36 em, with an average diameter of 19.8 em (nearly 5 em larger than the average Plate type 2). Plate X.S shows a red-slipped and burnished cover made from this plate type.

Plate 8 Total number of fragments: 936 Examples: Plate X.4, 7; Plate XVI.l8-38; Plate XVII1.3; Plate XIX.9-12 18 Parallels: Hazor 19 Samaria 20 Cyprus. Period IV 21 'Atii.t, Burial IV.a Khalde, Tomb 121, Level III 22 Sarepta 23 23

Plate type 8 is a plain straight-sided flaring plate with a string-cut base. The rim is sometimes slightly thickened to the exterior. It is usually well-fired but is only rarely burnished. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish this plate from Plate type 10 if the fragment in question is very small; Plate 10, however, has a slight curving of the body wall and is almost always burnished 459 pieces of Plate 8 were measured and they showed a diameter range of from 10 to 27 em, averaging 17.14 em. It should be noted that the Hazor and Samaria examples cited above usually have a somewhat more curved body wall than the Tyre examples, but if the examples from those sites are of the same period as Tyre Plate type 8, this plus the evidence from Cyprus and Khalde would seem to indicate a date in the eighth century for the type.

Plate 9 Total number of fragments: 299 Examples: Plate XVI.39-42; Plate XVIIJ.4-6; Plate XXIX.5 24 Parallels: Khalde, Tomb 121, Level III Tell Abu Hawiim, Stratum IV 25 Sarepta 26 Akko, Stratum 7 27 The basis for this· category was: (1) form, which is similar to that of Plate type 8 and (2) decoration, red pr red and black paint on the interior. Unlike Plate 8, Plate 9 is often burnished. The base is string-cut and the plate is usually well fired. The miniature versions of the plate, of which there were 28 fragments, were included in the type (see, for examples, pl. XVI.39, 40). The parallels to this type from Tell Abu Hawiim are evidence that it appears in the ninth century, while the parallels from Khalde and Akko indicate an extension into the eighth century.

Base 6 Total number of fragments: 61 Examples: Plate XVI.41; Plate XVIII.4-6 This is a string-cut base with red or red and black paint on the interior and is the base to Plate type 9. However, some complete examples of Plate 9 have paint only on the rim and the base for that group would then be the plain Base type 7, rather than Base 6. There were 61 examples of this painted base in the excavated material, the highest proportion in Stratum VI, the stratum in which the highest proportion of Plate 9 appeared, as would be expected.

Plate 10 Total number of fragments: 1,619 Examples: Plate XIX.13-16; Plate XXIII.2-3; Plate XXV1.6; Plate XXIX.6 In form, Plate 10 stands midway between Plates 11 and 8. It has a plain unthickened rim, a slightly curved body wall and is almost always burnished on the interior. It' usually occurs with a low ring base but there are some examples which have a string-cut flat base. 611 pieces were measured and showed a diameter range of 10 to 28 cm1 with an average of 17.24 em.

Plate 11 Total number of fragments: 1,854 Examples: Plate XVIII.l; Plate XXVI.1-4; Plate XXIX.4; Plate XXXI.l, 3; Plate XXXIII.2, 5 Parallels: Hazor, Stratum IX 28 Jericho, Tomb A 85, layer 4, tenth century with a possible extension into the ninth. Tell deir 'Allii, Phase I, where Phases I to L cover ca. 1150 to 1050. 30

29

This plate is characterized by a slight thickening of the rim interior and a curved body wall. The base is usually the low ring Base type 8, but examples with the flat Base 7 do occur. The plate is usually made of fine clay and it is

24

well fired; the surface is almost always burnished. 305 pieces were measured and the diameters ranged from 12 to 23 ems, with an average of 17.57 em.

Plate 12 Total number of fragments: 213 Examples: Plate XXXIII. I, 4, 16; Plate XXXVII.4 Parallels: Hazor, Stratum IX 31 Plate 12 is similar to Plate 11 but the body wall is usually more curved and the thickened rim has been squaredoff with a sharp instrument; this is to be contrasted with the soft rounded rim thickening of Plate 11. Plate 12 is always very well finished and highly burnished; it occurs with either a flat or a low ring base. 151 fragments were measured and found to have a diameter range of from 13 to 28 em, averaging 18.33 em.

Plate 13 Total number of fragments: 1,046 Examples: Plate XXXIII.3, 7, 8; Plate XXXVII.5, 6, 8; Plate XXXIX.17 Parallels: Jericho, Tomb A 85, layer 2, dated to the tenth century with a possible extension into the ninth 32 Tell Abu Hawam, Strata IV-V. 33 This plate has a slight carination below the rim. The rim itself can be either plain and straight or slightly thickened to the interior. Many of these plates have knobs or small horizontal handles attached to the rim. The complete examples indicate that it can occur with either a low ring base or a flat base (Bases 7 and 8). It is usually well fired and finished, and is almost always burnished. 393 pieces were measured; the diameters ranged from 13 to 28 em, with an average of 18.08 em.

Plate 14 Total number of fragments: 65 Examples: Plate XLII.9, 12; Plate XLVII.8 Parallels: Tell Abu Hawiim, Stratum V 34 This plate has an everted rim with a slight ridge on the interior; it is always poorly fired and has a light colored surface bloom. Not enough examples appeared to determine the average size or the characteristic base.

Bases 7 and 8 Total number of fragments:

Base 7: 1,989 Base 8: 677

Base type 7, the most common of the whole excavation, is the plain, string-cut flat plate base. The only interest that there is in tabulating the frequency of this type is so that it can be compared with the frequency of Base type 8. Base type 8 is a low ring base and is associated with Plates 10, 11, 12, and 13. There were 677 examples of this kind of base, 605 of them in Strata XIII-VIII. While Base 7 remains relatively constant through all levels (see Table 11), Base 8 is unimportant until Stratum XIII. From Stratum XIII up it becomes gradually more important until Stratum X, and in Stratum X-1 there were more examples of type 8 than of type 7 (257 as compared to 237 fragments). The proportion changes in Strata IX and VIII (about three or four type 7 fragments for every type 8 fragment) and type 8 almost disappears after that.

BaseS Total number of fragments: 25 Examples: Plate XCV.5.1 and 5.2 This is the cup-and-saucer base which is actually a variety of Base type 7 in that the base proper is string-cut. Only 25 examples of this base appeared, spread almost evenly over Strata XII to II. 25

Plate Summary Table 3 shows the fre1uency of the various plate types in Strata XVII to I. The percentage of miscellaneous plates is shown on Table 4. 5 As noted above almost all of the plates in the earlier strata fell into the category miscellaneous, but the majority of Plate 14 examples appeared in Stratum XVI. By the time of Stratum XIII, Plate type 13 is established and remains important through Stratum XL Plate type 12 is important only in Stratum XIII, while Plate type 11 is important in Stratum XIII and continues to be important through Stratum X. From Stratum X on, Plate 10 is dominant, with the painted Plate 9 increasing in importance after Stratum VI. With Stratum V, a new group takes over: Plates 6, 7, and 8, to be replaced in Strata II-III by plates 2, 3, 4, and 5. Plate type 2 continues in Stratum I but is joined by the new form, Plate 1.

Fine Ware Plates This category includes all of the very thin-ware plates which are always burnished and almost always red-slipped. This type of ware, sometimes called "Samaria Ware," 36 is very common in Tyre, but the Tyre repertoire of forms seems to be somewhat different from that at Samaria or Hazor. For one thing, the carinated bowl which is so common at Samaria 37 is rare at Tyre; the high-footed bowl of Samaria 38 is equally rare at Tyre. Secondly, it should be noted that while some forms appear in Tyre in quantity (i.e., Fine Ware Plate types 1, 2 and 6), other forms, each one singular, are also common. So common are the singular forms, in fact, that one is continuously reminded that the period of this ware probably saw more creativity and simple craftsmanship among the potters than any other Phoenician period. As it was the purpose of this study to identify the common forms, not much attention was giv~n to the singular form, and so it must be stressed that the few common forms listed in this category do not by any means exhaust the possibilities. Finally it should be noted that this ware appears rather suddenly - there are some antecedents, but the period represented by Strata V-IV of this excavation sees the sudden production of literally hundreds of new forms, many of them in ware so thin and so well finished that they are, even in fragmentary form, beautiful. The tradition continues, but the forms and wares of Strata III-I are already beginning to degenerate.

Fine Ware Plate 1

39

Total number of fragments: 5 Examples: Plate 1.1, 2 Parallels: Hazor, Stratum VA 40 Al Mina, Level VIII 41 The distinction between this plate and Fine Ware Plate type 2 is a small one as the ware and general form are identical. Fine Ware Plate 1 is slightly higher and somewhat smaller in diameter than Fine Ware Plate 2. Additionally, the red slip of Fine Ware Plate 1 is more like a wash than the heavier slip of Fine Ware Plate 2.

Fine Ware Plate 2 Total number of fragments: 153 Examples: Plate Xl.4-10, 12-16 Parallels: Hazor, Strata V and VA42 Sarepta 43 Sidon 44 Megiddo, Strata III to V 45 Samaria 46 'Atllt, Tombs IVa, X, Xlllb Far'ah, Niveau 2 48 Ashdod, Stratum 3 49

47

This plate has a flaring rim, a flat or slightly convex base, and is made of very fine, welllevigated, well fired clay, usually reddish yellow/pink in color. The most common decoration is an over-all red slip, but often the base has been red-slipped only in bands ("reserved slip"), or completely red-slipped and then incised in bands; both of these methods leave the original clay color exposed in rings. There are examples of this plate which have no red slip

26

Table 4A: Fine Ware Plates and Miscellaneous Plates

l

Stratum

2

4a

3

4b

6

5

8

7

2.31% 0.00% 0.46% 0.93% l. 85% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00'6

I

l-2-3-6 a b

Misc.*

Total*

9.26'6 0.46%

8.33%

49.98%

l. 42

.64

.56

.05

.11

7.27

.80

5.85

49.19

l. 04

.65

.65

l. 42

. 12

.12

2.69

l. 31

6.22

67.68

.78

1.19

.32

.18

3.85

2.11

6.87

62.55

.14

. 43

l. 00

.86

14.16

51.65

II III IV

2.44

.32

l. 21

l. 54

.81

.92

.09

v

.29

l. 60

7.75

.43

l. 57

4.55

9.31

44.76

2.10

17.72

52.22

2.65

13.95

46.33

2.27

15.13

43.07

x-1

.42

11.92

39.43

X-2 XI XII

.29

8.59

37.23

.69

16.21

40.53

.45

16.54

42.62

.20

13.88

32.60

.35

10.80

36.75

VI VII VIII IX

XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

18.44

32.49

21.10

27.05

23.88

29.60

20.84

23.74

*Plates and Fine Ware Plates Percentages based on total diagnostics per stratum

Table 4B: Fine Ware Plates

Stratum I II III IV

v VI VII VIII IX X-1

xxxxxx xxxxxx FWP 1

XXXXX XX XXX XXX FWP 2 XXX

--xx

X X X X XX XX FWP 3

XX X X

X X

xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx XXXXX FWP xxxx xxxx

xxxxxx XXX XXX xxxxx XXX XX XXX XXX

xxxx xxxx

I•'WP 4

x--X XX XX X X

Stratum T

TI

X

XI XII

X X X X X X

FWP 6

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

XX XX

XXX XXX

~

8

X X-2

X X XXX XXX

X X I•'WP 'i

TIT 2 .• ~xxxx

TV

xxxx

V

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX

FWP 1-2-3-6

xxxxxx XX

XX

but they are not common. About one-third of these plates have a black band on the rim. The plate is always wheel burnished and the diameter ranges from 17 to 27 em and averages about 21 em.

27

Base 3 Total number of fragments: 225 Examples: Plate I.2 and Plate XI.12-16 Fine Ware Plates 1 and 2 usually break at the join of the rim to the base. Base 3 is the red-slipped and burnished base of these plates, and it is often decorated, as noted above, by incision or by reserved slip bands.

Fine Ware Plate 3 Total number of fragments: 36 Examples: Plate XI.l-3; Plate :XVI.4 This plate seems to be a variant of Fine Ware Plate type 2. The ware of type 3 is thicker than that of type 2, and the two seem to have been manufactured by different methods. Fine Ware Plate type 2 is so thin that it was probably made on a mold, but Fine Ware Plate 3 looks as though it was made on a wheel and a line was incised on the interior, perhaps in imitation of the join between base and rim of Fine Ware Plate type 2. In addition, Fine Ware Plate 3 has a lower rim than type 2, but like type 2 it can be red-slipped and burnished or just burnished.

Fine Ware Plate 4 Total number of fragments: 191 Examples: Plate I.4; Plate X.14-16, 20-22; Plate :XV.8 Parallels: Al Mina, Level VIII. 51 Type 4 is a small bowl with a plain incurving rim, usually just hand-sized but occasionally quite large. The decoration varies; burnished, red-slipped and burnished completely or partially and with or without a black band on the rim. The type category is divided into: (a) red-slipped and burnished, and (b) burnished.

Fine Ware Plate 5 Total number of fragments: 79 Examples: Plate X.28, 31, 32; Plate XV.2, 5; Plate XVI. 10, 11 Parallels: Al Mina, Level VIII. 52 Sarepta 53 This is a small bowl with a narrow horizontal everted rim and an angle below the mid-point of the body apparent on some examples. The surface can be just burnished but is more often red-slipped and burnished. The black burnished example (the ware is dark gray) on pl. :XVI.lO is a variant and was the only fragment of its kind. A similar bowl which was not burnished and which had red paint on the rim (see pl. X.33 and pl. XVI.12) was not included in the category.

Fine Ware Plate 6 Total number of fragments: 238 Examples: Plate :XV.1, 4, 7, 10, 11 Parallels: Khalde, Tomb 121, Level III Hazor, Stratum VII 55 Kition 56

54

Fine Ware Plate 6 is the finest of the type which appeared in this excavation. The ware is thinner than Fine Ware Plates 1 or 2, the diameter is smaller and the base more convex. It seems to have been manufactured by molding. There is usually a small (ca. 2 em in diameter) circle incised about one millimeter deep into the base to form a platform on which the convex base can rest. The incision is so shallow that it does not show in the drawings. The majority of these pieces are red-slipped on the interior and just over the exterior rim but there do occur examples which are completely red-slipped or just burnished. Of the 238 examples of this rim collected, 169 of them occurred in Stratum IV.

28

Base4 Total number of fragments: Example: Plate XV.ll

84

Base 4, the base to Fine Ware Plate type 7, is recognized by the fine ware, the red-burnished slip on the interior and the burnished exterior with the small incised platform. Of the 84 examples collected, 41 were found in Stratum IV.

Fine Ware Plate 7 Total number of fragments: 13 Examples: Plate XI.18, 19; Plate XV.23 This plate is in a heavier ware but was included in the Fine Ware category because of the surface treatment which is similar to the other plates in the category. It is distinctive in having an incised ridge on the outer edge of the rim. Again, it is usually red-slipped and burnished or, less frequently, just burnished. There are also examples decorated in the "reserved slip" technique.

Fine Ware Plate 8 Total number of fragments: 190 Examples: Plate XIX.l-8; 57 see also Plate XXXI.12 Parallels: Megiddo, Strata V-III 58 Samaria, Periods III-VI 59 Hazor, Strata IX and VI 60 Tell Abu Hawiim, Stratum III 61 This plate or bowl appears in several slightly different forms, as can be seen on pl. XIX. The unifying factor is the very fine golden-colored ware and the surface treatment. The vast majority of the pieces have a heavy red slip on the exterior only (no examples with red slip interior) and are beautifully hand burnished both interior and exterior. A very few of these pieces (see pl. XIX. 7) have no red slip but are otherwise identical in manufacture. These plates are probably the predecessors of the wheel burnished plates of the later strata. Notice, however, pl. XXXI.12: the ware of this plate is not as thin as those which appear on pl. XIX and the red slip is somewhat different in hue (purplish), but several fragments of this heavier type appeared in the lower strata and indicate that this is the earliest form of Fine Ware Plate type 8 and so were included with the type. No example of Fine Ware Plate type 8 with an articulated base occurred in this excavation; however; in the same strata as Fine Ware Plate 8 there were a few fragments of a small disc base of similar manufacture (red-slipped and burnished exterior, burnished interior). 62

Fine Ware Plate Summary Table 4 gives the statistics on the occurrence of these plates. The last column, called "1-2-3-6," gives the numbers of those small rim fragments which.must belong to categories Fine Ware Plate 1, 2, 3, or 6 but which were so small that they could not with certainty be placed in any one of those categories. This group is divided into two parts: (a) red slipped and burnished, and (b) burnished. There were 452 red-slipped fragments and 117 fragments which were burnished only. In Stratum II, these fragments accounted for more than 8% of the total number of diagnostics (301 fragments). 63 As can be seen on Table 4, the Fine Ware Plate is most important in Strata V-1. The heavy variety of Fine Ware Plate 8 appears as early as Stratum XIII, but the type is not common. By the time of Stratum IX, the thin variety of type 8 has become important and remains so through Stratum VI, disappearing after that. With Stratum V the large group of wheel burnished fine plates appears; type 7 did not appear in great enough quantity to judge whether it is more important in the Strata V-IV group or the Strata III-II group. Type 6 is clearly the most popular in Strata V-IV; indeed, if it is presumed that the mixed type "1-2-3-6" fragments in Stratum IV are from Fine Ware Plate type 6, then these pieces account for almost 14% of the Stratum IV diagnostics. The bowl with the flaring rim, type 5, is also frequent in Strata V-IV. In Strata III-II, types 2, 3 and 4 become more important, and in Stratum I, Fine Ware Plate 1 replaces type 2.

29

Deep Bowls This category was the least illuminating of the study. Relatively few forms emerged and the conclusion is that the deep bowl, or thick-walled bowl, has more variety of form than other categories, making types more difficult to recognize.

DeepBowll Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate IX.21

31

This bowl has a "T-shaped" rim and the bowl can sit either on the top of the "T" or on the inside edge of it when inverted. The bowl is usually well finished, and sometimes burnished. Of the 31 examples collected, 28 of them occurred in Strata II-III.

DeepBowl2 Total number of fragments: 33 Examples: Plate XV.27; Plate XVIII.ll Deep Bowl type 2 has a very thick body wall which curves in directly below the rim; the rim itself is vertical and is thickened externally but usually only very slightly.

DeepBow/3 Total number of fragments: 57 Examples: Plate XV.25; Plate XVIII.7; Plate XIX.27; Plate XXII1.12; Plate XXVI.20; Plate XXVII.2; Plate XXXII.15 Parallels: Hazor, Stratum IXB (red burnished interior and exterior); Hazor, Stratum IXA (bichr6me paint exterior); Hazor, Stratum VIII (red burnished exterior), Hazor, Stratum VB (red burnished exterior). 64 This category includes all large bowls with an incurving body wall and inverted rim. Of the 57 fragments of this type collected, 18 were red-slipped and burnished, 2 had bichrome paint, and the rest were plain or burnished. There was one of these rims in Stratum XIII-1, 10 in Stratum XII, only 3 in Stratum XI, but 25 in Stratum X-1, and decreasing in numbers after that.

DeepBow/4 Total number of fragments: 29 Examples: Plate XXIII.ll; Plate XXVII.l Deep Bowl 4 is similar to Deep Bowl 3 in having an incurving body wall, but at the very top of type 4, the rim is everted to form a small ledge. Of the 29 examples of the type recovered, 6 had red paint on the rim. Only one example of the type was found in Stratum XIV, 6 in Stratum XIII, etc., up to Stratum VIII with 5 examples and none above that.

DeepBow/5 Total number of fragments: 62 Examples: Plate XIX.28; Plate XXIII.5; Plate XXVII.3, 4 This bowl has a flaring rim with an exterior articulation point below the rim. Above this point the rim is flaring or near vertical and sometimes thickened slightly. Of the 62 examples of the type collected, 27 occurred in Stratum X-1.

30

Table SA: Deep Bowls, Krater and Pithos

Stratum I

2

1

4

3

5

6

0.46% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Misc.

Krater

0.46%

0.00%

Pithos Rims Bases

Total

0.00%

o. 92%

0.00%

II

.54

.13

. .

III

.31

• 12

.08

IV

.09

.23

.05

.05

1. 05

.43

.14

2.58

.29

.29

.20

2.57

.59

.59

5.54

.23

1. 63

v VI VII VIII IX X-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

.

1. 39

.. . . . • 28 . . .16 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

.. .. .. .. .. .. . ..

.28

.28

.22

.11

.16

.11

.62

.20

• 38

.19

.16

..

.67 .38

.03

1. 67

.35

.14

.03

.04

.20

.08

.. ..

1. 62

1. 47

1.17

.06

2.87

.17

.55

2.21

.58

.95

.05

4. 33

2.22 1. 34

.49 .38

.47 .57

.

4. 77 3.24

2.03

.91

.80

2.62

.42

.46

1. 95

. 98.

1.09

.10

.17

.17

2.61

.87

.87

.07

.33

1.20

1. 80

1.60

1. 40

• 89

.48

.11

4. 4 5

.23

.. .05 . .16 .

. . . . .64 . . . .39 .. .. .. ..

~ercentages

.94 1.11

. .20 . .. .

• 72

.

.03

.72

4.83

1. 58

3.94

1. 85

3.83

.

4.71

4.06 .03

4.69

.13

II

III IV

v

XX XX XX XX X X

5. 91 5.68

based on total diagnostics per stratum

X

DB 1

r

l%=~~~~ DB 2

X XXX XXX

VI

xxxxxx

VII

XXTXX

XX XX X

i

X

VIII IX X-1

X X X

DB 3XX

--xx

X-2 XI J:CII XIII-1

1

X

XX X X X X

XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

xxixx

X X X X X X DB 4 X

X X XX

l

T

I

r

XI

X X X X X

X X

XX XXX XXX XXX

xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

X X X

XXX DB 5 XXX XX

X

XXX XXX XX XX

DB 6

31

6.53 7.56

.

Table 5B: Deep Bowls, Krater and Pithos Stratum I

4.05 4.50

X XX XX XX XX XX XX

xxxx xxxx XX XX

xxxx xxxx

XXX XXX XXX XXX

xxxxxx xxxx xxxx

Krater

X X XX XX X X XX XX

xxxx xxxx XX XX XX XX XXX XXX XX XX

xxxx xxxx XXX XXX

xxxxxx

XX XXX X XX XX Pithos

Deep Bowl6 Total number of fragments: 60 Examples: Plate XLIX.24, 25; Plate LII.7, 8; Plate LIII. 14-16. This is a plain flaring shallow bowl with a slightly curving body wall. The complete examples indicate that it occurs with a high ring base (Base type 11). There were 60 fragments of these bowls, 30 of them red-slipped and burnished. The red-slipped fragments occurred principally in Strata XV and XIV; the plain fragments occurred in about equal numbers in Strata XVII to XIII.

Base 9 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XCV.9

100

Base 9 is a heavy flat base which is identical in form to Base type 7 but belongs to a much larger bowl. Like Base 7, the proportion of this type of base remained relatively constant through all levels. However, when its numbers are added to the numbers of Bases 10 and 11, it indicates the relative importance of the large heavy bowl in the earlier strata.

Bases 10 and 11 Total number of fragments: Examples:

Base 10: Base 11: Plate XCV.1 0 and 11

18 29

It is in conjunction with the deep bowls of the earlier strata that these bases appear. Base 10 has a very rounded look in profile and indeed it probably was made by attaching a rolled coil of clay to the bottom of a finished bowl.

Base 11 is a flaring ring base. These two bases were most numerous in Strata XVII, decreasing gradually after that.

Kraters 65 Examples:

Plate XLI.7; Plate XLIL21

Only one type of vessel is recognized as a "Krater" in this type series: a closed vessel with an ovoid body, having a long vertical or in curving neck, a plain everted horizontal rim and two vertical handles from the rim to the body. The later type (pl. VII.8) has a much shorter neck and is made of "crisp" ware similar to the "crisp" ware sausage-type storage jars of the same period and is excluded from the category. 137 fragments of krater rims, excluding the Cypriote White Painted variety, appeared in this excavation, all but 8 of them in Strata XV to IX. This type is discussed by Chapman, and she cites parallels which indicate that the form, which she calls "amphora with vertical handles", has antecedents in the Bronze Age and is characteristic of Early Iron and early Middle Iron (or down to ca. 800 in her dating system). 66

Base 12 Examples:

Plate XLI.7; Plate XCV.12

This is a krater base with an unfinished interior, 67 flaring and either squared or rounded at the lower edge. 32 of these bases were counted and with the krater rims listed on Table 5 appear to be useful indicators of their period. Pithoi

Examples:

Plate XL; Plate XLVI

The category "Pithoi" takes in any pithos rim which is thickened on the exterior and has a vertical neck. In general, all the pithos rims found in this excavation had that basic form, the exterior thickening sometimes being

32

slightly longer than the example on pl. XL. Bases of the type shown on pl. XL are listed on Table 5 are "Pithos Bases." There were 148 fragments of this type of rim, 141 of them in Strata XV to VIII. Fragments of a pithos having an incurving (rather than vertical) form, but also having a thickened rim, were found in Stratum II and it is likely that the "hole mouth" type replaces the earlier vertical type in the later period. Not enough examples of the "hole mouth" type appeared to be certain of this, or even to include it in the type series. 68 Deep Bowls, Kraters and Pithoi: Summary

Table 5 gives the frequencies of these types. Deep Bowl type 1 seems confined to the latest strata, with types 2 and 3 important in earlier strata. Type 4 appears even earlier, but the statistics for Deep Bowl type 5 show that either the type is not well defined or several similar forms are involved. Type 6 is clearly confined to the.earliest, Late Bronze Age, strata. The Krater and the Pithos are important elements in Stratum XIV but continue after that.

Jugs Jug I

Total number of fragments: 22 Examples: Plate V.1-8, 13, 18 Parallels: AI Mina 69 Khalde, Tomb 121, Level III 70 Hazar, Strata VI and VA 71 Amathus 72 This type of jug is closely related to Tyre Jug type 4, which, however, has a "mushroom" lip. Jug 1 is rarely burnished and the body is perhaps somewhat more globular than that of Jug 4. The neck treatment of Jug 1 is identical to that of Jugs 2, 3, 4, 8 and 9, which all belong to the class "neck-ridge ware," when this is taken to mean that the jugs were manufactured in (at least) two parts: the rim being joined to the neck of the vessel as a secondary piece, a treatment that results in a "ridge" around the neck. The handles of these vessels are usually attached from this ridge to the body. Jug 1, then, belongs to this family but the rim is very narrow and only slightly everted. Uke Jug 4, Jug 1 usually has red or red and black bands on the neck and rim; but, unlike Jug 4, Jug 1 often has painted bands on the body. Judy Birmingham has pointed out that, on Cyprus, this jug is common only at the site of Amathus. 73 This is hardly surprising, as the jug is probably of Phoenician origin and Amathus is just about the closest site on Cyprus to the Phoenician coast. The jug is found in Amathus Tombs 25ii, 11, 7ii, 23i, 23ii, 23iv, 16, and 9. Birmingham dates Amathus 7ii to around-800; Tombs 9 and 16 to ca. 850.to 675; Tomb 11 to ca. 825 to 650; Tomb 23i to 950 to 925; and Tombs 23ii-iv and 25ii to ca. 700 to 675. 74 It would seem that the one piece from Tomb 23i probably belongs to a later level of the same tomb; one is tempted to speculate that the two pieces from Tomb 7ii belong to Tomb 7iii, dated to 725 to 700. If this were so, this plus the evidence of the other fifteen pieces would indicate a date closer to 700 than 800. Birmingham further points out that jugs of our type 1 are contemporary on Cyprus with jugs of our types 3, 4, and 5 (the "mushroom-lipped" jugs). 75 At Tyre, this jug appeared in quantity in Stratum III, with a few pieces in Stratum II, and only one fragment in Stratum I. Jug2

Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate Vl.8, 9

21

These jugs belong to the "neck-ridge" family but they are larger, have a wider mouth and the rim has been folded down over the neck forming a collar around the neck. The ware is "crisp" and very gritty. The one example from Stratum IV can probably be discounted; the other examples all came from Strata 11-111. Jugs 3, 4, and 5

Total number of fragments:

Jug3: Jug 4: Jug 5:

15 65 21 33

Table 6A: Jugs 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0.46% .13 .61

0.00% .21 .46 .05

0.93% .08 .38

0.00% .99 .73 .41

0.00% .27 .38 .05

0.00% .64 .19 .18

0.00% .38 .42 1. 51 1.72 • 99 .23 .72 .58 .02 .10 .11

0.46% . 32 .35 1. 28 1. 57 .99 .47 .83 .79 .37

0.00% .05 .04 .05

0.00% .24 .12 • 37 1. 86 3.56 .70 2.54 2.58 1.06 5.06 1.65 3.22 4.10 5.92 2.26 .81 • 39 .26

Stratum I II III IV

v VI VII VIII IX X-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

.20 .17

.16 .25 .20

.59 .23 .44 .63 .74 .76 .69 .49 1. 06 .87 .60 .24

11

Misc.

0.46% .11

1. 85% 1. 29 1.11 1. 37 4.15 3.76 5.83 4.19 4.22 3.63 2. 77 2.24 1.61 3.21 5.40 4.79 5.56 4.54 4.49

.05 .43

.17 .37 .42 .57 .37 .63 .39 • 35 .27 .16

Percentages based on total diagnostics per stratum

Table 6B: Jugs Stratum I II III IV

v VI VII VIII IX x-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

XX XX X X XX XX J 1

XX

xr XX;

XX J 2

XX

I

X XX XX XX XX XX XX X X XXX xxx J11 XX XX X X X X X X

XX XX X X X X XX XXX XXX XX xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx xxxx J 8 XX XX XXX XXX XX XX XX

J 6 XXX XXX X X X X

X

1

X XX XX XXX xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx XXX XXX xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx J 10 xxxxxxxxx XXX XXX XX XX X X

y X X X X X X

:XXX X J 4 xxxx X xxxx xxxx J 3 X -xx XXX XXX XX XX XX

34

X X XX XX J 5

XX XX X X XX XX XXX

*f* XXX J

XXX XXX XX XX XX XX xxxx xxxx XXX XXX XX XX X X

XX XX XX XX xxxxxx xxxxxx XX XX XXX xxxxxxx xxxx J 7 xxxx X X XXX XXX XX

9

X X X

l%=xxxx xxxx

Examples:

Parallels.

Jug 3: Plate 1.3 Jug 4: Plate V.14-17 Jug 5: Plate V. 19-23; Plate VI.4, 5 Megiddo, Strata IV, III, n 76 Hazor, Strata V, VA 77 Ashdod, Stratum 3b-3a 78 AI Mina, Level VIII 79 Sarepta 80 'Atllt 81 Akhziv 82 Khalde, Tomb 1, Level III 83 84 Salamis, Tomb 79

These three jugs have one element in common which is easily recognizable in fragmentary-form: the "mushroom lip." Jugs with such rims are known to have constituted a "calling card" of the Phoenicians; they appear all around the Mediterranean, even as far as Morocco. 85 Jug types 3, 4, and 5 were originally classified as one type but were separated when it became apparent that the three different rim fragment types could represent three different jug forms. The jugs on Plate Vindicate that the bichrome-decorated Jug type 4 has a globular body, while type 5 has a pronounced carination point below the neck. The semi-complete example of Jug type 3 (pl. 1.3) seems to indicate that this type has a body somewhat more elongated in form than Jug 4. Thus Jug 3 is a plain or burnished mushroom lip fragment; Jug type 4 is a mushroom lip fragment with bichrome paint; and Jug type 5 is a fragment of identical form which has a red-burnished slip. The parallels for this type of jug are extensive. The examples from Hazor V, al Mina VIII, Khalde III, and Ashdod 3 indicate wide distribution before the end of the eighth century. A jug of our type 4 was found at Kition and has on it an inscription dated to the end of the eighth century. 86 Birmingham discusses the Cyprus distribution of the type and says it begins in the late ninth century and continues through the eighth. 87 Her date for the initial appearance of the type depends not on Cypriote evidence, however, but on the appearance of a jug, apparently of our type 4 (but lacking the actual "mushroom" lip) in Tell Abu Hawiim Stratum III. Gus W. VanBeek, in his re-examination of the Tell Abu Hawiim III material, noted that it came from an uncertain provenience, but maintained that it belonged to Stratum III. 88 Exactly how uncertain the provenience was is clear from Hamilton's description of it: "This jug was found at Tall Abu Hawam before the excavations." 89 In view of this and in view of the fact that the piece lacks a rim and may in fact have a rim similar to our Jug type 8, it would seem that the Tell Abu Hawiim jug should no longer be considered evidential. The other early example is from Megiddo, Locus =2053, a locus which also contained a chalice similar to chalices from Megiddo Stratum III and Period VI at Samaria, 90 which makes it possible that some material from Locus = 2053 belongs to Megiddo III rather than IV. It is therefore probable that these jugs, common in Tyre Strata III to I, should be dated to. the eighth century.

Jug6 Total number of fragments: 33 Examples: Plate VI. 7, 10, 11, 12 Parallels: Hazor, Stratum VA 91 Megiddo, Stratum 1I92 This jug, or pitcher, is made of gritty ware and has a high straight neck, sometimes slightly pinched at the rim, and a handle from rim to body. One example (pl. Vl.10) has bichrome paint on the body. The combination of the parallels from Megiddo II and Hazor VA suggests that the type appears in the second half of the eighth century. Of the 33 examples collected, 24 were found in Stratum II, but the three complete examples (pl. VI. 7, 10, 11) were from Stratum III.

Base 13 Total number of fragments: 204 Examples: Plate V.1-23; Plate VI.7, 10, 11

35

This is an unthickened depressed base. It is sometimes red-slipped and burnished on the exterior (Base type 13a), but more often plain or burnished (Base type 13b ). Type 13a is associated with Jug type 5; type 13b is associated with Jugs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. It is frequent in Strata IV-H. There were 204 examples of this base in these strata, 130 of them in Stratum II.

Jug 7 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XX.l

110

This type category includes all red burnished trefoil jug rim fragments. In reality at least two quite different jugs fall into this category. This can be seen most clearly in Amiran's illustrations of the Phoenician jugs which have appeared in Palestine. 93 One type has an elongated concave neck (like our example, pl. XX.l), and the second, and 94 apparently later type, has a conical neck. Unfortunately, when dealing with a fragment of a rim, rather than a rim and a neck, the distinction is difficult to make. It should be noted, however, that the examples from the earlier strata tended to have a very heavy red slip, so heavy that it was usually cracked into dozens of fine lines; the examples from the later strata, particularly from Stratum IV, were finer ware with a lighter slip. The one example with an elongated concave neck comes from Stratum IX. Part of a jug neck (not illustrated) of the conical type and other fragments from the region of the join of the neck to the body, clearly of the conical type, appeared in Stratum IV. Parallels:(elongated concave): 95 Hazar, Strata IX-X 96 Megiddo, Stratum IV Cyprus, Periods III and IV 97 Parallels (conical): 98 Al Mina, Levels VII, VI 99 Megiddo, Strata IV-I 100 K.halde, Tomb 3, Level III 101 Salamis, Tomb 79 102 Hazar, Strata IXB, VIII Cyprus, Periods III and IV 103 The early appearance of the conical type at Hazar makes a chronological distinction between the two types 104 105 perhaps from 'Atllt, from difficult, but the examples from al Mina and Khalde, as well as others from Akhziv, 106 added to the fact that the conical jug doesn't appear at Tell Abu seventh and sixth century contexts in the west, Hawam, may indicate that the form doesn't enter the Phoenician repertoire until the eighth century. Jugs of type 7 first appear in this excavation in Stratum XIII, but it is likely that the type does not become important until a bit later, to judge from the piece in Stratum IX and the 13 fragments in Stratum VIII. There was only a single fragment in Stratum VII, and 5 in Stratum VI; then there were 12 in Stratum V and 33 fragments, probably from the conical jug, in Stratum IV.

Table 7: Red-slipped Handles: Strata IX to II

Stratum

IX

VIII

DoubleStrand

2

12

Strap

VII

2

36

VI

v

IV

III

II

3

3

5

2

10

2

16

8

8

Two types of handles are associated with the red-slipped trefoil jug: one is the two-strand, or double-rope handle; the other is a strap handle, rectangular in section. Table 7 shows the count for red-burnished strap handles and red-burnished double-strand handles for Strata IX-II. It appears that the double-strand handle becomes quite common in the early period and continues to be used, while the strap handle belongs to the later strata. Jug 8, Jug 9, Jug 10, and Base 14

Total number of fragments:

Examples:

Jug 8: Jug 9: Jug 10: Base 14:

Jug8: 128 Jug 9: 137 Jug 10: 555 Base 14: 172 Plate XIV.2-5; Plate XVIII.1 0; Plate XX.2, 4 Plate XXII.8; Plate XXV.7; Plate XXXI.15; Plate XXXVII.13 Plate XX1.8-10; Plate XXII.8; Plate XXV.l0-15; Plate XXXI.11, 15; Plate XXXIII.22, 25 Plate XXI.9; Plate XXII.8; Plate XXV. 7, 14; Plate XXIX.3; Plate XXX1.15; Plate XXXIII.20; Plate XXXVII.2; Plate XCV.14.

As stated at the outset, one of the criteria for inclusion in this type series was that a fragment be a clearly recognizable element from a known vessel. However, when one looks at, for example, the corpus of Phoenician 107 pottery in Chapman, one discovers that Phoenician jugs of the earlier Iron Age have elements which are identical but which occur in a variety of combinations, resulting in several different vessel forms. A type series based on fragments can therefore give only limited information. An examination of complete pieces shows, however, that the main outlines of the development of Phoenician jugs are clear. Table 8A. a-his a hypothetical reconstruction 108 of that development: Table 8A.a: Table 8A.b:

Examples: Parallels:

Pilgrim flasks with vertical concentric circle decoration, two handles and, often, knobs below the handles. 109 Globular jug, neck ridge, single handle often ending in a knob, plain flaring rim. Vertical, usually bichrome, concentric circles on either side. Decoration on the handle, on the panel opposite the handle, and below the handle is common, and decoration on the neck or rim is not unknown. 110 Plate XXV.12, 13, 15; Plate XXXIII.22, 25. 111 Megiddo, Strata VI-IV 112 Hazor, Stratum IXB 113 TeII Abu Hawam, Strata V, IV 114 Beth Shan, late Level VI Far'ah, Level 3 115 116 Hama, Period IV Khirbet Silm and Joya 117 Khalde, Level IV 118

On Cyprus the type appears in company with early wavy-line groups, or ca. 1075-1050 B.C} 19 it seems to have developed from the pilgrim flask and some examples from Hazor, Qasile and Khirbet Silm may be termed 120 transitional. Table 8A.c:

Ring based jug, neck ridge, single handle with no knob at the base, bichrome vertical concentric circle decoration, often decorated on the front panel and below and on the handle, but only 121 rarely with decoration on the neck or rim.

Examples: Parallels:

Plate XXII.8; Plate XXV.7 (unpainted), 14; Plate XXXI.15 Tell Abu Hawam, Strata IV, III 122 12 3 Rachedieh 124 Amathus

37

Table 8A: Hypothetical Reconstruction of the Development of Phoenician Bichrome Ware

a,

c.

1.

b.

e.

1.

k.

j.

g.

Sarepta 125 Khirbet Silm 126 Megiddo, Stratum Va

f.

h.

127

Birmingham dates the appearance of the type to the mid-tenth century and feels that they continue into the ninth.

128

Table 8A.d:

Ring based jug, neck ridge, single handle, but unlike a, b, and c (above), this jug has a rim which is squared off or thickened at the edge, and unlike a, b, and c is normally decorated on the neck and rim as well as having the vertical concentric circles on the body. No complete examples were found in this excavation.

Parallels:

Khirbet Silm, Joya and Qasmieh 129 Megiddo, Tomb 73 130 Rachedieh 131 Cyprus, Period III 132

Table 8A.e:

Ring based jug, neck ridge, single handle, squared or thickened everted rim. The body below the neck ridge is red slipped and burnished, while the neck above the ridge and the rim can be red slipped and burnished, red slipped and burnished with black bands, or painted with black and red bands. Plate XVIII.l 0 is from such a jug and Plate XIV.2-5 might be from such a jug.

38

Table 8B: Jugs 8, 9, 10 and Base 14

Stratum

Jug 8

Jug 9

Jug 10

• 46% .32

X X

.05

.24

III

• 34

X

.04

.12

IV

1.28

XXX

.05

v VI

1. 57 .99

XXX XX

I II

%

%

.38 1.86

.59

Base 14

X

3.37

X

.23

xxxx xxxxxxx

1. 00 .40 .47

XX X X

VII

.47

X

.23

VIII

.83

XX

.44

X

2.54

X XX XXX

1. 05

XX

IX

.79

XX

.63

X

2.58

XXX XX

.95

XX

X-1

.37

X

.74

X

1. 06

XX

1.14

XX

.76

XX

5.06

xxxxxxxxxx

1. 24

XX

1. 07

XX

X-2

.70

%

XI

.16

.69

X

1. 65

XXX

XII

.24

.49

X

3.22

XXX XXX

.52

X

XIII-1

.20

1.06

XX

4.10

XXX XXX XX

.74

X

XIII-2

.87

XX

5.92

xxxxxxxxxxxx

.35

X

XIV

.60

X

2.26

XX XXX

.27

X

XV

.24

XVI

X

= 0.50%

XVII

.81

XX

.39

X

.26

X

Parallels:

Khirbet Silm 133 Tell Abu Hawiim, unstratified 134 Cyprus, Period III 135

Table 8A.f:

Identical in form to e, above, but with no red slip, and having black and red bands on the neck and rim above the ridge. No complete examples were found in this excavation, but the rims shown on Plate XIV.2-5 might have come from such a jug. Kition 136 . Khirbet Silm and Joya 137 Carmel, Tomb 7 138

Parallels:

The unstratified jug from Tell Abu Hawiim 139 might be of this type, and the rims from Strata IX and VIII at Hazar, 140 and Period IV at Samaria 141 may come from jugs similar to those called d, e, or fhere. Table 8A.g:

Mushroom-lip jug (Tyre Jug type 5 +Base type 13a, see discussion under those types) which developed from vessel e. The reason why only the red slipped mushroom-lipped jug developed with a carinated shoulder is not yet clear. 142

Table 8A.h:

Mushroom-lip jug (Tyre Jug type 4 +Base type 13b, see discussion under those types) which developed from vessel f and retained the globular form.

39

Vessel forms g and h have already been discussed, and not enough fragments of the pilgrim flask (form a) were found to include them in the type series, so we are here concerned with vessel forms b, c, d, e, and f. The elements presumed to come from these forms included in the type series are as follows: Jug 8: The everted, squared or thickened rim which is common to vessel forms d, e, and f. No distinction was made among the painted, red slipped or plain 143 examples of this rim so the category type 8 was based on form alone. Jug 9: A plain flared jug rim with no decoration. Fragments were often preserved with the neck ridge and the top of the single handle. Fragments obviously coming from pilgrim flasks 144 were not counted in this category but some intrusion from rims of that group is possible. The basis for the category is form as no fragments with decoration 145 were counted. The rim here called Jug type 9 can occur on vessels b or c or on vessels identical to c which are plain. Jug 10: Unlike all other categories in the type series (except Storage Jar 11 and some Imports), Jug 10 was a type 146 category used for painted body sherds with concentric circle decoration. This skews the statistics somewhat. Fragments with similar decoration but whlch obviously belonged to pilgrim flasks of the flat variety were not counted in this category, but there is no way to tell whether fragments of globular pilgrim flasks of form a with this type of decoration were counted in this type category. The fragments counted as Jug 10 can occur on vessels such as Table 8A. b, c, d, and perhaps a. 147 Base type 14: A thickened disc jug base. This base is quite distinct from Base type 13 in that type 13 is clearly of the depressed type, while type 14, though it sometimes has a depressed profile, is thicker and usually closer to a flat disc base than Base 13. Base 14 occurs on vessels simllar to Table 8A.c, d, and f, as well as on other jug forms'(e.g., Plate XXIX.3 and Plate XXXIII.20), but many of the fragments counted in this category had part of the vertical circle decoration preserved, however. In summary form, the somewhat hypothetical vessel forms shown on Table 8A are related to the type series as follows: Table Table Table Table Table

8A.a: 8A.b: 8A.c: 8A.d: 8A.e:

Table 8A.f:

Fragments of such pilgrim flasks were possibly counted in category Jug type 10. Jug type 9 + Jug type 10. Jug type 9 +Jug type 10 +Base type 14. Jug type 8 +Jug type 10 +Base type 14. Jug type 8 (the body sherds of such jugs would have been counted in the general red-slipped and burnished group, see Table 1, and there was no category in the type series for a red burnished jug base of a form like Base 14). Jug type 8 +Base type 14.

Table 8B shows the relationship of elements Jug 8, Jug 9, Jug 10, and Base 14. The two fragments of circle painted sherds in each of Strata XVII and XVI can probably be dismissed. In Stratum XV, there were no fragments of Base 14, but there were three Jug 9 fragments and ten concentric circle body sherds. As has been noted, these might be from pilgrim flasks, so it is not proven that the spherical neck-ridge jug (Table 8A.b) appears by the time of Stratum XV but it is possible. The same problem is encountered in Stratum XIV (34 body sherds). In Stratum XIII, there were 32 rim fragments of Jug type 9, 139 body sherds fragments of type 10, and 21 fragments of Base type 14. Thls plus the evidence of the complete spherical jugs from this stratum (Plate XXXIII.22, 25), would confirm that jugs of the Table 8A.b type were well established by the time of Stratum XIII. In Stratum XII, that vessel form seems to continue, but the form with a base (Table 8A.c, cf. Plate XXX1.15) has appeared. By the time of Stratum XI, the number of Base 14 fragments has begun to rise, perhaps indicating that the spherical jug is beginning to disappear to be replaced by the form with a base. In Strata X and IX, the ring based, circle decorated form appears to continue (note, however, the spherical jugs in X-2, Plate XXV.12, 13 and 15). In Strata VIII, VII, and VI, the proportion of circle decorated body sherds continues to be hlgh, but Jug rim type 9 declines, while Jug rim type 8 increases. The proportion of concentric circle body sherds drops suddenly in Stratum IV and it would seem that the vessel with the Jug 8 rim in Stratum IV has either a red-slipped exterior or a plain body with bichrome decoration on the neck and rim only (Table 8A.e, f). As is obvious from the above, it is impossible to pin down with any precision the first and last appearances of any particular vessel form from a study of fragments alone because, particularly with these vessels, there are too many

40

variables. There does, however, seem to be evidence from this excavation for the general trend: the spherical vessel preceding the vessel with a base, the long life of the concentric circle decoration and its replacement by red slip, the gradual replacement of the plain flaring rim type 9 with the "disc" type 8, and, finally, in Stratum III, the appearance of the true mushroom-lip jug. Jug 11

Total number of fragments: 85 Examples: Plate XX.6; Plate XXIX.3. Parallels: Tell Abu Hawii.m, Stratum IV 148 Khalde, Level III 149 Megiddo, Strata VI, V 150 Hazor, Strata IX-X, VII, VI, V 151 Cyprus, Periods I, II 152 As a type category, this is·one of the least satisfactory because the only elements which are recognizable of this type of jar when it is broken are (1) strainer fragments, and (2) spout or trough fragments. Neither of these two elements can give very much information about the form of the vessel itself. The range of these fragments in Tyre seems to indicate that Jug type 11 appears slightly later than the spherical neck ridge jug (see Table 6). Two fragments were found in Stratum XV, 4 in Stratum XIV; it is most common in Strata XIII to IX.

This vessel, with its horizontal band decoration, may have had some influence on later Phoenician jugs. Because it has a spout at mid-body and a handle at right angles to the spout, the vessel cannot be decorated with vertical concentric circles, so horizontal bands are painted below the spout and the empty area between those bands and the base of the neck are filled with ladders, lozenges, slashes, etc. Such decoration is never found on the spherical or even the ring based jugs with plain flaring rim. However, when what is here called Jug type 8, the squared rim, appears, vessels having that rim sometimes have horizontal bands around the body, at the base of the neck and a filled panel between these bands. 153 The decor in the panel is very similar to such decor on the spouted jugs. The horizontal bands on Tyre Jug type 1 may have developed from this tradition. Table 8A.i, j, k illustrates this progression. 154 Note also that the spouted jug usually has a very long neck and that the neck and rim are almost always decorated; Phoenician neck-decorated ware may have developed from this tradition, as the earlier examples of the concentric circle vessels are only rarely decorated on the neck and rim. Jug Summary

No jug which was typical of the earliest strata was identified. Beginning at about the time of Stratum XIII or possibly earlier, the "neck-ridge" family appears. There seem to have been three major stages in this family: (1) The spherical and ring based jugs with concentric circle decoration; (2) an intermediate phase, characterized by Jug rim type 8, displaying a variety of decoration, red slip, red slip with black bands, concentric circles, or even horizontal bands (perhaps under the influence of the decor used on spouted jugs), but the important thing about this phase is the gradual transition from vessels with decoration on the body to vessels with decoration on the neck and rim; (3) the mushroom-lip stage.

Juglets Juglet 1

Total number offragments: 123 Examples: Plate XII.l-23 Parallels: Megiddo, Strata III-II 155 Hazor, Strata VII, VI, VA and VB Ashdod, Stratum 2 157 1 58 Sarepta . Khalde, Tomb 121, Level III 159 'Atlit 160 161 Beth Shan, Level IV 162 Akhziv Sidon 163

156

41

Table 9: Juglets Stratum I

1

2.78%XXXXXXXXXXX 0.00%

II

1.48

III

1. 96

IV

.so

v VI

2

3

4

Misc.

0.00%

0.00%

0.46%

xxxxxx xxxxxxxx

.03 .27 X

XX

.55 XX . 14 X

.23 X

.20 X

.40 XX .23 X

VII

.11

VIII

.11

.55 XX

IX X-1

.11

.58 XX .22 X

X-2

1.05

XI

.05

XII XIII-1

.45 XX .43 XX

XIII-2 XIV XV

1. 05

xxxx

.73 XXX .48 XX

XVI

.03 .12

.20 X

XVII

.40 XX .72 XXX 1. 78 xxxxxxx .53 XX

7.40% 6.33

.08

7.10

.05

6.65

.29

10.16

.59

11.08

.47 .28

8.16

.53 .37

10.44 6.83

.27

10.31 5.65

xxxx

.16 X

Total*

.39

9.83

.55

7.07 10.26

.52

14.28

.67 .56 .79

9. 72 8.53

.66

7.70 5.94

*Jugs and Juglets X = 0.25% Percentages based on total diagnostics per stratum

This juglet has a sharp angle at the point where the rim joins the body. It is usually very poorly made and poorly fired. This type seems to have developed from Juglet type 2 and is most frequent in Strata III-I (see Table 9). Juglet 2

Total number of fragments: 26 Plate XIV.7; Plate XX.5 Examples: This is a plain dipper juglet, sometimes quite small. It is better made than Juglet 1 and, unlike Juglet 1, there is no sharp angle between the neck and body. Base 15

Total number of fragments: 79 Examples: Plate XII.1-23; Plate XIV.7 This base is associated with Juglet 1 and sometimes with Juglet type 2. It is very crudely made; apparently the open tube of the juglet body was simply twisted closed and then smoothed over slightly. This results in a slightly pointed base with many of the examples being covered with fingerprints. Juglet 3

Total number of fragments: 100 Examples: Plate XXV.1-5; Plate XXXIII.17, 18 Parallels: Tell Abu Hawam, Strata III-IV 164 Juglet 3 has a trefoil mouth and seems usually to have a pointed base (Base 17), but can have a rounded base (Base 16). The juglets on pl. XXXIX.1-3 probably had this kind of rim. The type is common in Strata XV to VIII.

42

Base 16 Total number of fragments: 67 Examples: Plate XX.S; Plate XXV.4; Plate XXXIII.l7; Plate XXXVII.l; Plate XXXIX.l-3. This is a plain, rounded dipper juglet base, finished on the exterior, and associated with either Juglet 2 or Juglt#t 3.

Base 17 Total number of fragments: 14 Examples: Plate XXV.3; Plate XXXIII.18 Base 17 is a slightly pointed juglet base, associated with Juglet type 3. The type was most common in Strata XIII-XII.

Juglet 4 Total number of fragments: 33 Examples: Plate XLVII.1; Plate XLIX.1 7 This category includes all fragments of the "shaved" juglets. The type could have been placed with the imported wares but was placed with the juglets to show (see Table 9) that it is the predominant juglet type in Strata XVII to XV. The type is common on Cyprus in Late Cypriote IB1 to liB, or ca. 1525/1500 to.± 1320 B.C. 165

Storage Jars Since the evidence for continuous development from the earlier to the later forms is clearer for storage jars than for other classes, they are described in reverse numerical order. The statistical analysis for the occurrence of various types is on Table 10.

Storage Jar 15 Total number of fragments: 48 Examples: Plate XLII.13, 16; Plate XLIX.1, 6, 7; Plate LII.13 This rim is flared and has a slight collar with an exterior ridge midway down the rim. The rim is concave or indented both above and below this ridge. The ware is usually brown and always very soft, so soft that it tends to crumble when handled. One complete example of a jar with this rim occurred in connection with Grave 2 of Stratum XVIII (pl. LI1.13).

Storage Jar 14 Total number of fragments: 33 Examples: Plate XLIX.3, 4, 5 Jar rim type 14 is vertical or slightly flaring and has a very slight thickening at the top of the rim. The fabric is usually red/reddish brown and has a surface bloom giving the piece a white, pink, or yellow surface. No complete jars having this rim were found, so the form of the jar is unknown.

Storage Jar 13 Total number of fragments: 97 Examples: Plate XLIX.9, 10; Plate XLII.17 This is a jar rim which flares slightly and which is thickened on the exterior in such a way that there is a ridge midway down the exterior of the neck. Uke jar type 14, the ware is typically red, has a gray core and there is usually

43

Table 1 OA: Storage Jars Stratum

I II

l

2

%

%

3 %

3.24 7.87 .11

III

.00

4

5

%

%

.46 l. 85

6

7

10

11

12

13

% .00

%

%

%

%

.00

.00

.00

.46

. 96

.04

.04

3.62

.05

%

~

%

%

%

%

.00

.00

.46

.46

.00

.00

. 16

.40

.24 3.94 5.96

.64

. 21

.08

.15

.50

.65

.23

.12

.09

.09

.09

.46

• 18 l. 05

IV

9

8

v

l. 57

14

15

Hisc.

Total %

14.80 14.24

l. 91

.67

7.30 .20

l. 00

3. 77

.92

6.55

3.29

12.16

l . 39

13.08

4.66

17. 7l

3.14

15.55

VI

ll. 49

VII

12.82

VIII

12.30

IX

13.92

X-1

19.04

.05

X-2

8.40

.29

.19

.10

.10

2.86

ll. 94

XI

17.17

.05

.21

.27

.05

3.89

21.64

.18

4.16

21.97

.23 .11 .02

.84

2.90

17.66

.20

2.89

22.20

XII

16.61

.91

.11

XIII-1

13.92

.04

.63 2.54

.35

XIII-2 XIV

12.54 9.79

.17

.35 l. 20 5.33

XV XVI XVII

2.98 l. 38 .79

.04

3.36

20.88

.27

4.18 .20 3. 26

17.24 20.72

.97 .64 4.91 .39 l. 97 2.37 l. 38 l. 38 2.56 .92 .13 3.17 l. 85 3.56 3.03

16.75 ll. 43 13.45

.67

l. 37 3.14 2.74

Percentages based on total diagnostics per stratum

Table 1 OB: Storage Jars Stratum I II

XXX XXX SJ l

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx SJ 2

X X X X

III IV

xxxx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx

X X XX XX SJ 8

v VI VII VIII IX X-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1

X X

XIII-2

l

XIV XV XVI XVII

X X X X X X X

g_g

X X XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX SJ 13

XXX XXX X X X X

X X

I

XX XX SJ 14

XX XX SJ 6

xxxxxx

xxxx xxxx

XXX XXX X X

X X

SJ 4

SJ 5

X X SJ 9

X X XXX XXX

xxJxx X X XX XX

xxxx xxxx SJ 15

44

XX XX

XX XXX XXX XXX X X

SJ 12

5%=XXXXX XX XXX

a surface bloom of a light color. The type was most common in Stratum XVII, but, unlike Jars 14 and 15, it was also common in Strata XVI and XV.

Storage Jar 12 Total number of fragments: 253 Examples: Plate XXXI.16, 17; Plate XXXV.10; Plate XXXIX. 6, 7, 10-12; Plate XLVII.l1; Plate XXXVII.15, 16 fall between the two categories, Storage Jar 9 and Storage Jar 12. Parallels: Hazor, Stratum XII 166 Megiddo, Strata VIII-VIIB, V 167 This is a vertical rim, higher than rim type 9. It sometimes has an interior thickening, and is often made of a gritty, brittle ware with a surface bloom, or, in some cases, it has a light colored slip. Only one example of the type was found in Stratum XVII, 7 in Stratum XVI, but there were 39 in Stratum XV, 80 in Stratum XIV, and 65 in Stratum XIII-1, 168 falling off rapidly in numbers after that.

Base 21 Total number of fragments: 68 Examples: Plate LII.4; Plate XCV.21 Parallels: Megiddo, Strata XII, XI, X, IX, VIII, VIIB Tell Abu Hawam, Strata IV, V 170

169

Base 21 is a heavy storage jar base, which is probably associated with one of the above jars. It is slightly convex and at an angle to the body of the jar. As can be seen on Table 11, it occurs almost exclusively in Strata XVII to XIV.

Storage Jar 11 Total number of fragments: 79 Examples: Plate XXXIV.1 0 Parallels: Hazor, Strata IX-X, IX, VIII 171 Tell Abu Hawam, Stratum III 172 Sarepta 173 SJ 11 is an ovoid jar in a very light, crisp and brittle ware, usually light green, light yellow or light pink in color. It is painted on the body, shoulder and sometimes on the high rim. The rim is similar to the Storage Jar 12 type and it

may be that some of the rims counted as Storage Jar 12 in fact belong to Jars of type 11 but happened not to be painted on the rim. Unlike other storage jar categories, both painted body sherds and painted rims of the type were counted; this fact inflatesthe relative numbers somewhat. The painted rims were all of the same form as Storage Jar 12. The Late Bronze Age types collected by Amiran 174 have a rim different fromthe complete Stratum XIII example, but it may be that some of the jars, known in this excavation only from body sherd. fragments, are similar to Amiran's types.

Storage Jar 10 Total number of fragments:

8

This jar, of which only a few examples appeared in this excavation, was retained in the type series because of its distinctiveness. One complete example was found in Stratum XIII (pl. XXV.12). The jar is recognized by two features: the concave ridge on the interior of the rim above the very thick join of the rim to the shoulder, and the very horizontal shoulder. A somewhat similar jar with a different rim appeared at Sarepta in Strata E2 and F, strata tentatively dated to around 1200 B. C. 1 7 5

Storage Jar 9 and Base 20 Total number of fragments (SJ9):

3,063

45

Examples:

Plate XIV.13, 16; Plate XVIII.12; Plate XXI.l, 5, 11-13; Plate XXIV.2, 4; Plate XXVI.13, 15, 17, 18, 21; Plate XXIX.13, 14; Plate XXXI.19; Plate XXXV. II, 13; Plate XXXVII.14; Plate XLI.5, 9

This jar, by far the most common in the excavation, has a number of variations which, on the basis of the rim alone, cannot be isolated. The rim is two to three em high and about one em thick; it is usually plain and vertical but can have a slight bulge to the interior or the exterior; the color is in the brown/reddish-yellow range and it usually has a gray core. The base which is sometimes associated with rim type 9 is Base 20; for examples of this base, see pl. XXI.!, 11, 12, 13; pl. XXVI.18, 21; pl. XLI. 5. 623 examples of these bases were collected and the majority occurred in Strata XIV to VIII. In fact, after Stratum VIII, the type practically disappears (see Table 11), yet the rim type Storage Jar 9 continues; this would seem to indicate that a different form for the jar is involved in the later strata. It is probable, in fact, that the jars shown on pl. XIV.13 and 16 have a plain rounded base which is not recognizable in fragmentary form. The conclusion is that a quantity of storage jar rims of type 9 in conjunction with a quantity of Base type 20 is earlier than rim type 9 found in strata where there is a low proportion of Base type 20. A jar with a rim similar to type 9 and a base similar to type 20 was found at Megiddo in Stratum VII-VI.

176

Storage Jar 8 Total number of fragments: 41 Examples: Plate XIV.14; Plate XVIII.14 177 Parallels: Megiddo, Strata IV-II 178 Tell er-Reqeish This type of jar has a rim which is thicker, particularly at the base of the rim, than the average Jar type 9. The ware is pink and has a high straw content and large white grits. The handles, on those examples which still had handles attached, were much heavier than the usual storage jar handles. Further this type has no angular carination of the shoulder. The jar is usually poorly fired. Of the 41 examples of the type which occurred, 34 of them were in Strata V-IV.

Storage Jars 7, 6, 5 and 4 These four jar types belong to the same family. The common factors are their long "torpedo" or "sausage" shape, crisp brittle ware usually with a light surface bloom, angular shoulder, short round handles and pointed base. On the basis of material from locations at Tyre which are not in evidence here, the development of the rim form of these jars would seem to be from the higher to the lower, and the vessel form itself seems to have developed from a relatively straight form (pl. IV.5) to a form which "bells" out (pl. II.6). It had been hoped that this sequence would be established in this excavation but in the absence of a greater number of complete examples of each of the types, the sequence remains uncertain. Parallels to Storage Jars 7, 6, 5 and 4: 179 Hazor, Area B, Strata VB, VA, IV 180 Area A, Strata VII, VI, V 181 Area G, Strata VI, V 182 Megiddo, Strata IV-II 183 Ashdod, Strata 3, 3b, 2 1 84 Beth Shan IV 185 Lachish, Stratum III 186 Samaria, Periods V, VI 187 Sarepta Sidon 188 Tell er-Reqeish 189 Cyprus, Period IV 190

46

Storage Jar 7 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XIV.l 0

15

Storage Jar rim 7 has a collar and the rim stance is inward.

Storage Jar 6 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate IV.5

40

This rim is lower than Storage Jar 7 and the collar is much more pronounced. There is often an indentation on the interior caused when the fingers of the potter pressed together during the formation of the exterior collar.

Storage Jar 5 Total number of fragments: 245 Plate 11.1-9; Plate 111.1-5; Plate IV.4, 6 Examples: This rim is lower yet and, in profile, is almost square - as wide as it is high. There is a definite ridge on the exterior.

Storage Jar 4 Total number of fragments: Examples: Pia te Ill. 7, 8

163

This jar has a rim which, in profile, is wider than it is high.

Base 19 Total number of fragments: 213 Examples: Plate 11.8, 10, 11; Plate IIU-3, 7; Plate IV.2 Base 19 is the base associated with Storage Jars 4, 5, 6 and 7; it is a plain pointed base. The base shown on pl. IV.6 seems to be a variant of Base 19, squared off at the bottom. This squared type was classed as a miscellaneous base as only 13 examples of it appeared (all in Stratum II).

Storage Jar 3 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate VII.3 Parallels: Kition 191

15

This is a wide-mouthed jar with a narrow shoulder which is always painted red and black. However, nearly identical jars, one unpainted (pl. Vll.1 ), and one red-burnished (pl. VII.2) were found in this excavation. The bichrome variety is the one counted as the type in fragmentary form. This type, of which there are hundreds of examples from other areas of Tyre, seems to be a local development of the painted storage jar of the earlier Iron Age (i.e., Storage Jar type 11). The paint is usually a quite brilliant red with black and, sometimes white added. A complete example of this type from a newly-discovered tomb at Rachedieh near Tyre has a plain rounded base.

Storage Jar 2 Total number of fragments: 34 Plate 1.14; Plate IV. I. Examples: Parallels: Hazor, Stratum V 192 Sarepta 193

47

Table llA: Bases Stratum

I

la

lb

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

ll

12

0.00% 5.56% 0.00% 2.31% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.48% 0.00% 0.93% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

II

.30

2.76

.08

4.37

.11

.05

.19

5.63

.27

.24

III

.23

2.54

.27

1.50

1.50

.08

.31

5.99

.19

.19

IV

.23 .14

1.51

.50 .14

.82

1.88

.09 .43

.50 11.09 .72 8.73

.32 1.86

.14 .43

1.98 5.19 .23 10.02 .66 7.23 .21 6.33 5.86 5.63 .16 7.20

1.39 .23 1.88 2.32 6.35 5.06 4.05

5.81 6.33 6.27 5. 39

1.54 3.24 2.44 .93 .48

v

10

VI

.23 .17

VII VIII IX

XI

. 10 .29 .05

XII

• 14

X-1 X-2

XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV

5.31 4.34 2.90

XV XVI XVII

.23 .06 .05

.ll

.26 . 17 .67 . 32

.10 .10

.29 .05

. 31 .20 .35

.03

.20 .24

.20 1.06

.67 1.45 . 39 .66

20

21

.39 .66

.16 .15 .19 . 21 .14 . 23

.06 .48 .59 1.58

.27 .16

Percentages bascu on total diaynostics

Stratum I

II III IV

13a

14

15

16

17

18

19

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.39% 0.00% 0.00% 2.78% 0.93% 0.00% 0.00% .32 . 54 .27

3.17 l. 34

. 87

. 23

1.10 .58 .82

4.80 1.23 .09 .29

.13 .04 .30 .72

v

l. 00

VI VII

.40 .47

VIII

l. 05

IX

.95 1.14

.50 .37 .10

.02

2.57

X-2

l. 24

1.15

.10

XI

l. 07

.59

l. 91 2.61

XII XIII-1

.52 .74

.17 .24

XIII-2

.35

XIV

.27

X-1

.14 .20

.20 .47

Misc.

Total

2.31%

22.6n

2.55 l. 19 1. 47 2.43

26.07 17.72

3.56 3.03 4. 14 4.27 l. 80

.20 .23 1.10 2.11

.10 .05

21.13 17.03 13.12 15.14 16.90 17.03 18.36

2.58 3.68

19. 31 20.04 16.46 20.57

.10

4.27 4.89 3.48

.08

.52

.16 .52

3.43 4.46 5.23

19.16

.20

.07

XV

5.46 1.53

.60 2.09

5.86 6.68

19.98 18.42

XVI

.99

1.97 2.51

4.14

13.01 14.78

XVII

48

5.41

Table JIB: Bases

Stratum I II III IV

v VI

XXXX XX XX XX XXX X XX XXX xxxx XXX xxxx XXX XX XX XXX XX X X XX X B 2 X

u

i

VII VIII IX X-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1

X X X X X X X X ~ X X X X X

XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

XXX XXX B 18 XX XX XX XX

!L!

X

1

X X X B 16

x--

I

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx XX XXX xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx XXX XXX xxxxxx XXXXXX B xxxxxxx-7 xxxxxxx xxxxxxx XXX XX XX xxxxxx XX XX XX xxxxxx

X X

X X XX XX

xx

XX XXX B 21

xxx--

XXX XXX

xxxx

B 13

X X X X XX XX

B

X X X X

XXX XXX XX XX X X

B

X X

6

xxxx xxxx XXX XXX

B 8

xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx XX XX XXX XXX XX XX X X

5%=~~~~~

X X X B 10 X

X X

i

I

X X XX XX XXXX XX XXX XXX

X X

X X XX XX

B 11

l X

X X

xxxxx

XXX XX X X B 19

I

XX XX X X

xxxx

XX XXX XX XXX XX XXX XX XXX

15

X X

X X

X XX XX XXX XXX XX XX XXX XXX

xxxx xxxx

X X X X B 9

! X

XXXX X XXX XX XX XX XX XXX

xxxxx XXX XXX X X

B 20

Tell Abu Hawiim, Stratum II 194 Cyprus, Periods IV, V 195 This jar is probably a direct development of Jar type 9. The ware, in the reddish-yellow/brown range, is the same as that of Jar 9. The distinctive feature is that the rim is very low and pulled outward. This jar is the predecessor of the jars of the Persian through Roman periods which have a rolled-over rim and which show a gradual disappearance of the carinated shoulder. There is probably a direct line of development from the Late Bronze Age jars with the high rims through the Iron Age jars with the lower rims (type 9) to this late pulled-out rim. These jars all have in common, inTyre, a rather soft reddish-yellow/brown ware. The family discussed above (Jars 4-7, and Jar I, below) seems to be a completely separate group, distinguished by the "crisp ware." 196 It should be noted, however, that there are examples of Jars 4-7 and Jar I in "brown" ware, but they are not common. The "crisp ware family" seems to have no antecedents in the earlier Iron Age (inTyre) and, to judge by material found at other sites in Tyre, disappears after the period of Jar type I. Storage Jar 1

Total number of fragments: II Examples: Plate 1.15, I6 Parallels: Cyprus, Period V 197 Salamis, Tomb 79 198 Hazar, Strata IV, V 199 Kition 200 This jar, which develops from the "crisp ware family", but which also occurs in a very soft light brown ware, has a very low rim which sits right down on the shoulder. This jar can sit, when inverted, either on the whole rim 201 (pl. 1.16), or, more commonly, on the interior edge of the rim. This type seems to have developed from Jar type 4, the rim gradually getting lower and lower until it is right on the shoulder. The rim is usually like that of pl. Ll5 in having a depression at the center, and the similarity of this rim treatment to the rim treatment of the Plates in Stratum I, Plate type 1, has already been noted.

49

Base 18 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XCV.18

6

This base, undoubtedly associated with Storage Jar 1, is narrower at the point than Base 19; it continues to be quite narrow as it goes up and then flares out. This is to be contrasted with the gradual flaring of Base 19. It is likely that the jar to which Jar rim type 1 and Base type 19 belong is the "waisted" type which is narrow below the shoulder and then "bells."

Cooking Wares Cooking Pot 1 Total number of fragments: 38 Examples: Plates XII.24, 26, 27, 28, 31 Cooking Pot 1 has an exterior-thickened rim which forms an angle just below the rim edge. Most of the examples have a very short neck between the body and the rim.

Cooking Pot 2 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XII.33

10

This vessel has a plain incurving rim and there are two handles below the rim. When inverted, the vessel sits on the outside edge of the rim.

Cooking Pot 3 Total number of fragments: 9 Examples: Plate XVIII.19; Plate XX.13 Cooking Pot 3 has a plain, somewhat squared rim, thickened to the exterior. It sits, when inverted, on the exterior edge of the rim.

Cooking Pot 4 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XXVII. 7

46

This vessel has a long thickening on the exterior of the vertical or slightly flaring rim. Unlike Cooking Pot type 7, type 4 has no depression on the interior of the rim, but again, unlike 7, it usually has a slight ridge on the exterior of the rim.

Cooking Ware 5 Total number offragments: 47 Examples: Plate XX.16, 18; Plate XXIII.17; Plate XXIX.10 Parallels: Hazor, Strata X through V 202 203 Megiddo, Strata VI through III Cooking Ware type 5 is a baking tray. The underside of the vessel is always very smooth and is usually blackened from the fire. The upper side is always incised, either in circles or with single jabs from a sharp instrument. These tray~ were probably used for baking flat bread in the way women in the Middle East now make bread on a metal tray of identical form.

50

Table 12A: Cooking Pots Stratum I II III IV

2

1

4

3

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% .24 .03 .03 .03 .08 .03 .48 .04 .08 .04 .46 .09

.37

v

.57

VI

.40

.14 .79

. 05

.05

.14

.43

.14

.79

.20

.40

. 14

XI

.11 .26 .37 .19 .32

XII

.31

3.70%

3.70%

.99

1. 99

1. 04

1. 66

.55

1.11 2.70

1. 98

4.76

1. 63

2.80

.77 1. 69

2.44

.OS .02

.89

.20

.17

.83

.17

.37

2.06

.32

.54

.64

1. 56

.47

.29

.10

1. 53

.11

.91

2.96 1. 28

4.59 5.17

.53

.05

.16

.11

1. 97

5.44

.38

.21

1. 78

.52

.07

.10

.07

2.52

5.96

XIII-1

.16

.12

3.24

.86

.23

.12

.12

2.54

7.39

XIII-2

.17

.70

.70

.17

.17

1. 92

3.83

VIII IX X-1 X-2

.39

Total

1.14

1.17

VII

Misc.

.05 .10 .10

4.80

XIV

.13

.33

1.66

.07

.20

.13

.27

3.60

6.39

XV

.08

.08

1. 21

.32

.32

2.17

1. 69

5.64

11.51

.20

.20

.20

.20

1. 97

.99

4.54

8.30

.13

3.56

1.58

6.20

11.60

XVI

.13

XVII Percentages based on total diagnostics

Table 12B: Cooking Pots Stratum I II III IV

XX XX XX XX

1%=~~~~ CP 1

v VI VII VIII IX x-1 X-2 XI XII XIII-1 XIII-2 XIV XV XVI XVII

X

~ X X X XX X X XcP 4 X-X XX X XX X XX X XXX X XXX X X X X X xxxxxxx xxxxxxx CP 8 XXXXX _ _ xxxxx X X

I

X

I

XX XX XXX XXX xxxxx XX XXX XXX XXX xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx XXX XXX xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx XX XXX xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx XX XX X X X X CP 9 X-X

X X X X X X X XCP 10

51

XX XX

CP 3

:r XXX

** CP 5

T T XX XX

CP 7 X X xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx CP 11 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

¥

X X X X XXX XXX X X xxxx x~xx

CP 6

1

XXX XXX X X

X X XXX XXX CP 12 XXXXXX - - xxxx xxxx XXX XXX XXX XXX

Cooking Pot 6 Total number of fragments: 79 Examples: Plate XX.lO; Plate XXXH.14 This vessel has a slight ridge around the vertical rim. The body of the vessel flares out directly from the rim.

Cooking Pot 7 333 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XXIII.16; Plate XXVII.6, 8, 10; Plate XXIX.9; Plate XXXII.l2; Plate XXXV.2-6, 8; Plate XXXVII.l8 204 Parallels: Tell Abu Hawam, Stratum IV Cooking Pot 7 is characterized by an everted rim which has a convex section. Only a few of these pots had handles. There were 333 fragments of this type of cooking pot, all but 23 of them in Strata XIII- VIII.

Cooking Pot 8 Total number of fragments: 121 Examples: Plate XXIII.13-15; Plate XXVII.9, 11; Plate XXXIX.l6, 19, 22; Plate XXXV.9; Plate XLVII.19 This vessel has a slightly flaring rim thickened to the exterior and having an angular ridge. The rim is triangular in section, and there is sometimes a groove around the ridge. The single fragments which occurred in each of Strata XVII and XVI can probably be discounted, but there were 15 examples in Stratum XV, indicating that the form was established by this period; it continues to be important through Stratum X. Only 11 fragments occurred in Strata IX to V, probably pieces carried up from the earlier strata.

Cooking Pot 9 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XLII.20

9

Cooking Pot type 9 has an incurving T-shaped rim which probably formed a platform for a cover.

Cooking Pot 10 Total number of fragments: 18 Examples: Plate XLIX.26 205 Parallels: Hazor, Stratum XII 206 Tell Abu Hawiim, Stratum V The rim of this cooking pot is vertical or slightly everted and has a pendent lip which is depressed to the interior and forms a collar around the top of the pot.

Cooking Pot 11 Total number of fragments: 82 Examples: Plate XLVII.20; Plate XLIX.28 Cooking Pot 11 has a plain flaring rim, usually squared-off at the edge.

Cooking Pot 12 Total number of fragments: 51 Examples: Plate XLIX.22, 23

52

This cooking pot has a rim ending in a pendent which is triangular in section. It is similar to Cooking Pot 8, but the rim of type 12 is turned much further out.

Imports In this excavation, a small one by any standard, nearly one thousand pieces of pottery were found which fell into the class "import" - more than 4% of the total number of diagnostic sherds. Of this number, relatively few deserved individual attention; those that did are illustrated. The following classifications were designed to give the reader some idea of the frequency of broad types of imported pottery. As would be expected, most of the imports are from Cyprus; if the type series were for an excavation on Cyprus, it would obviously be further refined. It should be noted that no claim is made here about whether any individual piece was actually made on Cyprus (or in Greece); by "imported" is meant only that the ware and known parallels indicate that the piece was made outside of Tyre. A complete examination of this question would necessitate extensive chemical analysis of the sherds, a procedure beyond the scope of this project; a few of the sherds found in this excavation were tested by the neutron activation process and the results of this are found in Appendix C.

Import I Total number of fragments: 29 Examples: Plate Xl.21; Plate XVIII.17; Plate XXII.9, 10. Cypriote Black on Red Ware of any type: jugs, bowls, etc.

Import 2 Total number of fragments: 16 Examples: Plate X.27; Plate XI.22; Plate XVIII.l6, 18; Plate XXI.6; Plate XXXII.7. Cypriote Bichrome Ware.

Import 3 Total number of fragments: 24 Examples: Plate XXI1.4; Plate XXIV.6 This category is for Sub-Protogeometric skyphoi with pendent semicircles. The type is most common from the rnidcninth to the mid-eighth centuries. 207

Import4 Total number of fragments: 7 Examples: Plate XXII.5, 6; Plate XXIV.5 Import 4 is a flaring plate having pendent semicircle decoration. 208

Import 5 Total number of fragments: 336 Examples: Plate XVIII.20, 21, 22;.Plate XX.3; Plate XXII. 15, 16; Plate XXIII.9, 19, 20; Plate XXIV.3; Plate XXVI.8, 11, 12; Plate XXVIII.1-6, 8, 9; Plate XXX.2; Plate XXXII.lO; Plate XXXIV.4, 5, 12 This category is for all Cypriote White Painted Wares. 209

Import 6 Total number of fragments: 49 Examples: Plate XXII.17; Plate XXVIII.3, 7; Plate XXXIV.2, 3. This category is for rims of a small white-slipped skyphos with black decoration; it was the only one of the Cypriote White Painted Wares which occurred often enough to justify a separate category on the basis of form. This 53

Table 13A: Imports Stratum

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

%

%

%

%

%

%

%

0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

I II

.13

.05

III

.04

.04

IV

.14

.03

% o.oo

8-9

9

10

%

%

%

11

0.00 0.00 0.00

% o.oo

12

14

l3

%

%

%

15 %

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total %

0.46 .58

.05

.32

.04

.31

.04

.47

.27

.09

.55

v

.43

.05 .29

.14

.86

VI

.59

.59 l. 58

.20 4.55

.20

7. 71

VII

.47

l. 63

.23

2.33

VIII

.39

.11

.39

2.21

IX

.21

.05

.05

.11 l. 21

.21

X-1

.02

.05

.10

.02 l. 63

l. 86

.14

1.16

4.26

.90

2.74

4.48

.02 l. 93 .38 8.02

12.88

l. 44

.48

.53

.52

.24

.87

XIII-1

l. 80

.66

.55

XIII-2

1. 74

.17 1.92

X-2 XI

.05

XII

.03

.05

.33

XIV

.13

3. 77

.16

.08

.05

2.60

.11

.03

1. 80

.20

.31

.08

.40

.13

.27

.27

.53 1. 53

.40 2.74 4.43

.08

XVI

2.96

.39 1. 97 6.31 8.88

.39

XVII

1. 06

.92 1.9810.82 5.94

.53

.08

XV

.97

.40

.07

.53

Table I 3B: Imports Stratum V

VII VIII IX

X

X-1

X XX XX

XX XX

XX XX

X X XX XX XX XX

~

5 %=xxxxx

XXXXXX XXXXXX

~

xxxxx

Im>::>. 3

XX XX

xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx

xxxx xxxx

X-2 XI

X

X

XII

X X X

X X X X X

XX

- XIII-1

XX

XX

XX

XIII-2

XX-

XX

XIV XV XVI XVII

X X~

XXX XXX X X

XX~

XX XX X XX X ImE· 8-9

X X XXX XXX Imp. 10 XXXXXX XXXXXX

xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx

XX XX

Imp. 11

xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxx XXX XXX

X X

ImE· 12

54

4.19

.97 10.07 .08 .39 1. 97 24.05 .79 .79 1.72 1.06 24.82

Percentages based on total diagnostics per stratum

VI

3.84 4.00

.17

ImE• 15 XrmE· 13 X XX X XX X ImE· 14

X X X X XX XX X X

skyphos occurs in the Proto White Painted period and in the earlier part of the Cypro-Geometric period.

210

Import 7 268 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XXII.12, 13; Plate XXVIII.lO, 11. All fragments of Cypriote Black Slip or "Bucchero" Ware, whether of plates or jugs, went into this category.

Import 8 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate XLII.3, 7

45

This category was for all fragments of Base Ring II Ware vessels.

Import 9 Total number of fragments: 34 Examples: Plate LI1.6, 11; Plate LIII.lO Into this category went all fragments of Base Ring I Ware vessels, whether of bowls or jugs. The category "Import 8-9" was used for fragments of Base Ring Ware which could not be assigned to either Base Ring I or II Ware; there were 18 such fragments.

Import10 Total number of fragments: 164 Examples: Plate XLIX.16; Plate LII.5; Plate LIII.11, 12

All rim and handle fragments of Monochrome Ware vessels were assigned to this category. Import 11 Total number of fragments: 179 Examples: Plate XLI.l0-14, 16, 17; Plate XLIII.1-5, 7-29; Plate XLVII.22-23, 25-36, 38; Plate L. 1-2, 4-6, 12, 15 Import 11 was the classification used for all White Slip II Ware sherds, including those called "late" White Slip II.

Import 12 Total number of fragments: 7 Examples: Plate XLVI1.24, 37; Plate L.3, 9, 10, 11 Category Import 12 is for all White Slip I-II Transitional Ware sherds.

Import 13 Total number of fragments: 15 Examples: Plate XLI.15, 18; Plate XLIII.6; Plate L.7, 8, 13, 14 (?) This category is for all White Slip I Wares.

Import 14 Total number of fragments: Examples: Plate L.l6, 17

16

55

This category was for all Red on Black Ware sherds; one sherd of combination Red on Red/Red on Black Ware was also counted in this group as were two fragments of the relatively rare Red on Black Jug.

Import 15 Total number of fragments: 40 Examples: Plate XXXIX.20; Plate XLIII.30, 32-34; Plate XLVIII.2, 3; Plate L.l8, 20; Plate LXXXVIII.5 Category Import 15 was for all Mycenaean sherds.

Miscellany Covers

All the pieces which were identifiable as covers in this excavation are illustrated on pl. X. Nos. 1 and 2, from Stratum III are plain domed covers with knob handles; nos. 3 and 4, also from Stratum III, are based on Plate type 2, and have vent holes on either side of the handle. No. 5 was found half in Stratum III and half in Stratum IV; the form of the rim is identical to that of Plate type 7, common in Stratum IV. Wall brackets Only four fragments of wall brackets were found, one in Stratum IV, one in Stratum XII (pl. XXXII.9), one in Stratum XIII-1 (pl. XXXIII.22), and one in Stratum XVI.

"Gaming Pieces" In each stratum there were several round pieces of pottery, ca. three em in diameter, which had been chipped from previously fired pottery. In Stratum II, there were 96 of these fragments; they may have been used for a game, or perhaps they were used as stoppers for jugs. 211

Conclusions The picture which emerges from the analysis of the pottery on the basis of the type series is one of relatively unbroken development from the Late Bronze Age to the later Iron Age; however, several distinct phases are discernible:

(1) (2) (3)

Strata XVII-XV, with Stratum XIV as a transitional sub-phase. Strata XIII-VI, with a break (on the basis of the pottery) at about Strata X-IX, dividing the whole into two sub-phases. Strata V-I, with three sub-phases: (a) Strata V-IV, (b) Strata III-II, and (c) Stratum I.

Strata XVII- XIV As already noted, relatively little which could be called typically "Tyrian" was identified in these levels; indeed in Strata XVII and XVI, about 24% of the diagnostics were Cypriote. More than half of the juglet fragments in Strata XVII to XV were Cypriote White Shaved Ware. No typical jug or plate emerged for the period. The deep bowls, cooking pots and storage jar fragments show affinity with Canaanite forms. With Stratum XIV, the proportion of Cypriote forms falls off abruptly, to about 4%. Cooking Pots 11 and 12, common in Strata XVII to XV, are replaced by Cooking Pot type 8. The number of miscellaneous plates begins to drop and identifiable forms emerge: Plates 11, 12, and 13 in particular. Storage Jar types 11 and 12 peak in this stratum and Storage Jar 9 first appears in quantity. Most importantly, by the period of Stratum XIV the Phoenician bichrome jug seems to be in the process of developing from the globular pilgrim flask.

Strata XIII- VI The change of forms in these strata is very gradual but can be divided into two phases:

56

(a)

Strata XIII-X:

With Stratum XIII there is a clear change in the forms. Cypriote White Painted and Black Slip Wares become important. Plate type 13 peaks in this stratum; the small trefoil-mouthed juglet has appeared, and the bichrome neckridge jug is typical of the period. Storage Jar 9 has completely replaced the earlier forms and Cooking Pot type 7 appears in this stratum- abruptly and in quantity. In Stratum XII, Plate type 11 becomes more frequent than Plate type 13, but in general the forms introducedin Stratum XIII continue in use through Stratum X. As noted above, in Stratum X, Base type 8 becomes more frequent than Base type 7. Jug types 9, 10 and 11 are common in this period, as are Cooking Pots 4, 5, 6 and 7. Plate type 11, 12 and 13 are common and the early form of Fine Ware Plate type 9 appears. The Krater which first becomes important in Stratum XIV continues to be common. (b)

Strata IX- VI

By the time of Stratum IX, a new complex of forms is beginning to emerge; it should be emphasized, however, that there is a real continuity between these two phases. The second phase sees the appearance of Fine Ware Plate type 9 in quantity, the red-burnished Jug type 7 begins to be frequent and, as can be seen on Table 1, red-burnishing as a form of decoration begins to be more common than painting. The Jug rim type 8 replaces type 9 on the neckridge ware jugs. Storage Jar type 9 continues to be frequent but by Stratum VII Base type 20 has disappeared, indicating that Jar type 9 has been modified somewhat. Plate type 10 replaces the earlier group, and by the end of this phase, the painted plate (type 9) becomes very common. The Cooking Pot repertoire seems to remain the same as in the earlier period. In the import groups, White Painted and Black Slip Wares continue to be very common, but Bichrome and Black on Red Wares begin to appear. The Sub-Protogeometric skyphoi and open plates are also typical of this period. Strata V-I

This final period can be divided into three sub-phases: (a)

Strata V-IV

The pottery of this phase has clear antecedents in the earlier strata, but it represents a major change in the 212 pottery tradition. Fine Ware Plates 6 and 7 are common in this period, as are Plates 7, 8 and 9. Jug rim type 9 has disappeared and has been completely replaced by Jug types 7 and 8 (the Jug 7 probably being that of the conical type). Storage Jar 8 belongs to this group as does a form of Storage Jar type 9 which does not have Base type 20 and probably has a plain rounded base. The appearance of some fragments of the jars of the "crisp ware family" in 213 Stratum IV make it possible that this family was introduced during this period. The very fine red-burnished ware, in quantity, is the primary characteristic of the period. (b)

Strata III-II

In this phase, which is connected with the destruction of the Phase "a" building, the storage jar "crisp ware" family predominates; the "mushroom-lipped" jug and related forms completely replace the earlier forms of neckridge ware. A new type of dipper juglet appears and a new group of plates emerges. Plate 2 develops from Plate type 7; Plate types 3, 4 and 5 appear. Fine Ware Plate type 2 replaces the thinner type 7 and the red-burnished ware in general is not as fine or as beautiful as in the earlier phase. (c)

Stratum I

In this period the quality of the red-burnished ware continues to degenerate. Storage Jar types 1 and 2 predominate, as does Plate type 1. The "mushroom-lipped" jug continues. It would have been fortunate to have had one more stratum preserved above this one - primarily to see whether the "mushroom-lipped" jug and the red-burnished wares continued after the phase of Storage Jar type 1 and Plate type 1, or whether Stratum I represents the end of this tradition. Table 13 shows that comparative frequency of the most common types. Table 14 gives a summary of the findings of this study in terms of a relative chronology and is, hopefully, a basic outline of the pottery history of Tyre. No doubt future studies will correct and add to this chronology.

57

Table 14: Comparative Frequency of Selected Types Frequency based on total diagnostics per stratum: Smallest unit-2%

Imp.8

I

Imp.10 1 I

Deep Bowl

~

I P1thos I I

I I

CP 11 Cooking Pot 7 ~I ~~~---------------~I

I

Plate

I SJli. SJ

Strata: XVII-XV

XIV

rx...:vr

XIII-X

58

t7

V-IV

III-II

4I

I

Table 15: Relative Pottery Chronology

Stratum

Plate

FWP

1

1

D. Bowl

Jug

Jug let 1

1

3 1 2 4 5 6

I

II-III

IV-V

VI-IX

X-XIII

XIV

2 3 4 5

2 3 4

6 7 8

5 6 7

9 10

8

7 8

2

11 12 13

3 4 Pithos Krater

13

Pithos Krater

1

1 2 3 4 5 6? 7?

2

6? 7? 8

6

Cooking Pot

Base

1 2

15 18 1 3 13 15 19

1 2 3 4

3

4 14

1 2 3

6 14

1 through 7

8 12 17 20

5 6 7

Import

3

91

9 10 11

3

92 10 11

9 10

3

11 12

8

20

6

4

13 14 15

11 12

10 11 21

8 through 15

7 8 9

1 combined with a low proportion of Base 20

General Character Decline of red-burnish

4 5 6 7 4 5 6 7

XVII-XV

14

Storage Jar

Red-burnish "Crisp Ware" "Mushroomlipped" Jug Fine red slip, wheel burnished Red slip, hand burnished

Phoenician Bichrome Few Imports Cypriote forms common

2comsined with a high proportion of Base 20

Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

Similar angular lamps occur at Megiddo in Strata III to I (Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 37.8, 12), Akhziv (Culican 1966, fig. Ill), Sarepta (Culican 1970a, fig. 3.4; Pritchard 1975, figs. 16. 1-4, 27.3), and Sidon (Contenau 1920, fig. 27). See also the type series summary, pis. XCI to XCV. Taylor 1959, fig. 6.25, 28, 39. Hamilton 1935, figs. 7 and 8. Pritchard 1975, fig 18.6-7, 20, 22. Gjerstad 1948, fig. LXVII. II. Dothan 1971, fig. 53.12. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 23.4. Pritchard 1975, fig 18.19. Taylor 1959, fig_ 6.33. Yadin 1961, pl. 251.27. Karageorghis 1973, pis. 234-5. Tomb 79 is dated by the excavator to Cypro-Archaic I or ca. 700 B.C. (pp. 120-122) and also contained parallels to Tyre Jug types 3-5 and 7 (pls. 226-227) which occur in the same strata in Tyre as Plate 2. Saidah 1966, no. 8. Culican 1970a, fig. 2B; the plate has a base similar to Tyre Base type 2. Saidah 1966, no. 19. The high proportion of these plates with convex bases may indicate that they were used, as at Khalde, as covers rather than as table ware. Taylor 1959, fig. 6.20. For example: Yadin 1958, pls. 47.7, 49.10; Yadin 1960, pls. 66.19, 79.12, 80.39, 98.17; Yadin 1961, pls. 181.29, 220.2, 222.20; a similar plate with a red band on the rim is common in Hazor Strata VI and V (Yadin 1958, 20; Yadin 1960, 17). Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, 139-41, fig. 13.1-4. Gjerstad 1948, fig. XLIV.2. Johns 1938, fig. 6.5. Saidah 1966, no. 29.

59

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56.

57. 58. 59. 60.

61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70.

Pritchard 1975, fig. 18.24. Saidah 1966, nos. 26, 30. Hamilton 1935, nos. 153, 155. Pritchard 1975, fig. 18.23. Dothan 1975, fig. 24.5. Yadin 1961, pl. 208.7, 15. Kenyon 1964,487-8, fig. 253.3. Franken 1969, fig. 59. 73. Yadin 1961, pl. 208.18. Kenyon 1964,487-8, fig. 253.1. Hamilton 1935,nos.156and290;p.9,fig.15. Hamilton 1935, nos. 220 and 253. The category "miscellaneous plates" includes both the untyped ordinary plates of the "Plate" category and the untyped decorated plates of the "Fine Ware Plate" category. See Katzenstein 1973, 148, who says of these wares that, " ... it is high time they were called after their country of origin, that is 'Phoenician ware.'" Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, figs. 18.9, 10; 19.1, 2. Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, fig. 10.5, 6; 14.2-13; Amiran 1970, photos 223-4. Again these could have been called "plates and bowls" or "bowls"; the designation "plate" is arbitrary. Yadin 1961, pl. 230.12; see discussion below under Storage Jar type 1: the piece should perhaps be dated later than Hazor VA. Taylor 1959, fig. 6.1, 2, 3. Yadin 1960, pl. 82.16; see also Yadin 1958, pl. 54.6 and Yadin 1961, pl. 223.19 which, however, are somewhat different in form and decoration from Tyre Fine Ware Plate type 2. Pritchard 1975, fig. 17.3. Contenau 1920, fig. 27. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 25.57. Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, figs. 9.2; 19.3-4. Some of the Samaria examples are, like the Hazor examples, somewhat different from the Tyre examples; the plain thin-ware plate at Samaria is, however, quite similar in form to the Tyre type; see figs. 10.11; 18.6-8. Johns 1938, figs. 6.2, 10.2, 13.3. DeVaux 1952, p. 569. Dothan 1971, figs. 37.17, 59.6, 10. Karageorghis 1976, fig. 76; of all the parallels cited here for Fine Ware Plate type 2, the Kition example is the closest; it may even have been manufactured inTyre. Taylor 1959, fig. 6.4. Taylor 1959, fig. 6.7, 10. 13, 15, 24; the examples from al Mina indicate the range ofvessel-wall forms associated with this type of rim. Pritchard 1975, fig. 18.18. Saidah 1966, no. 28. Yadin 1958, pl.49.23. Nicolaou 1976, pl. 28.10; the diameter of this Kition bowl is ca 16 em which makes it closer in form to Tyre Fine Ware Plate type 6 than to type 2. The decoration, however, is closer to type 2 although such elaborate decoration is not unknown on Tyre Fine Ware Plate 6 (see pl. XV. 7). The Kition piece was found in a tomb in company with Cyprio-Geometric III wares. The bowl shown on pl. XIX.! is a variant form and was singular in having a ridge at the rim, but the ware and decoration were otherwise identical with the rest of the group. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pls. 24.56, 28.93B. Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, figs. 4.10, 18.1-3. Yadin 1961, pl. 208.24, 25, Stratum IX; see also pl. 191.17, Stratum VI which is similar to Tyre Fine Ware Plate 8, but see also pl. 191.19 of the same stratum which has a red slip on the interior. This may indicate that the Hazor VI group should not be compared with the Tyre type. The Tyre category was basically defined by the ware and the lack of red slip on the interior. This means that some of the Megiddo, Samaria and Hazor parallels are not close parallels. Hamilton 1935, p. 7, fig. 9; pl. XIII.68; p. 21, fig. 69; these last two were red-slipped on the interior, but Hamilton noted (p. 7): "Sometimes such bowls are yellow on the inside and red on the outer." As on the Tell Abu Hawam examples. This seems a very high number, but if the 301 fragments are presumed to come from Fine Ware Plate 2, a plate which has an average circumference of about 66 em, and if it is remembered that the fragments are rarely more than 2 or 3 em across, this could represent as few as ten plates. Yadin 1960, pl. 53.34; Yadin 1961, pls. 175.7, 178.39, 220.13. These might better have been called amphorae. Chapman 1972, figs. 18, 19, 20 and pp. 161-2, 180, and references to other parallels there. It is the unfinished interior which distinguishes it from Base type 11; Base type 11 belongs to a deep bowl and is therefore finished on the interior, but in profile Bases 11 and 12 are very similar. Such a rim does occur in the Sarepta type series; Pritchard 1975, fig. 25, Rolled Rim type 7. Taylor 1959, fig. 2.7, unstratified. Saidah 1966, nos. 23-24.

60

71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108.

109. 11 0. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118.

119. 120. 121. 122.

Yadin 1958, pl. 52.23; 1960, pls. 70.16, 88.4. Gjerstad 1948, fig. XXXIII.3, Bichrome IV Ware; Birmingham 1963, 32. Birmingham 1963, 32. Birmingham 1963, 41. Birmingham 1963, 32. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 3. 78-79; see also pl. 1.38; Loud 1948, pl. 91.4. Yadin 1960, pl. 88.5; 1961, pl. 189.16. Dothan- Freedman 1967, fig. 37.23. Taylor 1959, pl. 20b; figs. 2.9-11; 7.1, 3-6. Pritchard 1975, figs. 16.6, 20.6; see also Pritchard 1971, 62, dating the type from the eighth to seventh centuries. Johns 1938, fig. 7.1. Culican 1966, fig. 111; 1970a, fig. 2B. Saidah 1966, no. 2. Karageorghis 1973, pl. 226, dated to ca. 700 B.C. Pritchard 1970, 17, chart showing the distribution around the Mediterranean, and 20: "What this jug was designed to contain is difficult to guess. Surely the wide, drooping lip of its rounded mouth did not facilitate the pouring of a liquid such as oil, wine or water; the pinched-lip jug was more functional for this purpose." Masson 1971. Birmingham 1963, 30-32. Van Beek 1955, 34. Hamilton 1935, no. 78. Loud 1948, pl. 91.4, 12; Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 33.12; Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, figs. 25.1, 3-4, 7, 9, 13; 26.7. Yadin 1961, pl. 228.3. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 2.69. Arniran 1970, pl. 92; see also Chapman 1972, figs. 26 and 27, and discussion pp. 166-168. The conical type seems to have been influenced by manufacturing techniques for bronze jugs; see Amiran 1970, 272, and Culican 1968. Yadin 1961, pl. 177.15. Loud 1948, pl. 91.3. Gjerstad 1948, fig. XXVII.4, 5; fig. XLIII.1 0, 11. Taylor 1959, fig. 7.7 and discussion, pp. 83-4. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 3.83, 85, and p. 182: two pieces in Stratum IV, twelve in III, one in II, and three in I. Saidah 1966, no. 9. Karageorghis 1973, pl. 227. Yadin 1961, pl. 176.5; 1960, p. 13 and pl. 58.25. Gjerstad 1948, fig. XXVII.6; fig. XLIII.13; see also Birmingham 1963, 26-7, who makes even further distinctions in this group. Culican 1966, fig. 111. Johns 1938, fig. 6.1. Cintas 19 50, types .150, 151, 160, 193-19 5, and pl. LXXXI. Chapman 1972. Table 8A. a-h based on the following examples: a. After Chapman 1972, fig. 13.272; see Tyre pls. XXXI.lO, XXXIII.24; b. Tyre pl. XXXIII.25; for the rim, see Chapman 1972, fig. 3; c. Tyre pl. XXV.14; for the rim, see Chapman 1972, fig. 4.51, 52. d. Hypothetical, based partly on Chapman 1972, fig. 5.57, 193, and fig. 32.312; see Tyre pl. XX.4; e. Tyre, pl. XVIII.1 0 and Chapman 1972, fig. 27.151; see Gjerstad 1948, fig. XXVII.3; f. Tyre, pl. XIV.5 and Nicolaou 1976, pl. 28.3; see Chapman 1972, fig. 6.178; g. Tyre pl. VI.5 +pl. V.23; h. Tyre, pl. v. 16. For a discussion of parallels, see Chapman 1972, 159-161. Chapman 1972, fig. 3 .192. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 36.12; Loud 1948, pls. 80.1-4; 86.1-3; 91.10. Yadin 1961, pl. 176.6. Hamilton 1935, nos. 158,249,250, 251; on the stratification, see Birmingham 1963,37. James 1966, fig. 51.11. DeVaux 1952, p. 563, fig. 11. Riis 1948, p. 66, fig. 82. Chapman 1972, fig. 3, and discussion pp. 150-152. Saidah 1966, nos. 13, 52, 55, 56; no. 13 is from Tomb 4 which was assigned to Level III, but which must belong to Level IV on the evidence of the similarity of its contents to the Level IV tombs; compare no. 14 with no. 48; no. 15 with nos. 50, 51, and 54; and no. 16 with no. 60. Tomb 2, now assigned to Level III, may also belong to Level IV. Pieridou 1973, p. 103, pls. 8.10, 9.1-2; see also Birmingham 1963, 37; Ami ran 1970, 271, notes that the origin of the style seems to be Phoenician rather than Cypriote; on a possible Philistine source, see Dothan 1967, 241. Yadin 1961, pl. 202.2 (Stratum XII); Chapman 1972, fig. 4.50 and seep. 150; Mazar 1967, fig. 7. Loud 1948, pl. 88.15. Hamilton 1935, nos. 52, 152.

61

123. 124.. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143. 144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154.

155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175.

Macridy 1904, pl. VI.ll. Des borough 1957, fig. 2a. Pritchard 1975, fig. 20.11. Chapman 1972, fig. 4.51, 52. Loud 1948, fig. 88.15. Birmingham 1963, 38. Chapman 1972, fig. 5.57, 193; fig. 32.312. Guy- Engberg 1938, pl. 66.20, upper part of jug only, with decoration at base of neck; called Early Iron, but the same (disturbed) tomb yielded a Cypriote Red on Black I (III) Ware juglet. Macridy 1904, pl. VI.l2. Gjerstad 1948, fig. XXII.l4. Chapman 1972, fig. 27.151. Hamilton 1935, no. 67. Gjerstad 1948, fig. XXVII.3. Nicolaou 1976, pl. 28.3, 5, in company with Period III wares, see pp. 252-3. Chapman 1972, fig. 6.33, 178, 185; fig. 6.42, with a band at the base of the neck, might represent the transition from the form here called d to that here called f. Amiran 1970, pl. 91.8. Hamilton 1935, no. 78. Yadin 1960, pl. 58.28; 1961, 208.45. Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, fig. 6.17; note also fig. 22.5, with horizontal bands around the body, however, Period III. See Chapman 1972, pp. 15 5, 168. Unpainted versions of vessels identical to forms d, e, and f do occur; see Chapman fig. 7.25. If more fragments had been available, a distinction in the type series among plain, red slipped, and painted might have been meaningful. These could be identified by their small size, lack of a neck-ridge, or the presence of two handles. Plate XXV.7; to my knowledge, plain versions of vessels like Table 8A.b do not occur and red slip versions of the form seem to by a late development; see Chapman 1972, p. 152. Note that the 555 sherds counted as Jug type 10 were not included in the general category "Painted Body Sherds" of Table 1. Vertical concentric circle decoration is rare on vessels other than these, but see Chapman 1972, fig. 10.15, a pitcher with such decoration. This must be classed as an "oddity," as pitchers usually have horizontal bands as decoration. Hamilton 1935, pp. 9-10, n. 1; see also Hamilton 1933, pl. XXII.20, Stratum V, no. 252. Saidah 1966, nos. 49, 57. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pis. 6.153, 8.175; Loud 1948, pis. 75.20-23, 82.1-5. Yadin 1958, pis. 46.6, 56.13, 52.20; 1961, pis. 218.5, 228.1. Gjerstad 1948, figs. VIII.10, XVI.9; see also Chapman 1972, 148-150 for other parallels and division of the form into three groups. Chapman 1972, fig. 8; Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 8.177. Table 8A.i based on Tyre, pl. XXIX.3; for the rim, see Chapman 1972, fig. 2.4, 7; j. Sketch based partly on Chapman 1972, fig. 8.190; k. Tyre, pl. V.4. On stylistic grounds, the jugs from Sarepta (Pritchard 197 5, fig. 20.8-9; Culican 1970a, fig. 3. 7) with a rather high bulging neck and bands around the body might be a transition from the vessel of Table 8A.j to the vessel of Table 8A.k. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 1.1 0, 11, 13. Yadin 1960, pl. 107.14; 1961, pis. 180.16, 184.17, 224.7, 228.14. Dothan- Freedman 1967, fig. 40.12. Pritchard 1975, fig. 21.5. Saidah 1966, nos. 31, 33. Johns 1938, fig. 16.8. James 1966, fig. 128.3. Culican 1970a, fig. 2B. Contenau 1920, fig. 27. Hamilton 1935, nos. 57, 58, and 167. Astr6m 1972b, fig. LVIII. On the chronology, see Astr6m- Astrom 1972,700-701, 762. Yadin 1961, pl. 202.9, 10. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 20.120, 21.122; Loud 1948, pl. 64.1. The almost complete absence of the type from Stratum XIII-2 is surprising, but the sample from that pit was small. Loud 1948, pls. 27.1, 5, 7; 35.4; 42.3; 51.12; 59.12; 64.1. Hamilton 1935,figs. 13, 16. Yadin 1960, pls. 52.21, 59.4, 7; 1961, pl. 209.19. Hamilton 1935, no. 97. Pritchard 1975, fig. 24.2. Amiran 1970, pl. 44. Pritchard 1975, fig. 24.6; another example, dated to Palestinian Iron I is discussed by the same author in Ward 1968, 101, and see fig. 2.1.

62

176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. I82. I83. 184. 185. 186. I87. 188. 189. 190. 191.

192. 193. 194. I95. 196. 197. 198. 199.

200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207.

208. 209. 210. 2Il. 212. 2I3.

Loud 1948, pls. 71.13, 83.3. Lamon- Shipton 1939, pl. 13.69. Culican 1973, fig. l.Rl (which has a base similar to Tyre Base 20); fig. 4.21 (which has a plain rounded base). Yadin 1958, pls. 57.11; 64.8; 65.13; 1960, pls. 60.9-10; 72. 1-9; 73. 1-16; 1961, pls. 180.19-20; 186.11, 12, 15, 17-19; 189.22. Yadin 1958, pls. 68.6; 1960, pis. 79, 24-25; 90.1-4; 91.1-16; 101.9, 10, 12-15; 107.12; 1961, pls. 229.11-13; 230.28. Yadin 1961, p1s. 250.13, 253.1, 353.13. Lamon- Shipton I939, p1s. I4.72; 15.78; 16.79-81; I7.83. Dothan 197I, figs. 38.2-3; 42.4, 6; 57.8-9. James 1966, figs. 70.1, 3; 128.2. Tufnel11953, pl. 95.489. Crowfoot- Crowfoot- Kenyon 1957, 163 and fig. 21.4. Pritchard 1975, fig. 23.2, 3, I8-20. Contenau 1920, fig. 27. Culican I973, fig. 4.R22. Gjerstad I948, fig. XLIV. II. Myres 1897, fig. 12.14; Nicolaou 1976, pl. 30.1-2, 4, 6, Cypro-Archaic II. The closest parallels to the type are among the early colonial pottery. Indeed a whole class of Punic jars seems to have developed from this homeland form; see Cintas 1950, pl. LXVI.233, pl. LXVII.233. Apparently the rim gradually became lower and the angle between the rim and shoulder disappeared and, in the later period, a base was added; e.g., Cintas 1950, pl. LXVII. 233, 230, 243, 244, 248, as a sequence of forms. Yadin I960, pl. 75.15. Pritchard 1975, fig. 24.4, 5. Hamilton 1935, fig. 3, but the crude twisted handles of this piece may indicate that it is a later form of Tyre type 2. Gjerstad I948, figs. XLIV.IO, LVI.28. Amiran 1970, 241. Gjerstad 1948, fig. LVI.29, Kition T. 59, dated by Birmingham 1963, 31, to after 725 B.C. Karageorghis I973, pl. 225.593, 807, ca. 700 B.C. Yadin 196I, pl. 255.23, Stratum IV; pl. 230.29, Locus 3I46, assigned to Stratum VA, but the lamps from this locus (pl. 232.9, 10) are unlike the other lamps of Stratum VA (pl. 232, I-7, II-12); this plus the evidence of the Stratum IV piece from Area G make it possible that Locus 3I46 should be assigned to Stratum IV. The point is more important than would normally be the case because of the fixed date for the end of Hazor VA. The Cypriote parallels given in notes 197 and 198 suggest a date around 700 B.C. for the form. This would be confirmed on the mainland if Locus 3146 belongs to Razor IV. Nicolaou 1976, pl. 30.5, Cypro-Archaic II. The piece illustrated on pl. 1.16 may represent the transition from Storage Jar type 3 to Storage Jar type 1. Yadin 1958, pls. 46.I5-I6, 48.I7-I8; I960, pis. 52.26-27, 62.1-2; I96I, pls.179.2I-22, 211-16,253.5-6. Lamon- Shipton I939, pis. 24.27, 31.152; Loud I948, pl. 85.10-11. Hamilton 1935, no. 160. Yadin I961, pl. I65.6, 10. I7. Hamilton I935, no. 270. See Coldstream 1968, pl. 32e, g, and h, and discussion pp. I52-4; he dates the type to ca. 850 to 750 with survivals as late as 720 (chart, p. 330); see also Desborough I952, pis. 24-26, and pp. 193-194: "On the accepted dating, this would place the first appearance of this skyphos at the very end of the tenth century ... It certainly looks as though most of the skyphoi that found their way to the eastern Mediterranean did so during the first half of the eighth century." Desborough 1952, pl. I2, and p. II8; the type is probably late protogeometric; for other examples, see Kraiker - Kubler 1939, pl. 52, and Goldman 1963, p. 307 and fig. I 02. ISII, which has line decoration on the rim and is from the destruction level at Tarsus, ca. 700. Except the skyphoi of category Import 6. Note that fragments counted in category Import 5 may include parts of Bichrome ware vessels which happened not to have red paint on them. Pieridou 1973, p. 98, pl. 4.2-4; Nicolaou I976, pl. 26. 2-3; Adelman 1976, figs. I09-II8. For similar pieces, see Pritchard 1975, 34 and fig. 45.I; Lamon- Shipton 1939.,pl. I 03.1-Il. Indeed in any chronology for the Phoenicians based on the pottery, the Iron Age would have to be divided into two sections: (1) the period of Phoenician Bichrome, and (2) the period of Phoenician Red Slip. There were I8 sherds of this group in Stratum IV; a reexamination of whether they really belonged there or were intrusions was inconclusive. There was a problem during the excavation of this stratum with sherds falling from the Stratum II pottery dump in the balk.

63

CHAPTER HI CHRONOLOGY: STRATA XVIII TO I

The very high percentage of imported wares and comparative material found in this excavation should make it possible to arrive at an absolute chronology for the levels; but the absolute dates of wares manufactured in Greece and Cyprus are not themselves certain, and the dating of strata of Palestinian sites is a subject of controversy. The relative chronology for the Late Cypriote Bronze Age is comparatively certain and for documentation of the material from Tyre we have relied almost completely on Paul Astrom's The Late Cypriote Bronze Age (SCE IV: lC, D), as well as his The Middle Cypriote Bronze Age (SCE IV: 1B). The absolute dates which he proposes for the Late Cypriote Bronze Age are as follows: LC LC LC LC LC LC LC

IA IB IIA liB IIC IliA IIIB

ca.

1600/1575- 1525/1500 1525/1500- 1425/1415 1425/1415- 1375/1360 1375/1360- ±1320 ±1320-1190 1190- 1125/1100 1125/1110-1050 1

For the Mycenaean material, we are completely dependent on Arne Furumark's Mycenaean Pottery. For the later Greek material, we have relied on Vincent Desborough's Protogeometric Pottery, and J. N. Coldstream's Greek Geometric Pottery. The Cypriote Iron Age chronology is far less clear than that of the Bronze Age. The standard reference is Einar Gjerstad's The Cypro-Geometric, Cypro-Archaic and Cypro-Classical Periods (SCE IV:2), but Gjerstad's chronology was based almost exclusively on internal considerations. Several attempts have been made to revise that chronology, and the most ambitious of these was the study by Judy Birmingham. Her study of the comparative material from stratified contexts in the Levant resulted in a new general chronology for the Cypriote Iron Age: Early Iron Middle Iron I Middle Iron II Late Iron

1050- 900 900-725 725-600 600 - Hellenistic

She related this to Gjerstad's types by placing his types I-II in Early Iron, type III, ca. 900 to 800, and ca. 800 to 700 for type IV, with the proviso that the sequence of types itself needs revision. 2

Stratum XVIII Grave 3

As noted in Chapter I, it is likely on stratigraphic grounds that Grave 3 is the earliest of the three graves: Grave 3 was covered with sterile sand, while Graves 1 and 2 were covered with discolored sand - indicating that the sand had already become discolored by use of the area before the graves were dug. The dating of Grave 3 depends on the animal shaped vase (pl. LII.3) as the other pieces in the grave are of types which have a rather long life span. As can be seen in the discussion of the parallels to the piece, 3 there is some dispute as to whether it belongs to White Painted V-VI or White Painted VI. The similarity between the piece and the typical forms and decoration of White Painted VI, noted by Merrillees, is convincing; compare pl. LII.3 with pl. LIII.3, 4, particularly on the form of the rim. The animal-shaped vase does not occur in Egyptian tombs, but the White Painted VI juglets of the type found in Grave 2 do occur, and range in date from Late Cypriote lA down to early Late Cypriote IB, or, on the Egyptian evidence, no later than 1525. 4 The earliest date for the piece remains problematic. On Astri:im's chronology, and his placing of the type in White Painted V-VI, the first appearance of the type would be before 1600 B.C. Merrillees's placing of the type in White Painted VI or beginning in Late Cypriote lA gives a date of 1650/ 1625 for the earliest appearance of the type, and results in a date range of 1650 to 1525 for the piece.

64

Grave 2

This grave has in it much more material from which to judge the date. The group itself finds its closest parallel in Megiddo Tomb 1100, dated to Late Bronze Age I; Tomb 1100 contains Palestinian Bichrome Ware, but does not

contain parallels to the two red-burnished juglets of the Tyre group (pl. LIII.6, 7 ,) or to the black juglet (pl. LIII.8). 5 The Black Polished jugs (pl. LIII.1, 2) are placed by both Oren and Merrillees at the beginning of Late Cypriote I. The White Painted VI juglets (pl. LIII.3, 4), if the Egyptian evidence is correct, give a terminus ante quem of about 1525. Further, since Base Ring I Ware (pl. LIII.IO) and Black Slip Wheel-made Ware (pl. LII1.20) do not appear before Late Cypriote IA2, 6 then the group must be dated, on Astrom's chronology, to after 1550/1540, or on the chronology of Merrillees to about forty years earlier. The group can thus be safely dated to about the middle of the sixteenth century, and since Grave 3 is earlier, Grave 3 probably belongs to the first part of the sixteenth century. The point is more important than would normally be the case with a grave group as the animal shaped vase of Grave 3 and the Red on Black Ware sherds of Stratum XVII are, so far, the earliest pottery found above the occupation gap witnessed by the sand layer, and thus on the present evidence Tyre was re-founded at about 1600 B.C. Grave 1

This grave had in it one complete Base Ring I Ware bowl, a Monochrome Ware bowl and a "Spindle Bottle". 7 The combination suggests a date range offrom Late Cypriote IB2 to Late Cypriote IIA2, or ca. 1475/1460 to 8 137 5/1360. However, since it is not likely that a great amount of time passed between the period of Graves 2 and 3 and the period of Grave 1, and since Grave 1 must pre-date the building levels at the end of the Stratum XVII period, 9 then Grave 1 must belong to the first part of that date range.

Stratum XVII The pottery found in this stratum indicates that there was a rather long period of casual visits to the area during and after the period of the graves: a period during which there was no real habitation. The earliest material found in Stratum XVII was Cypriote Red on Black Ware. This ware was being exported as early as Middle Cypriote III and continued to occur down to Late Cypriote lA (Astrom, 1525/1500; Merrillees, 1575/1550) so these sherds must have been left at this site during the period of Graves 2 and 3. The presence of White Slip II Ware sherds in the stratum, however, shows that the period went on for a long time. On Astrom's account, White Slip II does not appear before Late Cypriote IIA1, 10 or before 1425/1415. It is likely that the White Slip II sherds were deposited here just before the building activity of the beginning of Stratum XVI, and the stratum must be dated from ca. 1600 to after 14 25 I 1415.

Stratum XVI Stratum XVI displa¥S a standard complex of Late Cypriote IIA forms - in contrast to the mixture found in Stratum XVII. The Mycenaean sherds can fit into this dating as Late Helladic III begins at about the same time as Late Cypriote IIA. 11 So the first building activity in the area can be dated to after 1425/1415 and the period of use probably continued to about 1375/1360.

Stratum XV Stratum XV also contained a great deal of Cypriote White Slip II material including types which Astrom calls 12 "late White Slip." The group fits into Cypriote Late Bronze IIB, that is after ctt 1375/1360; the presence of the Mycenaean IIIB material (pl. XLIII.30, 33), the "late White Slip" sherds and the Base Ring II Wares indicate that this stratum continues into the Late Cypriote IIC period, probably well into the thirteenth century. The one scarab found in this stratum is perhaps from the reign of Ramses II, 13 and the cylinder seal (pl. XLIV.16) is probably from the time of Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244-1208 B.C.). 14 Thus Stratum XV must be dated from a period after 1375/1360 to after 1244 and probably down to 1200.

Stratum XIV In this stratum there was a marked drop in the quantity of Cypriote imports, but there was the Mycenaean IIIC cup (pl. XXXIX.2Q) paralleled at Enkomi in a stratum dated to 1150. Further, the stratum in general, on the

65

basis of the jugs, the storage jars and the deep bowls, is to be compared with Hazor Stratum XII; on the basis of the deep bowls, it can be compared with Megiddo VI. A further confirmation comes from the pottery which was found 15 on the Cape Gelidonya shipwreck excavated by George Bass and dated to 1200 B.C., plus or minus fifty years. 16 The pottery found on the wreck can be compared to Tyre Storage Jar types 12, 13, and 14 and to Base type 20, a combination of elements found in Strata XV and XIV. Three scarabs were found in this stratum, none of which 17 18 are later than the Twentieth Dynasty, that is, no later than 1069. The absence of Cypriote White Painted (Cypro-Geometric I) sherds in this stratum confirms that the period of this stratum must have ended before 1070/50 19 B.C. Thus it is likely that the period of Stratum XIV extends from about 1200 B.C. to about 1070/50 B.C. and covers a period roughly equivalent to Palestinian Iron I and Late Cypriote III.

Strata XIII-I: General Considerations The appearance of White Painted Wares in Stratum XIII makes a date immediately after 1070/50 B.C. likely for this stratum. Stratum I is probably to be dated not much later than 700 B.C., and so between Stratum XIII and Stratum I there is a date range of only about 350 years, with the major breaks occurring at Strata IX, V, III, and I on the evidence of both the architecture and the local pottery. The major dating evidence for these strata falls into four classes: Egyptian, Cypriote, Greek and Palestinian. The Egyptian evidence consists of the inscribed urn found between Strata III and II (pl. XIII); it is to be dated to the 21 Twenty-fifth or Twenty-sixth Dynasties, 20 and thus is not likely to be earlier than about 750 B.C. and probably 22 is somewhat later. Allowing for the object to be traded to Tyre, broken and buried, a date toward the end of the eighth century is even more likely. Turning to the Cypriote evidence, it must be emphasized again that the Cypriote chronology for the Iron' Age is not as certain as that for the Bronze Age, so it is necessary to proceed with caution. In Strata XIII-X, Cypriote wares of Gjerstad's periods I and II appeared. On Gjerstad's chronology, the most likely dates for these strata would 24 be 1050 to 850. 23 Birmingham would raise the closing date for types I and II to 900. By the time of Stratum IX, type III forms are beginning to appear, and material of Gjerstad's type IV appears in Strata V to II. Thus the Tyre material follows the internal chronology of the Cypriote Iron Age. It is the absolute dating that is a problem. With Gjerstad's chronology, the period IV forms belong in the seventh century, but Birmingham would put them in the 25 eighth century. The evidence of Salamis Tomb 79 which contains exact parallels to Strata III-I material, and which is dated to ca. 700, would seem to confirm Birmingham's chronology on this point. The Greek evidence also contributes to the dating of these strata. The Sub-Protogeometric skyphos with pendent semicircles (Import type 3) appears sforadically from Stratum XI onwards. The type is supposed to have first appeared in the east in the ninth century, 2 which would indicate that Stratum XI is ninth century but a more precise date is impossible. Turning to the evidence from sites in the immediate area, there are not very many that show really parallel material to the Tyre sequence. There are a great number of parallels to individual pieces from Hazor, Megiddo and Tell Abu Hawam, but for the earlier Iron Age it is difficult to compare whole groups from Tyre with whole groups from any of these sites. Tell Abu Hawam IV appears to be most similar to Tyre Stratum XIII and perhaps XIV, while Tell Abu Hawam III can perhaps be compared to Tyre Strata XII to X or even IX; however, since the dating of these strata at Tell Abu Hawam is very uncertain, it is possible that the dating of strata at Tyre can help to resolve the Tell Abu Hawam problem, rather than the reverse. For the later Iron Age, Tyre I seems to be most like Hazor IV and al 27 Mina VII-VI, both of which belong to the end of the eighth century. The "crisp ware" storage jars, mushroom-lip jugs, and red-slipped plates of Tyre Strata III-II, and perhaps IV, have parallels in Hazor VI-V, al-Mina VIII, Samaria Periods V-VI, Ash dod 3, and Cyprus Period IV, all of which would combine to date Tyre III-II and perhaps IV in the eighth century. The lack of parallels to that material in Tell Abu Hawam III is a further confirmation of this.

Strata XIII to X In these strata Cypriote wares of Gjerstad's types I and II dominate, and should on the basis of his chronology be dated down to about 850 B.C. The appearance of a Sub-Protogeometric skyphos in Stratum XI and another at the base of the Stratum X-I deposit (pl. XXIV.6) make a date after 850 B.C. likely for Stratum X-1. Stratum XIII must begin at the time of the beginning of Cypro-Geometric I or ca. 1070/50, and in Stratum XII there is a small barrel juglet (pl. XXXII. 7) of a type discussed by Birmingham; on the basis of evidence from stratified groups from Cyprus,

66

Tell Fara and Lachish, she concludes that the type belongs to the period 950 to 850. 28 Stratum XI, on the basis of the jug with Bichrome II parallels (pl. XXIX.3) and on the basis of the Greek pottery could belong to the first part of the ninth century. The Stratum X-2 deposit probably is to be dated to the first half of the ninth century or even to around 850 B.C. 29 In view of the problem of dating the Cypriote material, fixed dates for these strata are difficult to determine, and one is forced to approximate; but the whole group can be dated 1070/50 to about 850, with perhaps a break at about 1000 B.C. between Strata XIII and XII and another break at about 925 between Strata XII and XI.

Strata IX to VI The Greek material in Strata IX and VIII makes a date after 850 B.C. likely for these levels. The small Bichrome juglet (pl. XXII.8) is dated by Birmingham to after 850 B.C. 3 Further, the Cypriote pieces in these strata fell into the categories II-III, III, and III-IV. Birmingham places period III at 900 to 800 and period IV at 800 31 to 700, but if Desborough is correct in dating the end of period II (with Gjerstad) at 850, then period III must begin at 850 and extend into the eighth century. As Stratum Vis probably to be dated toward the end of Cypriote period III and the beginning of IV, Strata IX to VI most likely cover a time from the mid-ninth century to sometime in the eighth century; it would then be probable that the large-stone building of which Stratum VII was the floor should be dated to about 800 B.C.

°

Strata V to IV This period sees the building and use of the great straight-walled building. There was very little in these strata which would give an independent date. The small Bichrome fragment (pl. XIV.17) might be period III or IV; the jug of pl. XIV.8 can be compared to one at Hazor in Stratum V which might indicate a mid-eighth century date. Material found in Stratum IV can be compared to that in a Kition tomb group published by Nicolaou, a group which contained Cypro-Geometric III pottery which according to Nicolaou might range in date from 850 B.C. to 700 B.C. 32 The Egyptian urn and other evidence indicate, however, that Strata III-II belong to the later part of the eighth century, and, at Khalde in Tomb 121 there was material similar to both Stratum IV and III, 33 so it is likely that these two strata follow closely on each other. For this reason, and because of the Hazor parallel noted above, a date around 740 B.C. for the transition from Stratum IV to Stratum III is preferable. How long before this the straightwalled building, of which Stratum Vis the foundation trench and floor, was built is difficult to determine. That date, however elusive it may be at the moment, may prove to be quite important as the building of the structure of Stratum V marks the change from Phoenician Bichrome to Phoenician Red Slip. For the moment a general date of around 760 B.C. seems most likely.

Strata III to II These two strata follow very closely on each other as the pottery in them was almost identical. The present dating of the Egyptian urn of pl. XIII to after 7 50 B.C. and the presence of Cypriote period IV wares in these strata indicate a date in the second half of the eighth century. However, since there are parallels to these strata in Hazor V and Samaria VI, it is likely that Stratum III begins before 732 B.C. 34 Stratum I seems to begin around 700 B.C., so a date in the last third of the eighth century is likely for these two strata.

Stratum! Stratum I probably follows immediately after Stratum II, since the mushroom-lip jug and Plate type 2 continue in this stratum. The evidence of Salamis Tomb 79 on Storage Jar type 1, of the parallels in Locus 3146 of Hazor which is probably to be dated to after 732 B.C., and of the parallels to Cypriote Period V wares, indicate a date of ca. 700 B.C. for this stratum.

Summary Taking into account the problems in the various chronologies discussed above, and keeping in mind that the material presented hereis itself new evidence for some of these questions and, finally noting that all archaeological chronologies, even when termed "absolute" are usually relative, one hesitates to set down a listing of dates; however, as a general guide to the reader on the evidence presented above, the following is proposed as a tentative dating of the strata:

67

ca.

Stratum

II-III IV-V VII-VI IX-VIII X XI

XII XIII XIV XV XVI XVII XVIII

700 740 to 700 '7760 to 740 800 to '7760 850 to 800 850 '?925 to 850

'? 1000 to ?925 1070/1050 to ? 1000 1200 to 1070/1050 1375/1360 to 1200 After 1425/1415 to 1375/1360 1600 to after 1425/1415 1600 to before 1425/1415

Notes 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33.

34.

Astrom- Astrom 1972, 762. Merrillees 1974a would, on the basis of Cypriote material found in Egyptian tombs raise those dates somewhat to: LC lA 1650/1625-1575/1550 LC lB 1575/1550- 1475/1450 LC IIA 1475/1450- 1400/1375 Birmingham 1963, 39-40, but what is actually needed is a complete revision of the sequence based on wellstratified examples from Cyprus; the present sequence is based largely on tomb groups. For the documentation of the references in this chapter, please see the notes to the plates and the preceding chapter for the parallels to the forms in the type series. Merrillees 1968, 146. Guy 1938 pls. 45-48. Astrom -Astrom 1972,700-701 (chart). A.strom- Astrom 1972, 700-701 (chart). On A.strom's dating; Merrillees: 1525/1500 to 1400/1375. Before 1425/1415; wall47 went right over Grave 1. A.strom · A.strom 1972, 700-701 (chart). A.strom- A.strom 1972, 760. A.strom 1972b, figs. 57 and LXXXVI; compare with Tyre pl. XLIII.l9-20, 22-29. Plate XLV.SO; see Appendix B, No. 74/11/489. See Appendix A. Bass 1967, 165. Bass 1967, fig. 132.2 (=SJ 13 and Base 20), fig. 132.3 (=Base 20), fig. 132.5 (=SJ 14), fig. 132.6 (=SJ 12). See Appendix B, Nos. 74/11/567, 517 and 491. Kitchen 1973, 465. Gjerstad 1948, 427: Cypro-Geometric begins 1050; Birmingham 1963, 39, and Desborough 1957, 17, agree with this. See Appendix C, No. 74/11/71. Kitchen 1973, 468. Note that since the object was found in connection with what is apparently a pottery manufacturing area, it may well have been purchased for use as a check on the capacity of the storage jars. Gjerstad 1948, 427; Desborough 1957, 218, considering the Greek evidence, seems to agree with Gjerstad on this point. Birmingham 1963, 39. Gjerstad 1948, 427; Birmingham 1963, 40. Or earlier, as there was such a piece at Tell Abu Hawiim (Hamilton 1935, no. 96) in Stratum III. Heurtley 1935, 181, dated the piece to before 925 B.C.; Maisler 1951, 25, lowered the date of Tell Abu Hawiim III to 815; VanBeek 1955, 38, reverted to Hamilton's higher dates; Aharoni · Arniran 1958, 183, would prefer 841 B.C.; on the problems this creates for Greek chronology,see Coldstream 1968, 303-305. Yadin 1972, 200; Taylor 1959,92. · Birmingham 1963, 38. Charles Adelman saw the drawings of this group and commented," ... the Cypriote material in X-2 belongs mainly to Type II (CG II, 950-850) and the offset rim of pl. XXVIII.S is a late feature." He also noted that the angle-line triangles of pl. XXVIII.S are a feature of late type II. Birmingham 1963, 41, Amathus Tomb 9. Birmingham 1963, 39-40; Desborough 1957, 218. Nicolaou 1976, pl. 28, and seep. 310. Saidah 1966, nos. 17-36. No. 35, a scarab found in this tomb was attributed to Osorkon IV, and is nearly identical to a scarab found in Burial xiv at 'Atilt (Johns 1938, fig. 14) and attributed there to Sheshonk IV. As both of these graves contain material similar to Tyre Strata IV-III, these two scarabs might be helpful for dating, but Kitchen 1973, 354 and n. 639, seems to indicate that these scarabs cannot be so precisely dated. Taking the end of Razor V (Yadin 1972, 200) as a convenient fixed date. It is interesting, however, that there is less of this material, and no mushroom-lip jugs, at Samaria, destroyed 10 years later (Crowfoot - Crowfoot Kenyon 1957, 97); this might indicate that the mushroom-lip jug appears just before the destruction of Razor V but had not yet spread south in 722 B.C.

68

CHAPTER IV THE POTTERY OF STRATA XXVII TO XIX

Relatively little material emerged from the levels below the sand deposit. Most of the recognizable pieces are illustrated on plates LIV to LVIII. The pottery was for the most part such tiny fragments that an attempt to formulate a type series for this group was frustrated by a lack of complete or even semi-complete pieces. A few forms did emerge and these will be discussed, but before proceeding to that, there are some general considerations. The first of these is that the pottery can in general be divided into two groups: (1) Strata XXVII to XXI, forms which are certainly to be placed in the Early Bronze Age, and (2) Strata XX and XIX, which belong to that period called Early Bronze IV, Middle Bronze I, or Intermediate Early Bronze-Middle Bronze. Secondly, in the absence of any stratigraphical evidence for an occupation break during the period of Strata XXVII to XIX, it must be presumed that these strata follow successively on each other. Thirdly, note that the pottery of Strata XXVII to XXI was generally homogeneous and, in the absence of any stratigraphical layers related to architecture (up to Stratum XXII), one should keep in mind the possibility that at least some of this material could belong to a fill brought in to level the area for the large building; that is, the sequence of the layers would be more certain if there were architecture associated with, say, Stratum XXV. Finally, note that nothing was found which would help to date these earlier levels independently; there was no Khirbet Kerak ware and the cylinder seal (pl. LIV.6) which was found in Stratum XIX belongs to an earlier period. 1 There is no way to judge when it arrived at Tyre.

Strata XXVII to XXI The most important pottery forms in these levels are as follows: (1) The rim and body sherd fragments of hole-mouthed jars (pl. LVIII.2, 32-37); these fragments were all of a very light colored ware, poorly fired with a black or gray core; the clay had a very high straw content and all the sherds had traces of a red or red/brown wash on the exterior. Similar rims appear at Megiddo in Strata XX to XVI? At Razor, a rim of the same form and ware appears in Stratum XX, 3 a stratum containing Khirbet Kerak ware. 4 Another jar of the type was found at Far'ah in an EB liB context, 5 and Roland de Vaux places the appearance of the type in EB lb. 6 (2) The inverted rim bowl (pl. LVII.57; pl. LVIII.13, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44); this is G. Ernest Wright's form Ila and on the basis of evidence from Megiddo and Beth Shan, he assigned it to EB I and EB II. 7 De Vaux placed the type in EB Ib, 8 while Kenyon states that the type comes into use in the last stages of the proto-Urban period. 9 The type appears later, however, at Hama in Stratum J, dated to after 2350 B.C. 10 (3) A second type of jar, made of a brown ware with a very high white grit content and having a "rolled" rim. This jar was the most common type found (pl. LVII.l-3, 9-12, 14, 32-34, 38-43, 52(?), 55(?); pl. LVIII.5). A similar type appears at Megiddo in Stratum XX, 11 but, more importantly, at Razor in Stratum XIX with Khirbet Kerak ware. 12 (4) The large red-burnished platter (pl. LVII.17, 59; pl. LVIII.14, 17, 38, 39, 45; see also pl. LV.21; pl. LVII. 58; and pl. LVIII.15 which are not red slipped). The type appears at Megiddo in Strata XIX to XVI, 13 and both de Vaux and Wright place the first appearance of the type in EB II. 14 Examples very similar to ours appear at Razor in Strata XXI, XX, and XIX, strata dated to EB II and III. 15 The type appears in a context dated to EB Ila at 16 Far'ah, and J. B. Hennessy dates the examples from Jericho to EB II and III. 17 (5) The "metallic" combed ware jars (pl. LVI.22 and pl. LVII.69). DeVaux places the beginning of this 18 type in EB II, and it appears in Stratum XVIII at Megiddo, 19 and Stratum J4 at Hama. 20 A similar, handleless jar of the type was found at Razor in Stratum XIX. 21 Hennessy says the type is most common in EB III which he dates 2700-2350 B.C. 22 In addition to these types there were a few individual pieces which are useful for dating. First, in Stratum XXVI, the juglet with the pointed base (pl. LVIII.18): de Vaux states that the type is most common in EB III but some do

69

appear in EB II. 23 The jar rim of Stratum XXVII (pl. LVIII.49) can be compared with one at Hazor in Stratum XXI. 24 Another jar rim, pl. LVII.64, of Stratum XXV, is of a type which Wright calls characteristic of EB Ill, 25 and is paralleled at Megiddo in Stratum XVII. 26 The small bowl in Stratum XXV (pl. LVII.62) also has parallels at Megiddo in Strata XIX and XVI. 27 On the basis of such fragmentary evidence it is difficult to assign precise dates to these early strata. In general, these strata can be compared with Hazor Strata XXI to XIX, dated by Yadin to the end of EB II and EB Ill. 28 The appearance of a red-burnished platter in Stratum XXVII (pl. XVIII.45) makes a date earlier than EB II for this stratum most unlikely; the evidence of the "metallic" wares as well as of the juglet in Stratum XXVI (pl. LVIII.18) would seem to point to a date in EB Ill for most of these strata. So, on the present evidence, Tyre was first occupied sometime after about 2900 B.C. 29 Since the building of Strata XXII-XXI was covered with the material of Stratum XX, material to be dated to the Middle Bronze I or Early Bronze IV period, the building probably belongs to the later part of Early Bronze Ill, or about the middle of the third millenium.

Strata XX and XIX The pottery which was characteristic of these strata is as follows:

(1) The "black teapot" (pl. LV.17; pl. LVI.l0-13). This type, which belongs to Ruth Amiran's "Family C," 30 31 appears at Hama in Stratum 14 with a combed ware jar similar to that of pl. LVI.22. The "black teapot" is the 32 characteristic feature of the Megiddo "Shaft Tombs," and is found in Hazor Stratum XVIII with amphoriskoi similar to those on pl. LIV.2 and pl. LVI.4. 33 Other examples are known from Tell Bir el Gharbi 34 (again in the north) and in Lebanon from Byblos 35 and Sidon. 36 (2)

The straight-sided large plate or open bowl (pl. LV. 7, 9, 22; pl. LVI.5, 9).

(3) The "bag-shaped" jar with everted rim (pl. LIV.1 ,4(?); pl. LV 1-4; pl. LVI.2). The type appears in the Megiddo "Shaft Tombs," 37 and at Beth Shan, 38 among others; the jar is placed in "Family B" by Amiran. 39 (4) The amphoriskoi (pl. LIV.2; pl. LV.10, 11, 23, 24; pl. LVI.4). The closest parallels to the complete piece of Stratum XIX (pl. LIV.2) are from Ma'ayan Barukh. 40 A jar with similar decoration but of slightly different form appeared at Hazor in Stratum XVIII. 41 This typeis also put in "Family B" by Amiran. 42 Similar but not identical jars were found a Dhahr Mirzbaneh 43 and el-J:Iu~n. 44 ' : Amiran was the first to note that "Family B" was characteristic of the north, and the appearance of types from her "Family B" at Tyre are further confirmation of this. 45 The order of appearance of the families is still under discussion 46 as indeed are the other facts relating to this period and a discussion of these problems is beyond the scope of this presentation. In any case, it is doubtful whether such fragmentary evidence can contribute very much to the solution of these problems beyond adding Tyre to the lists of the "Northern" group. In 1973, Dever proposed that the "Northern" and "North Central" groups, i.e., the material from Megiddo, Hazor XVIII,,Beth Shan, Ma'ayan 47 Barukh included in Amiran's groups Band C belong to (his) Early Bronze IVB, dated to the period 2200 to 2100 B.C. In view of the likeness of these groups to the Tyre material, it is probable that Strata XX and XIX should be similarly dated.

Notes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

See Appendix B, no. 74/11/583. The date of the seal would be ca. 2686 to ca. 2498 (Hayes 1970-1971, l.l, 173-193 and 1.2, 995). Loud 1948, pls. 1.16-21, 24; 3.3; 97. 10-15; 107.6-7; 109.13. Yadin 1961, pl. 154.25; see also pl. 197.22. Yadin 1961, pl. 154.1-3; these were assigned to Stratum XXI, but are now assigned to Stratum XX (Yadin 1972, 119, n. 7). DeVaux- Steve 1948, fig. 9.2. DeVaux 1971, 212. Wright 1937, 94-5. DeVaux 1971, 212. Kenyon 1960, 76-7. Fugman 1958, fig. 58, and pp. 278, 281-2 on the dating; Albright 1965, 53, dates Hama 18-1 to from before 2200 to after 2000; see also Dever 1973, 61: 2300 to 2000/1950. Loud 1948, pl. 1.7.

70

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46.

Yadin 1961, pl. 155.11. Loud 1948, pls. 5.16, 17; 97.50-54; 104.7-14; 106.10-11; 107.31-33; 108.11; 110.6-7. DeVaux 1971, 213; Wright 1937,69. Yadin 1961, pls. 154.4, 5, 9, 11, 12, 14; 155.4-6; see also pl. 197.1. DeVaux- Steve 1948, fig. 8.8. Hennessy 1967, pls. 6.63; 7.68; 8.76; 9.85; 10.95, 95a, 95b, 97; 13.1; 14.12; and see pp. 13-15,22, the type is a hallmark of EB III, dated by Hennessy (p. 90) to 2700-2350 B.C. DeVaux 1971, 212. Loud 1948, pl. 105.1-4. Fugman 1958, fig. 85 and pp. 281-2: a Radio Carbon 14 test for Hama JS/4 produced a date of 2210± 120 B.C. Yadin 1972, 120, n. 2. Hennessy 1967, pl. 13.7 and pl. 60; see pp. 23, 72, 90. DeVaux 1971, 213. Yadin 1961, pl. 154.7. Wright 1937, 101, form VIIId. Loud 1948, pl. 106.7. Loud 1948, pls. 3.6, 6.12. Yadin 1972, 119-120,200. Albright 1965, 57: EB II, ca. 2900-2600; EB III, ca. 2650-2250. Amiran 1960, figs. 1.1, 4.3, 7.3-5, and p. 211. Fugman 1958, fig. 85. Guy- Engberg 1938, pls. 11.28-32; 12.1, 7, 12, 13; 15.1, 2, 6-9; 20.13; 22.3-5; 23.10. Yadin 1961, pl. 156.1-9; amphoriskoi: pl. 156.16-17. Prausnitz 1962, 143. Dunand 1954,119, no. 7585. Hopper 1975, pl. 19.1. Guy- Engberg 1938, pl. 10.10. Oren 1973, fig. 20.1, 12. Amiran 1960, fig. 3.2; note that decoration with a single tool as on our pl. LIV.l-2, is also characteristic of "Family B"; see Amiran 1960, 209. Amiran 1961, fig. 7. Yadin 1961, pl. 156.17. Amiran 1960, fig. 3.14. Lapp 1966, figs. 5.11; 6.12-16; 8.1-2; 19.5; 40.6-8; and discussion, pp. 73-76. Harding 1953, fig. 2.42, 43. Amiran 1960, 213. See Amiran 1960 and 1969, Dever 1970, 1971 and 1973, Huesman 1975, Lapp 1966, 86-116, and Prag 1974. Dever 1973, 61, fig. 6.

71

CHAPTER V THE EXCAVATION AND THE HISTORY OF TYRE

Except in one area, this excavation did not contribute any new information to our knowledge of the history of Tyre. 1 The size of the exposed area would not allow for this, but perhaps it is not too premature to point out those areas where the literary evidence and the present archaeological evidence can be integrated. The only new evidence derived from the excavation has to do with the date of the foundation of Tyre. The material found on bedrock makes it clear that the island must have been occupied at least by the middle of the third millenium B.C., and the large building of Strata XXII-XXI indicates that there was a permanent occupation during the Early Bronze Age. It is with some interest then that we read the account of the visit to Tyre made by Herodotus in the middle of the fifth century B.C. He relates that he was told by the priests of the temple of Melquart that "the temple of the god was founded when Tyre first became a city and that was two thousand three hundred years since." 2 Thus Tyre, according to Tyrian tradition, was founded at about 2750 B.C., a date which corresponds remarkably with the archaeological evidence. Writers on the history of Tyre have never taken this account very seriously; they record it and move on, 3 but it would seem that we must now at least consider the possibility that the priests of the temple.did indeed have annals reaching back to that early period, annals which allowed them to report with confidence the strange number "2300."

The argument against this possibility, an argument beyond the one inherent in the time span involved, also comes from this excavation. If we are correct in our assessment that the island city was abandoned during the period ca. 2000 to ca. 1600, then can it be credited that the records 'ofthe period before that gap were preserved during the gap? Herodotus is referring to the temple on the island; from Justin 4 and from Curtius Rufus, 5 we learn that the most ancient temple of Heracles (Melqart) was to be found in "Old Tyre," i.e. on the mainland. Justin and Curtius are, of course, reporting the reply given by the people of Tyre to the request by Alexander the Great to offer sacrifice at the temple. The answer given by the Tyrians that the oldest temple is. on the mainland is motivated by a rather strong desire to keep Alexander off of the island; but it also tells us that there were two temples identified with Melqart. It is thus at least possible that annals of the island temple may have been kept during part of their history on the mainland. The sand deposit of Stratum XVIII also raises a question about what has been thought to be the oldest known reference to Tyre: an Execration Text reference to fzkJ n DjwJwj, read by Posener as "ruler of Tyre." 6 The text was dated by Posener to a time after ca. 1880 B.C., 7 by Albright to after the mid-nineteenth century, 8 and by S. H. Horn to about 1785 B.C. 9 The question is whether Tyre existed at all during the period of the text. It seems certain that in the immediate area of the excavation there was no human habitation during the period ca. 2000 to ca. 1600 B.C. Was there a village elsewhere on the island? It seems very unlikely for the following reason: Tyre in this period probably consisted of two islands; the land area which resulted when the two islands were joined by 10 Hiram, and expanded by land fill during the first millenium B.C., never exceeded one square kilometer. The land mass of the original "large island" must be presumed to be considerably smaller. Now the fact that bedrock lay below this excavation area confirms that the excavation area is within the perimeter of one of the original islands, and not on secondary land flll. The point here is that we are not dealing with a situation in which settlements of successive periods can "move," as is common at many Near Eastern sites- we are dealing with an island which can be crossed on foot in a matter of minutes. Now, if there was a "ruler," and consequently a city on the island during the period of the Execration Texts, it is difficult to believe that only sterile sand remains at this site. The fact is that no trace of any occupation during the Middle Bronze II period was found and, though it is an argument ex silentio, 11 it is unlikely that there was any city of Tyre during the period of the Execration Texts. Tyre was a flourishing city in the period just before this which would allow for the interpretation that "ruler of Tyre" was already established as part of the enemies list, and the fact that no such prince existed at the moment was not enough to dislodge it. It is also possible that the "ruler of 12 Tyre" existed on the mainland, but the mainland city is always called "Ushu" in the Egyptian and Assyrian sources.

72

Finally there is the possibility that the reading itself, rendered as "ruler of Tyre" only hesitantly by Posener and ..mcorrect. Alb n.ght, 13 1s 14 The next references to Tyre, in the "Tale of Keret" from Ugarit, and in a Hittite evocatio, 15 belong to the early fourteenth century. The earliest detailed information we have about Tyre comes from the Amarna letters, written by vassal princes in Asia to pharaohs Amenhotep III and his son Amenhotep IV (Akhenaton). Among these are ten letters written by Abi-Milki of Tyre to the Egyptian court. 16 All of the letters are pleas for help to protect Tyre against i1s anti-Egyptian enemies. Each successive letter reflects a gradually deteriorating situation; the king of Sidon has conquered Ushu (mainland Tyre) and Tyre cannot get drinking water or wood or bury its dead. The last letter is a desparate plea:

Further: Let my lord, the king, as there is no wood, nQ_,water, no straw, no earth, no place for the dead, let the king, my lord, care for the servant of Sal!Jlayiiti that life be given to him. When the king, my lord, gives water to drink for the servant of Salmayiiti then I _§et my face towards his service. Then let the king care for his servant and for Tyre, the city of Salmayati. Let the king ask the deputy if he dwells in Sumura. Behold, the man of Beruta has gone in a ship, and the man of Zidon goes away in two ships, and I go away with all the ships and my whole city. So let the king care for his servant and protect the ships of the king in ... 17 The correspondence breaks off at this point and it is unclear what the outcome of the siege was. At the least, the siege itself may have caused some disruption of normal life in the city. These events are to be dated to about the time of the break between Strata XVI and XV, and, in contrast to the situation at the time of Stratum XVIII (the graves) seem to reflect a period during which the dead have ceased to be buried on the island but are now buried in mainland Tyre. The period of Stratum XV itself seems, on the archaeological evidence, to have been a long period of stability; there is nothing in the literary evidence available to us to indicate anything else. Tyre is listed in the annals of Sethos I and Ramses II, 18 and inscriptions of both of these pharaohs have been found in Tyre. 19 The very "international" quality of the finds in Stratum XV confirms that this was a period of prosperity and commercial growth for the island kingdom. An Egyptian school text of the late Nineteenth Dynasty says: They say another town is in the sea, named Tyre-the-Port. Water is taken (to) it by the boats, and it is richer in fish than the sands. 20 A second text, of the reign of Merneptah, mentions a dispatch for the "Prince of Tyre Baal-termeg (?)," ing that there was a monarchy in this period.

21

confirm-

The archaeological evidence from Stratum XIV presents an entirely different picture: a marked drop in imported pottery and evidence that some of the walls built during Stratum XV fell into disuse. Albright believed that Tyre was destroyed early in the period of the invasions of the "peoples of the sea." 22 The path of destruction cut by the sea-peoples down the Phoenician coast cannot be doubted but the exact events in Tyre are not yet clear. In this small excavation, there was no evidence of a massive destruction level between Strata XV and XIV but in so limited an area this is not decisive. On the other hand, it does seem that Tyre went into a period of decline; whether this decline was caused by disruption of her normal trading connections or by actual attack is still a question. It may well be that there was no battle as such, but that many of the Tyrians were forced to flee to the mainland for economic reasons. Tyre's greatness was in all periods dependent on her position as a fortified trading center; if normal trade became impossible, life on the island may have become very unattractive. Two texts of a later period give some clue to what may have happened. The historian Justin, writing in the second century A.D., says: The Sidonians many years after the building of their city were defeated by the king of Ascalon, and came in their ships to Tyre, which they founded a year before Troy fell. 23 A second text, from Josephus, confirms the date given by Justin: And at the time when the temple began to be built- in that same year, Eironomus was already in the eleventh year of his reign at Tyre; from the founding (of this city) to the building of the temple there was an interval of 240 years. 2 4

73

The tradition in these texts is that Tyre was (re-)founded at about 1200 B.C. This excavation was too small to justify any substantial conclusions, but the indications are that there was a period of decline, apparently caused by a disruption in trade. There was no evidence that Tyre was at this time completely abandoned, 25 but it may well have been seriously depopulated. This would fit in well with the evidence from Josephus and Justin: Tyre received an influx from Sidon which, because of the situation of decline in Tyre itself, was considered the foundation of a new city. The invasion of the sea-peoples had a second, and ultimately greater effect on Tyre. They dealt a death blow to Ugarit and Alalakh, the trading centers of the preceding period. The monopoly on trade between east and west was taken over by the major Phoenician cities, with Tyre in the lead. After the reign of Ramses III, the Egyptians never again dominated the Phoenician coast; the Assyrians, however, briefly held sway over many of the Phoenician 26 cities. Interestingly, Tyre is not mentioned in the tribute lists of Tiglath-Pileser I, and it is this freedom from foreign domination that is the background for the golden age of Tyre, the period of the house of King Hiram. The only text we have of the period immediately following the disruption caused by the sea-peoples is in a papyrus containing the report of Wenamun on his journey to Phoenicia. He mentions seeing the harbor of Tyre, but 27 the text is too fragmentary to judge anything more about the situation in the city at that time. The fact of his visit does confirm that there was a city on the island at about the time of the change from Stratum XIV to Stratum XIII, and that political conditions were stable enough to allow such a visit. There is also evidence that by the end of the eleventh century Tyre had already established her first colony on Cyprus, at Kitium (modern Larnaka). The evidence is from an account in Josephus that Hiram, at the beginning of his reign, had to go there to suppress a rebellion. 28 This presumes that the colony was already established by the time of Hiram's father, Abibaal. The evidence of this excavation- with the massive influx of White Painted and Bucchero wares in Stratum XIII - confirms that trade had been re-established between Tyre and Cyprus after 1070/50. Hiram's dealings with Solomon concerning the temple at Jerusalem are too well known to recount here, but his activities at home are of some interest. Josephus records that Hiram expanded the city, joined the two islands, rebuilt the harbor and the temples. 29 These projects presume great wealth, wealth from her position as the "trader of the nations." 30 To judge by the results of this excavation, the succeeding centuries saw only continuous growth - growth that was uninterrupted by the rise of the Assyrians. Tyre is listed as having paid tribute to Ashurnasirpal II (883-859), Shalmaneser III (858-824), Adad-Nirari III (810-783), and Tiglath-Pileser III (744-727). 31 Writing of this period, Oded says: ... the Assyrians did nothing that could seriously injure the interests of the Phoenician cities. They took tribute from them but did not attempt to control their economy or to compete with their trade. Nor did they interfere in the internal affairs of the Phoenician city-states. 32 During this period, the "kingdom of the Sidonians" with its king at Tyre extended from Acco in the south to the Nahr el-Kelb in the north, a stretch of one hundred kilometers along the coast. 33 The sea kingdom extended across the Mediterranean as far as Spain. The situation changed during the reign of Shalmaneser V; according to Josephus, the mainland kingdom of Tyre revolted against the island and surrendered to the Assyrians. 34 The island itself was under siege for five years: But the king of Assyria, on retiring, placed guards at the river and the aqueducts to prevent the Tyrians from drawing water and this they endured for five years, and drank from wells which they had dug. 35 The evidence of Josephus is that Tyre easily survived this siege, dated by Katzenstein to 724-720, "that is, during the last three years of Shalmaneser [V], and the first two years of Sargon's reign." 36 Relations between Sargon and Tyre after this seem to have been good and this is to be contrasted with the situation after-704 B.C. when Sennacherib ascended the throne. The rev-olt of Eloulaios, King of Tyre, and his flight to Cyprus in 701 B.C. mark the end of the greater kingdom of Tyre; the river Litani became the northern boundary and Sidon again becomes a separate kingdom. 37

74

This period, from Hiram to Eloulaios, corresponds roughly with Strata XIII to I of this excavation, strata in which there was evidence of continuous growth as well as apparently continuous trade with Cyprus and evidence of the expansion of the trading sphere into Greece. The subsequent sieges of Esarhaddon, Asurbanipal, and the catastrophic siege of Tyre by Nebuchadnezzar 38 (the siege lasted from 585 to 573/2 B.C. ) fall beyond the periods for which there was any evidence in this excavation. By the sixth century, perhaps because of Nebuchadnezzar's siege, Carthage has taken over from Tyre as the leader in the Mediterranean. Tyre never again was "the crowning city, whose merchants are princes, her traders 39 the most honored me~ on earth," but, through Carthage, her influence on the west continued. The tiny island of Tyre, and her daughter-city, virtually ruled the Mediterranean for nearly one thousand years. We are left with many questions about Tyre, questions which may be answered by further excavation. The first of these has to do with the sand deposit of Stratum XVIII: what happened at Tyre at the end of the Middle Bronze I period? The second question is suggested by the quantities of Cypriote material during the period from the Stratum XVIII graves to Stratum XV; what exactly was the relationship between Tyre and Cyprus during the Late Bronze Age? We have a great deal of literary evidence for the relationship between the two during later periods but no evidence for this period. There is still a question about the date of the foundation of Carthage. The date is put at 814 B.C. by Timaeus, 40 and the excavator of Carthage maintains that the date is correct in spite of the fact that no material which can be dated to that period has been found. 41 The earliest material found to date at Carthage is the foundation deposit of 42 the precinct of Tanit. Most of the pottery seems to be copies of Greek originals and is dated by Coldstream to the 43 period 730-710 B.C. The lamp in the foundation deposit can be compared to the wide-lipped lamps from Tyre 44 Strata II-III. A survey of other material. from Carthage reveals that there are no forms which can be compared with any level at Tyre previous to Stratum IV or previous to ca. 7 50 B.C. 45 The evidence of the "mushroom-lipped" jugs makes a period contemporary with Stratum III likely for most of the material uncovered at Carthage. Thus the evidence from Tyre combines with the Greek evidence to witness a gap of one full century between the traditional date of the foundation of Carthage and the earliest material uncovered in extensive excavation there. Finally, there is a question raised by the evidence of Strata V-IV. Although there was only one building left of this period, one is struck by the apparent change both in the architecture and pottery at Stratum V. The fine redslipped Phoenician wares existed before this period; but at Tyre there seems to be a clear change in this period. The conical trefoil-rimmed jug, the "mushroom" jug," the thin red-slipped plates and the "crisp ware" storage jars, characteristic of Strata V to I, are the forms which are found around the Mediterranean, not the earlier bichrome wares. One is forced to ask what caused the change in the Phoenician pottery repertoire at this time, a time which coincides with the revitalization of Greek pottery. To put it another way, it seems that there are two different Phoenician periods: the "bichrome" period and the "red-slip" period. It is the "red-slip" repertoire that goes with the colonists to the western sites. If the "red-slip" period is as late as suggested by the evidence of this excavation, what significance does this have for the history of Phoenician expansion? These are a few of the questions which may be answered by further excavation at Tyre and other Phoenician sites.

Notes 1.

2.

For histories of Tyre based on the literary evidence, see Fleming 1915, Eissfeldt 1948, 2 Jidejian 1969, and Katzenstein 1973. Herodotus 2.44:

etpaaav "(UP /Jp,a Tvpw o'twL~OJlEVTJ Kat TO lpbv TOV l'teov lopv1'J-iivat, elvat oe erea CL1r' oi5 T&pov oiKi:ovat TPL'f/K.OGW Kai owxL\ta. I 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

On the antiquity of the temple see also Arrian 2.16.1. Eissfeldt 19482, col. 1882; Jidejian 1969, 12; Katzenstein 1973, 18. Justin 11.10.11, mentioning a temple at Tyros vetus. Curtius Rufus 4.2.4: Legati respondent esse templum Herculis extra urbem in ea sede quam Palaetyron ipsi vocent. Posener 1940, 82, E. 35. Posener 1940, 31-35; see also Posener in Posener- Bottero- Kenyon 1971, 540-1, dating them to after Sesostris III (18 78-1843 B. C.). Albright 1942, 32.

75

9. 10. 11.

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45.

Cited by Katzenstein 1973, 19. Josephus Ant. 8.147: " ... and the temple of Zeus Olympios, which stood apart by itself,[Hiram] joined to the city by filling up the space between them." See also C Ap. 1.113. Although the sand itself constitutes positive evidence. Note that if this had been the only excavation ever conducted at Tyre the gap between Strata I and R-2 might have been interpreted as an occupation break during the Persian and Hellenistic periods, but there was no sand between those two strata; see also chapter I, n. 7. Katzenstein 1973, 21. Posener 1940, 82; Albright 1941, 34: "DwJwy (Surruyu?)." AN£T3, 145. ANET3, 352. ANET3, 484; see also Albright 1937, 190-203, and Katzenstein 1973,28-45. EA 155; translation from Jidejian 1-969, 20; Albright 1937, 191, dates the letters to the years 1365-58 B.C., the last one (EA 155) having been written to Meritaten, the daughter of Akhenaton, after the death of her father. On the order of the letters and the dating, see Campbell 1964, 70-72, and Campbell - Freedman 1970, 62, where Campbell dates the correspondence to the years 1376-1350 B.C. Katzenstein 1973,45, places EA 155 in the fourteenth regnal year of Akhenaton. ANET3 243; the extent of Egyptian domination over Tyre in this period is not clear; see Katzenstein 1973, 46-55. These were not in situ, but were found near the area of the IC6/11 excavation; Chehab 1965, 113. AN£T3, 4 77 (Papyrus Anastasi I). AN£T3, 258 (Papyrus Anastasi III). Albright 1966, 35-6, 39; and Albright in Wright 1961, 340-1. Justin 18.3.5: Post multos deinde annos a rege Ascaloniorum expugnati, navibus appulsi Tyron urbem ante annum Troianae cladis condiderunt. Mazar 1967, 5, n. 11, rejects the commonly held view that this text reflects the invasion of the sea-peoples. Josephus Ant. 8.62; Hiram ascended the throne ca. 970 (Katzenstein 1973, 82); Liver 1953, 113-120, proposed a slightly higher date of 979/978. Ellen Herscher points out that the Mycenaean IIIC: 1 cup of Stratum XIV (Plate XXXIX.20) would seem to be positive evidence that Tyre was not abandoned. ANET3, 275; Albright 1961, 63-4, felt that Tyre belonged to Sidon in this period and would therefore not have been mentioned separately; Sidon is mentioned in the lists; Katzenstein 1973, 63-4, believes that the explanation is that Tiglath-Pileser I never went further south than Arvad, and that while Sidon and Byblos sent tribute to him there, Tyre felt herself to be strong enough to refuse. ANET3, 26; the journey took place between 1085 and 1060 B.C. (Albright 1966, 36). Josephus Ant. 8.146 =CAp. 1.119; on the reading 70~,700 101.000

47Q,.I)00 ~~~.ooo

,9A0

311.000

17Q,.OOU

S~ltn,.nllO

!,570

30.101J

4A~.nno

l!:>~o.ooo

,.9?4 1. 020

?A,.}"()I} 41,.40()

,983

?~.c;nn

2.510 l.f-40 ?.li90

.:1.~00

o;.~uu

4.:Ho

~-2"0

Yfi?OJ PPM

CAll

PCT

.929

?7 .. 7011 31-i.,.f\00

,AC,A !.440 .93'i .437 .755 !.060

3:-t.t;/lr}

~.540

?4.~011

1 ~ ,.90 o)

~. A90 4 .. 200

?,..,,.40•)

.79~

11.400 11. 7Ull

,.f.47 ,R95

4,. l 0•1 }4. 9{1•1

~-~.Ann

90

}.Ynll

3.440 3.1 ;>O

H,.HUU

o;.IuO

ll.~l/0

l6.;oo !4~ ·100

7,.4A0 A,.i'7U t;,.4AO

1.8711

11;,.1}0

?.,.4.=10 1.740

3,.,:,411 .l. 520

• .i~()

7.n?O c;,.770 c;,.sno