Philosophy

The Dawn of the Bronze Age
Culture and History of the

Ancient Near East
Founding Editor
M.H.E. Weippert
Editor-in-Chief
Thomas Schneider
Editors
Eckart Frahm
W. Randall Garr
B. Halpern
Theo P.J. van den Hout
Irene J. Winter
VOLUME 72
The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/chan

The Dawn of the Bronze Age
The Pattern of Settlement in the
Lower Jordan Valley and the Desert Fringes
of Samaria during the Chalcolithic Period
and Early Bronze Age I
By
Shay Bar
LEIDEN t BOSTON
2014
This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface. With over 5,100 characters
covering Latin, IPA, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the
humanities. For more information, please see www.brill.com/brill-typeface.
ISSN 1566-2055
ISBN 978-90-04-26563-9 (hardback)
ISBN 978-90-04-26564-6 (e-book)
Copyright 2014 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers and Martinus Nijhofff Publishers.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
Brill has made all reasonable effforts to trace all rights holders to any copyrighted
material used in this work. In cases where these effforts have not been successful the
publisher welcomes communications from copyright holders, so that the appropriate
acknowledgements can be made in future editions, and to settle other permission
matters.
This book is printed on acid-free paper.

CONTENTS
Preface ........................................................................................................... 1
Chapter One
General Introduction .................................................................................. 3
Chapter Two
Geographical and Environmental Data .................................................... 7
Chapter Three
History of Archaeological Research of the Chalcolithic and Early
Bronze I Periods in the Study Area ......................................................... 35
Chapter Four
Methodology .............................................................................................. 42
Chapter Five
Settlement Patterns in the Southern Jordan Valley and the Desert
Fringes of Samaria in the Chalcolithic Period ....................................... 53
Chapter Six
Settlement Patterns in the Southern Jordan Valley and the Desert
Fringes of Samaria in the Early Bronze I Period ................................... 96
Chapter Seven
Comparison of the Settlement Pattern with the Settlement in the
Eastern Jordan Valley and the Slopes of the Jordanian Mountain
Ridge in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze I Periods ........................ 134
Chapter Eight
The Pottery of the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze I Periods in the
Jordan Valley and Southern Desert Fringes of Samaria ..................... 142
Chapter Nine
'Ein Hilu: A Chalcolithic Site on the Desert Fringes of Samaria ....... 195
VI contents
Chapter Ten
One of the Latest Chalcolithic sites of the Jordan Valley? Fazael 2:
Preliminary Report of the 2007–2008 Excavation Seasons ............... 272
Chapter Eleven
The Excavations at Fazael 7 – One of the Largest Dwelling
Complexes from the Chalcolithic Period in the Southern Levant .... 322
Chapter Twelve
Sheikh Diab 2 – An Early Bronze Age I Period Hamlet in the
Jordan Valley ............................................................................................ 346
Chapter Thirteen
Fazael 4: The Excavations at the Early Bronze Age I Site ................... 409
Chapter Fourteen
General Conclusions ............................................................................... 442
Chapter Fifteen
Site Catalogue .......................................................................................... 458
Reference List ........................................................................................... 577

PREFACE
Professor Adam Zertal encouraged me to write this book. It was after a

long research project that culminated when I received my PhD diploma
from the University of Haifa in the summer of 2009. “You excavated five
sites, re-analyzed more than 120 existing and newly discovered survey
sites, and wrote more than 650 pages of new data regarding the Chal-
colithic and Early Bronze Age I (EB I) periods of the Jordan Valley – all
in Hebrew?” The reader must realize that according to the regulations
of Israeli universities most theses are written in Hebrew, and the fact
that most of the scholarly world cannot read them is not given much
consideration. That was when I started to translate parts of my thesis
into English, and added new chapters to illuminate the subject, so that
any researcher everywhere can use the data.
The western Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria are an
ideal area for research. This semi-arid region has been sparsely inhab-
ited from the Middle Bronze Age II (MB II) period until modern times,
and the absence of urban processes and development helped to protect
ancient sites from destruction. The geo-political situation in this region
during the last 200 years, and the remoteness from centres of popula-
tion, resulted in an almost complete lack of research, and this area of
750 km2 was one of the most neglected regions in the archaeology of
modern Israel/Palestine. This changed when the Manasseh Hill Coun-
try Survey started its long endeavour in this area 30 years ago, and since
then our knowledge of the archaeology and history of large parts of
Samaria and the Jordan Valley has developed. This book presents some
of the data collected by myself and others in this long project, and in
other pioneering work in this area.
This book adds new data about excavated and surveyed sites dat-
ing to the Chalcolithic and EB I periods in the western Jordan Valley
and the desert fringes of Samaria. It also sheds new light on intriguing
questions concerning these periods, such as the changes in the pattern
of settlement and the spatial distribution of structures within the settle-
ment; the poorly understood end phase of the Chalcolithic period; and
the new understanding and redefining of the Um-Hammad style of
pottery from EB Ib. These and many other issues are described in detail.
I am grateful to many friends and colleagues who helped and en-
couraged me during this long journey of excavating, surveying, data
2 preface
processing, writing, translating, and finally editing this work. I whole-

heartedly thank Adam Zertal who was the unknowing motivator for
this book. He was the supervisor of my PhD, and we spent many hours
discussing the finds and data gathered in his long-lasting Manasseh Hill
Country Survey. I thank Adam and the entire team of the Manasseh
Hill Country Survey for seven years of true friendship, and many long
hot days working together in the Jordan Valley.
I would also like to thank my friends the archaeologists and volun-
teers who helped in the field seasons. Special amongst them are the
field managers, who volunteered every season for more than five years:
Uri Davidovich, Hagar Ben Basat, Hagai Cohen Klonymus, and Oren
Cohen. I am forever in debt to the Leiba family in hospitable Moshav
Fazael for being a true family to me for so many years.
Professional and logistical assistance was provided by the Zinman
Institute of Archaeology at the University of Haifa, and especially its
drivers, Prof. Segal and Dr. Eisenberg; the Archaeology Department at
the University of Haifa, and its helpful staff and researchers; the Jordan
Valley regional council; and the Shomron and Jordan Valley Survey
Foundation.
Thanks also go to the scholars who submitted professional chapters
for the excavation reports presented here. They were: Haim Winter
(lithics), Guy Bar-Oz, Noa Raban-Gerstel and Ronny Zuckerman
(fauna), Elisabetta Boaretto (radiocarbon dating), and Danny Rosen-
berg and Dror Ben-Yosef (stone tools). Special thanks are due to Eliot
Braun for long conversations about the proto-history of the southern
Levant.
I thank all the people who helped in the making of this book: Sapir
Haad (graphic design), Don Glick (translations), John Tresman (edit-
ing), and everyone at Brill.
Last, but not least, my caring family; my dear parents, my wife Inbal,
and my daughters Goni and Or, who spent too many nights without
their father, and whom I love so much.
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
The second half of the 5th millennium and the 4th millennium BCE
– the Chalcolithic period and the EB I – have recently become a signifi-
cant and important, and sometimes controversial, topic in the archae-
ology of Israel and the southern Levant.
Numerous fundamental questions confront researchers who deal
with these periods, and we will present just a few:
– What was the nature of these periods? What settlement pattern
was unique to each of them? What was the sociological character of the
inhabitants? What was the inhabitants’ economy based on? What sets
the periods apart?
– Until now the transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze
Age (EB) has been a gap in archaeological research. Can any new data
be presented regarding the nature of this transition? Was there cultural-
settlement continuity? Was there material continuity?
– How did the urbanization process that characterizes the EB II
begin? Had it already begun in the EB I, or was it a product of the EB II?
This book will address these questions and others, and will propose
a number of characteristics and new ideas which will aid researchers in
formulating a more firmly based view with regard to the time and the
region of the study.
The aim of the study is to examine the settlement pattern and its
characteristics from standpoints of both chronology (Chalcolithic and
EB I) and geography (the western Jordan Valley and the desert fringes
of Samaria).1
Two parameters make this study unique:
The first involves geography: this is the first study conducted in the
field over an extensive area in the western Jordan Valley and desert
fringes of Samaria. This area has rarely been investigated in the past,
giving an opportunity to introduce a new, wide-reaching, and so far un-
known collection of data. The idea that in the Jordan Valley there was
an important centre and a main transit route in the southern Levant,
1
This region, covering an area of about 750 km2, stretches from Nahal Bezeq in the
north to Wadi 'Aujjeh in the south, and from the Jordan River in the east to the lower
part of the scarp of the eastern hills of Samaria in the west.
4 chapter one
from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (and probably earlier) to the end
of the Bronze Age, is not new. Our study emphasizes the importance of
the region, and from this, makes possible inferences about processes,
and draws conclusions about the entire southern Levant.
The second parameter is defined by the methodology. Two meth-
ods were combined to ensure reliable results. Firstly, it employed the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey, a high-resolution archaeological survey
of the region that encompassed an exceptionally large area. No surveys
of this scale have been carried out elsewhere in the southern Levant,
and therefore it had the advantage of providing a complete picture of the
sites from these periods over the whole area of the study. Secondly, the
results of the five excavations the author conducted at sites dated to the
sub-phases of the periods discussed in this book significantly expanded
the database, and allowed a more accurate picture of the phases of these
periods. The survey and excavations produced data that supplemented
each other, allowing us to analyze a variety of components related to the
structure of the society, its economy, etc.
In order to answer the fundamental questions, a number of steps
were taken.
Firstly, the survey results of 93 relevant published sites and 30 un-
published sites were analyzed.2 In addition, the results of a number of
small excavations were checked.3 In the next stage all the boxes of arti-
facts from the different surveys were examined and reprocessed, apart
from about 10% which could not be located. At the same time the exist-
2
The surveys used were: the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (Zertal 2005; 2008),
the Emergency Survey (Gophna and Porath 1972; Bar-Adon 1972), the Samaria Survey
II (Porath 1968 – not yet published, but the data from it was examined within the
framework of this study), the surveys of Tzori in the southern Beth Shean Valley (1962;
1977b), the Survey of Ephraim (Finkelstein et al. 1997), the Mittmann survey in the
southern Beth Shean Valley (Mittmann 1970), the Glueck survey in western Jordan
(Glueck 1951), and surveys by researchers of the Archaeological Staff Officer of the
Judea and Samaria (not yet published).
3
The excavations checked were: a salvage excavation conducted by Porath in a
building from the Chalcolithic period in the settlement at Fazael (Porath 1985); a sal-
vage excavation by Peleg in a building from the Chalcolithic period in the same settle-
ment (Peleg 2000); a salvage excavation by Hizmi in the settlement of Yitav (Hizmi
2003); a salvage excavation by Sadeh and Gophna in a Chalcolithic site north of Mehula
(Sadeh and Gophna 1991); cleaning of a section containing material from the Chalco-
lithic period in Wadi Far'ah by Mellaart (Leonard 1992); excavations conducted at Tell
Tsaf by Gophna and Sadeh (Gophna and Sadeh 1988–89) and Garfinkel (Garfinkel
et al. 2007), which proved that the tell was settled in the earlier, rather than the later,
phases of the Chalcolithic period (for this reason it is not dealt with in the regional
analysis); and a salvage excavation conducted by Eisenberg at a fortified EB Ib settle-
ment near Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996).
general introduction 5
ing sites were comprehensively surveyed, based on new environmental

parameters (these are presented below), and the chronology of their
periods was re-defined and its reliability was reviewed (see The Prin-
ciple of Probability, below). Following the initial reprocessing of the
surveys, a regional ceramic typology was created for the two periods.
Simultaneously with the research and the renewed chronological
segmentation of the sites, excavations were initiated and directed by
the author at five sites in the study region:
– 'Ein Hilu – the first Chalcolithic site excavated in the desert fringes
of Samaria. The purpose of the excavation was to learn about the
Chalcolithic period in this unknown region. The site was radiometri-
cally dated to the third quarter of the 5th millennium BCE.
– Fazael 2 and Fazael 7 – Chalcolithic sites in the Fazael4 Valley, in
the southern part of the study region, which were excavated for the
purpose of learning about the pattern of settlement at the end of the
Chalcolithic period. Fazael 2, radiometrically dated to the first quarter
of the 4th millennium BCE, is one of the latest sites of the period in the
Jordan Valley, and might constitute the beginning of the transitional
period between the Chalcolithic and EB I.
– Sheikh Diab 2 and Fazael 4– Two EB I sites in Wadi Fazael which
were excavated in order to examine the settlement pattern and rural
settlement planning in the EB I.
The new excavation data, after processing, improved the accuracy of
the chronological segmentation of the survey.
Next, the excavation and survey data were integrated to construct a
preliminary settlement picture, which presented parameters of spatial
analysis that were previously unknown. Here the environmental com-
ponents derived from the renewed detailed survey were added, thus
combining the ecosystem (water, soil, topography, orientation, etc.)
and the settlement distribution. This was done by means of statistical
analyses, together with GIS, for comparing and analyzing the connec-
tion between the distribution and the ecology. For example, discussions
were held regarding the influence of sources of water on settlement dis-
tribution, the grouping of settlements, the selection of the location and
its surroundings, etc. The integrated results present a reliable picture of
the settlement pattern and its structure in detail, such as issues related
to domestic architecture and the finds in it. These new data allowed us
4
The name is sometimes written Fasael, but in this book Fazael is used. The name
is the modern Hebrew name of a village about 1.5 km north of the Bedouin village
Fusail (ancient Fasaelis).
6 chapter one
to analyze the society and economy of each period separately, compare

the periods, and make a comparison with the present data from Jordan.
Structure of the Book

The book consists of 15 chapters:
Chapters 1 to 4 are an introduction to this research, and include a
General Introduction; geo- and palaeo-data concerning the Jordan Val-
ley and the desert fringes of Samaria; the history of the archaeological
research of the Chalcolithic and EB I in the region explored; and the
research methodology.
Chapters 5 and 6 deal with the settlement patterns in the region in
the two periods. Chapter 7 compares both sides of the River Jordan
during the periods under discussion, followed by an analysis of the pot-
tery of these periods (Chapter 8).
Chapters 9 to 13 present the results of five excavations carried out
by the author as part of this research. These are followed by a general
summary (Chapter 14), and the Site Catalogue of all the sites analysed
(Chapter 15).
The Reference List of the entire study completes the book.
Notes:
1. The reader will notice some inconsistency in the place-names: e.g.
'En Esur - 'Ein Assawir; 'Ein Hilu - Ein Hilu; Beth Yerah - Bet
Yerah. These different spellings were used in the cited publica-
tions, and it was felt that it would be easier to retain them to assist
literature searches.
2. Sites are referred to by Site number, which appears in the Site Cat-
alogue, Chapter 15. Note that site numbers quoted from Zertal’s
list are written with lower case ‘s’ to avoid confusion.
CHAPTER TWO
GEOGRAPHICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
Geographical Boundaries Of The Study

The southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria are two
neighbouring geographic units, west of the River Jordan, in the eastern
part of Palestine. The southern Jordan Valley is defined as the flat land
between the Samarian hills in the west and the River Jordan in the east.
The northern part is the southern Beth Shean Valley, and in the south
it borders on the Jordan’s outlet into the Dead Sea. The Jordan Valley is
about 70 km long in this section between Nahal Bezeq and the estuary.
The width of this section ranges between 5 km in the vicinity of Fass
ej-Jamal, and 25 km opposite Jericho (Ben-Yosef 1979: 247).
The desert fringe of the Samarian hills is a narrow elongated stretch
of land extending west of the lower Jordan Valley, and east of the scarp
of the eastern Samarian hills. In the north it borders on the Beth Shean
Valley, and in the south Wadi 'Aujjeh and the desert fringes of the Ju-
dean Hills. Its width varies with that of the southern Jordan Valley, and
ranges between 6 km at its narrowest part in the regions of Kokhav
Ha-Shahar or Duma, and more than 20 km at its widest part in the area
between Fass ej-Jamal and Ras Jadir.
The boundaries of the study area were fixed in these two geographi-
cal regions (Fig. 2.1): the northern border along Nahal Bezeq (Wadi
Shubash), which flows west from the Zebabdeh Valley via the southern
part of the Beth Shean Valley and empties into the Jordan southeast
of Tirat Tzvi; the eastern border is the Jordan between the mouth of
Nahal Bezeq in the north and the mouth of Wadi 'Aujjeh in the south;
the southern border was set along Wadi 'Aujjeh which flows west from
the vicinity of Khirbet Marjameh to its outlet in the Jordan, east of
'Aujjeh village; and the western border passes through the lower part
of the scarp of the eastern part of the Samarian hills (the monocline
of the eastern hills of Samaria, Spanier 1992: 122). This scarp forms
a prominent boundary between the lower eastern region (inside the
study region) and the higher western one outside the study region. The
western boundary also overlaps the line of average annual precipitation
(250–300 mm, Shachar 1995: 28). This boundary runs along the bot-
8 chapter two
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Ancient site To Beth Shean

Modern village
205 Boundary of the study 205
Road
Wadi
Na h l B
a e z eq
( Wa d as h )
i Shu b
i Yab i s
200 Wad 200
Zebabdeh
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wa d i M a lih
o rdan
'Ein Hilu
Tubas
190
Fass 190
ej-Jamal
Tell Far'ah
(North) frin
Wa d i Ku
ji
185 185
180 180
qa
175 175
Z er
Wa
z
ie
d
W
iF
d
Wa
r 'a
a
ad
i Ah Tell
ma
h
r um
170 170
Hammed
Majdal
Beni Sartaba
Fadil
165 165
Fazael 2
ael
Wa d i Faz Fazael 4
River J
Sheikh Diab 2
160 Fazael 7 160
or
dan
155 155
'Aujjeh
150 150
h
jje 0 40 k m
'Au
i
W ad
N im r i n
145 Wa d i 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 2.1. The boundaries of the study.

geographical and environmental data 9
tom of the eastern slopes of the following ridges (from north to south):
Har Bezeq, Har Gadir, Har Kabir, Neby Noon, Majdal Beni Fadil; Zahr
el-Qabah, and Qubbet en-Najmeh.
The total study area was 750 km2.
Geology And Geomorphology

The Jordan Valley is a long narrow depression extending from Sharm
el-Sheikh in southern Sinai to the Galilee panhandle in northern Israel.
This depression is the part of the Syro-African Rift that runs from the
Red Sea in the south to Turkey in the north, and is about 1,000 km long
(Mimran and Belitsky 1995: 257; Horwitz 2001: 508–513).
The valley also constitutes the contact line between two of the earth’s
continental plates – the African Plate west of the valley and the Arabian
Plate east of it, which is moving northward relative to it (Garfunkel
1981).
The Jordan Valley depression consists of continental and marine
sedimentary rock which has been forming from the Neogene period
to the present. These marine sediments include rocks formed by the
evaporation of water when the sea flooded the valley at the end of the
Pliocene period. The youngest rocks were deposited in the section of
the Jordan Valley between Hatzeva and Lake Kinneret (the Sea of Gali-
lee). These belong to the Lisan Formation (dating to the Upper Pleisto-
cene), above which are deposited mostly clastic rocks that were formed
in the Holocene (Mimran and Belitzky 1995: 257).
According to Belitzky (1999), the Lisan Lake began to shrink and
withdraw to the present boundaries of the Dead Sea about 20,000 years
ago. With the retreat of the lake a sloping plain was exposed in the
Jordan Valley, which descends gently from an elevation of about 200 m
below sea level in the vicinity of Lake Kinneret to about 400 m below
sea level at the Dead Sea. This is the Plain of Jordan (in Hebrew: Kikar
Ha-Yarden; in some sources it is referred to in Arabic as the Ghor,
which means depression or valley). As the Plain of Jordan was forming,
removal and deposition processes occurred in it, while the River Jor-
dan drained the entire length of the plain. Thus a landscape consisting
of badlands and sediments deposited as alluvial fans was formed. The
River Jordan, which is lower, formed a relatively narrow flood plain
(Zor in some sources) about 1 km wide, delimited by precipitous banks
30 to 70 m high (Belitzky 1999: 439).
10 chapter two
The Ghor and Zor are two geological levels that make up the foun-
dation of the Jordan Valley. The Ghor is the high level formed by the
Lisan sediments (Lisan marl) deposited on the ancient Lisan Lake (Dan
and Alperovitch 1971: 6). The Zor, however, is the Jordan flood plain,
formed by the action of the river’s erosion of the Ghor.
The Zor extends from Lake Kinneret to the Dead Sea, and is lower
than the Ghor by an average of 25 m in the north and 35 m in the south.
The slopes separating the Ghor from the Zor are sub-vertical to vertical
(Nir and Ben-Arie 1993: 73), and form long terraces on both sides of
the valley to the Jordan riverbed, with an intermediate terrace between
the two levels.
Based on an analysis of the morphology and drainage network, Be-
litzky (1999: 441) suggested identifying young folding and fracturing
structures that were active after the retreat of the Lisan Lake, some of
which also affected the course of the Jordan.
The main fault in the valley consists of three major sections: the
northern section from Lake Kinneret to Wadi Yabis; the central section,
from Wadi Yabis to the Valley of Succoth; and the southern section,
from the Valley of Succoth to the Dead Sea.
The faults in the two end sections run in a north-south direction,
and long depressions were formed in them (the Jericho depression in
the south and Kinneret depression in the north), leading to the ac-
cumulation of thick sediments over the course of millions of years. A
bottleneck about 4 km wide was formed in the vicinity of Fass ej-Jamal.
This section, between Wadi Malih in the north and Wadi Far'ah in the
south, is about 30 km long, and is the narrowest section in the Jordan
Valley.
The section between Wadi Far'ah and the Jordan estuary in the Dead
Sea is called the Plain of Jericho, and is 38 km long. In this section the
river descends at a fairly moderate gradient. The section is 16 to 20 km
wide, and is confined between steep slopes on both sides. Several fault
slopes are located in the east, at the feet of which are broad alluvial fans.
In the west, however, the border of the hills is irregular, and conforms
to the tectonic structure of the hills of eastern Samaria and the Judean
Desert monocline. In the north this section penetrates into the broad
and fertile Far'ah Valley in the Jordan Valley.
The geological structure of the desert fringes of Samaria, west of the
southern Jordan Valley, is connected to the Wadi Far'ah anticline, which
runs from north-east to south-west. Its boundaries are the southern
Beth Shean Valley in the north, and the region of Wadi 'Aujjeh in the
south. In the west, it borders on the Nablus and Jenin synclines, and
in the east on the Sartaba syncline and the slopes of the Jordan Val-
ley. The escarpments of the monocline in the middle of the anticline
form slopes inclined as much as 40° to the east, toward the valley. The
anticline is dissected by a row of faults running mostly from southeast
to northwest (Spanier 1992: 122–124), forming a series of horsts and
grabens. The most prominent of the horsts in eastern Samaria and the
desert fringes are Jebel Kebir, Jebel Tammun, and Ras Jadir. The Sarbata
ridge, which is also prominent, is a block of soft Eocene rock that was
uplifted by a series of parallel geological fractures. The eastern slopes
of the horsts of eastern Samaria constitute the boundary of the study
region. The prominent grabens of eastern Samaria are Wadi 'Aujjeh,
Wadi Fazael, Wadi Ahmar, Wadi Far'ah, the Buqei'ah, and Wadi Malih.
The River Jordan

The Jordan Valley is 105 km long from Lake Kinneret to the Dead Sea,
and the River Jordan is about 220 km long in this section. The average
gradient of the valley is 0.18%, and this gentle descent is a consequence
of the river’s many meanders (Kline 1988: 75–76; Nir 1989: 306–307).
The Jordan’s meanders are affected by the intensity of the high flow,
type of soil, the flow gradient, and the nature of the load that the river
carries (Schattner 1959: 157–175). All of these factors contribute to the
dynamism of the annual changes that occur in the river banks.
The valley formed by the River Jordan is relatively narrow, as its av-
erage width is about 1,200 m. However, in several sections it narrows to
an average width of 500 m, particularly south of the Wadi Malih outlet.
Elsewhere it is 200 m wide, and in several areas the width is reduced to
just the riverbed and a few metres on either side of it (Ilan 1973: 22).
This might explain why few permanent settlements developed along
the western bank of the Jordan.
Almost vertical badlands occur on both sides of the Jordan, and de-
limit the valley where the river flows (between the Ghor and the Zor):
these are called al-Qatra in Arabic (meaning ‘the camel humps’). They
vary in width; in the north they have a maximum width of 1 km, and at
the mouth of the Yabuk on the east and the mouth of Wadi Malih in the
west they can be as much as 3 km wide. The soft marl of the badlands is
dissected by channels that result from flowing water, falling rocks and
soil erosion, and ground collapses in the direction of the channel. Dur-
12 chapter two
ing the course of this process the badlands erode, and are constantly
being reshaped, and the great load the river transports affects its course
and behaviour. This natural dynamism is probably the reason why no
archaeological sites have been found on the terrace badlands.
An important phenomenon in the geomorphology of the River Jor-
dan is its shift westward. The drainage area between Lake Kinneret and
the Dead Sea, east and west of the Jordan, is 13,500 km2, of which the
western part comprises only about 2,000 km2 (a ratio of 1: 6.8 between
its two parts). This asymmetry is mainly due to the enormous amount
of water drained from the major perennial streams coming from the
east, while the western side is in the rain shadow and its streams have
a much lower rate of flow than those to the east, or are seasonal. Most
of the alluvial fans are on the east, and some reach as far as the bank of
the Jordan.
The multitude of streams in the eastern part shifts the Jordan west-
ward, enlarging the eastern side of the valley at the expense of the
western side (Nir 1989: 305). Evidence of this is apparent in the area
between Wadi Far'ah and Wadi Nu'eimeh. In this region there are no
large streams on the eastern side between Nahal Yabbok and Wadi
Nimrin, and the Jordan flows approximately in the centre of the valley.
In some places the western bank is even larger than the eastern (Ilan
1973: 23–25).
Additional explanations regarding the shift of the River Jordan west-
ward were proposed by Schattner (1962) and Ben-Arieh (1965: 33). The
first contends that the presence of hard infrastructure rocks between
the layers of the rift also causes the river to be shifted westward, and the
other suggests that the river’s gradient to the west in the central Jordan
Valley is also related to the fact that the valley slopes from east to west.
According to Ben-Arie, the alluvial delta of the River Yarmuk caused
the flat area of the Jordan Valley south of the Kinneret to slope from
east to west. This resulted in the Jordan flowing in the lower area on the
western side of the valley. All the large deltas of the major streams give
the Plain of Jordan an inclination from east to west, thus causing the
Jordan to flow on the western side of the valley.
Soil
Some of the different types of soil in the Jordan Valley and desert fringes
of Samaria were created from the erosion of brown clay alluvium or
grey limestone of the surrounding hills, and some by the weathering of

the Lisan marl. Dan and Alperovitch studied the soil extensively (1971;
Ben-Yosef 1979: 257; Dan 1988: 95–128), and sampled 46 soil sections
on the western side of the River Jordan, from the vicinity of Nahal
Bezeq to north of the Dead Sea. The researchers sought to classify the
soils in the valley according to their compositions, and determine the
amount of the arable land.
The soil compositions presented below are only those that appear in
the study region near Chalcolithic or EB sites, based on their descrip-
tions by Dan and Alperovitch (1971):
1. Brown alluvial soils: Ghor soils mainly formed from the erosion
of the high hills (these soils are referred to as brown forest soil in
this study).
2. Soils formed from Lisan marl: drained, and containing large
amounts of limestone (about 50%), gypsum, and easily soluble
salts.
3. Solonchaks: undrained saline soils. These were mostly formed
from alluvium; however, several soils were produced directly
from Lisan marl. Their distribution in the study region is north
of 'Aujjeh, in the vicinity of Wadi Far'ah, and some in the Fazael
region and the Zor.
4. Stony brown soils: formed from old stony alluvium. These soils
are common on the slopes of Wadi Malih, in the southern Beth
Shean Valley, and in the Wadi 'Aujjeh valley.
5. Light brown and greyish brown colluvial-alluvial soils: loose
stony clusters of soil formed from the erosion of the surrounding
hills in the north of the Jordan Valley. Soil salinity is low, and the
amount of chalk in them can reach 50%. These soils are distrib-
uted between the Beth Shean Valley and Wadi Far'ah.
6. Undeveloped soils – lithosols and regosols: the shallow soils of the
badlands, like the chalky desert calcareous lithosol formed from
Lisan marl, belong to this group. These are shallow soils with a
high degree of salinity. They are distributed on the hill slopes and
in the badlands between the Ghor and the Zor.
7. The most calcareous types of soil: referring mainly to the grey
colluvial-alluvial soils formed from the erosion of the chalk hills.
These soils are common at the foot of the hills, in areas between
Wadi Far'ah and Wadi Fazael, and small amounts are also found
in the Zor.
For the most part the characteristics of the soils in the Jordan Valley
14 chapter two
limit, and sometimes even prevent, their use for farming (Dan and Alp-
erovitch 1971: 30–31). This is due to their main characteristics, namely
the amount of chalk and high degree of stoniness, shallowness, poor
drainage, and salinity. This conclusion has major archaeological rami-
fications when attempting to reconstruct the interrelationship between
man and the environment in antiquity.
The most common soils in the desert fringes are:
1. Terra rossa – fertile soil, mainly typical of the Far'ah anticline, and
also found in the southern desert fringes in Wadi Far'ah and the
Buqei'ah.
2. Rendzina – soil of mediocre fertility (dependent upon rainfall),
mainly characteristic of the desert fringes and Wadi Malih.
3. Brown Mediterranean forest soil, mainly characteristic of the
areas north of Wadi Far'ah. According to Ravikovitch (1981: 76)
this soil is formed in rainy climates, and its presence in regions
where the climate is that of a steppe-desert fringe might suggest
pluvial conditions and a different floral covering in the past.
4. Alluvial erosion (grumusol) – this kind of soil is quite fertile, and
is mostly used for field crops. It is typical of the eastern valleys of
Tubas and Zebabdeh, the Buqei'ah, and parts of Wadi Far'ah.
5. Colluvium-alluvium – the fertility of this soil depends upon its
origin and the amount of organic material it contains. It is found
in the ravines and at the foot of hills where there are terra rossa or
rendzina soils.
6. Stony-desert soils – shallow, containing a high percentage of
stone, and therefore not fertile. They are commonly found in the
seam between the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes, and in the
flood plains of the major streams (Far'ah, Malih, Fazael etc.).
Climate
The Climate Today

The main factors for the formation of desert climatic conditions are the
location of the Jordan Valley east of the Samaria hills, and its distance
from the Mediterranean Sea (Gat and Karni 1995: 17). This is one of the
hottest and most arid regions west of the River Jordan, and the largest
number of heat-waves occur there. The average annual precipitation in
the valley decreases from 270 mm in the north to 160 mm in the south.
The evaporation values are especially high, and exceed 2,000 mm/year.
In terms of both heat and cold, the most extreme climate in the region
occurs in the Zor.
In the winter (January) the average maximum and minimum tem-
peratures are about 19°C and 9°C respectively. In the summer (July) the
average maximum daily temperature is 37–38°C (Gat and Karni 1995:
17). The relative humidity in the Jordan Valley decreases from north to
south. The lowest values are measured in the spring, and the highest
in the winter. The average maximum relative humidity in the winter in
the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria ranges between 75%
and 85% (Rubin et al. 1992). The average maximum relative humidity
in the summer is about 70% (Gat and Karni 1995: 17–18).
The wind regime is determined by the general synoptic system and
local factors. In the summer, from the early morning to midday, the
winds blow from the east and south-east. From midday to shortly be-
fore sunrise the winds blow from the north-west and west, originating
with the breezes from the Mediterranean. In the winter the wind regime
is determined by the barometric pressure systems that pass through the
region. The combination of these with the harsh topography of the Sa-
marian hills causes strong gusts from the west and south-west that can
reach more than 100 km/hour (Gat and Karni 1995: 18). The strongest
winds usually occur in the region of Wadi Far'ah, which is open in the
east-west direction, thereby allowing the wind to blow directly into the
wadi.
The Presumed Climate in the Chalcolithic and EB I

Most of the studies that attempted to reconstruct the climate that pre-
vailed in the southern Levant in general, and the Jordan Valley in par-
ticular, did not focus on the Middle Holocene period (the Chalcolithic
and EB I); and the trends in climatic changes in them were studied
at resolutions of hundreds or even thousands of years. Studies at a
higher resolution were also based on a small number of absolute dates,
sometimes with high standard deviations relative to the chronology
defined in the archaeology. In addition, the research record presented
here shows there are no conclusive results regarding the climate in the
region and in the periods we are addressing. This has not prevented nu-
merous researchers over the years from suggesting that the climate in
the Chalcolithic and EB was more humid than today (e.g. MacDonald
2001: 598), and using this supposition as the main cause of changes in
the settlement patterns in the region (e.g. Bourke 2002: 24).
16 chapter two
Many researchers have dealt with the palaeoclimate in this re-

gion. Rosen (1986; 1995), who conducted research in the Negev, the
Shephelah, and the coast of Israel, pointed out alluvial and flooding
activity of valleys in the Chalcolithic and EB, and argued that the pre-
vailing climate in these areas was warmer and wetter.
Frumkin and others (Frumkin et al. 1991: fig. 8; 1994: 325–326)
investigated the salt levels in view of data collected from the salt caves
in Mount Sodom. Their results corroborate the hypothesis that the cli-
mate was relatively dry in the Chalcolithic period, but probably more
humid than today, whereas in the EB I–II the prevailing climate was
the wettest in the past 7,000 years (Bruins 1994: fig. 2). The data of the
Chalcolithic are also supported by a study on land snails near Qumran
(Goodfriend et al. 1986).
Bar-Matthews and others (Bar-Matthews et al. 1997; 1998) inves-
tigated the variability in stable isotope values from Soreq Cave. From
this they concluded that a sharp decline in the amount of precipitation
occurred in the early 5th millennium BCE, and that later there was a
certain increase to values similar to those of today. The validity of this
model has recently been questioned (Kolodni et al. 2005; Enzel et al.
2008).
A palynological and palaeological examination of the Hula Basin
indicated that a climatic change occurred about 2500 BCE, and it was
only then that the area of the lake diminished and the climate in the
region became Mediterranean, similar to that today (Frumkin et al.
1994: 326, 328–329).
Netser and Gvirtzman (1996: 294) agreed that the data from the
Hula Basin and Mount Sodom showed similar results, reinforcing the
assumption that the climate was relatively wet in the Chalcolithic, and
that the humidity reached a peak in the EB I.
Ravikovitch (1981: 76) argued that the Mediterranean brown forest
soils (characteristic of the desert fringes of Samaria) were only pro-
duced in a rainy climate. Finding them in the study region suggests plu-
vial conditions and a different floral covering, stemming from a wetter
climate in the past (without identifying the specific period).
Information collected from more distant regions corroborates this
to some extent. For example, a palaeoclimate study at several sites in
the Sahara Desert showed that a wetter climate prevailed there in about
2000 BCE, and only later did desiccation processes begin (Nicholson
and Flohn 1980).
Yet other studies do not confirm the assumption that the climate was
more humid. For example, a study in Lake Zeribar in Iran showed that
the humidity there reached today’s level 6,200 YBP (Bottema and van
Zeist 1981).
The analysis by Sanlaville (1996: fig. 4) also shows that the Dead Sea
reached its current level around 6,800 YBP (in the Chalcolithic), and
that current climatic conditions were reached around 5,730 YBP (about
the time of the transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I). A study
dealing with sedimentary stratigraphy on the coastal plain (Gvirtzman
and Wieder 2001) showed that in the Middle Holocene the sedimenta-
tion was characterized by sand dunes and kurkar, which indicates a
relatively dry period. Other studies dealing with sediment cores north
of the Red Sea (Arz et al. 2003), and the variation rates of stable isotope
values of coral from the Gulf of Eilat (Moustafa et al. 2000), present
data that support the end of the humid phase of the Holocene during
the course of the 5th millennium BCE.
Several attempts have been made to check the archaeological re-
cord in order to corroborate or challenge views regarding the climate
in ancient times. For example, a study of the Beer Sheva region and
the northern Negev in the Chalcolithic concluded that the climate was
wetter, based on the archaeological evidence (Alon and Levy 1996).
The study was based on three key facts: the intensity of the agricultural
settlement in regions where today’s climate is marginal, the use of flood
agriculture, which is typical of regions with stable and greater rainfall
regimes than today, and the presence of pig bones in the faunal assem-
blages in the Negev sites, which is indicative of a wetter habitat suitable
for raising such animals (Grigson 1995b). Nonetheless, it should be
remembered that the archaeological record cannot be relied upon as
evidence of climate changes.
In conclusion, the data are insufficient to make a firm determina-
tion regarding the climate in the study region during the Chalcolithic
and EB I. The data allow us to assume with a certain degree of cau-
tion, a climate which was somewhat wetter, but not significantly dif-
ferent, from today’s. It is important to note that no ‘climate crisis’ in the
Chalcolithic–EB I transition has been identified, which could explain
the change in interpretation that presented the climate as a key factor
in the collapse of the Chalcolithic settlement system in the southern
Levant.
However, the desert fringes are affected more by climate change
than the central regions, and sometimes a few years of drought or the
slightest change is sufficient to compel populations to migrate to wet-
18 chapter two
ter regions or alter their grazing practices. An example of this was in

a recent study of the region, based on the author’s conversations with
Bedouin shepherds in Wadi Malih, and especially in Wadi Fazael, be-
tween 2006 and 2008. Between 2005 and 2008 there was a decline in
humidity in the Jordan Valley region. The change was relatively mild,
but it still affected some of the grazing populations, especially those
who customarily came down from the hill villages (Beth Dajjan, Majdal
Beni Fadil, and Duma) to graze in the valley, and who ceased to do so
because of the slight change in climate. Shepherds residing in perma-
nent settlements in the Jordan Valley (e.g. in Fusail), did not alter their
grazing practices.
Sources Of Water
Two kinds of water sources exist in the study region: perennial streams
that flow east toward the study region (e.g. Wadi Far'ah) or within it
(Wadi Malih and Wadi Fazael), and springs located inside the study
region.
There is a distinct difference between the sources of water in the
fertile, southern Beth Shean Valley, and those of the relative arid Jordan
Valley.
In the southern Beth Shean Valley there are numerous contact
springs, for example, Mehazzim, Ibrahim, Malqoah, Buleibil, Shemsi-
yeh, Safafa and Sakut (Zertal 2005: 25, 27). Most of the springs flow
in the eastern part of the Beth Shean Valley, close to the Jordan, while
those flowing in the west include Qa'un, Bardaleh, and Hammah. Their
source is in the ‘topographical contact zone’ between the hills in the
west and the erosion plain of the Jordan Valley on a filtering aquifer.
A cluster of settlements developed in the Chalcolithic period near the
springs of the southern Beth Shean Valley (the sites of Qa'un, Mukehaz,
'Ain ed-Deir, 'Ain Buleibil, etc., Sites 2, 4–5, and 10–11 in the Site Cata-
logue). Zertal (2005: 25, 27) argues that irrigated farming might have
already developed in the Chalcolithic period.
There are almost no sources of water in the narrowest part of the
Jordan Valley. There are three small contact springs along the fringes
of the Ghor: 'Ain Juneidiyeh, 'Ain Saleh and 'Ain Abu Sidra, yet no sites
were discovered near them from the periods that this study addresses.
A number of streams flow across the Jordan Valley, the most im-
portant being Bezeq, Malih, Far'ah, Ahmar and 'Aujjeh. Some of these
streams are fed by springs that have a high flow rate ('Uyun Beidan,
Dilb and Far'ah feed Wadi Far'ah, and Meiyiteh, Malih and Hilu feed
Wadi Malih). The streams in Wadis Malih, Far'ah, Ahmar and 'Aujjeh
are perennial, and it seems that they provided water for the permanent
inhabitants who also depended on them in the Chalcolithic and EB I.
Different kinds of springs are typical of the southern Jordan Valley
and the desert fringes of Samaria. They can be categorized according
to flow rate. Spanier (1993: 269) divided them into three main groups:
the first group includes springs that have a high flow rate (hundreds of
cubic metres per hour), such as 'Ain 'Aujjeh and 'Enot Fazael. There is
considerable evidence of human activity that took place around them
from prehistoric periods until the present, and in the past aqueducts
conveyed water from them for irrigated farming. The second group
comprises springs that have a medium flow rate (more than 100 litres
per hour), such as 'Ain Juheir, 'Ain Rashash, 'Ain es-Sukhun, etc. There
was less evidence of human activity around them. The third group
includes springs with a low flow rate (less than 100 litres per hour),
Figure 2.2. 'Ain 'Aujjeh spring. Photographed by the author in Wadi 'Aujjeh.
20 chapter two
such as Hafireh, Jerusaliliyeh, etc. Human activity did not always occur
around these springs. The spring flow rate can change over the years,
and a spring can also dry up. An example of this is the spring near the
large site of 'Ain Mta'a (Site 54) which is presently dry, but we learned
from the local Bedouin that it was flowing until about 50 years ago.
Vegetation
The Vegetation Today

The structure of the natural vegetation, its composition, and distribu-
tion are affected by diverse ecological conditions (Sabbah 1992: 48).
These include: climate (precipitation, temperature, and wind regime),
the edaphic factor (the relationship between rock, soil and the water
available to a plant), the relief (terrain – escarpment, valley and plain
– which create a unique micro-climate), and the human factor (human
intervention in the area and vegetation).
The decrease in precipitation and temperature from west to east,
from the hills and desert fringes to the Jordan Valley, affects plant life.
The lower Jordan Valley, around the Fazael Valley and south to the
Dead Sea, belongs to the desert Saharo-Arabian phytogeographical
region, where a desert climate with irregular rainfall of 50–200 mm
prevails. The vegetation is meagre, and there are many areas with no
plant life at all.
In the Saharo-Arabian region, and even north of it, are Sudano-Dec-
canian enclaves that are the northernmost extensions of the tropical-
East African flora in the Middle East (Zohary 1962: map 4; 1980: map
2). These enclaves are common in the desert oases and in moist non-
saline soils in the southern Jordan Valley. The plant life here consists
mainly of tropical trees or shrubbery, which require high temperature
and moisture (Ilan 1973: 53). The ideal regions for this vegetation are
around Wadi 'Aujjeh and Wadi Far'ah.
The Irano-Turanian region in the northern Jordan Valley (from Lake
Kinneret to Wadi Far'ah) and in the desert fringes of Samaria, is also
known as the 'Arava (Zohary 1959). Here too, annual precipitation is
irregular, and does not exceed 300 mm. The vegetation consists mainly
of shrubs, grasses, and isolated trees.
The vegetation in the Far'ah anticline, west of the desert fringes, is
characterized by the Mediterranean region groups, together with carob
(Ceratonia siliqua) and mastic (Pistacia lentiscus) groves. In the des-
ert fringe itself there are areas with Irano-Turanian 'Arava vegetation.
It lacks trees and is typically herbaceous (Sabbah 1992: 50). The only
tree species found in this region is the jujube (Ziziphus spina-christi,
Fig. 2.3),1 which usually looks like a large shrub. The vegetation on the
slopes of the monocline is affected by the acute topographical relief and
the exposed limestone. Wall pellitory (Parietaria officinalis), forming a
continuous shrub cover, is prominent among the groups growing in the
rocks. White broom (Retama raetam) and mountain germander (Teu-
crium montanum) appear between Ma'ale Ephraim and Gitit. Asphaltic
sea-blite (Suaeda asphaltica) stands out on the northern and western
slopes. White willow (Salix alba) is the characteristic tree species east of
this region, and salsola (Salsola vermiculata) is the typical shrub.
Wadi Far'ah itself is characterized by Sudano-Deccanian vegetation
(Zohary 1980), with the Jericho balsam (Balanites aegyptiaca), jujube
and Sodom apple (Calotropis procera) being the most prevalent woody
species.
The Jordan Valley itself is cultivated by man, hence the difficulty in
identifying the natural plant life there. There are four secondary land-
scape units in the valley: the marl plain, the river alluvial fans, the salt-
water marshes, and the desert oases. On the marl plain where the runoff
flows, the salt concentrations increase, while the amount of water in its
lower horizons is meagre. The plants growing here are mainly shrubs
that are resistant to the salinity of the soil, among which salsola is the
dominant species. The silty soil in the alluvial fans of the streams is
covered with river pebbles. Jujube shrubs grow here and there in these
areas. In the desert oases of 'Aujjeh and Wadi Far'ah there is the Sodom
apple and Jericho balsam, in addition to the jujube. The only plants that
exist in the salt marshes are those that can cope with the high salinity
of the water and soil. Most of the area is covered with woody shrubs up
to 2 m tall, such as species of orache (Atriplex), sea-blite and glaucous
glasswort (Arthrocnemum macrostachyum). There are also some Jordan
tamarisk (Tamarix jordanis) and desert tamarisk (Tamarix tetragyna)
trees.
East of Fazael there is a grove of mustard trees (Salvadora persica).
This is a large shrub, and the Jordan Valley is the northernmost point
1
The jujube is the most common woody vegetation growing in the Jordan Valley.
When mature the bush actually looks like a tree with a thick trunk. The tree has deep
roots that firmly hold the soil. In the vicinity of water it remains in bloom for more than
half the year, with several fruit-bearing cycles. The jujube fruit is edible, but its pits are
fairly large relative to its pulp.
22 chapter two
Figure 2.3. Jujube (right) and Sodom apple (left) Photographed by the author
in Wadi 'Aujjeh.
of its distribution in the World.

Plants resistant to salt and arid conditions characterize the vegeta-
tion in the Ghor. Salsola (Salsola vermiculata) and silvery orache (Atri-
plex halimus) are predominant in the entire region.
In more arid conditions the shrubby vegetation is concentrated in
the wadi channels, and in the winter the annual herbaceous vegetation
appears on the badlands (in extremely arid years there is no vegetation
on the badlands).
The Zor vegetation is characterized by large amounts of water and
high soil salinity. A wooded area comprising three main species of
trees, Euphrates poplar (Populus euphratica), Jordan tamarisk and wil-
low of the brook (Salix acmophylla), is located along the river.
The Vegetation in the Chalcolithic and EB I

The data we have concerning the plant life in these periods drawn from
archaeological reports of excavations conducted in the study area and
its environs in recent years. The finds are divided into domesticated
plants (agriculture) and natural plants (wild plants indigenous to the
region, evidence of which was found in the different excavations). Not
surprisingly, most of the information derived from the excavation of
settlement sites deals with domesticated species, and there is very little
known about natural vegetation. The results below were processed by
the author, based on these reports, and are presented according to the
different periods.2
Chalcolithic
The data are based on the following reports: Fazael (Porath 1985),
Teleilat Ghassul (Bourke et al. 2000), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10), Nahal
Qane (Liphschitz 2008), Cave of the Treasure (Bar-Adon 1962), Tell
Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1986), and Pella (Bourke et al. 1998).
Most of the data are from Teleilat Ghassul.
Domesticated Vegetation3
Common grain and legume crops: wheat (Triticum spp, 2 rows and 6
rows), English wheat (emmer – Triticum dicoccum), legumes (lentils
- Lens culinaris), peas (Pisum sativum), beans (Phaseolus vulgaris),
chickpea (Cicer arietinum), vetch (Vicia ervilia), onion (Allium cepa),
garlic (Allium sativum), pistachio (Pistacia vera), and barley (Hordeum
vulgare).
Common orchard and fruit crops: domesticated olive (Olea euro-
paea), date palm (Phoenix dactylifera), and almond (Prunus dulcis).4
Natural vegetation
Common species: tamarisk (Tamarix), wild olive, and wild herbs.
Infrequent species: spiny dock (Emex spinosa) and Palestine pistachio
(Pistacia palaestina).
In general, the diversity of the vegetation in the period is remarkable.
The main field crops were wheat and barley, and the domesticated olive
was already at its peak (Meadows 1998; Neef 1990). Legumes were also
common, and fruit trees started to appear. The tamarisk was the most
prevalent tree.5
2
The number and quality of the reports affects the amount of information in a par-
ticular period, and does not indicate the lack of a specific item in that period or another
period. Thus for example, the detailed report of Tuleilat Ghassul contains almost all of
the plant species that exist in the other reports of Chalcolithic period, and also adds a
significant number of species that were not known from other excavations.
3
Regarding some of the species added to the agriculture section, such as almonds,
etc., it is unclear if they were domesticated or were gathered wild.
4
It is not known if the date palm and almond were fruit that was gathered, or in-
tentionally grown.
5
This is based on carbon samples submitted for analysis from Fazael 2 (Nili Liph-
schitz, chapter Ten).
24 chapter two
EB I
The data are based on the following reports and articles: Cave of the
Warrior (Werker 1998), Jericho (Hopf 1983), Pella (Bourke et al. 1998),
Tell esh-Shuna (Neef 1990), Bab edh-Dhra' (McCreery 1981; 2003),
and Fazael (which was published as Fatzael 3 – Goring-Morris 1980).6
Most of the data are from Jericho and Bab edh-Dhra'.
Domesticated vegetation
Common species: European olive (Olea europea), English wheat
(emmer – Triticum dicoccum), wheat (Triticum spp, 2 rows and 6 rows),
tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), barley (Hordeum vulgare), legumes, vetch
(Vicia ervilia), and grapes (Vitis sp.).
Infrequent species: flax (Linum usitatissimum).
Natural vegetation
Infrequent species: Tabor oak (Qyercus ithaburensis), Jerusalem pine
(Pinus halepensis), willow, pennycress (Sinapis sp.), hackberry (Prunus
avium), jujube, almond, and spiny burnet (Poterium spinosum).
Not surprisingly, the variety of vegetation in the Chalcolithic period
was similar to that of the EB I in the study region. A significant dif-
ference was the farming techniques that did not change the variety,
but did change the economy of the period. According to Philip (2001:
184) the following techniques were introduced or were utilized more
intensely: flood agricultural (Mabry et al. 1996, and a different opin-
ion – Milevski 2011: Chapter 7), using animals to cultivate fields, an
increase in processing olives and grapes, using donkeys as a beasts of
burden, and increased agricultural output by using metal tools at the
expense of flint implements (and especially replacing the bifacial flint
tools, such as the adze, which disappear from the EB I tool assemblage,
by metal implements).
Most significant of all was the penetration of settlements into the
hilly regions of Samaria, which was almost unknown in the Chalco-
lithic. This change drastically expanded the growing of fruit, especially
olives and grapes (which seem to have become widespread in the EB
Ia).
The absence of the jujube from the assemblage of EB I sites is inter-
esting. The reason for this is probably the small sample of sites from this
period that were excavated and in which wooden finds were treated.
6
The site Fazael 4 (called Fatzael 3 by the excavator Goring-Morris) is actually an
EB I settlement site, and does not date to the Chalcolithic period as the excavator of the
site incorrectly believed.
Wildlife And Domesticated Animals
Wildlife in the Present and Historical Periods

The climatic-geological history led to the introduction and establish-
ment of various zoo-geographical fundamentals in the study region.
The terrestrial animals represent a wide variety of regions of origin
(with representatives from the tropics, Sudan, and India – Ben-Yosef
1979: 263–266). Especially prominent are porcupines (Hystrix indica),
honey badger (Mellivora capensis), wild boar (Sus scrofa), mongoose
(Herpestes ichneumon), mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella), and fox
(Vulpes vulpes). The marine life and amphibians are characterized by
fish species (about 20 different varieties that exist mainly in the Jor-
dan); oysters and molluscs (the most prominent being Melanopsis,
Cerithidae, Theodoxus, Unio semirugatus), freshwater crabs (mainly
Potamon potamios), and numerous kinds of water insects. The viper
(Vipera palaestinae) is the most prominent reptile in the region.
The Jordan Valley, being part of the Syro-African Rift, also serves as
an important migration route for many birds (peaking in March–May
and August–November). The birds living in the valley year-round in-
clude partridge (Alectoris chucar), quail (Coturnix coturnix), and fran-
colin (Francolinus francolinus).
The Dead Sea sparrow (Passer moabiticus), warbler (Prinia gracilis),
honey-sucker (Nectarinia osea), and bulbul (Pycnonotus xanthopygos)
are also common. The valley is also characterized by birds of prey that
nest there, among them the eagle (Aquila. sp.), buzzard (Buteo buteo),
and falcon (Milvus migrans).
In 1987–1988 Nissim (1992: 190–193) headed a survey of the preda-
tors in the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes. The survey results show
a high prevalence of fox (Vulpes vulpes) and hyena (Hyaena hyaena).
The jackal (Canis aureus) and jungle cat (Felis chaus) are less frequent,
and the wolf (Canis lupus), weasel (Vormela peregusna), leopard (Pan-
thera pardus), and caracal (Caracal caracal) are rare.
Information on animals in the historical periods is found in written
sources, such as the Bible, travel literature, the writings of explorers, etc.
Of course the sources pay most attention to the predators – the most
impressive and frightening of the region’s animals (incidentally, their
relative number among animals was presumably marginal).
The lion was the most prominent animal along the Jordan. It is men-
tioned in the Bible in connection with the river: “Behold he shall come
26 chapter two
up like a lion from the thickets of the Jordan against the strong habita-
tion” (Jeremiah 49: 19; 50: 44); “there is a sound of the wailing of the
shepherds; for their glory is in ruins: a sound of the roaring of young
lions; for the pride of the Jordan is in ruins. “ (Zechariah 11: 3).
Lieutenant Lynch, who headed an American expedition, sailed on
the Jordan in 1848. According to his notes they saw along the way: “We
frequently saw fish in the transparent water; while ducks, storks, and a
multitude of other birds, rose from the reeds and osiers…At one place
we saw the fresh track of a tiger…At another time a wild boar started
with a savage grunt and dashed into the thicket” (Lynch 1855: 107, 137).
In 1883 an American traveller and archaeologist named Merrill re-
ported his findings, including the disappearance of leopards from the
Jordan Valley: “Boars, jackals, hyenas, ichneumons, otters, and other
wild animals frequent these jungles, and birds also are found here in
great numbers and variety. We have already over one hundred speci-
mens in our natural history collection…. But these creatures (leopards)
are destined soon to become extinct….Large amounts have been of-
fered for their skins…” (Merrill 1883: 204–205).
Wildlife in the Chalcolithic and EB I

Data pertaining to this area are derived from the archaeological reports
of excavations conducted in the region in recent years. Like the flora,
the faunal remains are also divided into domesticated and wild animals.
The results below were processed by the author, based on these reports,
and are presented according to the different periods:
Chalcolithic
Based on the following reports: Fazael (Porath 1985), Tell Abu Hamid
(Dollfus and Kafafi 1993), Teleilat Ghassul (Bourke et al. 2000), 'Ein
Hilu (Chapter 9), Pella (Bourke et al. 1998), and Fazael 2 (Chapter 10).
Domesticated animals
Common animals: sheep/goat (Ovis/Capra about 70% of the domesti-
cated animals, and there are usually a greater number of sheep – Bourke
2001: 118), pig (Sus domesticus), cattle (Bus taurus), and equines (Equi-
dae, donkey/horse).
Wild animals
Common animals: gazelle (Gazella gazella).
Rarer animals include: fish, birds, fox, dog, ram, cat (probably wild),
Lepus capensis 1% Bos taurus 5.3%

Sus scrofa 6.2% Ovis aries 2%
Capra hircus 5.3%
Gazella gazella 27.1%
Capra/Ovis 52.1%
Figure 2.4. Distribution of animals at the Chalcolithic site of 'Ein Hilu.

Number of identified items: N = 95.
Crustacea (Crab) 3%
Small predator 1.6%
Felis 3%
Lepus capensis 6.2%
Bos taurus 6.2%
Capra/Ovis 80%
Figure 2.5. Distribution of animals at the Chalcolithic site of Fazael 2.

Number of identified items: N = 62.
and freshwater crab.7 According to the data published from excavations

in the eastern Jordan Valley the most prevalent animals among Chalco-
lithic livestock were sheep (a ratio of 4: 1 vs. goats – Bourke 2001: 118),
which indicates an increase in the use of sheep products (milk, food
and textiles), followed by goats, cattle, and pigs.
According to an age analysis it seems that in the Chalcolithic pe-
riod goats, sheep and cattle were mainly kept to supply milk and dairy
7
To these we can add other wild animals discovered in Nahal Mishmar (Bar-Adon
1980), such as ibexes and hares. It should be remembered that the prevalence of some
species, particularly the smaller ones, such as fish and birds, is affected by their poor
preservation and the methods used to collect them in the various excavations.
28 chapter two
Lepus capensis 3% Felis 1%

Crustacca (Crab) 1%
Sus scrofa 4%
Bos taurus 6%
Gazella gazella 17%
Ovis 3% Capra/Ovis 61%
Capra hircus 4%
Figure 2.6. Average distribution of animals from the Chalcolithic sites

of 'Ein Hilu and Fazael 2 in the western Jordan Valley, excavated by the
author. Number of identified items: N = 157.
products, while pigs provided meat (and this also seems to be the case
from the age analysis at 'Ein Hilu – Chapter 9). The number of pigs at
the sites increases northwards along the Jordan Valley (Bourke 2001:
118; this is also supported by data derived from the 'Ein Hilu and Fazael
2 excavations). This is explained by the marshy regions around the
northern sites close to the Jordan (Tell Abu Hamid, Tell esh-Shuna, etc)
which are habitats preferred by this species. It is still unclear if the pig
was completely domesticated in the Chalcolithic period, but the finds
from 'Ein Hilu contribute to this supposition.8
Surprisingly there is a fairly significant presence of wild animals (deer
are especially prominent) in the faunal assemblages of the Chalcolithic,
mainly in western Jordan. Despite the almost complete disappearance
of arrowheads from the tool assemblages, the inhabitants still managed
to hunt these animals (they might have used wooden arrows, which
usually do not survive in the archaeological record – e.g., the arrow-
heads found in the Cave of the Warrior south of the study area – Schick
1998).
Analysis of the archaeological finds at the Chalcolithic sites exca-
vated in the framework of this research project corroborates some of
the data (Figs. 2.4–2.6):
Goats and sheep are the most prominent species amongst the do-
8
Therefore pigs are ascribed to the group of domesticated animals in this section.
mesticated animals comprising the livestock in the Chalcolithic period.

At 'Ein Hilu, in the desert fringes of Samaria, goats and sheep constitute
57% of the assemblage, while cattle and pig make up 5% and 6% respec-
tively. Wild animals, particularly deer, make up a significant portion
(26%) of the assemblage.
At Fazael 2 in the southern Jordan Valley (in a late phase of the
Chalcolithic period), goats and sheep constitute 80% of the assemblage,
cattle 6.5 %, and wild animals (fox and wild cat, but no deer) about 10%.
Despite the small sampling (95 individuals at 'Ein Hilu and 62 in-
dividuals at Fazael 2), goat and sheep are dominant at both sites, as
they are at other sites in the eastern Jordan Valley. The domesticated
pig at 'Ein Hilu is consistent with the data from the Chalcolithic sites
east of the Jordan. But unlike those sites, no evidence of donkeys has
been found so far in the small sampling at 'Ein Hilu and Fazael 2. The
proportion of wild animals at these sites is also large (22% of the finds)
relative to the data published from the sites in Jordan. Especially con-
spicuous is the high percentage of deer at 'Ein Hilu.
EB I 9
Based on the following reports: Beth Yerah (Cope 2006), Pella (Bourke
et al. 1998), Tell esh-Shuna (Croft 1994), Jericho (Clutton-Brock 1983:
802–803) and Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12; Fig. 2.7).
Domesticated animals
Common animals: goat/sheep (Capra/Ovis about 60%), cattle (Bus tau-
rus), pig (Sus domesticus) and donkey (Equus asinus).
Wild animals
Rare animals: gazelle (Gazella gazella).
The most common animals among the EB I livestock are goats/sheep
followed by cattle. There is an interesting trend showing an increase
in the amount of cattle and a decrease in the number of pig as the EB
I progresses (Philip 2001: table 5.4). This change might imply a rise
in the importance of cattle as work animals in the EB Ib, or their re-
placement of pigs as the source of meat. The significant decline in the
percentage of wild animals in the assemblages is apparently indicative
of a transition to raising animals primarily for supplying meat (a trend
9
There are fewer reports from the EB I sites than from the Chalcolithic period, and
therefore the results should be taken with some degree of skepticism until additional
reports are released that will either substantiate or invalidate the conclusions stemming
from the data presented.
30 chapter two
Equidae 6%
Bos taurus 9%
Capra/Ovis 53%
Sus domesticus 32%
Figure 2.7. Distribution of animals in the EB I site of Sheikh

Diab 2. Number of identified items: N = 34.
90
N=62 Fazael 2
80 80
N=43 Sheikh Diab 2 70
60
53
50
40
32
30
13.8 20
6 9 6.2
10
0
Wild Animals Equidae Bos taurus Sus domesticus Capra/Ovis
Figure 2.8. Comparison of animal remains between Chalcolithic and EB sites

in the Fazael Valley in percent.
that had already begun in the Chalcolithic period).

Despite the size of the sampling, the comparison between Fazael 2
and Sheikh Diab 2 is interesting: the first site is Chalcolithic, and the
second dates to the EB I; the source of water is identical for both – Wadi
Fazael, and the distance between them is less than 1 km as the crow
flies.
The main animal at both sites is goat/sheep, but in percentage terms
it is much more significant at Fazael 2. The percentage of cattle raised
at both sites is similar. More wild animals which are absent from Sheikh
Diab 2 (fox, wild cat) appear at Fazael 2. At Sheikh Diab 2, pig, which
does not appear at all at Fazael 2, is dominant. Equines (probably don-
keys) also appear in the meantime only at Sheikh Diab 2.
Although these data are only preliminary, there are some trends that
can be identified:
1. The high proportion of sheep/goat (grazing and milk and dairy
products) in the assemblages of the two periods.
2. Fluctuations in the utilization of pig in the EB I (for meat).
3. Appearance of animals used for work and trade in the EB I.
Transit Routes
There is no evidence indicating the use of clearly defined roads during
the ancient periods of the study. It is therefore likely that people mainly
moved between different settlements regions via the easiest routes,
where the valley meets the hills. It is also possible that movement across
the region took place near or by way of the large river valleys (Fig. 2.9).
Furthermore, it seems that the Jordan could only be crossed at fords (as
in later periods). We think it is possible to address the topic of move-
ment/transit routes in this study in the absence of archaeological or
historical data that identify a specific axis as a route that was used in
these periods.
Such routes are identified by encampment sites along them, locating
settlement regions in the hill country or north and south of the study
region to which these routes logically lead (as shown by Esse 1991: 27).
There is one long possible north-south route between Nahal Bezeq
and Wadi 'Aujjeh that parallels the River Jordan channel and the ridge-
line of the desert fringes, together with six possible lateral routes (Nahal
Bezeq – Zebabdeh Valley; Wadi Malih – Tubas Valley; Wadi Far'ah –
Nablus; Fazael – Upper Wadi Ahmar; Fazael – 'Ain Rashash; Wadi 'Au-
jjeh). The Jordan blocks all routes from the east, and it was necessary to
cross it at the fords.
North – South
The Jordan Valley route runs from the Beth Shean Valley in the north
to the Jericho Valley in the south. It crosses the entire area from Nahal
Bezeq to Wadi 'Aujjeh, probably in the region where the valley meets
the slopes of the desert fringes of Samaria. In later periods a road passed
through the region from Beth Shean to Jericho.
Analyses of the geography and site distribution show that in the early
periods this was the only route that could link the settlement clusters
of the southern Beth Shean Valley with those of Wadi Far'ah, Fazael
Valley, Wadi 'Aujjeh and the Jericho Valley.
32 chapter two
East – West
Nahal Bezeq – Zebabdeh Valley

This is a possible lateral route that runs along Nahal Bezeq (Wadi Shu-
bash) from the southern Beth Shean Valley to the Zebabdeh Valley
in the Samarian hills, along which the following sites are located: Tell
Qa'un, Mrahes-Sbeh, and 'Iraq el-Hamam (Sites 2, 8–9). Given that the
last two sites and the Zebabdeh Valley sites were not inhabited in the
EB I, it seems that this route was mostly used in the Chalcolithic period.
Wadi Malih – Tubas Valley

A possible lateral route might have run along Wadi Malih, beginning
west of the ford over the Jordan near Tell Abu Sus (Site 14), via the sites
of 'Ein Hilu and Qta'at el-Khalifeh (Sites 19–20), to the Tubas Valley
(about 20 km). Like the Nahal Bezeq – Zebabdeh Valley route, it seems
that this route was mostly used in the Chalcolithic period.
From Tell Abu Sus the probable route could have crossed the Jordan
to the eastern Jordan Valley at two possible river crossings that still
exist: Mahadet Abu-Sus in the west and Mahadet Fathallah in the east.
Wadi Far'ah – the Nablus syncline

A lateral route might have passed through Wadi Far'ah to the Nablus
region. The route runs in a south-east – north-west direction from el-
Makhruq to Tirza Junction (about 30 km). Here the route could have
branched off to the north, toward Tell Far'ah (North), or south-west
to Nablus via Wadi Beidan. This route was widely used in the EB I,
and dozens of sites from this period were discovered along it. From
el-Makhruq a possible route continued east to the ford near Tell ed-
Damiyeh on the other side of the Jordan, and from there eastward along
Wadi Zerqa. This road is probably the most important lateral route in
the study region in the EB I, owing to its location in the heart of the
valley, and because it linked the main concentration of settlements in
the western part of Wadi Far'ah with eastern Jordan.
Fazael Valley – Wadi Ahmar

This is a lateral route from the Fazael Valley along Wadi Ahmar to the
hill country west of Khirbet Juraish (Site 64). Many sites dating to the
study periods were discovered along Wadi Ahmar, and this was prob-
ably an important route that might have connected the valley sites with
the sites discovered in the hills.
Fazael Valley – 'Ain Rashash

This is a lateral route from the Fazael Valley running the length of the
Wadi Rashash to the hill country in the vicinity of the Rashash springs
and Duma. It was probably only used in the EB I and later (no Chalco-
lithic sites were discovered along it, or in the region of the Rashash
springs and Duma).
Wadi 'Aujjeh
This is a lateral route along Wadi 'Aujjeh from where it flows into the
Jordan to the vicinity of the spring at 'Ain 'Aujjeh. Many sites were lo-
cated in the Wadi 'Aujjeh flood plain, which is 6 km long. The route is
a steep trail that is more difficult to traverse the further west from 'Ain
'Aujjeh, and it is there that the ancient settlements also stop.
Conclusions
The Jordan Valley is characterized by a network of ‘natural’ transit
routes that relied on the topography of the region, especially along the
large streams. When examining the distribution of the Chalcolithic and
EB I sites relative to these routes, it clearly becomes apparent that most
were built taking the transit routes into account. This is not surprising,
because of the direct relationship between the routes and the streams
that were the sources of water for the sites.
The main lateral routes used in the Chalcolithic were: Nahal Bezeq –
Zebabdeh Valley, Wadi Malih – Tubas Valley, and Fazael Valley – Upper
Wadi Ahmar. It is surprising there is no evidence of a Chalcolithic
settlement in the western valley of Wadi Far'ah.
The main lateral routes used in the EB I were: Wadi Far'ah – the
Nablus syncline, Fazael Valley – Wadi Ahmar, and Fazael Valley – 'Ain
Rashash. Another possible route in this period, although its precise
course is unclear, might have run along the slopes of the hill country
between the groups of sites in Wadi Far'ah, south to the spring sites
around 'Ain Juraish and 'Ain Rashash (This route is actually manifested
by the distribution of Um-Hammad pottery in the EB Ib at these spring
sites, and not in the contemporary sites located east of the Jordan Valley
itself).
The north-south longitudinal movement seems to have been based
on the seam where the hill slopes meet the valley.
The Zor was not suitable as a river crossing or for grazing, and the
Jordan could probably only be crossed at the fords along the river.
34 chapter two
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
205 Beth Shean 205

Valley
Nahal B
e zeq
(Wad
i Sh u b a sh)
s
Zebabdeh i Ya b i
200 W ad 200
Zebabdeh
and
River J
Mehula
Tubas
195 Valleys 195
Wad i Malih
o rdan
Tubas 'Ein Hilu
190
Fass 190
ej-Jamal
Tell Far'ah
(North) in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 W 185
ad
iF
ar
'ah
W
ad
iF
180 180
r'
a
a
h
W
ad
175 175
iF
r qa
ar
Ze
'ah
e z
di
Wa
Wa Tell
d um
170 i Ah 170
m Hammed
ar
Majdal
Beni Sartaba
Fadil
165 165
Fazael
Valley Boundary of the study
Fazael 4 Ancient site
Fazael 2
River J
Fazael 7 Modern village

Sheikh Diab 2
160 Wad Transit route 160
i Faz
Settlement cluster
el
a
Wadi
or
an d
155 155
'Aujjeh
h
150
Wadi 'Aujje 150
h
jje
'Au
i
W ad
n
i Nim r i
145 W ad 145
0 5 Jericho
km
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure. 2.9. Map of possible routes in the study area during

the Chalcolithic and EB I periods.
CHAPTER THREE
HISTORY OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH OF THE

CHALCOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE I PERIODS IN THE
STUDY AREA
Introduction
Until recently fewer archaeological studies had been conducted in the
southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria,1 than the more
developed research in other regions in the southern Levant (the Beer
Sheva valley, Golan, etc.). It is true that surveys and excavations were
carried out here, beginning in the second half of the 20th century, but
these were mostly of short duration. A fundamental change occurred
with the start of the Manasseh Hill Country Survey in the Jordan Val-
ley in the 1980s. This survey is presently continuing, and constitutes a
cornerstone of our accumulated archaeological knowledge of the whole
region.
Mallon, Neuville and Koeppel were the first researchers who identi-
fied and defined the Chalcolithic culture at Teleilat Ghassul, slightly
south of the study region (Mallon et al. 1934). Albright (1926) was
the first to deal with the Early Bronze Age in the Jordan Valley. But
it was only in the works of Engberg and Shipton (1934) at Megiddo,
and Fitzgerald (1935) at Beth Shean that the EB was chronologically
subdivided, and the finds were ascribed to the EB I. The topic was first
summarized in works by Wright (1937; 1958). It was only in the 1930s
that the necessary knowledge was acquired to identify sites from the
Chalcolithic and the EB I.2
We will not present all of the archaeological research carried out in
the southern Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria; rather
1
The paucity of research apparently stems from a number of reasons: peripheral
– in the 20th century both Israel and Jordan considered the western Jordan Valley a
periphery and therefore it was not a centre for research; religious – the three mono-
theistic religions viewed the centre in Jerusalem, and not on the fringes of Samaria;
and political – no research was done because of political considerations, the essence of
which revolved around the question of who had the right to study this region.
2
Such an important survey as that of Conder and Kitchener (1882) did not iden-
tify any sites in the region dating to the periods addressed in this study, and so is not
included.
36 chapter three
focusing on the Chalcolithic and EB I. Nor will we discuss the history

of the research of these periods from a broader or regional point of view
(for this there are numerous studies, from Albright [1932] to later stud-
ies and articles, such as Miroschedji 1971; Amiran 1985; Ben-Tor 1985;
Hanbury-Tenison 1986; Levy 1986; 1995; Gilead 1988; Esse 1989; 1991;
Gonen 1989; Joffe 1991; 1993; Braun 1996; Philip 2001; and Bourke
2001; Blackham 2002; Rowen and Golden 2009; Golden 2010; Chesson
2011; Banning 2011).
Chalcolithic and EB I Research in the Southern

Jordan Valley and the Desert Fringes of Samaria
We will focus on the two most common methods of research – survey
and excavation.
The first survey performed in the western Jordan Valley was con-
ducted by Glueck in the 1940s, and was partial and not systematic
(Glueck 1951). Glueck identified the EB I sites at Tel Miski and in the
vicinity of Tell Sheikh Diab.
In the 1960s and 1970s Tzori (1958; 1962; 1977a; 1977b) and Mit-
tman (1970) carried out surveys in the southern Beth Shean Valley.
Tzori (1962), who identified four sites that appear here, was also the
first to identify the EB I site at Tel Shalem and the Chalcolithic site
at Tell Mukehaz. As part of Mittman’s work in the survey of Gilead,
the southern part of the Beth Shean Valley was also surveyed, and two
previously unknown sites were discovered, among them the EB I site in
the region of Shemsiyeh.
In 1967–1968 the Emergency Survey was conducted throughout
Judea, Samaria and the Golan. Survey teams headed by Bar-Adon
(1972) and Gophna and Porath (1972) operated in the southern Jordan
Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria. This was the largest modern
archaeological survey performed to date. The survey encompassed an
extensive area, but due to time constraints it was only partially com-
pleted. Seven Chalcolithic and EB I sites were discovered. The large
Chalcolithic sites in the Wadi Far'ah flood plain – Kaziyet el-Ratrut and
Far'at ej-Jiftlik (Bar-Adon 1972) are prominent among them because of
their size.
In 1968 Porath continued surveying the region (Samaria survey B –
Porath 1968). The survey was not published, and the Chalcolithic and
EB I sites discovered in it are presented for the first time in our study.
history of the archaeological research 37
Nine Chalcolithic and EB I sites were discovered, among them other

major sites in Wadi Far'ah (Mantaket Wadi Zeit, Khirbet Wadi umm-
Watad, and Shunet el-Masna'ah), and the fortified EB site at er-Rjjum
(which Porath named ‘Khirbet Wadi al-Far'ah B’).
The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, under the direction of Zertal,
has been active in the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria
from the late 1980s until the present.3 This is the largest and most com-
prehensive survey conducted in the study region. Fifty-five sites from
the Chalcolithic and EB I were discovered and published in its frame-
work. In addition, 14 other sites that had been published by previous
researchers were re-examined (Zertal 2005; 2008). This comprehensive
survey constitutes the main database for the information and data pre-
sented in this study. In the context of this project more than 30 other
Chalcolithic and EB I sites discovered in recent years have yet to be
published. This study analyses and presents them for the first time.
Another survey was conducted in the region of Ephraim (Finkelstein
et al. 1997). The eastern part of the survey extended into the desert
fringes of Samaria, where four Chalcolithic and EB I sites were discov-
ered, among them the Chalcolithic site on the Wadi Ahmar terrace.
In the past two decades the Archaeological Staff Officer of Judea
and Samaria has conducted map surveys in the study region. With the
exception of a preliminary report (Spanier 1994b), none of these have
been published. In checking with representatives of the Archaeological
Staff Officer of Judea and Samaria, the author ascertained that no new
Chalcolithic or EB I sites were discovered in these surveys.
In 1953 the first excavation was conducted in the southern Jordan
Valley. Mellaart excavated a Chalcolithic site named Jiftlik in Wadi
Far'ah (Leonard 1992: 5–8). This was not a normal excavation, but
rather a section was cleaned and artifacts were gathered between the
houses of the tenant farmers in the village of the same name (Site 62).
In 1960 a section was also cleaned at another Chalcolithic site named
the Bezeq Canal (Sadeh and Gophna 1991) in the southern Beth Shean
Valley, south of Nahal Bezeq (Site 6).
In 1972–73 Porath (1985) conducted a salvage excavation in a
Chalcolithic building during the construction of the Fazael settlement
(Site 90). In the same region a number of surveys and excavations were
conducted in the 1970s at prehistoric sites, among others, in Wadi
Ahmar (Hovers 1993) and in Wadi Fazael (Goring-Morris 1980). In
3
The author has been an active participant in this survey since 2004.
38 chapter three
the framework of these studies an EB I site – Fatzael 3 – was excavated

(which is called Fazael 4 in this work, and is Site 89), and was mistak-
enly identified as Chalcolithic (Goring-Morris 1980: 7).
In 1979–1980 Gophna and Sadeh carried out two short excavation
seasons at Tel Tsaf on the northern border of the study area (Gophna
and Sadeh 1988–89). Garfinkel continued the excavation at the site in
2004–2007 (e.g. Garfinkel et al. 2007). This site is ascribed to a relatively
early phase of the Chalcolithic, which the excavator called ‘Middle
Chalcolithic’. Although it is a key site in the study of the Chalcolithic
of the southern Levant, it is not included in our research because of its
chronological antiquity.
In 1987–1988 Eisenberg excavated the EB I site at Tel Shalem
(Eisenberg 1996). This site, in the southern Beth Shean Valley and in
the northern part of the study region, is a fortified settlement dating to
the EB Ib (Site 7).
In the 1990s researchers of the Archaeological Staff Officer of Judea
and Samaria excavated two Chalcolithic structures. Peleg (2000) exca-
vated a small building in the settlement of Fazael that was probably
connected to the large settlement situated on the northern bank of
Wadi Fazael (Site 90). Hizmi excavated a building with a courtyard in
the settlement of Yitav on the northern bank of Wadi 'Aujjeh (Hizmi
2003, Site 110).
Numerous sites were excavated north and south of the study region:
Many Chalcolithic and EB I sites were excavated north of the study
region, in the Beth Shean Valley.
– The following Chalcolithic sites are of note: Tel Kitan (Eisenberg
1993), Tell 'Ali (Garfinkel 1993a; 1993b), Beth Shean (Tzori 1977a), and
Gesher (Covello-Paran 1995). There is no final publication for any of
these sites.
– The following EB I sites are important: Tel Beth Shean (Fitzgerald
1935; Braun 2004) and Khirbet Et-Tuwal (Eisenberg 1998).
Numerous surveys were also conducted in the Beth Shean Valley.
First and foremost is that of Tzori (1958; 1962; 1977b).
Chalcolithic and EB I sites were also excavated south of the study
region in Jericho and the northern Judean Desert and the northern
Dead Sea area.
– The following Chalcolithic sites are significant: The Cave of the
Treasure in Nahal Mishmar (Bar-Adon 1980), caves excavated and sur-
veyed in the framework of the cave research project carried out in the
northern Judean Desert in the early 1990s (Sion 2002; Eshel and Zissu
2002; Eisenberg 2002; Abeles 2002; Khalaily 2002), Cave of the War-
rior (Schick 1998), the Ein Gedi temple (Ussishkin 1980), Tell el Maf-
jar (Mellart 1962), and caves surveyed and excavated in the wadis of
the Judean Desert (Avigad 1993; Aharoni 1993; Bar-Adon 1962, 1993;
Yadin 1993; Patrich 1993).
– The following EB I sites are notable: Jericho (Tell es-Sultan)4, which
was fortified in the EB I, and where a cemetery of the period was also
exposed (Kenyon and Holland 1982, 1983; and a general summary in
Kenyon 1979), Tell el Mafjar (Mellart 1962) and Herodian Jericho in
the mouth of Wadi Qelt (Pritchard 1958).
The excavation project in the city and cemetery at Bab edh-Dhra'
(Rast and Schaub 2003), which is located in the southeastern part of
the Dead Sea, should also be mentioned. It constitutes an example of
a unique regional culture (particularly in the early phase of the EB I).
West of the study area, in the eastern hills of Samaria, an impor-
tant site was excavated dating to the periods this study deals with. Tell
Far'ah (North), located in the western part of Wadi Far'ah north-east
of Nablus, was excavated by de Vaux beginning in 1946. Although
the excavation is still not fully published, preliminary reports make it
possible to follow the finds from the excavation at the tell itself and
in the large cemetery nearby (summary in Miroschedji 1971 based on
de Vaux 1949, 1951, 1955, 1957, 1962; de Vaux and Steve 1947, 1948,
1969). The terminology in the reports is confusing. The stratum that
the excavators refer to as ‘Eneol. Moyen’ is actually Chalcolithic.5 The
‘Eneol. Recent’ is the EB I, as apparently is the first phase of the period
referred to as ‘Bronze Ancien’. The Chalcolithic remains are meagre and
belong to the early phases of the period (de Vaux 1957: fig. 4 includes
a strap handle and a bow-rim jar), and so are the remains from the EB
Ia, which were mostly discovered in tombs (Louhivuori 1988: 46). The
beginning of the important settlement is on the tell itself, and most of
the funerary artifacts probably belong to the EB Ib (de Vaux 1993).6
4
Jericho itself is a topic that requires numerous studies. It is not the author’s inten-
tion to discuss the many finds discovered at the tell and in the cemeteries, or their
significance. The reference to Jericho is only made in the context of the research of the
settlement pattern in the region on the one hand and parallels of the finds from the
survey and excavations that were conducted within the framework of the research on
the other.
5
Here mainly meaning the Early/Middle Chalcolithic, as manifested in Cave U (de
Vaux 1957).
6
Although the mere existence of many tombs dating to the EB Ia suggests that a
significant site located there has not yet been exposed in the areas excavated on the tell
itself or nearby.
40 chapter three
In the Samaria hills west of Tell Far'ah (North) Zertal (Zertal and
Mirkam 2000: 42–43; Zertal 2004; 2008) and Finkelstein and others
(Finkelstein et al. 1997) surveyed a number of Chalcolithic and EB I
sites that indicate the central hill country was inhabited in these peri-
ods (including large EB I settlements at a number of sites such as 'Ai
and Tell Balata – Finkelstein and Gophna 1993).
Numerous Chalcolithic and EB I sites were surveyed and excavated
east of the study region, in the eastern Jordan Valley (in Jordan).
– Some of the prominent Chalcolithic sites are: Teleilat Ghassul
(Mallon et al. 1934; North 1961; Hennessy 1969, 1982; Bourke 1997;
Bourke and Lovell 2004; Bourke et al. 2000, 2001; Seaton 2008), Pella
(Lovell 2000), Kataret es-Samra (Leonard 1989)7 and Tell Abu Hamid
(Dollfus and Kafafi 1986, 1993; Dollfus et al. 1988).
– The important EB I sites are: Tell esh-Shuna (Contenson 1960;
Gustavson-Gaube 1987; Baird and Philip 1994), Tell Abu al-Kharaz
(Fischer 1997, 2006, 2008), Tell Um-Hammad esh Sherqi (Helms et al.
1992) and Tell Abu Habil (Contenson 1960). Also relevant to our study
is the survey that was performed in Wadi Hasa (Papalas et al. 1997)
that concentrated on the Chalcolithic and EB, among other things, and
other surveys carried out in the region.
Of all of the sites geographically adjacent to the study region, from
the Beth Shean Valley in the north to the northern bank of the Dead
Sea in the south, complete scientific reports have been published for
only four large sites (the Chalcolithic period at Teleilat Ghassul and
the EB I at Tell Um-Hammad, Tell Abu al-Kharaz, and Jericho). The
rest of the excavations were of limited scope, and were only partially
published, or not published at all. This is a very significant fact for un-
derstanding the necessity for research in this region. In fact, despite the
‘well-researched’ image that has been created for the region between
the south of the Kinneret and north of the Dead Sea, this area has al-
most not been studied at all.8
All the Chalcolithic and EB I sites in the southern Jordan Valley and
desert fringes of Samaria are described in Chapter 15.
This work is built on a large number of different and diverse studies,
as well as on different degrees of depth and professional knowledge. In
order to reach the most accurate and highest common denominator in
7
Remains dating to the Middle Chalcolithic and EB I were found at the site.
8
Only in the last generation has a new integrated work concerning this region in
the Chalcolithic period been published (Blackham 2002), but it is based on the meagre
data available to the researchers prior to this work, and is therefore somewhat limited.
the correct chronological segmentation of the sites, it was decided not

to rely on the spare reporting of the different surveyors, but to check
the finds themselves (if they exist).9
Conclusions
In summary, so far no in-depth research has examined the data from
the various surveys and proposed some sort of spatial synthesis. Small-
scale salvage excavations were primarily conducted in the study region,
most of which were not completely, or even partially, published.
The information we have about the outskirts of our region is also
incomplete, and relies heavily on old surveys. The essential difference
between our region and the adjacent areas is the excavation of the
large tells (Beth Shean, Far'ah [North], Jericho). It is true that most of
them were not published in full, but they do provide a data base for
comparison. Because of the lack of very reliable comprehensive data
it was decided to excavate additional sites as part of the research proj-
ect. These were meant to provide a chronological anchor and source of
comparison, if only partial, for the data collected in the surveys. Thus
the sites at 'Ein Hilu (second half of the 5th millennium BCE), Fazael
2 and 7 (first quarter of the 4th millennium BCE), and Sheikh Diab 2
and Fazael 4 (second half of the 4th millennium BCE) were excavated.
These excavations, with the data published from the excavations of
neighbouring sites, made it possible to determine the chronological re-
liability of each site, and form a more accurate picture of the settlement
in the Chalcolithic and EB I.
9
For example, the material collected by Mittman in the survey of Gilead and Tzori
in his surveys of the southern Beth Shean Valley was not available. But these are the
exception rather than the rule, and the author has succeeded in accessing the published
material from more than 90% of the sites.
CHAPTER FOUR
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to examine and present the pattern and
nature of settlement in the Chalcolithic and EB I in the southern Jordan
Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria. To this end a methodology
was decided upon that combined the two accepted research methods in
archaeology – excavation and survey.
The archaeological survey draws a map of the settlement in a specific
period and region. There are advantages and disadvantages to the sur-
vey (see below), but there is no disputing that this method is the only
one that makes it possible to obtain comprehensive spatial information.
The excavation draws a much more precise picture, but in an area that
is limited both chronologically and geographically. The combination of
the two methods produces a more reliable picture of the settlement in
the study region during the two periods we are addressing.
Completion of the initial processing of the survey data from all of
the sites in the study region gave a starting basis. An examination of
the data revealed a number of problems, the most basic of which was
the disparity in the quality of the surveys, and hence the lack of correct
identification of the settlement periods in the different sites.1 Conse-
quently, we decided to re-examine all 123 sites that were identified in
the various surveys as Chalcolithic or EB I.
For this purpose the following measures were taken:
1. All the existing publications of the sites were examined.
2. All the boxes of artifacts from the different surveys were physi-
cally examined. About 10% of the material was lost or is not in the
country.
3. All the existing sites were re-surveyed, and material was collected,
except at those sites that were already destroyed, or were inac-
cessible. The sites were analyzed in the field, and many of their
physical-environmental characteristics were defined for the pur-
pose of spatial analyses (the parameters are presented below).
1
Esse (1991) also identified a similar problem in his work on the surveys of the
Jezreel Valley.
methodology 43
4. A regional pottery typology was constructed, based on the survey

data from sites where the chronology is very reliable.
5. The period when the site was inhabited was redefined after
reviewing all the information, and the reliability of the chrono-
logical ascription was determined (see the principle of probability
below).
In addition, five sites were excavated:
1. 'Ein Hilu – a Chalcolithic site located in the desert fringe of Sa-
maria. This is the first site excavated in the desert fringes of Sa-
maria, and we excavated it in order to learn about the period in
this unknown region. The site was radiometrically dated to the
third quarter of the 5th millennium BCE.
2. Fazael 2 and Fazael 7– two Chalcolithic sites in the Fazael Valley –
in the southern part of the study region, which were excavated for
the purpose of learning about the later phases of the Chalcolithic
period. Fazael 2 was radiometrically dated to the first quarter of
the 4th millennium BCE. Based on existing data, this is one of the
latest settlement sites in the Jordan Valley and southern Levant
where the radiometric dating is reliable.2
3. Sheikh Diab 2 and Fazael 4 – two EB I sites in Wadi Fazael that
were excavated in order to examine the planning of the rural
settlement in the EB I.
The information derived from the excavations assisted in a more ac-
curate segmentation of the survey sites so as to determine chronologi-
cal definitions more precisely.
After implementing these measures – the survey and excavations – it
was possible to construct a settlement picture of Chalcolithic and EB
I. This also allowed us to conduct various environmental analyses of
those sites that have a medium or higher chronological reliability.
Terminology and Chronology

The terminology and chronology of the Chalcolithic and EB I are still
not agreed. The debate is centred on the Pre-Ghassullian–Beer Sheva
2
A reliable dating that is significantly later was only received from the Cave of
the Treasure in Nahal Mishmar and the Cave of the Warrior in Katef Jericho. These
were not habitation sites, but burial sites or places where artifacts were concealed. Later
settlement sites were in the Golan Heights (Carmi et al. 1995), the Beer Sheva Valley,
and probably also at 'Ain Assawir (Yannai 2006) and Modi'in (van den Brink 2011), but
no relevant radiometric information was collected from the two latter sites.
44 chapter four
phases of the Chalcolithic period, and the transition from the Chalco-
lithic to the EB I. These disagreements mainly deal with names used in
the terminology and culture, rather than chronological problems.
The publication of a relatively large number of radiometric dates in
recent years makes it possible to determine borders (if only partial) bet-
ween these periods and those preceding and succeeding them.
It is not our intention to discuss the Chalcolithic terminology
of those scholars who disagree (a partial list of the proposals in the
past two decades is: Banning 2002a; Bourke et al. 2001; Braun 1989;
Garfinkel 1999; Joffe and Dessel 1995; Gilead 1990; 1994; 2007; Lovell
et al. 2007).
Most researchers agree that the major phase of the Chalcolithic began
around 4500 BCE, and ended in the first half of the 4th millennium
BCE (agreed upon and verified radiometric dates from settlement sites
are as late as 3900–3800 BCE only, excluding the Golan sites).3
EB I researchers differ about the beginning of the period. Some
think it started around 3600 BCE (for example Yekutieli 2007; Philip
2001; Milevski 2011). Others push the date back to the third quarter of
the 4th millennium (Joffe and Dessel 1995), while still others bring it
forward to the first quarter of the 4th millennium (Golani 2004; and an
opposing view in Braun and Gophna 2004). There is consensus among
scholars that the period ends in the last century of the 4th millennium
BCE4.
Thus the research boundaries can be defined as between 4500 BCE
and 3050–3000 BCE (the transition from the EB I to EB II). The terms
we use are ‘Chalcolithic’ (4500–3800 BCE) and ‘EB I’ (3600–3000 BCE).
We should point out the problematic chronological gap between the
end of the Chalcolithic (during the first quarter of the 4th millennium
BCE) and the beginning of the EB I (about the middle of the 4th mille-
nnium BCE). The author is convinced that this gap will be reduced as
research progresses (the most recent discovery that makes it possible
to reduce this gap significantly is the stratigraphic sequence from the
Chalcolithic to the EB I discovered in salvage excavations at Modi'in –
van den Brink 2011).
3
For example Gilead 1994; 2007; Banning 2007: fig. 7; Lee 1973, as opposed to
completely different dates in Burton and Levy 2001. A new set of dates and analysis
that support such an early end date for the Chalcolithic period was suggested when this
book was in press (Braun et al. 2013).
4
For a slightly longer transition between EB I and EB II, from 3200-2900 indepen-
dently in each site, see Regev et al. 2012.
methodology 45
Garfinkel Lovell Banning Blackham Joffe and

Dates BCE Gilead 2007
1999 2001 2007 2002 Dessel 1995
Terminal
3750–3500
Chalcolithic
Late Terminal Terminal Developed
4000–3750
Chalcolithic Chalcolithic Chalcolithic Chalcolithic
Late
Late Late Late Late Developed
4250–4000 Chalcolithic
Chalcolithic Chalcolithic Chalcolithic Chalcolithic Chalcolithic
B
Late
Late
Late Late Chalcolithic Early Developed
4500–4250 Chalcolithic
Chalcolithic Chalcolithic Middle Chalcolithic Chalcolithic
A
Chalcolithic
Table 4.1. Terms and dates for the period 4500–3500 BCE in the southern
Levant (selected examples).
The Archaeological Survey –

Products and Limitations
Unlike an excavation, the survey focuses on the study of extensive re-
gions. It employs multi-disciplinary means for gathering initial infor-
mation from the ground. The survey is an inexpensive, relatively quick,
and usually non-destructive method. It collects information that can
be used to reconstruct and learn about the settlement history of the
surroundings. In recent years extensive research literature dealing with
methodological and practical aspects of the survey has been published;
setting goals, defining the site and its size, how to process and publish
data, etc. (Banning 2002b; Schiffer et al. 1978/79). At the same time
the regional survey method that considers economic-ecological aspects
and the interrelationship between man and his environment was devel-
oped.
Along with its advantages, there are also considerable drawbacks to
the survey (Banning 2002b: 72–74; Miller 1991: 252–253): its results
are an approximate estimate that can only be validated by excavation;
a site surveyed more than once where samples were gathered from the
field might produce different information from that collected the first
time; the presentation of the data and the results might vary, based on
the surveyor’s research approach; etc.
There are no defined rules on how to conduct the survey in the
field, and many models exist (for example Banning 2002b: 39–67). The
46 chapter four
method is determined by the surveyor in accordance with accessibility

to the survey area, the topographical and accessibility, season, weather
conditions, size of the survey team, etc. (Schiffer et al. 1978/79: 13–14).
In some surveys the team members walk a few metres apart and per-
form a complete survey (Zertal 2004), and in other surveys the distances
between members can be hundreds of metres (Ofer 1990: 187–188). In
other instances the survey is conducted from inside a vehicle, and the
surveyors are aided by aerial photographs (Adams 1981). The quality of
the survey depends on numerous factors (Banning 2002b: 39–68): the
number of surveyors and the distance between them, the experience
and motivation of the team and how familiar it is with the surveyed
area, the degree of visibility and contrast of the surface, covering veg-
etation, or the existence of unstable landscapes such as dunes or ero-
sion plains, etc.
An important question in survey methodology is the site definition.
In the absence of agreed-upon rules the definition is ultimately deter-
mined by the surveyors, while taking into account the nature of the
area, kind of remains, and their period.
A site is a basic unit that the archaeologist relates to, and is the means
by which objects are brought together into an ‘archaeological assem-
blage’. The site is also the basic counting unit on which the quantitative
analysis of the finds rests. The site definition can expand to every place
where traces of human activity were found at a specific point in time,
such as mines and quarries (Keller and Rupp 1983: 26–27), installa-
tions, or sherd concentrations. There are those who broaden the defini-
tion of a site to include any work by man, such as a road, pit, terrace,
aqueduct, farming installation, etc. (Haiman 1991).
Determining the area of the site has far-reaching implications for
calculating the maximum inhabited area of the region, or attempts
to establish hierarchal settlement theories based on the area of settle-
ments. The site area is determined with reference to the boundaries
of the architecture that survived there, and the density of the sherds
or flint tools on the ground. Therefore in a multi-strata site it is not
possible to determine its borders and area during all of its settlement
periods. Attempts to solve the problem by means of a mathematical
formula, with parameters such as the overall area of the site, number
of periods found at the site, number of sherds from the period in ques-
tion, duration of the site’s existence, etc. (Ofer 1993: 163–168), have
encountered much opposition (e.g. Finkelstein et al. 1997: 20–21). This
is based on researchers who think that other, unquantifiable, factors
methodology 47
should be considered (e.g. the effects of later remains compared to

those of earlier periods). In the Ramat Beth Shemesh survey, Dagan
(2000: 63) showed that what at glance appears to be a ‘sherd patch’ from
all periods might turn out after excavation to be just a two-period site.
There is no absolute solution to these problems; and the determination
as to what is a site and what is its area rests with the subjective discretion
of the researcher. Hence the final results are only an approximation.
Another limitation in our study is the difficulty of implementing a
complete and total survey of the entire study region, because there are
areas or segments that could not be surveyed for years or re-examined.
Especially problematic are the mined regions west of the River Jordan
and caves that are inaccessible without rappelling equipment and suit-
able knowledge. Buried sites that cannot be identified on the surface
are probably concealed beneath the alluvial plain of the large wadis
(particularly Wadi Far'ah). Despite these limitations, the study encom-
passes more than 95% of the surface, and provides a reliable picture of
the settlement pattern in the region.
The Scientific Principles of the Study

The fieldwork and presentation of the data are mainly based on the sci-
entific principles used in the framework of the Manasseh Hill Country
Survey (Zertal 2004), with slight changes and modifications.
The Manasseh Hill Country Survey has been conducted continu-
ously in Samaria and the Jordan Valley, beginning in 1978. This survey
was carried out completely on foot, and was performed by a team of
surveyors, the nucleus of which was permanent. The surveyors walk
20 to 50 m apart, covering all of the defined area (except for caves that
are difficult of access, and minefields). Points in the area where any
archaeological finds (architecture or small finds) are discovered are
documented (Zertal 2004). An area of about 3,000 km2 was examined
in the framework of the survey. To date, more than 1,530 sites have
been discovered (Zertal 2004; 2005; 2008; 2012; Zertal and Mirkam
2000). Approximately 85% are new sites that were previously unknown.
In order to process the data from each site, geo-archaeological
characteristics that are very important in understanding man and the
ancient environment were identified. This set of data is listed for each
site, and constitutes the scientific basis of some of the analyses. All the
data presented below for each of the sites appear in the Site Catalogue,
Chapter 15. These were processed as part of the work for each of the
48 chapter four
analyzed sites (including sites discovered in other surveys and exca-

vations, sites discovered in the framework of this study, and sites for
which there is still no scientific publication).
The descriptive components of each site which were defined for the
purpose of scientific processing are:
Site name. The name is recorded according to the English translit-
eration in accordance with the rules of the Survey of Israel (Kochavi
1972: 15).
Map reference according to the Old Israel Grid. The point of reference
is taken from the middle of the site, as is customary in the Survey of
Israel. Until 2000 the map reference was derived from a map, and after-
wards it was determined by means of GPS. In re-visits to sites discov-
ered prior to 2000 all the environmental data were rechecked, including
the map reference, and were updated as needed in the Site Catalogue.
Elevation. There are two parts to this section – absolute elevation in
metres above sea level (m.a.s.l.), and relative elevation of the site above
or below its immediate surroundings (m.a.s.a.). The relative and abso-
lute elevations are of great significance regarding both the ecology and
precipitation, and in understanding the nature of the settlement.
Type of site. Eight types of sites were defined. However, in many
instances a single definition was insufficient, and so there may be addi-
tions, connections and changes:
1. Tell – an artificial mound. If the mound is fortified it is defined as
a ‘fortified tell’.
2. Settlement – a site where the walls of a number of buildings are
visible on the surface. In our study we divide this settlement ac-
cording to area:
a. Large settlement –site area between 3 and 10 hectares.
b. Medium settlement –site area between 1 and 3 hectares.
c. Small settlement –site area up to 1 hectare.
3. Enclosure – a walled enclosure.
4. Cemetery – a concentration of tombs.
5. Building – a single structure with at least three walls.
6. Cave – a natural cavity in the bedrock that was used by man.
7–8. Sherd scatter – a scattering of sherds on the ground. It is some-
times defined as a temporary encampment site (for topographical
reasons, or because the place was also preserved as a temporary
encampment site in later periods). In other cases where no archi-
tectural remains were identified, it was defined an ‘open site’.
The treatment of the data regarding the type of site makes it possible
methodology 49
to obtain a more precise picture of the settlement pattern in the study

region.
Area of the site. The area in hectares is the inhabited area, that is, the
place where buildings stood when the site was at its largest. This datum
is subjective and difficult to measure, especially when the site is covered
with river alluvium, or is on a tell with several strata. However, the fact
that most of the sites in this region are single-period, and the preserva-
tion on the surface is good, makes it easy to determine their area. Those
whose area is uncertain (tells, sites covered by a modern settlement or
river alluvium, etc.) were not taken into account in the statistical tests,
and in the Site Catalogue it is stated that their original size is unknown.
Processing the information about the area of the settlement allows us
to obtain a clearer, albeit approximate, habitation picture of various
aspects, such as settlement hierarchy, estimated population size, etc. 5
Topography. The main forms of the site’s possible topography were
determined. Sometimes two or more forms were specified at a site (e.g.
a dome on the edge of a valley):
Ridge – a long narrow topographical rise forming a watershed along
its length.
Valley fringe – the contact line between the valley plain and the
slopes nearby. A site defined as such was situated on the contact line, or
up to 100 m up the slope.
Hilltop – a hilltop or mountain top.
Slope – a plane area of up to 45°.
Plateau – a large elevated flat area.
Ravine – a narrow valley delimited on both side by slopes.
Saddle – an elongated elevation between two domes.
In addition, the orientation of the ancient settlements was checked.
This information makes it possible to ascertain whether the people
who founded the ancient sites had topographical preferences. We can
use these preferences in trying to learn about the nature of the popula-
tion in these sites.
Closest source of water and the distance to it. The distance between
the sources of water (streams and springs) and the different sites was
checked. By processing this information we can better understand the
sites with respect to the sources of water.
5
It should be remembered that the picture is incomplete and only circumstantial.
For example it is difficult to tell if two nearby sites are part of one large site, or are two
different settlements. We also have no reliable way of knowing that sites situated on two
sides of a wadi are contemporary.
50 chapter four
Settlement periods at the site. The periods identified at the site by

the different surveyors were noted. By processing this information the
settlement continuity at the different sites can be checked, from the ear-
liest phases of the Chalcolithic to the EB II. If there is a disparity with
what was recorded in the previous surveys a question mark appears
alongside the problematic periods in the site catalogue.
Number of sites observed. The number of contemporary sites visible
from the highest point of a particular site. By processing this informa-
tion the connection between sites can be studied.
Number of visits. The number of visits/surveys at each site is pre-
sented. Usually the greater the number of visits to any given site, the
greater the amount of information that can be derived from it.
Number of sherds. The number of sherds ascribed to the Chalcolithic
or EB which were found on the surface (not all of the surveys conducted
in the study region had a prescribed statistical method of collection,
and the sampling includes everything the survey team gathered from
the ground). In most cases the author also inspected pottery collections
gathered by the different surveyors. This information aids in determin-
ing the reliability/probability of the site belonging to a particular period
(see the section Probability below).
Previous surveys. Where the site was published (bibliographical ref-
erence). If the site has not been published the word ‘none’ appears.
Verbal description. This includes a description of the site’s location
in the area and relation to other places, and a description of the vis-
ible remains. Sometimes a personal assessment of the general nature
of the place and its relation to other sites is presented at the end of the
description.
Pottery. Analysis of the ceramic finds discovered in the various sur-
veys and in subsequent visits to the site. The quantitative and qualitative
reference appears in the typological tables in the chapter on pottery.
Flint artifacts. Basic analysis (quantities and kinds of diagnostic
tools) of the flint discovered in the surveys.
Other finds. Description of other finds (such as stone objects) dis-
covered in the surveys.
Findings, analyses, and conclusions. A decision regarding the degree
of probability for ascribing a particular site to a particular period.
Based on this decision further analyses are done concerning the differ-
ent parameters and different periods this study addresses. Preliminary
conclusions regarding the site are presented.
Picture/plan. Picture and/or plan of the site if it is relevant to the
methodology 51
periods discussed in the study.
The Principle of Probability

The principle of probability is intended to define the chronological as-
cription of the site. The reason for this stems from the real need that
arose to examine physically each of the finds from the different surveys.
At quite a number of sites it was unclear why the surveyor decided that
the site actually belonged to a particular chronological horizon. Fre-
quently a chronological ascription to a specific period was solely based
on body sherds, or a site was ascribed to a very long chronological pe-
riod (e.g. the entire EB) without making a more precise segmentation
of the period.
The principle of probability is defined as the possibility that a certain
site does indeed belong to a particular settlement period. Five levels of
probability were defined:
– Low – no diagnostic finds were discovered at the site (e.g. only
body sherds were found at the site).
– Low-medium – only one diagnostic find was discovered at the
site.
– Medium – at least two diagnostic finds were discovered at the site.
– Medium-high – at least five diagnostic finds were discovered at
the site.
– High – more than ten diagnostic finds were discovered at the site.
There might also be a site that was inhabited during a particular
period with a specific probability, and was inhabited in another period
with a different probability. There are also several instances where it
was determined with some level of probability that a site was inhabited
in both the Chalcolithic and the EB I periods. This is true in those cases
where the diagnostic finds characterize both periods, and a more pre-
cise separation cannot be made.6 Only those sites that have a medium
or higher level of probability were taken into account when construct-
ing the settlement pattern and performing the statistical calculations.
In this study the author classified 140 probabilities for 123 different
sites according to the following segmentation:
Chalcolithic – 53 probabilities were specified, of which 40 sites were
of medium or higher probability.
EB I – 56 probabilities were specified, of which 46 sites were of me-
dium or higher probability.
6
In such cases the site is not considered as belonging to both periods, and is not
included in the different statistical calculations.
52 chapter four
Chalcolithic or EB I – 21 probabilities were specified, of which 4 sites

were of medium or higher probability.
The EB was not subdivided – four probabilities were specified, all of
which were of medium or higher probability.
Excavation Methodology
The Jordan Valley project began in 2006. From the outset, it was de-
signed as a long-term project, with the intention of excavating several
sites spanning the 5th and 4th millennia BCE. It was therefore decided
to pursue a strategy of a measured continuing research programme,
with limited excavation areas each season. The excavation methodol-
ogy was similar in all sites, with slight modifications depending on the
nature of the site and the local preservation conditions.
Each season lasted up to three weeks (18 working days). The exca-
vators were either archaeological students or experienced volunteers,
comprising not more 15 persons each season. We worked in the field
for nine hours every day, and then returned to our base in Moshav
Fazael, where we washed and sorted the finds.
Each area of excavation had a supervisor who was in charge of all the
field work and registration activities. The excavated areas were divided
into 5 x 5 m squares, usually separated by 50 cm-wide baulks used for
stratigraphic control. With the exception of topsoil and disturbed areas,
the excavations for the most part were carried out using relatively fine
tools (hand picks and small trowels). Ten to twenty percent of the exca-
vated accumulations from fills was sifted through a 5 mm mesh, while
66-80% of the recognized living surface deposits was similarly sifted.
Only very high-quality loci were wet-sieved. The development of the
excavation was recorded daily by the area supervisors, who later wrote
a season summary. Further documentation included photography and
dimensioned drawings of architectural plans and baulk sections. All
data were later computerized into the project database. The material
culture remains (ceramics, lithics, animal bones, groundstone artifacts,
metals, etc.) were labelled and washed, and then sorted. Usually, all
finds were kept, except for non-diagnostic sherds, which were reburied
at each site.
CHAPTER FIVE
SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE SOUTHERN JORDAN

VALLEY AND DESERT FRINGES OF SAMARIA
IN THE CHALCOLITHIC PERIOD
Introduction
This chapter presents the settlement patterns of the region in this pe-
riod. It comprises the following sections:
– Types of sites, and what can be learned about them.
– Dwelling units.
– Areas of the sites (according to types).
– Proximity to sources of water.
– Spatial distribution and location of sites.
– Topography and preferred orientations for settlement sites.
– The question of settlement continuity.
In addition, the subsistence economy and transition periods are ex-
amined, and a spatial synthesis of the settlement pattern and hypotheti-
cal explanations for the nature of the changes are presented.1
The study includes two fundamental assumptions:
– The accuracy of the chronological segmentation in the basic sur-
vey is limited, and therefore the following steps were taken at each
site: the boxes of artifacts were re-examined, the site was revisited,
and additional finds and information were gathered (assuming
the site still existed or was accessible), and a specific level of prob-
ability was defined.
– A statistical analysis was made only for those sites that had a me-
dium or higher level of probability.
Some of the data presented here were statistically processed accord-
ing to questions relevant to each datum.
We based our examination of the proximity of sites to sources of
water on the following statistical question: Is the average distance of
all the sites from a source of water significantly less than the average
1
Two other questions were asked in this study: – is there a preference for a particu-
lar kind of soil and – is there a preference for a particular kind of rock? In view of the
negative results we can say there was no preference for either in selecting settlement
sites in the periods discussed in this study.
54 chapter five
distances from a source of water of a random collection of points in the

area? This was done by means of a t-test (Underwood 1997).
The following steps were taken in order to create the database for
the test:
– All the sites were uploaded to a geographic information system
(GIS), and the minimum distance of each site to the nearest
source of water (stream/spring) was measured.
– A collection of random points (the number of sites in each pe-
riod) was scattered in the area. The distance to each point was
calculated in the same manner. Tables with the distances of the
real sites and the random points served as the basis for the statisti-
cal test. The test was performed on three groups of sites for each
period: all of the sites with a medium or higher level of probabil-
ity; settlement sites with a medium or higher level of significance;
and open sites/temporary encampment sites with a medium or
higher level of significance.
To answer the question of whether the spatial distribution of the sites
is random or deliberate (do they tend to cluster?) the dispersion pattern
of the sites was tested statistically. The test was based on the index of
dispersion (ID). This index is the ratio between the variance and the av-
erage number of sites located inside a random sample of areas (squares)
of a known size. If the variance is small relative to the average, one can
assume that the dispersion is uniform, and that a similar number of
sites existed in all of the squares. If the variance is larger, it is more likely
that the dispersion is clustered, because there are many squares without
sites and few squares with many sites. On the other hand, if the average
and the variance are similar, then the dispersion is random. In addition,
if the dispersion is random, the number of sites in a square is expected
to follow a Poisson distribution.2
The index of dispersion ID is:
s2
ID
x
Where ID = 1 – random
ID > 1 – clustered
ID < 1 – uniform
2
Other advanced methods for checking the dispersion of the sites in a given area
were presented by Fletcher (2008), with regard to Chalcolithic period in the southern
Levant.
settlement patterns in the chalcolithic period 55
In addition, basic calculations of percentages were made in order

to answer some questions. Questions such as these are relevant to the
area, topography and orientation of the sites, and continuity compared
to single periods.
Settlement Patterns in the Chalcolithic Period

Seventy-four sites from the Chalcolithic period were discovered in the
study region (Settlement map – Fig. 5.1). Forty of them with a medium
or higher level of probability are analyzed in this chapter (except for
special instances that are indicated separately).
Five types of sites were discovered in the study area during the Chal-
colithic period. The most common among them (without segmenta-
tion according to probability) was the settlement site, which is divided
into four area-dependent sub-categories (see below). Thirty-one sites
of this type (60% of all the sites of the period) were discovered. Twelve
open sites (23% of all the sites), six enclosures (11.5% of all the sites),
two work sites, and one cave site were also discovered.
Similar results are also obtained when checking medium or higher
probability: the most common was the settlement site (all types), of
which 27 sites were discovered (79.5% of all the sites). The open sites
were rare (four sites were discovered – 11.5% of all the sites). The work
sites (two sites were discovered – 6% of all the sites) and enclosures
(one site was discovered – 3% of all the sites) were even less frequent.
The cave sites (these are common in the Judean Desert south of the
study area), and burial sites (more common in the EB I), are missing
from the types of sites that have a medium or higher level of probability
in the Chalcolithic period.
Settlement Sites
This is the most common type of site (66% of all the sites that were
checked, and 79.5% of the sites with a medium or higher probability).
A settlement site is one that was inhabited and used for dwelling (due
to the geophysical and initial conditions of the study, in most of the
cases building remains were found on the surface). The settlement is
not surrounded by a fortification line or an enclosure wall (as opposed
to fortified sites or enclosure sites), and is not in a cave.
There are four types of settlement sites in the study region: large –
covering an area of about 10 ha, with numerous buildings (see below);
56 chapter five
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Medium-High probability site

To Beth Shean
Less then medium probability site
Modern village
205 205
Boundary of the study
Road
zeq
Wadi
2 Na h
al Be
(Wa ash)
di Sh u b
4 6 7 i Ya b i
s
200 98 5 10 W ad 200
Zebabdeh 11 12
15
River J
Mehula 16
195 195
Wad i Malih 18
o rdan
Tubas 19
20
190 190
22 23 in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 185
25
180
39 45 180
44
46
55 53 52
175 56 175
r qa
57
60
Ze
61 62
W
65
e
ad
di
Fa
Wa
i
66
r'
ah
170
67 68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 73 72
75
165 76 79 165
7478 80
85 83 81
el
88 91 Wad
86 8987 92 90
za iA
Wa d i Fa
hm
River J
93 a
100 99
r
160 160
119
101
102
or
an d
155
104 155
108 106 'Aujjeh

109 111 110 114 115
112
150 150
116 ujje h 113

i 'A
W ad
n
i Nim r i
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 5.1. Settlement map of the study region in the

Chalcolithic period.
medium – with an area of 1–3 ha (see below); small – with an area of

up to 1 ha (see below); and a single building – usually in an area not
exceeding 2,000 m2.
The limitations in estimating the area of the sites make it difficult
to conduct an analysis of relative areas and the number of all of the
types of sites. Of those whose remains project above the surface and
are not covered with layers from later periods, the most common type
of settlement site is the small settlement (eight sites). This is followed
by the medium site (six sites) and large site (six sites). There is some
deviation when the sites at the foot of the tells (e.g. Tell Qa'un – Site 4),
which were apparently settlement sites, are removed. It is also difficult
to estimate the area of the settlement sites in Wadi Far'ah, which are
now covered with modern construction.
Large Settlement Sites

Their main characteristics are:
– A large area.
– The spatial distribution of buildings is not dense, but rather dwell-
ing units are located some distance from each other (in the case of
Fazael, sometimes by more than 100 m).
– The sites are located at the valley fringes at the point where the
slope meets the level ground of the wadi, to exploit the building
stones on the slopes, and leave as large an area as possible for
cultivation on the plain, well away from the channel itself, which
tends to flood.
– The location is situated near sources of water and extensive arable
areas.
Six sites 10 or more ha in area, which seem to be very large settle-
ment sites (villages), were identified. These are situated only in the
Jordan Valley: in Wadi Far'ah3 (four sites: Shunet el-Masna'ah, Kaziyet
el-Ratrut, Mantaket Wadi Zeit and Far'at ej-Jiftlik – Sites 55–57, 62), in
the southern part of the Beth Shean Valley (ej-Jobeh – Site 15), and in
Wadi Fazael4 (the Fazael site includes Sites 88, 90–93, with an estimated
3
The sites in Wadi Far'ah are today covered with modern construction, and it is
very difficult to investigate their area. The estimation of their areas was based on data
from the Emergency Survey and the Manasseh Hill Country Survey which visited the
sites when they were not as densely covered, and it was possible to estimate the size of
the settlement.
4
The author agrees with Porath (1985), who claims that the group of sites north of
Wadi Fazael was one large settlement site in the Chalcolithic period, and not a collec-
tion of isolated settlements. The importance of Porath’s observation lies in the fact that
58 chapter five
area of more than 20 ha).

Of these sites only small parts of the Fazael site were excavated (by
Porath, Peleg and the author –details are in the Site Catalogue and the
excavation reports).
Medium Settlement Sites

– Relatively dense construction compared to the large settlement
sites, with distances of up to 50 m between dwelling complexes in
some of the sites where structures are visible on the surface.
– Access close to sources of water; and access to agricultural land
only in some instances.
The typical topographical location is on a ridge/spur above the
source of water.
Six sites that were 1–3 ha in area, and appeared to be villages, were
identified in the framework of the study. These were distributed in all
of the main wadis except Wadi Far'ah (where the large settlement sites
are concentrated): in Nahal Bezeq – the Bezeq Canal5 (Site 6); Wadi
Malih – 'Ein Hilu (Site 19); Wadi Ahmar – 'Ain Juraish (Site 65); Wadi
Fazael – Fazael 1 (Site 87); Wadi 'Aujjeh – 'Ain 'Aujjeh 1, 'Iraq el-Awarna
and EP -261 (Sites 108, 109, and 114).
Five of these are located in the Jordan Valley, and two are in the des-
ert fringes ('Ein Hilu – excavated – Chapter 9, and 'Ain Juraish – not
excavated).
Small Settlement Sites

– Limited area.
– In instances where architecture was identified it seems that a
maximum of three buildings stood at the site.
– The isolated building is very similar to the dwelling units in larger
sites – there is no difference in the basic plan, and it is difficult
to suggest an alternative use of the building. The basic unit con-
sists of a broad room and a circular or square courtyard next to it.
he saw the region prior to the modern construction of the Fazael settlement and of the
agricultural and water systems that accompany it, which destroyed parts of the ancient
site. In the Site Catalogue they are presented separately according to the methodology
that states that if no settlement continuum is visible in a specific area then we are deal-
ing with separate sites.
5
Estimated area only.
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
To Beth Shean
205 205
Na h zeq
al Be
(Wa ash)
d i S h ub
4 6 W ab i s
200 98 10 ad i Y 200
Zebabdeh 12
15
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wad i Malih
o rdan
Tubas 19
20
190 190
23
in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 185
25
45
44
180 180
46
55 53 52
56
175 175
r qa
60 57
Ze
61 62
W
65
e
ad
di
iF
Wa
r'
a
a
66
h
170
67 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 73
76
165 165
81
az
ael
89 88 91
Wa d i F
87 92 93 90 Wadi
River J
A hm
160 ar 160
100
or
and
155 104 155
109 110 'Aujjeh

108
150 114 150
jj e
h 113 Settlement site
'Au Open site
Wa di
Enclosure
Caves
Working
Nim r in
site
145 a di
WBoundary 145
of the study
Modern village
Road
0 5 Wadi
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 5.2. Types of sites in the Chalcolithic period.

60 chapter five
Based on the excavations (below) it seems that the building was

used mainly for dwelling, and the courtyard was used for domes-
tic work and maintaining livestock.
– The location was not dependent upon an immediate proximity to
sources of water, although most of the sites are near these sources.
– The location is not in the immediate proximity of the farmland
(only four sites are close to arable land).
– The topographical location is diverse.
Eight small settlement sites of up to 1 ha in area were identified.
It seems that they were small villages or farmsteads consisting of ex-
tended households, or units belonging to a nuclear family. These are
randomly scattered in the Jordan Valley and desert fringes alike (Sites
8, 10, 12, 45, 66, 100, 110, and 113). Only one of these sites was exca-
vated (Yitav – Site 110).
Figure 5.3. Satellite photograph of the Fazael region. The dwelling units
identified are marked with circles. The minimum estimated area of the
settlement is marked with a solid line and the estimated additional area is
marked with a dotted line.
'Ein Hilu
Fazael 1
'Ain Juraish
Figure 5.4. Plans of medium-sized unfortified sites in the
study region. 'Ein Hilu (Bar et al. 2008); Fazael 1 and 'Ain
Juraish (Manasseh Hill Country Survey – unpublished).
62 chapter five
Enclosures
The main characteristics of the enclosures are:
– Located in regions that are remote from settlement sites (average
distance 2.67 km).
– Far from sources of water (average distance 1.87 km).
– Construction consisting of only a single course of large fieldstones
(boulders). This probably served as a foundation for vegetation or
mud bricks that formed an enclosure wall.
– 20–35 m diameter.
– Paucity of small finds.
– Topography – typically situated on a slope or a low spur.
Enclosures are quite common in the outlying regions and studies in
our region and researchers (e.g. Spanier 1994a: note 2; Hirschfeld 1985:
11; Ben-Yosef 2007: ch. 6) ascribe to them the function of animal pens.
Bar-Adon (1972; 1980) actually attributed cultic significance to them.
In the author’s opinion this assertion is illogical, because there are a
multitude of enclosures (e.g. in the Judean Desert, where Bar-Adon
worked, there are more than 35 enclosures – Davidovich 2008), and
they are simple and yield few finds. Surveys and excavations conducted
in recent years in the caves and enclosures in the Judean Desert show
there is no archaeological basis for dating these enclosures to the Chal-
colithic, or for ascribing a ritual function to them (Davidovich 2008).
The paucity of finds in the enclosure sites in the Jordan Valley is also a
characteristic common to the eastern part of the valley where research-
ers (Papalas et al. 1997: 434) had great difficulty in dating enclosure
sites, and assumed they belonged to the Chalcolithic–EB I chronologi-
cal horizon based on the scant finds. An examination of the findings of
the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (Zertal 2005; 2008) showed that the
dating was largely based on non-diagnostic body sherds.
Only six enclosures from these periods have been found in the Jor-
dan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria (Fig. 5.5) – a relatively
small number compared to the Judean Desert. These were located in
distant regions, mainly in the Masu'a Valley, and also in Wadi Ahmar
and in the Buqei'ah.
The only site in this category that has a medium level of probability
is Ro'i 1 (Site 25). Repeated surveys at the site have shown that it was
indeed mostly used in the Chalcolithic period, but finds from later pe-
riods were also discovered that were not found in the original survey.
Thus for example, a number of Iron Age sherds were found, from a
Wadi Ahmar 3
Ro'i 1
'Urqan er-Rub
Figure 5.5. Plans of enclosure sites in the study region. Wadi Ahmar 3
(Zertal 2005: fig. 383); Ro'i 1 (Zertal 2008: fig. 260); 'Urqan er-Rub
(Zertal 2005: fig. 406).
time when the enclosures were most common in the Jordan Valley (de-
tails in Ben-Yosef 2007). Hence it is possible that the enclosure at Ro'i
1 is late, and it covers an earlier site from the Chalcolithic period. This
hypothesis cannot be verified other than by an archaeological excava-
tion at the site.
The excavations at 'Ein Hilu and Fazael 2 demonstrate the impor-
tance of grazing in the subsistence economy of the region’s inhabitants
in the Chalcolithic period. It therefore seems that the built enclosure,
despite the ethnographic parallels to modern Bedouin life and the Jor-
64 chapter five
dan Valley inhabitants in the Iron Age, was not a significant compo-
nent in ancient pastoralism. The customary nature of grazing in the
region did not consist of long-term foraging between remote areas, but
perhaps a day’s journey – setting out and returning in one day from
where the animals were kept inside a dwelling complex6 (see below
regarding the importance of the courtyard in the animal husbandry of
this period).7 The absence of enclosure sites from the period in higher
and more remote regions on the slopes of the Samarian hills supports
this view. There is of course a possibility that the movements of these
shepherds were not identified in the archaeological finds (e.g. the use
of caves instead of enclosures for corralling sheep/goat. There are also
ethnographic parallels to this in modern Bedouin life).8 Many stud-
ies, mainly in the outlying regions (southern Israel – e.g. Haiman 1992;
Banning and Kohler-Rollefson 1992; Avni 1992; Eldar et al. 1992)
have attempted to identify nomadism in the archaeological finds. Oth-
ers (e.g. Khazanov 1984, and in his footsteps Rosen 2002 and van der
Steen 2007 in the southern Levant; Szuchman 2009) dealt with models,
usually based on ethnographic studies, for characterizing the relations
between the nomads and the sedentary inhabitants of the peripheral
areas. What these studies all have in common is the real difficulty in
identifying nomadism in the archaeological finds, and in determining
that the essence of the connection between the nomad and sedentary
settler exists in the border of the outlying region.
The Jordan Valley, during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods, was a
centre and not a periphery.9 The area becomes an outlying region only
6
For an ethnographic parallel of Bedouin life in the Dimona region, which oper-
ates in a similar fashion, see Eldar et al. 1992.
7
And see similar ideas regarding encampment sites used by shepherds that prob-
ably belonged to the inhabitants of permanent sites in the Beer Sheva Valley (Gilead
1992). For the northern Jordan Valley, Esse (1991: 161) has suggested the term 'distant
pastures husbandry' (based on Khazanov 1984: 22), in which the majority of the popu-
lation leads a settled life based on agriculture, and a portion of the villagers lives for part
of the year on pasture far from the settlement.
8
Today daily foraging is widely accepted among the Bedouin tribes of the Jordan
Valley (personal observation over the years), and during the hot months herds are often
seen taking shelter in the shade of natural caves. Long-term movement, due to seasonal
changes and the need to change grazing regions, exists year-round among some of the
residents. In these instances the Bedouin exchange their dwelling site with another
absolutely identical site on the Samarian slopes (They do not exchange dwellings in
enclosures or other alternatives; rather they migrate and set up residential buildings
that are identical in nature in the new settlement region).
9
Unlike the peripheral characteristics of the Jordan Valley today, in the pre- and
proto-historic periods, the valley was one of the major centres in the southern Levant.
south of Jericho, or in regions in the southern part of Jordan (Henry

1992).
There is a question whether the connection between the Jordan Val-
ley and the hills was such that it allowed nomadic cultures to exist in
the hills (as Finkelstein believes regarding the EB – 1992). The author
has found no support of this in the study so far, and only an in-depth
study of finds of these periods in the hill versus the valley will make it
possible to determine if there was a connection here between nomads
and sedentary populations.
Open Sites
This type of site is divided into two groups: sherd scatters and encamp-
ment sites. The first are characterized by a scatter of material finds in a
small area, without any preserved architecture. The encampment sites,
on the other hand, are sherd scatters and have some of the attributes
listed below that are based on numerous ethno-archaeological studies
of modern encampment sites, mainly in the Negev and Jordan (e.g.
Banning and Kohler-Rollefson 1992; Avni 1992; Eldar et al. 1992), and
possible ancient encampment sites in the region of Nahal Sekher in the
northern Negev (Gilead and Goren 1986).
A total of 12 open sites were found with a level of probability that is
greater than low, which were ascribed to the Chalcolithic period. Four
of these have a medium or higher level of probability.10
The main characteristics of the encampment sites are:
– Located in regions far from the main settlement clusters.
– Far from sources of water (average distance 2 km).
– Located in areas with limited accessibility, mostly in hilly regions.
– Far from arable regions.
– No architecture was identified on the surface level (it probably did
not exist).
– Small sites (average area 0.24 ha per site).
– Paucity of finds.
– Typical topography – elevated above a wadi (ridge, saddle or
slope) or a hidden ravine.
Its centrality is reflected in the development of advanced Neolithic cultures (in Jericho
– Kenyon 1957, and in Sha'ar Ha-Golan – Garfinkel 1993a, 1996), and the beginning of
urbanization during the Early Bronze Age.
10
Because of the sparse archaeological evidence in these sites, and in order to learn
about them, an analysis was performed from a low-medium level of probability and
higher.
66 chapter five
– Mostly multi-period.
The presumed encampment sites are located in the western part of
Wadi Malih (Site 20), the desert fringes (Sites 23, 46, 53, 61), the west-
ern part of Wadi Ahmar (Site 67), and in Wadi Baker (Site 104).
Sherd scatters were found in the south-western part of the Beth
Shean Valley (Site 2), the desert fringes (Site 60), the eastern part of
Wadi Ahmar (Site 76), and the western part of Wadi Fazael (Site 85).
Burial and Cult

Changes in burial and cultic practices were identified for the first time
during this period, as opposed to Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic.11
In all phases of the period burials were typically inside the settlements.
The burials were mainly near dwellings, or below floors, and were of
adults, and particularly children (e.g. at Gilat, Shiqmim, Tel Tsaf, and
Teleilat Ghassul – personal communications from David Ilan, Yorke
Rowan and Yossi Garfinkel, Mallon et al. 1934 respectively).
Large cemeteries were established for the first time in the Chalco-
lithic near a small number of the settlements (Adamiya near Teleilat
Ghassul and Mezad Aluf near Shiqmim – Stekelis 1935; Levy and Alon
1982 respectively), but the common phenomenon is regional: inter-
ment in ossuaries inside natural caves (especially on the coastal plain, in
the Negev, the Shephelah, Judean Desert and Galilee. Recently, for ex-
ample, caves were published at Kissufim and Shoham (North) – Goren
and Fabian 2002; van den Brink and Gophna 2005 respectively, and in
the Upper Galilee – Peqi'in Cave – Gal et al. 1997). The architecture of
the burial unit varied, and interments in rectangular cells, stone circles,
dolmens and built structures started to appear.
From a cultic perspective, specific types of buildings stand out –
temples built inside settlements (e.g. at Teleilat Ghassul – Bourke 2001,
2002; Seaton 2008; and Gilat – Levy 2006) and in open regions ('En
Gedi – Ussishkin 1980), and there is also the appearance of accessories
in conjunction with ritual practices (such as violin-shaped figurines,
common mainly in the south of the country, particularly in early as-
semblages in the Chalcolithic; and the anthropomorphic basalt pillar
figurines from the Golan, which were probably used in worship).
No evidence of any of these has been discovered in the finds of sur-
11
It should be borne in mind that we know very little about the funerary and cultic
practices in the earlier phases of the Chalcolithic, and the picture will probably change
with advances in research.
veys and excavations in the study region. Despite the systematic and
methodical survey done on foot in every area, no open burial sites like
those in Adamiya and Mezad Aluf were identified.
The large cemeteries discovered in Wadi Qa'un and in Wadi Far'ah
only contained finds from the EB I and later. In the few caves with finds
from the Chalcolithic (e.g. the cave in Wadi Baker 1 – Site 104, Peleg
and Hameiri 2002, and in Zbeidat Cave – Site 52 near Argaman) no
burial remains were discovered. Nor were any cultic buildings or figu-
rines found in the excavations that the author and others conducted in
Chalcolithic sites.
The only such finds are the two burials of an infant and foetus below
the floors of the Chalcolithic building excavated by the author at Fazael
2 (Chapter 10). In addition to enriching this type of funerary corpus,
we can reconstruct some of the unknown parts of the burial process.12
This was the first time that finds were analysed using computed tomog-
raphy technology (CT), which avoided the need of actually excavating
the jar and its contents. The data concerning the preparation of the
burial process are:
– The two burials were primary.
– Both were deliberately placed beneath the floors of the building.
– Both were placed exactly in the corners of the building (Figs
5.6–5.7).13
– The burial jar was in secondary use, and dedicated-type contain-
ers such as ossuaries were not used.
– The jar rim was intentionally broken so that the vessel would be
stable when buried upside down in the ground (Fig. 5.8).
– The base of the jar was also deliberately broken to allow the inser-
tion of the infant into the burial container (Fig. 5.9).
– The mouth of the vessel was sealed with a clay stopper. This is the
only evidence of the use of clay as a stopper in jar burials (Fig.
5.10, upper right picture).
– The infant in the burial vessel was placed in a foetal position, rest-
ing on the stopper and the sides of the jar (Fig. 5.10, lower right
picture).
– No funerary offerings were detected in the CT imaging, apart
from a copper object less than 1 cm diameter (a bead?) on the
infant’s skull.
12
For a detailed analysis of this burial see Eshed and Bar 2012.
13
The other two corners of the room were destroyed, and it was impossible to as-
certain if there were also burials beneath the floor there.
68 chapter five
Figure 5.6. Plan of Fazael 2. The burials were located in the northern
corners of the southern room (Loci 42, 75).
Figure 5.7. Infant burial. Note the location in the corner

below the first stone course of the wall.
Figure 5.8. CT of the burial jar. Note the deliberate

retouching of the rim in order to maintain stability
when the jar is buried upside down.
Figure 5.9. CT of the burial jar. Note the deliberate

retouching of the jar’s base rim in order to facilitate
inserting the infant.
70 chapter five
Figure 5.10. CT of the burial jar. Note the stopper made of light-coloured clay
on which the infant was placed.
– An upper lid for the burial vessel was prepared from the base of
another jar. The lid was retouched so that it fitted exactly when
placed on the two ledge handles of the burial jar (Fig. 5.11).
– The burial vessel was found filled with soil. It is still unclear if this
was intentional fill or if soil slowly penetrated through the cracks
in the jar from the time of the burial until it was exposed.
– At the time of burial stones and potsherds were intentionally
placed beneath the bottom of the jar (where the rim was origi-
nally) so as to stabilize it in the ground (Fig. 5.12).
– It is impossible to determine whether the jar was buried when the
building was constructed (a foundation offering?), or during its
use.
Figure 5.11. Jar burial. The lid and the jar as found at
the time of the excavation. Note the location of the lid
on the ledge handles.
Figure 5.12. Jar burial. Note the potsherds and stones

supporting the jar and maintaining its stability.
72 chapter five
Although we are still in the initial stages of the research we can identify
several interesting characteristics:
– The burial was primary, unlike burials in caves and ossuaries,
which were always secondary.
– The burial was not in a container specifically designed for this
purpose, or was without a container at all (as opposed to the os-
suaries and burial jars in which adults were interred).
– Although the container was not specifically made for burial, it is
obvious that it was carefully prepared for use as a burial vessel,
especially the retouching of the rim and the upper lid.
– Great care is evident in the manner in which the container was
placed in the ground.
– The vessel was intentionally placed upside-down (perhaps sym-
bolizing the connection to the earth or an image of a foetus in its
mother’s womb before birth).
– The vessel was sealed with a stopper to prevent its contents from
leaking.
– The vessel was carefully positioned by arranging stones and pot-
sherds around the rim and shoulder.
– The location of the burial is not random, but planned – precisely
in the corners of the building.
Other Types of Sites

Other types of sites are cave sites and work sites.
Cave sites
In the Chalcolithic period caves were commonly used for a variety of
purposes such as dwelling (e.g. Umm Qatafa and Umm Qala'a in the
Judean Desert – Perrot 1992), burial (e.g. Peqi'in Cave in the Galilee
– Gal et al. 1997), or for concealment (e.g. in the Judean Desert, the
southern Jordan Valley – Davidovich 2008).
In the vicinity of Jericho, in the south of the study region, a number
of caves used in the Chalcolithic were discovered (e.g. Cave V49 –
Eisenberg 2002; Katef Yericho Cave – Patrich 1993; Upper Wadi el-
Makkuk Caves – Hirschfeld and Riklin 2002). Unlike the widespread
use of the caves in a number of regions in the southern Levant, only
one cave was found in the study region (Zbeidat – Site 52) that was used
in the Chalcolithic period, and it also has just a low-medium level of
probability. No Chalcolithic finds were discovered in a number of caves
recently excavated in Wadi 'Aujjeh by Yuval Peleg of the Archaeological

Staff Officer of Judea and Samaria (Peleg, personal communication). It
should be emphasized that most of the surveys undertaken in the study
region did not go into any caves that were difficult to reach (with the
exception of a dedicated cave survey conducted in the southern part of
the study region by Barshad and Shaked, and there too, no Chalcolithic
finds were discovered – Barshad and Shaked 2002). If the exploitation
of caves was an accepted factor in the Chalcolithic it is likely that other
caves would have been discovered in the surveys. Hence it appears that
the inhabitants of the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria
did not use caves.
Work Sites
These are defined according to the activity associated with a particular
kind of work performed in them (e.g. workshop, quarry, agriculture,
etc). In the Chalcolithic period such sites were located at 'Iraq Hamam
(lower) (Site 9), which was probably used for processing wood, and
'Iraq e-Hamrah (Site 44), where flint tools probably used by a farming
community were discovered. Another work region was identified in a
field near Tell ed-Deir (Site 12), where concentrations of flint tools were
found, indicative of (agricultural?) activity conducted there.
Remarks Concerning the Dwelling Unit

in the Chalcolithic
The excavations at 'Ein Hilu, Yitav and the Fazael sites and the sur-
vey data from other sites in the Fazael region provide insights into the
dwelling unit (a general study of the subject was published by Porath
[1992], and regional studies were published by others such as Epstein
[1998]). A detailed summary of the subject was recently published by
Banning (2011).
The plan, dimensions, construction style, and content of the basic
dwelling unit reflect the society and economy of the population. This
chapter deals with the area, plan and architecture of the units that were
excavated and surveyed in the study region.
The data were derived from the following sites: 'Ein Hilu, Fazael 2,
Porath and Peleg’s excavations at Fazael (Sites 90–91), Fazael 5 (Site 92),
Fazael 7 and Yitav (Site 110).
74 chapter five
The Dwelling Unit and its Architectural Characteristics

The basic dwelling unit of the period was a square or trapezoidal com-
plex consisting of two main elements:
One or more covered rooms – rectangular broad rooms, often with
smaller cells next to them. The broad rooms were 4–5 m wide and 5–15
m long. The adjacent cells are smaller, rectangular, and usually do not
exceed 10 m2 in area. The number of adjacent rooms varied between
one and three ('Ein Hilu, Area E). Sometimes the broad room was di-
vided into two units of similar size (Fazael 2), at least one of which
was roofed. The covered room was primarily used for sleeping, and
sometimes also for cooking (it is an effective means of heating the
house in the winter14). The adjacent cells, some of which were paved
with stone, were mainly used for storage. Especially noteworthy was a
covered room at Fazael 7 that was almost 8 m wide, about 14 m long,
and about 120 m2 in area (this is one of the largest roofed structures of
the Chalcolithic period found in the southern Levant).
One or more courtyards – most of the dwelling units have a large
square courtyard or group of courtyards adjacent to them (Fig. 5.13
and Table 5.1) 180–700 m2 in area (so far there is no explanation for the
extreme variation in the area of the courtyards). In all cases examined
the ratio between the dwelling unit and the courtyard was at least 1:
2.3, while the average was a ratio of 1: 3.3. Most of the daily house-
hold activity was conducted in this courtyard, and it seems that the
livestock also lived in it. Pavements, silos and hearths were discovered
in courtyards, and in most were found the household’s large storage
vessels (pithoi, kraters, and large jars) and vessels and implements used
to prepare food (holemouth jars and bowls).
Openings
The inside openings, when located, were always in the centre of the
large broad room of the dwelling unit, facing the courtyard or the outer
open space of the site. There was sometimes an opening in the centre
of the side of the courtyard opposite the entrance to the dwelling unit.
The socket stones were always located on the inside of the door, to the
right and left of the entrance, which indicates that the door opened
inward. The average width of the openings was 80 cm and they were
paved with stone.
In some of the sites (e.g. Fazael-Porath’s excavation) there was a step
14
Hearths were found in these units at Fazael 2.
descending from the opening to the lower level of the room/courtyard

because of differences in the elevation of the area outside the building.
Walls
There was, quite surprisingly, a fairly uniform standard for how the
walls were built. Most of the foundations that were excavated or sur-
veyed were built of two rows of medium-sized fieldstones with in-fill
consisting of smaller stones and mud. The walls ranged from 65 to 85
cm thick, which indicates that the building was probably just one storey
high. The thickness of the walls might have served as an effective insu-
lation against the effects of weather.
In rare instances there were thinner walls – almost always for in-
ternal partition, outside benches, or later phases and additions to the
initial construction phase.
These walls were usually built to a maximum height of three courses,
and the construction above them was completed with mud bricks. The
large building at Fazael 7 is unique in the characteristics of its walls:
their thickness ranged between 80 and 100 cm, and their height sur-
vived to 1 m, indicating that most of the structure was built of stones
and not of mud bricks. The thickness of the walls supports the possibil-
ity of an upper story in this building.
Floors
The level of the floors, which were made of tamped earth, sometimes
combined with crushed chalk, was always below the level of the mud
bricks (usually at top of the first stone course). It is important to note
that stone construction was characteristic of those parts of the Jordan
Valley near the hill slopes. In the regions near the River Jordan and
far from the raw material – the stone – the construction was almost
entirely of mud brick (e.g. Tel Tsaf, which is located near the Jordan –
Garfinkel et al. 2007). In some regions stone pavements were evidently
used as storage surfaces (these appeared mostly in the small cells adja-
cent to the broad houses, or in certain parts of the courtyard that were
probably work or food processing surfaces).
Roofs
It is obvious that at least some of the dwelling units in the excavated
buildings had roofs. Nevertheless, no remains of the organic mate-
rial used as roofing were found, and apart from one stone base ('Ein
Hilu, Area E) and the wall construction at Fazael 7, no architectural
76 chapter five
remains of roof supports were discovered. The fact that the width of
the rectangular residential rooms was almost uniform (4.0–4.5 m) may
suggest roofing beams made of organic material (presumably wood)
cut to a specific length.15 This is not the case for the large building at
Fazael 7, where a very wide room, almost 8 m wide, was excavated. The
room had an inner partition formed by two walls crossing to make four
smaller broad rooms (Chapter 11). These inner walls were a unique
method of roofing this wide structure, discovered for the first time in
the Chalcolithic period.
Area of the Dwelling Units

Ethnographic studies have shown a direct link between the area of
the dwelling unit and the status and wealth of its owners (the larger
the unit, the higher was the owner’s status, and the more assets he had
– Ilan 2001), but this is more suited to instances investigating urban
populations affected by the absence of available area in a limited space.
Another factor is the size and structure of the owner’s family. Table 5.1
shows some of the areas of the dwelling units excavated and surveyed
in the framework of the study.
Area of
Area of
Unit roofed Total area
Site courtyards
structures
m2 m2 m2
E 92 ? ?
'Ein Hilu
B 70 ? ?
Fazael (Porath) 70 180 250
Fazael 2 90 620 710
Fazael (Peleg) 60 ?
Unit 3 100 320 420
Fazael 5
Unit 4 165 700 865
Fazael 7 120 1100 1220
Yitav 110 430 540
Table 5.1. Area of the dwelling units from the Chalcolithic period
in the study region.
Table 5.1 shows the large variation in the area of the dwelling units.
15
See an analysis of similarly sized units from the EB I at 'En Shadud and Yiftah'el
(Braun 1985; 1997).
The areas of the rooms with roofs can be divided into two groups, one
of 60–100 m2, and the other of about 160 m2. Both groups were subdi-
vided into secondary rooms. The data of the dimensions of the covered
rooms in the large group were taken from survey plans, and not from
an excavation, and therefore there were probably inaccuracies in de-
fining the area. The dwelling units indicate that the typical complex
probably included one nuclear family.16
The area of the courtyard varied greatly, between 180 and 700 m2.
The considerable difference in the area of the courtyards (even at the
same site, assuming that all of the Fazael sites were probably one large
site) is indicative of home owners with greater means, or who had a
social or economic position that necessitated the use of a larger area.
Comparing the data from this study with that of EB II Arad (Ilan
2001) reveals a significant difference in the size of the dwelling com-
plexes: the average area of the dwelling complex at Arad was about 84
m2, as opposed to more than 520 m2 in this study. The dwelling units at
Arad were also smaller, averaging about 27 m2, compared to about 100
m2 in this study, and similar differences also existed in the area of the
courtyard. It seems that these differences were so large because of the
different nature of the sites – a dense, fortified settlement of the EB II,
as opposed to a spread out, rural settlement of the Chalcolithic period.
Another comparison was made between the Chalcolithic dwelling
units of the Fazael sites and Teleilat Ghassul, and those of the EB I at
Sheikh Diab 2 (Table 5.2). The comparison is more relevant because
in the case of the Fazael and Sheikh Diab 2 sites we are dealing with
the same area (the Fazael Valley – less than 1 km apart), and because
of their similar economies (a sedentary population mainly engaged in
grazing and farming).
The comparison shows a striking difference between the sites, both
within the Chalcolithic period, and between that period and the EB I.
The comparison between the sites at Fatael and 'Ein Hilu and the site
at Teleilat Ghassul reveal the following facts:
1. In both instances the excavators (this study; Bourke 2001) claim
they are dealing with a unit belonging to a nuclear family. In the
cases of Fazael and Teleilat Ghassul the site was situated in a simi-
lar ecosystem (arable land, sources of water, etc.).
2. The dwelling unit area in the study sites (Fazael and 'Ein Hilu)
was substantially larger (at least twice as large) than a similar unit
16
For the purpose of this study a nuclear family is defined as three generations with
direct blood relations.
78 chapter five
'Ein Hilu Fazael site Fazael site Teleilat Teleilat Sheikh

excavations excavations Ghassul Ghassul Diab 2
and Area H
surveys
m2 m2 m2 m2 m2 m2
Average
80 107 80 25 35 18
room area
Average
courtyard ? 400 700 50 91 165
area
Total area ? 507 780 75 126 183
Table 5.2. Comparison of the dwelling unit areas of the Chalcolithic sites at
'Ein Hilu, Fazael 2, and Teleilat Ghassul, and the EB I site at Sheikh Diab 2.
at Teleilat Ghassul.
3. The area of the courtyards in the study sites was considerably
larger than in similar units at Teleilat Ghassul.
4. The overall area of the dwelling units at Fazael was at least twice as
large (and as much as seven times) as the parallel units at Teleilat
Ghassul.
Here we should check a number of assumptions and basic questions:
– Were the sites of a similar nature (the same type of site)?
– Did the sites have similar economies?
– Did the residents have a similar social status?
We can suggest the following answers:
1. Different types of sites – Teleilat Ghassul was crowded and large,
'Ein Hilu was crowded and small, and Fazael was dispersed and
large. This is of great significance at a time when there was no
proper settlement planning. A large site like Teleilat Ghassul (a
regional centre?), which attracted many residents, grew in an un-
restrained manner, and the areas of the dwelling complexes in it
were relatively small and lost some of their flexibility for change.
On the other hand an extensive site like Fazael, which had ample
land reserves and a slow rate of growth, provided sufficient area
for the construction of larger residential complexes (A modern
model of the same phenomenon is – construction in an urban
area = high density and costs that allow construction over a lim-
ited area; or construction in an open area/farmland = relatively
low density and costs that allow construction over a larger area).
2. The sites’ economies were dissimilar – it seems that the economy
at Fazael was primarily based on grazing and herds, together

with agriculture. At Teleilat Ghassul, where the courtyards were
significantly smaller and no compounds were found suitable for
herds, pastoralism was probably less important than agriculture.
3. Social status – Ilan (2001) contends that in the EB II the area of
a dwelling complex (especially the size of the courtyard) was in-
dicative of the residents’ relative wealth. This conclusion might be
correct when analyzing the spaces of a single site, or analyzing the
spaces of a number of sites that have identical features (particu-
larly size, economy and geo-ecological data). However, because of
the different natures of the sites, we cannot draw conclusions.
A comparison with the dwelling complex completely excavated at
Tel Te'o (Eisenberg 1989) in the Hula Valley presents another case in
which the area of the covered rooms was considerably larger than that
of the courtyards: the roofed rooms were 230 m2 and the courtyards
only 120 m2. This room to courtyard ratio was the opposite of that in
the settlements of the southern Jordan Valley. This might stem from the
significant difference in the climate of the two regions, and the greater
need of covered areas for storage, living space and animals in the north
of Israel. However, it should be remembered that in the case of Tel Te'o
only a single structure detached from its immediate surroundings was
excavated, and one cannot infer from it the existence of other similar
buildings at the site.
A comparison between the Fazael and Sheikh Diab sites reveals the
following facts:
1. In both cases we are apparently dealing with a nuclear family unit.
The sites were also located in an identical ecosystem (both are in
the Jordan Valley, about 1 km apart).
2. The dwelling unit area at the Fazael sites was significantly larger
(approximately four times as large) than a similar unit at Sheikh
Diab 2.
3. The average area of the courtyards at the Fazael sites was slightly
larger than similar units at Sheikh Diab 2.
4. So far silos have only been found at Sheikh Diab 2.
5. The overall area of the dwelling complexes at Fazael was larger
than that of their counterparts at Sheikh Diab 2.
Analysis of the above questions/assumptions gives the following
results:
1. The types of sites were quite similar, spread out in the same eco-
logical region and their economic was probably similar, and based
80 chapter five
'Ein Hilu B Fazael 7
3
1
'Ein Hilu E
Yitav
Fazael Porath
4 5
Fazael 5
6
0 10
m
Figure 5.13. Dwelling units from the Chalcolithic sites excavated and surveyed
in the framework of this study (1–2 – Bar et al. 2008; 3–6 – Manasseh Hill
Country Survey, not yet published; 4 – Porath 1985; 5 – Hizmi 2003).
on grazing and agriculture (see below).

2. The difference in the area of the dwelling units might indicate a
transfer of some of the daily activity from covered areas to open
areas. Ilan (2001) contended that some of the function of the
small rooms adjacent to the large rooms at the EB II sites might
have been for sheltering animals and storing food in the winter. If
this supposition is true then the absence of the adjacent rooms at
Sheikh Diab 2 may indicate a change in the subsistence economy
(beyond more intensive agriculture, see below), or a change in
how the animals were maintained and fed in the EB I.
3. The areas of the courtyards were similar (they were slightly larger
at Fazael). If the areas of the courtyards equate to economic wealth
(see above) this indicates that the assets of the nuclear family were
probably relatively similar in both periods.
4. The existence of silos at Sheikh Diab 2 constitutes further evi-
dence of a possible change in the economy, which relied more on
farming (but still included elements of pastoralism).
5. The overall area of the dwelling complexes (they were larger in
the Chalcolithic period), the size of the sites themselves, and their
topographical location, are all indicative of a significant change in
the transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I in this region.
In the Chalcolithic period the site was spread across the northern
bank of Wadi Fazael in the centre of its flood plain, whereas in the EB
I it was relocated onto a relatively narrow area above the wadi where
it enters the flood plain (the only EB I sites in the Fazael valley were
found there). Climatic changes (mainly the fear of flooding17) might
have caused the inhabitants of the site to abandon the plain and move
to higher ground, but most likely it was probable that more extensive
areas were available for cultivation along the stream. (A change in the
land usage – from a model of grazing combined with some grain farm-
ing, to grain farming combined with grazing sheep/goats).
This comparison shows the difference and similarity between two
sites in the same ecological region during successive periods. Identify-
ing the architectural changes allows us to assume that a certain change
in economic priorities occurred between the two periods, with the
emphasis on a transition from an economy that combined grazing and
growing crops to an economy based on growing crops, with grazing
constituting a secondary priority.
17
The subject of climate during the transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I is
controversial – Chapter 2.
82 chapter five
Areas of the Sites

Segmentation of the area of sites is very problematic (Chapter 4).
Therefore, for the purpose of this discussion we have only taken into
account those sites whose size can be reasonably estimated (architec-
tural preservation, conspicuous sherd scatters that can be delimited,
etc.). It is clear, however, that the estimate is only an approximation,
especially regarding the area of the sites scattered in Wadi Far'ah. The
conclusions drawn from the examination must therefore be seen in
light of the objective difficulties: of 40 sites with a medium or high level
of probability, the size of 33 sites was defined, and seven sites were de-
fined as immeasurable.
An examination of the areas of the sites revealed four main groups:18
Large sites, about 10 ha in area. Eight sites of this group were dis-
covered (24.5% of all measurable sites). This group comprises only the
large settlement sites that were mainly discovered in the Wadi Far'ah
flood plain (Sites 55–57, 62), but also in the southern Beth Shean Valley
(Site 15) and in the Wadi Fazael flood plain (Sites 88, 90, 93, which were
apparently one large site).
Medium sites, 1–3 ha in area. (most are closer to 2 ha in area). Nine
sites of this group were discovered (27% of the total). Only a medium
settlement site type appears in this group, which was discovered next to
all the wadis and large springs in the study region.
Small sites, 0.3–1 ha in area. Seven sites belonging to this group were
discovered in the study (21.5% of the total). They constitute a variety of
types, including mostly small settlement sites and open sites. These too
are located along the sides of the wadis and large springs.
Very small sites, up to 3,000 m2 in area. Nine such sites were discov-
ered (27% of the total), including mostly open sites (encampment sites),
but also work sites and single buildings. This type was discovered in all
of the regions, regardless of the water sources.
The main conclusions from this analysis are:
– There was no obvious hierarchy in the area of the different sites.
This is inconsistent with attempts to develop complex socio-set-
tlement models in the region.
– The sources of water and potential agricultural area were an
extremely important component in the size and location of the
18
From a statistical standpoint there is no significance to average or median be-
cause of the inaccuracy in measuring the area of the site. Therefore we relate only to
area groups for the discussion.
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
To Beth Shean
205 205
2 Na h
al Be
zeq
(Wa ash)
d i S h ub
8 4 67 W ab i s
200 9 5 10 ad i Y 200
Zebabdeh 11 12
15
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wad i Malih
o rdan
Tubas 19
20
190 190
23
in
ufr j
Wadi K
i
185 185
25
180
44 45 180
55
175
56 175
r qa
57 62
Ze
W
65
e z
ad
di
Wa
i
ar
F
'a
66
170
67 170
h
Majdal
Beni
Fadil
76
165
78 165
81
ael
87 91
Wa d i F
az 89 Wad
88
River J
i
92 90
A hm
160 ar 160
100
or
an d
155 155
109 110 'Aujjeh

150 108 113 114 150
Unknown size
h Up to 0.3 ha
jj e
'Au
Wa di 0.3-1 ha
1-3 ha
Larger than 10 ha
Nim r in
145 a di
WBoundary 145
of the study
Modern village
Road
0 5
km Jericho Wadi
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 5.14. Areas of the sites in the Chalcolithic period.

84 chapter five
larger sites – all the sizes are concentrated on the flood plains of
the major wadis and in the southern Beth Shean Valley, and the
medium sites are concentrated on the flood plains, or near the
major springs of the study region.
– The small sites are scattered in the area regardless of the sources
of water. This corroborates the hypothesis that they were probably
encampment sites.
– More than 90% of the Chalcolithic population inhabited large and
medium sites in the Jordan Valley, with no significant penetration
into the desert fringes and the higher regions of Samaria.
– In the Chalcolithic period the total built-up area of settlement
sites with a medium or higher level of probability was about 69 ha.
Proximity to Sources of Water

The proximity to sources of water is accepted as one of the main con-
siderations in settlement, and the purpose of the discussion is to check
the tendency of sites to be located near a source of water. The check was
made using GIS and a t-test (explanation in Chapter 4) applied to three
groups of sites: all types of sites with a medium or higher level of prob-
ability, settlement sites with a medium or higher significance level, and
open/encampment sites with a medium or higher significance level.
A test of all types of sites with a medium or higher level of probabil-
ity revealed that there is a significant tendency for the sites to be near
sources of water (t-test at a significance level P = 0.02) when the average
distance from the site to the source of water is about 950 m.
In testing settlement sites with a medium or higher level of prob-
ability we found that the sites tend to be located near sources of water
in a significant manner (t-test at a significance level of P = 0.000076),
when the average distance from the site to the source of water is 520 m.
A test of the open/encampment sites with a medium or higher level
of probability found that the sites do not tend to be located near sources
of water in a significant manner, and the location was random (t-test at
a significance level of P = 0.242), when the average distance to a source
of water was 1,875 m.
From this standpoint we can significantly conclude that the settle-
ment sites in the Chalcolithic period tended to be established near
sources of water. On the other hand, the selection of the location of the
encampment sites was not dependent upon sources of water. The differ-
ence between the settlement sites and encampment sites demonstrates

that water was the major component of settlement considerations in
the Chalcolithic period in the region.
Spatial Distribution of Chalcolithic Sites

This section is divided into two parts:
The first is a statistical test that checks the tendency of the different
sites to gather into settlement groups (settlement clusters); the second
tries to explain why certain regions were inhabited, while others were
not.
A test of the index of dispersion (explanation in Chapter 4) of the
Chalcolithic sites with a medium or higher level of probability showed
a significant tendency to be located in groups (ID > 1, P < 0.001).
Hence, the spatial distribution was not random, but directed. This is
proof that the geographical selection was consciously based on specific
considerations, some of which can be proved – e.g. proximity to sources
of water, and some assumed – e.g. proximity to regions that favoured
agriculture and grazing.
Visual contact between settlement sites was also tested. 85.5% of
the settlements were in visual contact with at least one other site from
the Chalcolithic period. This figure also supports the tendency of the
settlements to group together.
The location of the sites in a region is built on two major geographi-
cal axes. There are three main units on the east-west axis: the Jordan
Valley, the desert fringes and the slopes of the Samarian hills. The fol-
lowing geographical units are on the north-south axis: the Beth Shean
Valley, Wadi Malih, the desert fringe of Samaria, Wadi Far'ah, Sartaba
ridge, Wadi Ahmar, Wadi Fazael, and Wadi 'Aujjeh.
We can identify differences between the three geographical strips on
the east-west axis:
– The eastern strip – the southern Jordan Valley – was settled in the
Chalcolithic, mainly in the flood plains of the large wadis. The
reasons for this are probably the availability of relatively numer-
ous sources of water and level ground suitable for agriculture.
– The centre strip – the desert fringe – was very sparsely populated
in the Chalcolithic period, when the most common type of settle-
ment was an encampment site. There were few sources of water
and little easily cultivated land in this strip. The desert fringes are
86 chapter five
suitable for grazing, and might have served as a transit route on

the way to the hill region.
– The western strip – the slopes of the Samarian hills – was very
sparsely populated in the Chalcolithic period – in the inner val-
leys of Samaria and beside springs.19 Extensive woodlands and
the remoteness from sources of water and arable regions did not
tempt potential inhabitants in the Chalcolithic period to settle in
the hills. Settlement in hills in the Chalcolithic period (despite
its small scale) might have been spurred on by growing olives,
which are suitable to the Mediterranean climate in this region of
the country. Studies conducted in Jordan (e.g. Lovell 2002; Lovell
et al. 2006), and the Golan Heights (Epstein 1993) present ad-
ditional examples where the settlement pattern was influenced by
agro-economic considerations connected to growing olives in the
hilly regions.
Differences between the geographical strips were also found on the
north-south axis:
– The southern Beth Shean Valley was very densely populated. The
region has a multitude of springs and great agricultural potential.
This strip does not end at Nahal Bezeq, but extends to regions
outside the study.
– Wadi Malih was very thinly populated, perhaps because the
brackish non-potable water in the wadi.
– The desert fringes of Samaria – between Wadi Malih and Wadi
Far'ah – were sparsely populated, mostly in a few encampment
sites. This is probably because of the distance to sources of water
and arable land.
– The eastern part of Wadi Far'ah was very densely populated. The
central part of the wadi (between Bab ed-Dayyq in the east and
Bab en-Naqeb in the west) was uninhabited, and its western part
(from Bab en-Naqeb west to Tell el Far'ah [North]) was very thinly
populated. This picture changed radically in the next period, the
EB I, when the western part of the wadi became the centre of
settlement of the entire region. It is difficult to understand at this
stage of the research why the settlement did not spread westward,
even though there were extensive sources of water and land in
the western part of the wadi. Firstly, the abundant land and water
resources in the eastern part of the wadi were probably sufficient
19
Gophna and Tzuk (2005) identified a similar phenomenon of isolated settlement
on a smaller scale near springs on the western slopes of the Samarian hills.
for its inhabitants, and there was no pressing urgency to expand

westward. Secondly, it seems that the central part of Wadi Far'ah
was not easily settled and cultivated. A look at the settlement map
of the region for all of the periods until the Ottoman period shows
that this section of the wadi was almost uninhabited, unlike the
eastern and western sections (Zertal 2005: Site maps). Because of
hydrological reasons, or other reasons that are still unclear, they
avoided settling in this segment, and only a great need to enlarge
the subsistence areas of the sites could have caused the inhabitants
to expand westward (a need that apparently did not exist in the
Chalcolithic period).
– The Sartaba ridge was uninhabited, primarily due to the difficult
topography and the absence of water resources and arable land.
– Wadi Ahmar and Wadi Fazael were densely populated in their
eastern parts, where there were many potential sources of water
and arable land. The western part of Wadi Fazael was uninhabited
(despite the Rashash springs that are located just a few kilometres
from the settlement cluster in the wadi). There were several sites
in the western part of Wadi Ahmar, in the region of Juraish. These
were an encampment site upstream, and settlement sites in the
upper part of the wadi beside the springs (perhaps for reasons
connected to growing olives).
– The desert fringe between Wadi Fazael and Wadi 'Aujjeh was very
thinly populated: only encampment sites, open sites and enclo-
sures suitable for grazing were found.
– Wadi 'Aujjeh was not as intensely settled as Wadis Fazael, Ahmar,
and Far'ah. There is no known satisfactory reason for this phe-
nomenon. The extensive alluvium in the wadi probably covered
the ancient settlement that was only partially identified in the sur-
veys. A number of earlier sites in the Chalcolithic sequence were
discovered in the region of Wadi 'Aujjeh, and for some reason the
settlement did not continue in the wadi with the same intensity in
later phases of the Chalcolithic period. It might be possible to tie
the decline in settlement in this wadi to the decline in the settle-
ment in the Jericho Valley, nearby to the south, in the Chalcolithic
period (where it is also unexplained).
The following are the main conclusions from the spatial analysis:
– The Chalcolithic sites tended to group in settlement clusters.
– Water and land were the main factors in selecting the settlement
sites in this period.
88 chapter five
– Three major settlement clusters were identified – the southern

Beth Shean Valley, Wadi Far'ah, and Wadi Fazael, and possibly a
smaller cluster in Wadi 'Aujjeh. In each of them (with the excep-
tion of Wadi 'Aujjeh) there was one site or a main block of sites
that was the focal point of the settlement cluster. Around it were
usually a number of smaller settlements, not more than 5 km dis-
tant. The distance between the settlement clusters ranged between
15 and 40 km. This seems to have been a settlement pattern with
extended family or tribal characteristics, where a familial entity
was concentrated in each cluster of sites. It can be assumed, but
not proven, that these clusters were linked by various ties (family,
trade, alliances, etc.).
– The many regions where the water and soil resources were not
exploited (e.g. certain sections in the southern Beth Shean Valley
– especially between Qa'un and Mehula and along Nahal Bezeq;
Wadi Malih; the central and western parts of Wadi Far'ah; Wadi
'Aujjeh between 'Aujjeh and 'Iraq el-Awarna), suggest that the
population in the Jordan Valley was not large, and did not exhaust
its potential for expanding by the end of the Chalcolithic.
Topography and Orientation of Chalcolithic Sites

The considerations of the topography and orientation of Chalcolithic
sites and the significance of the location were examined. Only the sites
with a medium or higher level of probability were analyzed, comparing
all of the sites with settlement sites. It is evident that topography and
orientation were taken into account in establishing sites in the Chalco-
lithic period.
Topography
An examination of the topographical location showed a clear prefer-
ence for two locations:
– Sites on the edge of a valley and slope: 36% of all the sites and 44%
of the settlement sites were located on the edge of a valley or on
slopes.
– Plateau sites: 33% of all the sites and 40% of the settlement sites
were located on flat ground. This type of topography is common
primarily in the level Beth Shean Valley and on the flood plains
of the major wadis.
Other sites located on spurs, hills, tells, or in ravines constituted 31%

of all the sites and 16% of the settlement sites.
In the large open valleys there was a clear preference for plateau sites,
usually near sources of water. On the other hand, the fringes of the
valley were preferred on the flood plains of smaller wadis and along
the wadis channel. Possible reasons for this might have been the need
to leave more area available for cultivation, and to be at a safe distance
from the wadi channel which was subject to flooding. In addition there
are the proximity to the slopes of the wadi where construction materi-
als were available, and building on a gentle slope which allowed natural
drainage and cleaning. There is a striking similarity between this loca-
tion and the locations of Bedouin tents in the Jordan Valley today.20
Orientation
An analysis of the orientation was only made when it was possible to
identify it clearly, and sites that were located on plateaus were not taken
into account for this test. An examination of the topographical orien-
tation showed a clear preference: 76% of all the sites and 88% of the
settlement sites faced south or east. These figures indicate a conscious
decision that was made at the time the site was being constructed. The
reasonable ecological reason for this stems from the movement of the
sun and its effect on plant life in a period that was probably wetter than
at present. In this region a southern orientation is hotter than a north-
ern one, as it receives more direct and uninterrupted sunshine, and the
vegetation in it is sparser. The people who established the sites in the
Chalcolithic period preferred to keep the areas with a northern orienta-
tion free for agriculture (grazing or crops).
Single Periods versus Continuity in

Chalcolithic Sites
This section examines the degree of continuity between the sites of the
Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic sequence (Bar and Rosenberg 2011)
and the Chalcolithic sites and those of the EB I.21
For the first time five early sites in the Chalcolithic sequence (Sites
20
Personal observation of the author.
21
Continuity is the existence of the two periods at a specific site. Without exca-
vating it is impossible to prove there was absolute succession between the different
periods.
90 chapter five
67, 86, 108–109, and 113) were identified during the course of the work
in the study region. In addition to these are four sites of this type from
previous studies: Tel Tsaf22 and Al-Mas'udi 2, ascribed to the Wadi
Rabah phase (Zertal 2008), the Bezeq Channel (Site 6) and Tell Far'ah
(North), which according to the ceramic description (Miroschedji 1993)
can be ascribed to the Early Chalcolithic (or Pottery Neolithic – Wadi
Rabah). There are probably other early sites in the study area that will
be discovered from amongst the sites that have a relatively low level of
probability. Without excavations this hypothesis cannot be confirmed.
Of these ten early sites, seven also existed in the subsequent period.
Most of the sites – 27 in number (79.5%) – were established in the Chal-
colithic. Hence it is clear that in the Chalcolithic there was an increase
in settlement compared with the previous period.
Of the Chalcolithic sites with a medium or higher level of probabil-
ity, only seven (20.5%) existed with a medium or higher level of prob-
ability in the EB I.23
It is difficult to subdivide the EB I just by means of a survey, and the
number is probably lower. This is in cases where the transition was not
continuous, but passed for example from some phase in the Chalco-
lithic to the late EB I. This phenomenon apparently occurred at 'Ain
'Aujjeh – Site 108, and was common at many sites, such as Tell Far'ah
(North) (Miroschedji 1993), Tell es-Shuna (North) (Gustavson-Gauba
1987), and in Hittin on the edge of the Arbel Valley (Getzov 2007).
Thirteen of the Chalcolithic sites with a medium or higher level
of probability are single-period sites. To further emphasize the point,
no sites were found in the study where there is stratigraphic proof of
settlement continuity between the early phases of the Chalcolithic, or
between the Chalcolithic and the EB I. One of the big disadvantages of
the archaeological survey is reflected here – a fairly low resolution in its
ability for precise chronological segmentation.
The Subsistence Economy in Chalcolithic Sites

A subsistence economy in a prehistoric period is studied from archaeo-
22
The recent work of Garfinkel at Tel Tsaf supports a later date for the site between
the wadi Rabah stage and the Ghassulian Chalcolithic (Garfinkels 'Middle Chalcolithic'
– Garfinkel 1999; Garfinkel et al. 2007).
23
Similar figures where noted by Esse (1991) and Joffe (1993) in their work on the
evolution of social complexity in the EBA of the southern Levant.
logical research data (primarily excavations24), together with geograph-

ical information of different kinds (soil, climate, etc.), derived from
indirect studies. Most of the data in this chapter were collected from
excavations performed within the framework of our study, together
with geographical data, relevant survey data from single period sites,
and a comparison with Jordan.
Generally speaking, it seems that the economy of the period was
based on a combination of agriculture and grazing.
Grazing and Livestock

Grazing was of considerable importance, as 68% of all the faunal as-
semblage were goats and sheep - Capra/Ovis (Chapter 2).The flint arti-
facts were relatively abundant, with tools suitable for processing animal
products (mainly scrapers and cutting tools). To this day pastoralism
plays a major role in the subsistence economy of the inhabitants of the
region. Uncertainty regarding the climate in the Chalcolithic (Chapter
2), does not contradict this conclusion, because even if the climate had
been slightly wetter, it would still have been suitable for grazing. A pre-
liminary analysis of the ages of the animals shows they were used (at
least at the 'Ein Hilu site) as a source of milk and wool, and not meat (as
indicated by the high number of churns and spindle and loom weights).
Pigs (Sus domesticus) were raised for meat (4% of the assemblage), and
possibly also cattle (Bus Taurus, 6% of the assemblage), together with
older ewes which no longer produced milk. No equine pack animals
were found, and it seems that any movement between settlement re-
gions did not involve such animals.
No evidence was found of nomadic shepherds who roamed the re-
gion, despite the difficulty of identifying them amongst the archaeo-
logical finds,25 and it seems that the residents of the permanent sites
engaged in grazing as part of their subsistence economy.
Agricultural Crops
The sickle blades found in the excavated and surveyed sites are indica-
tive of grain farming. Evidence supporting this is the tools that were
used for crushing and grinding in processing food. Cattle were prob-
24
The use of data from surveys is fairly problematic because of the difficulty in
ascribing surface finds to a specific period with the proper probability.
25
As opposed to Levy (1995), who claimed that the sherd scatters in the Jordan
Valley are evidence of shepherd camps.
92 chapter five
ably used as work animals (Grigson 1995a), as the bull figurine carry-
ing a churn from 'En Gedi seems to suggest (Ussishkin 1980). The com-
mon grain and legume crops26 were: wheat (Triticum spp, 2 and 6 rows),
English wheat (emmer - Triticum dicoccum), legumes (lentils - Lens
culinaris), peas (Pisum sativum), beans (Phaseolus Vulgaris), chickpea
(Cicer arietinum), vetch (Vicia ervilia), onion (Allium cepa), garlic (Al-
lium sativum), pistachio (Pistacia vera), and barley (Hordeum vulgare).
The only fruit tree identified was the olive (Olea europaea, at the same
time also in the Golan and Jordan – Epstein 1993; Lovell 2002). Date
palm (Phoenix dactylifera) and almond (Prunus dulcis) were found, but
it is unclear if they were planted or were collected at random.
It is not known if irrigated farming was practised in the region, but
the perennial streams suggest such a possibility.
The most common wild tree was the tamarisk (Tamarix, according
to a botanical analysis of finds from Fazael 2), probably mainly used as
fuel for heating and cooking (it was always found in hearths). The small
number of bifacial tools discovered in the excavated sites is surprising,
and the number of adzes increases towards the north and west. This
indicates that wood was processed mainly in the higher regions on the
Samarian slopes (e.g. at 'Iraq Hammam (lower) – Site 9), as well as else-
where in parts of the southern Beth Shean Valley, where the climate was
more favorable for the growth of trees.
Trade
Only scant evidence was found of items originating outside the study
region (e.g. the haematite mace head and pendant discovered at Fazael
2, or the shell from the Mediterranean Sea found at 'Ein Hilu). These
were probably brought in the framework of inter-regional trade. The
basalt tools from the two sites, which were brought as part of the in-
tra-regional trade, are additional evidence.27 These indicate there was
some sort of transfer of objects from remote regions to this region.
26
Based on the following reports: Fazael (Porath 1985), Teleilat Ghassul (Bourke
et al. 2000), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10), Nahal Qana (Liphschitz 2008), Cave of the Trea-
sure (Bar-Adon 1962), Tell Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1986), and Pella (Bourke
et al.1998).
27
Research (Philip and Williams-Thorpe 1993) conducted on the sources of basalt
from Chalcolithic sites in Jordan proved that the trade in basalt was a local-regional
phenomenon, and not interregional as researchers thought, regarding the basalt from
the Chalcolithic sites of the Negev (Rosen 1983). Basalt might have been brought to the
Jordan Valley sites from areas that are fairly close by – the wadis of eastern Samaria in
the study regions, or the wadis in Jordan close by to the east.
The meagre evidence seemingly diminishes the regional and inter-

regional trade in the Chalcolithic, but we can assume that it stems from
the small amount of archaeological research that has been done in the
region. Jordan and the Judean Desert show trade involving numerous
and diverse items (e.g. bowls from the Negev, 28 mace heads and shells
from Egypt, metal from the Caucasus, etc. – Conclusions in Bourke
2001), some which come from extremely remote regions. In addition,
the finds recently discovered at Tel Tsaf are indicative of vigorous trade
in a variety of raw materials and finished products already occurring
in the Middle Chalcolithic (Garfinkel et al. 2007). Hence, the Jordan
Valley was part of a network of inter-regional trade. It seems that this
network, which encompassed many regions in the southern Levant in
the Chalcolithic (Rosen S. A. 1986 and a recent summary by Rowan
and Golden - 2009), has not yet been manifested in the archaeological
finds in this region, even though we can reasonably assume that it also
had an effect on the western part of the Jordan Valley.
The Transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I

Transition times in pre- and proto-historic periods are a complex issue.
We will not deal here with terminology, methodology, or the identifica-
tion of the periods (there is brief discussion in Kerner 2008). Suffice it
to say that transition periods may have been of short duration (e.g. a
relatively rapid influx of foreign elements into a given area, such as oc-
curred for example in the transition from the EB III to the IB in Israel),
or protracted (e.g. major technological changes that take a very long
time to make inroads, such as the beginning of the use of pottery in
the transition from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic to the Pottery Neolithic).
Few comprehensive studies have been made of the transition be-
tween the periods that this research addresses (some of the important
researches were done by Hanbury-Tenison 1986; Esse 1991; and Joffe
1993). Until 20 years ago the transition from the Chalcolithic to the
EB I was thought to have been brief, that it occurred about 3200 BCE,
and was tied to Egyptian chronology (the transition between the Pre-
Dynastic period in Egypt to the First Dynasty – e.g. Levy 1986; Gonen
1989). This opinion was presented despite the absence of agreed-upon
radiometric dates from Chalcolithic settlement sites after the beginning
28
90% of the V-shaped bowls examined at Tell Abu Hamid came from the Negev
(Dollfus and Kafafi 2001).
94 chapter five
of the 4th millennium BCE. Studies over the past 20 years, especially in
the south of Israel (e.g. the Tell Halif terrace, Afridar G, the quarry at
Palmahim 3, Tel Erani, and other sites [Braun and Gophna 2004; Braun
2000; Alon and Yekutieli 1995; Yekutieli 2000; 2007, etc.]) bring the be-
ginning of the EB forward to at least the middle of the 4th millennium
BCE. This joins the end of the Chalcolithic settlement in the Jordan
Valley and Beer Sheva Valley in the first 200 years of the 4th millen-
nium BCE (Gilead 1994; 2007; Lovell 2002; Braun et al. 2013; and for
an opposing view, later dates from Shiqmim – Burton and Levy 2001).
Based on these studies, the Chalcolithic presumably ended at the
first quarter of the 4th millennium BCE, and the next period began to-
ward the middle of that millennium. The 200–300 year hiatus that was
created has been given several names: Joffe and Dessel (1995) ascribed
this period to the Chalcolithic and called it ‘Terminal Chalcolithic’, and
Braun (1989) did not attribute it to any period, and dubbed it a ‘Miss-
ing Link’. The Chalcolithic sites of the Golan, such as Rasm Harbush
(Carmi et al. 1995), were mostly ascribed to this period, and also Ash-
kelon Afridar, which the excavator considered to be an EB I site (Golani
2004, and an opposing view presented in Braun and Gophna 2004).
Other possible later sites in the same group are Shiqmim (despite the
disagreement about the interpretation of the radiometric dates) and
Hujeirat al-Ghiuzlan north of 'Aqaba (Kerner 2008). There are also
sites where there is possible continuity from the Chalcolithic to the EB
I without 14C dating (e.g. 'En Esur – Yannai 2006; Modi'in – van den
Brink 2011).
It has been postulated that the nature of the transition, especially
in the south, was sharp; that is, the Chalcolithic was abandoned, for
a variety of possible reasons, and (after a chronological break of un-
known duration) an entirely new population without any connection
to the Chalcolithic population entered the region (see the summary
of opinions in Hanbuty-Tenison 1986; Gonen 1989). Others have sug-
gested an overlap between the Chalcolithic and EB I (e.g. Miroschedji
1971; Helms 1992, summarized in the table in Yekutieli 2001).29 A more
moderate view was later proposed; which maintains there was some
continuity (particularly in pottery characteristics), combined with a
penetration of new elements into the region (e.g. Amiran 1985; Braun
1989; Joffe 1993; Kerner 1997).
29
This is mainly due to the erroneous attribution of grey burnished pottery to the
Chalcolithic period.
Both the periods were found in 20% of the sites in our region.30 How-
ever, in none of them is it possible to prove settlement succession, but
only that the sites were inhabited in the two periods. Most of these sites
are located in regions that have continual settlement potential, given
the proximity to abundant sources of water and arable land. The ce-
ramic finds from both of the periods (Conclusions in Chapter 8) show
that a number of types continued from the Chalcolithic to the EB I (EB
types: H1a, H2, B1, J2a, J4a, J4b), but there are also many new types.
In this study we propose a contribution that might reduce the gap in
our knowledge about the transition: The Fazael 2 site, which we exca-
vated (Chapter 10), is one of the latest Chalcolithic sites known today
in the Jordan Valley (radiometric dates place it in the first quarter of
the 4th millennium BCE), and it probably constitutes a possible initial
phase in the transition between the Chalcolithic and EB I. An impor-
tant attribute of the site – the Cananean blades – could be interpreted
as signifying the beginning of the ‘transition’, at a relatively early stage
of the 4th millennium BCE. The combination of the radiometric dates
and the flint artifacts denote Fazael 2 as a site at the end phase of the
Chalcolithic period, when a long transition between the Chalcolithic to
EB I might have begun.
30
In the northern valleys Joffe (1993) found there was continuity from the Chalco-
lithic to the EB I in an almost identical percentage of the sites (21%).
CHAPTER SIX
SETTLEMENT PATTERNS IN THE SOUTHERN JORDAN

VALLEY AND DESERT FRINGES OF SAMARIA
IN THE EARLY BRONZE I PERIOD
Eighty-two sites attributed to the EB I were discovered in the study area.

Forty-five of them, which were identified as having a medium or higher
level of probability, are discussed in this chapter (with the exception of
special cases so indicated).
Types of Sites
Seven types of sites from the EB I were discovered in the study area: un-
fortified, open, burial, enclosures, fortified, caves, and a unique cultic
site.
Of the total number of 82 sites, the most common (without taking
level of probability into account) is the unfortified site – 37 sites (45.5%),
which is divided into four secondary categories of area. There are also
27 open sites (33%), seven burial sites (9%), six enclosures (7%), two
fortified sites, two cave sites, and one cultic site.
Of the 45 sites with a medium or higher level of probability, the most
common type is the unfortified site, constituting 31 sites (69%). The
following types of sites discovered have a medium or higher level of
probability: seven burial sites (16%), four open sites (9%), two fortified
sites (4.5%), and one cultic site. All the cave and enclosure sites found
in the surveys have a less than medium level of probability.
Unfortified Sites
This is the most common type in the period.1 Four types of unfortified
settlements were identified: a large village with an area of about 10 ha,
with numerous buildings; a medium-sized village with an area of 1–3
ha; a very small village or extended household with an area up to 1 ha;
a single structure – a farmhouse or a house of a nuclear family (usually
1
This kind of settlement reached the height of its development throughout the
country in the EB I, except in the Hula Valley, but have hardly been investigated (Get-
zov et al. 2001: 39).
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period 97
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Medium-high probability site To Beth Shean

Less than medium probability site
205 Boundary of the study 205
Modern village
Road
Wadi 1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
ash)
(Wa
43 di Shu b
7 W ab i s
200
ad i Y 200
Zebabdeh 13 11
117 14
River J
Mehula 16
195
17
195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 21 190
22
in
ufr j
262724 25 Wadi K
i
185 185
29 28
30 32 31 34 35
41 33 40 36
3839 37
43
42 44
180 180
47
48
50
54 49 51 53 52
55
175
58 56 175
r qa
57
59
Ze
62 63
W
64 60
e
ad
di
65
Wa
i Fa
r'
a h
170
68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 73 72
75
165 77 78 165
74 80
82
96 azael 8584 8381
Wa di F 89 Wadi
94 95 92
River J
97 Ah
160 98 99
mar
160
or
103
an d
155
104 155
105
108 107106 'Aujjeh
150 111 150
h
jj e
'Au
Wa di
i Nim r in
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 6.1. Map of settlement in the EB I.

98 chapter six
not exceeding 3,000 m2 in area).

The limitations in estimating the areas of the sites made it difficult to
perform an analysis of the relative size and number of each type. Of the
sites with prominent remains, which are not covered with later strata,
the most common is the medium-sized unfortified site (13 sites). This
is followed by the small unfortified site (8 sites), and the large unforti-
fied site (4 sites).
The analysis does not take into account the sites at the base of the
tells (e.g. Tel Qa'un – Site 4) parts of which were probably unfortified.
The areas of the large settlement sites in Wadi Far'ah, which are pres-
ently covered with modern construction and agriculture (Sites 55 and
56), are difficult to estimate.
The following features characterize the large unfortified sites:
– Extensive area.
– Located where the slope of the wadi meets level ground, in order
to exploit the building stones scattered on the slope, to leave more
area on the wadi plains for farming, to be at a safe distance from
the river channel that is prone to flooding, and to take advantage
of gravity for the purpose of efficiently draining the site itself.
– Located near sources of water and large arable areas.
Four sites of this type 10 ha in area or more have been discovered,
and it seems that they were very large villages. These are all situated
in Wadi Far'ah (Shunet el-Masna'ah, Kaziyet el-Ratrut, Mantaket Wadi
Zeit, and Far'at ej-Jiftlik – Sites 55–57, 62), and none have been exca-
vated. Due to the coverage of modern construction, it is impossible to
make an in-depth examination of them, and the description of their
characteristics is only general.
The following features characterized the medium-sized unfortified
sites:
– Relatively dense construction.
– Located near sources of water.
– Typical topographical location – on a shoulder or spur above the
source of water.
– Construction of round courtyard houses.
Thirteen sites of this type, of area 1–3 ha, which fits the definition
of medium-sized villages, were discovered. They are distributed in all
the major wadis, except Wadi Malih and Nahal Bezeq, but are mainly
concentrated in the western parts of Wadi Far'ah and near the springs
in the desert fringes of Samaria. Two such sites were excavated (Sheikh
Diab 2 and Fazael 4 –Chapters 12 and 13).
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
To Beth Shean
205 205
4 1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
(Wa ash)
di Shu b
3
200
7 W
ad i Y
ab i s
200
13 11
Zebabdeh 14
River J
Mehula
195
17
195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 190
in
ufr j
24 25 Wadi K
i
185 26 27 185
29 28
32 34 35
30
41 33 40
3839 43
180
42 44 47
180
48
50 53 52
54 49 51
55
175 58 56 175
r qa
57
59
Ze
62 63
W
64 60
e
ad
di
iF
Wa
65 'a
ar
h
170 68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
7573 72
Fadil
165 77 78 165
82 84 81
96 azael 85 83
Wa d i F 89 Wadi
97 94 95 92
River J
Ah
160 98 mar
160
99
103
or
and
155 104 155
108 107 'Aujjeh

150 150
Unfortified settlement site
h Fortified site
ujj e
i 'A Open site
W ad
Enclosure
Caves
i Nim
Burial /dcultic r in
site
145 W a of the study
Boundary
145
Modern village
Road
0 5
km Jericho Wadi
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure. 6.2. Types of sites in the EB I.

100 chapter six
The characteristics of small unfortified sites are:

– Limited area.
– It seems that only two or three buildings were at the site.
– Located near a source of water.
– Usually very close to potential farmland.
– Irregular topography.
Eight small unfortified sites up to 1 ha in area were discovered, and
it seems that they were of extended households, or the dwelling units of
nuclear families. They are scattered irregularly in the Jordan Valley, and
none have been excavated.
on
Sup
port
ing
Wa
ll?
-162
-16 4
-16 6
-1 68
-1 7
-1
0
72
(OHFWULF3ROH
-17
-1 75
d
Roa
halt
(OHFWULF3ROH
Asp
Wadi
Rashash
Fazael 4
0 15
m
38
0
430
420
-6
-4
-2
12
0
2
10
4
8
410
Pit 400
390
Pit 0 50
0 10 380
m Cupmark m
'Ain 'Aujjeh 'Ain Mta'a

Figure 6.3. Plans of the medium-sized unfortified sites in the study area.
Fortified Settlements
In the past it was customary to associate the first appearance of forti-
fications in Canaan with the start of urbanization, a phenomenon that
was deemed a characteristic of the EB II (for example Amiran 1970,
Joffe 1993, Esse 1991). However, in recent decades, with the excavation
of fortified sites from the EB Ib, such as Tel Aphek (Kochavi 1975),
Tell es-Sa'idiyeh (Tubb, et al. 1997), Jericho (Parr 2000), Tell es-Sakan
(Miroschedji 2001), and Tell Abū al-Kharaz (Fischer 2006), this view
has changed, and today it seems that the beginning of fortifications and
the start of urbanization commenced earlier – in the EB Ib. To the sites
presented above we should also add others whose fortification is uncer-
tain, or the time of the fortification is in dispute. The sites attributed to
this type include Tel Erani (Kempinski and Gilead 1991), the Samarian
‘enclosures’ (Zertal 1993), Tell Esh-Shuna (North) (Baird and Philip
1994), Megiddo (Finkelstein et al. 2000), Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006),
and Tell el-Far'ah (North) (in the opinion of de Vaux, Hout and Amiran
on one hand, and of Miroschedji and Kempinski on the other – Ami-
ran 1970; de Vaux 1962; Hout 1967; Kempinski 1978, and Miroschedji
1989; 1993 respectively).
It is important to note that most of the ancient fortified sites are lo-
cated in the Jordan Valley, between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead
Sea. Albright (1926) was the first to notice this. He contended that the
peak period of settlement here was in the first half of the 3rd millen-
nium BCE, although most of the major settlements already existed
there earlier. Recently, this issue was addressed by Paz (2000; 2002),
who analyzed fortified sites of the EB Ib in Israel and Jordan, and by
Getzov et al. (2001), who investigated the pattern of urban settlement
throughout the entire period, and they are in agreement that this region
was the centre of the beginning of urbanization in the southern Levant.
Alternative views regarding the beginning of urbanization in the
southern Levant have appeared in the last few years (e.g. Chesson and
Philip 2003). These scholars see the fortifications that appeared in the
southern Levant at the beginning of the EB II not as a pure urbanism
model, but rather a more complex end of a continuum of village sites,
and that the separation between urban and rural communities had not
yet occurred (for a different view based on the same data, that sees the
EB II walled sites as cities, see Paz 2010). In accordance with some of
this new data I do not refer to the fortified sites that appear in the region
at the end of EB I as 'cities' and retain the term 'fortified settlements'.
102 chapter six
Two fortified sites in the study region deserve special discussion:

1. Tel Shalem (Site 7; Tzori 1962; Eisenberg 1996; Zertal 2005: site
18). This is a large site near the 'En Avraham spring, 2 km south of
Tirat Zvi. The site consists of two parts, one fortified and the other
open. The fortified portion extends across a presumed area of 4
ha, a small section of which was excavated by Eisenberg (1996).
Two parallel mud brick walls were found: a main wall (thickness
5 m), and two later additions to the original construction. The
excavator is of the opinion that the later additions were used as a
glacis. The total width of the fortification, including the open area
between the walls, reached 17 m. In the three settlement strata
excavated, most of the ceramic finds date to the end of the EB
Ib, and only a negligible number to the beginning of the EB II
(Eisenberg 1996: 8–20). The open site is situated south-west of the
fortified core, and is thought to cover an area of up to 12 ha.
As with Megiddo, Beth Yerah, and Jericho, the large site at Tel
Shalem probably served as a local regional centre. It seems that it
was abandoned at the beginning of the EB II and never resettled.
2. Er-Rjjum (Site 43; Porath 1968; Zertal 2008: site 187). This is a
fortified site that covers 3.4 ha, surveyed on the north bank of
Wadi Far'ah, on an isolated spur separated from its surroundings
by deep river channels. The place is surrounded by a wall about
3 m thick. A trench or deep moat was excavated in the north-
eastern part of the site, in the only easily accessible area. An en-
trance complex consisting of a gate and two towers was discov-
ered nearby. Around the wall are adjacent architectural remains.
There are heaps of building stones in the centre of the site that
apparently cover other buildings. The pottery includes carinated
bowls, holemouth and other jars, as well as Um Hammad ware, all
of which date to the EB Ib. A few sherds from the EB II were also
found, which indicates that the site continued to exist, and raises
reservations regarding the certainty with which the fortifications
are dated to the EB I (however, in view of the small amount of
pottery from the EB II, the likelihood that the fortification is from
this period is not high).
The size and characteristics of the site at er-Rjjum are similar
to those of other fortified sites that are also located in the re-
gion discussed here: el-Makhruq (EB II – Damti 1993), Khirbet
Juraish, Tell Za'anuni, and Khirbet Rahiyeh. The following is a
brief description of the last three sites where EB I artifacts were
discovered.
– Tell Za'anuni (Site 42; Zertal 2008: site 183). Tell Za'anuni is a
fortified mound on a high terrace on the Jebel Kebir ridge, south
of Wadi Far'ah. The site consists of an acropolis of area about 1.5
ha, and a lower build-up area of similar size. A wall with an aver-
age thickness of 3 m survived. The pottery collected includes Um
Hammad type holemouth jars, jars and kraters, hemispherical
bowls and body sherds with band slip painting – all dating to the
EB Ib. The pottery from the EB II indicates a continued presence
there, but without excavating the date of the fortifications remains
unknown.
– Khirbet Juraish (Site 64; Porath 1968; Finkelstein et al. 1997).
This is a fortified site covering an area of 2 ha on a high knoll
along the slope of a spur surrounded by precipitous wadis. Wadi
el-Mashkara, where there is a spring, runs east of the tel, which is
surrounded on the west and south by Wadi Juheir, where there is
also a spring –'Ain Juheir. At the top of the knoll is a large building
from which a wall descends along a steep slope and encloses the
entire eastern part of the site. The wall is about 4 m thick, and is
built of extremely large stones. The ceramic finds recovered from
the various surveys include holemouth jars, a krater with rope or-
namentation, and hemispherical bowls from the EB I. Most of the
finds actually date to the EB II; consequently it is less likely that
the site was fortified in the EB I.
– Khirbet Rahiyeh (Site 96; Finkelstein et al. 1997). This is a large
fortified site (about 5 ha) on a steep slope north of and above
Wadi Rashash. It is located about 1 km south of Duma, and 400 m
east of 'Ain Duma. On the upper part of the site are the remains
the surrounding wall that probably dates to the EB. It is about 5
m thick, and is built of boulders. The pottery finds include Um
Hammad type holemouth jars, jars, a krater, and body fragments
with rope ornamentation that date to the EB Ib. Most of the finds
at the site are ascribed to the EB II. However, it can be assumed
that the settlement was founded, and possibly also fortified, in the
latter part of the EB I.
These sites, together with the sites at Beth Yerah, Tell el Far'ah (North),
and Jericho, form a geographical sequence of fortified settlements
west of the River Jordan, between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea.
A similar phenomenon also exists east of the Jordan, where Abū al-
104 chapter six
Kharaz, Pella, and es-Sa'idiyeh are among the sites that are part of that
sequence. The phenomenon, both west and east of the River Jordan,
dates to the second part of the EB I, while during its first part the settle-
ment includes small open sites (for example Gophna 1995a).
The distribution of the fortified settlements and the presence of
open settlements around them implies the existence of at least a two-
tier hierarchy. The question of the positions of these fortified sites in
the settlement array awaits further research and excavations before
clearer views can be expressed. The available data enable us to make a
theoretical reconstruction of the possible borders between these units.
The analysis is based on the topography and diffusion of the sites.
The principal site in the southern Beth Shean Valley was Tel Shalem.
Its area probably extended from the River Jordan in the east to the Gil-
boa ridge in the west, and from ‘Peqaq ha-Shomron’ (the region where
the valley is exceptionally narrow west of the Jordan River, near the
Fass ej-Jamal ridge) in the south to an uncertain boundary in the north
(possibly the area of the site at Tel Beth Shean).
The main site in the middle part of Wadi Far'ah was er-Rjjum. Its
region was dictated by the topography – the River Jordan in the east,
‘Peqaq ha-Shomron’ in the north, and the Sartaba ridge with Wadi
Ahmar in the south. The western boundary lies between the areas of
er-Rjjum and Tell el-Far'ah (North). If both of them existed at the same
period it would mean that the area of Tell el-Far'ah (North) was quite
small, consisting only of a group of sites in the hill country of Samaria
(Zertal 1993) and some of those in the east of Wadi Far'ah. Therefore,
in the author’s opinion, there are two possibilities:
1. The two sites were not independent units; rather they were part
of the Wadi Far'ah settlement complex (the fortified site at Tell
Za'anuni may have been added to it). It is difficult to determine
which is the more important of the two sites, since their areas
are similar: er-Rjjum was not excavated, and the information we
possess about Tell el-Far'ah (North) is incomplete. In view of the
fact that the former was abandoned during the EB II, and Tell
el-Far'ah (North) became a principal city in the same period, the
latter was probably the more important of the two.
2. The two sites were not contemporary, and the fortified city at Tell
el-Far'ah (North) replaced er-Rjjum at the beginning of the EB II.
It should also be noted that the locations of the sites are different: er-
Rjjum controls the narrow defile of Wadi Far'ah, in passing from the
Tel Za'anuni er-Rjjum
er-Rjjum
Tel Shalem
Figure. 6.4. Plans and pictures of the fortified sites in the study area.
Tel Za'anuni and er-Rjjum, from Zertal (2008).
106 chapter six
centre of the valley, where there are few sites, to the densely populated
western part: Tell el-Far'ah (North) is located in the western part of the
wadi, at the end of the main settlement concentration. The location of
Tell el-Far'ah (North) may possibly indicate it was a link in the connec-
tion between the valley sites and the hill country sites.
The paucity of EB I sites in Wadi 'Aujjeh and the absence of Um
Hammad ware, which is the regional pottery characteristic of the EB Ib
in the Jordan Valley (Bar 2010; Chapter 8) and characterizes the Wadi
Far'ah sites, demonstrate that this stream may have been the boundary
between the Wadi Far'ah area and that of Jericho to its south.
In fact two groups of sites, whose locations were influenced by geo-
graphical conditions and economic considerations, were identified in
the study: the settlement centres in the Beth Shean valleys and in Wadi
Far'ah, and isolated sites in the Samarian foothills. Around each of the
fortified sites (a possible central settlement) were seven to 15 open sites
(secondary settlements), while some of the sites had an open settlement
adjacent to them (for example, at Tel Shalem; 'Ain Juraish – next to
Khirbet Juraish, at 'Ain Duma – next to Khirbet Rahiyeh, and also at
remote sites such as Megiddo). These may have become ‘lower cities’,
some of which were also fortified (e.g. Tell Za'anuni).
The social framework of these groups is not clear, and at this point
we should, in the author’s opinion, avoid defining the fortified sites as
‘cities’, and certainly not as ‘city states’, in agreement with Paz (2000),
who sees limited political units here, with just the beginning of bureau-
cratic mechanisms. This is in accordance with ideas expressed by other
scholars (e.g. Chesson and Philip 2003, Paz 2010).
Enclosures
The main characteristics of the enclosures are:2
– Located in regions far from settlement sites (average distance 2.85
km from a settlement site).
– Far from sources of water (average distance 2.1 km from a source
of water).
– Construction consists of a single course of large fieldstones (boul-
ders). This probably served as a foundation for plant material or
mud bricks that formed an enclosure wall.
2
These are very simple constructions, not to be confused with the EBA fortified
enclosures in the Golan (Paz 2002), Samaria (Zertal 1993) or other regions of the
southern Levant (Esse 1991: 158).
– 20–35 m diameter.
– Meagre amount of small finds.
– Topography – typically on a slope or on a low spur.
The enclosures are fairly common in the desert fringes, and studies
in our region and researchers (e.g. Spanier 1994a: note 2; Hirschfeld
1985: 111; Ben-Yosef 2007: chapter 6) ascribed to them the function of
animal pens. It was very difficult to date them in the eastern part of the
Jordan Valley (Papalas et al. 1997: 434), where researchers supposed
they belonged to the Chalcolithic-EB I chronological horizon, based on
the paucity of finds. A check of the survey finds in the region (Zertal
2005; 2008) has also showed that the dates are mainly based on non-
diagnostic body sherds.
Only six enclosures were found dating to the study periods in the Jor-
dan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria, all with a low-medium level of
probability.3 They are located in regions far from the settlement sites, in
the Masu'a Valley, Wadi Ahmar, and the Buqei'ah. The enclosures were
dated to the Chalcolithic by the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (Zertal
2005; 2008). They are included in this study even though no ascription
to the Chalcolithic was determined after they were revisited, and they
possibly also date to the EBA.
To clarify this issue it was decided to excavate a site with buildings
and courtyards similar to those of the region’s enclosures. This was
done in light of the lack of successfully dated isolated enclosures in
the areas of other excavations (Davidovich 2008). We decided to ex-
cavate the site at Elevation Point 167 (Zertal 2005: site 195) in Wadi
Ahmar, which includes courtyards and buildings. The courtyards at
the site are similar in shape to the isolated enclosures in our region
(e.g. the enclosures of Wadi Ahmar 3 and 'Urqan er-Rub, which are
located in the same wadi), and they are different from the courtyards
excavated by the author in the Chalcolithic and EB I settlement sites in
the same region. The excavation showed that this is a single-period site,
and the courtyards and buildings are part of the same functional unit.
The paucity of pottery and flint finds at the site was consistent with the
Chalcolithic/EB enclosures, and the only radiometric dating obtained
was a terminus ante quem of 2300 BCE. Hence, we were unsuccessful
in our attempt to establish a chronological link between the site and
the study period. Nevertheless, we substantiated the possibility that the
enclosures belonged to the EBA chronological horizon, and not to the
3
This region was not an outlying region during the periods the study addresses.
108 chapter six
Chalcolithic.
The excavations at Sheikh Diab 2 showed that the courtyards were
an integral part of the architecture in the EB I. Because of the impor-
tant role grazing played in the inhabitants’ economy, it seems that the
isolated enclosure, despite parallels to modern Bedouin life and the
population of the Jordan Valley in the Iron Age, was not a significant
component in the methods of ancient grazing. Like the situation in
the Chalcolithic, it seems that the nature of grazing in the region was
not one of long-term nomadism between distant regions; rather it was
done on a daily basis of going out from and returning to the dwell-
ing complexes.4 The movement of shepherds is also difficult to iden-
tify amongst the finds (e.g. caves instead of enclosures for corralling
the herds – this too has ethnographic parallels amongst the Bedouin
today5). Numerous studies, especially in the southern outlying regions
of Israel (detailed in Chapter 5), have tried to identify nomadism
amongst the archaeological finds, and dealt with models, mostly based
on ethnographic studies, in order to characterize the relations between
the nomadic and sedentary inhabitants in the periphery. All reached
the same conclusion regarding the difficulty in identifying nomadic
elements amongst the archaeological finds, and the distinction that the
relationship between nomad and sedentary was essentially the bound-
ary of the outlying region. The Jordan Valley, in the periods this study
deals with, was a centre and not a periphery,6 and only south of Jericho
did the area become an outlying region. This was also the situation in
regions in the southern part of Jordan (Henry 1992).
Open Sites
A total of 27 open sites that are ascribed to the period were found: only
four of these have a medium or higher level of probability. They are
4
An ethnographic parallel to this are the Bedouin living in the Dimona region,
who operate in a similar fashion (Eldar et al. 1992).
5
Today daily foraging is widely accepted among the Bedouin tribes of the Jordan
Valley (personal observation over the years), and during the hot months herds are often
seen taking shelter in the shade of natural caves. Long-term movement, due to seasonal
changes and the need to change grazing regions, exists year-round among some of
the residents. In these instances the Bedouin exchange one dwelling site with another
absolutely identical site on the Samarian slopes (They do not exchange dwellings in
enclosures or other alternatives: rather they migrate and build identical dwellings in
the new settlement region).
6
A similar picture emerges from analyses by Gilead (1992) in the Beer Sheva
Valley.
divided into two groups: sherd scatters and encampment sites. The for-
mer was defined in this study as a dispersion of finds in a small area,
with no architectural remains. In this study encampment sites are scat-
ters of sherds with some of the following characteristics: far from settle-
ment centres; located along possible transit routes; far from sources of
water; multi-period encampment sites, etc.
Characteristics of open sites:
– Usually located far from the major settlement clusters and from
easily cultivated regions.
– Located in regions that are hard to reach, usually on a spur, saddle
or slope above wadis.
– No architecture.
– Very small sites (averaging 1,700 m2 in area).
– Paucity of finds.
Most of the encampment sites were multi-period, and the sherd scat-
ters single-period.
Burial and Cult

Seven burial sites were identified (constituting 16% of the sites with a
medium or higher level of probability), and one that was probably used
for cultic purposes – el-Khellaiyel (Site 24). Burial sites are known to
exist in the southern Beth Shean Valley – Qa'un (Site 4), Wadi Far'ah –
Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh, el-Maqbarah, el-Maqaber, Aqrabaniyeh, and
Jelamet el-Ahmar (A) (Sites 26–29, and 38; Zertal 2008: sites 161–163),
and on the slopes of the Samarian hills – Tana Cave (Site 59).
The site of Aqrabaniyeh was excavated by A. Eitan, of the Archaeo-
logical Staff Office of the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria,
but the finds were not available for examination. The rest of the sites
had been extensively plundered, and the finds were collected from the
entrances to the tombs. Most of the burial caves could not be surveyed
due to the danger of collapse.7
The burial site at Qa'un was apparently used by the residents of Tel
Qa'un and Khirbat Qa'un in the EB I and later. No other burial sites
were found in the southern part of the Beth Shean Valley, and it was
probably a regional cemetery.
The burial sites in Wadi Far'ah are just part of very large burial com-
plexes on the southern slope of Jebel Tammun, and along the entire
7
Except the cemetery at Qa'un (Zertal 2005: figs 51–52), but the caves that were
drawn cannot be dated specifically to the EB I.
110 chapter six
length of the northern bank of the wadi (Sites 26–29). While revisiting
the region (2008) hundreds of newly plundered caves were noted along
the Jebel Tammun cliff between 'Ain Shibli and north-east to Aqrabani-
yeh.
The northern bank of Wadi Far'ah (more than 5 km wide between
'Ain Shibli and Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh8) was probably one of the larg-
est cemeteries in the southern Levant in the EB, as well as afterwards.9
Another burial complex was discovered in Wadi Far'ah at Jelamet el-
Ahmar (A) (Site 38; Zertal 2008; site 178). Apart from the many tombs,
a special processional route was discovered that was in all likelihood
connected to the burial complex. It is difficult to link the processional
route to the EB I tombs, because numerous tombs dating to the IB were
found at the site, and it is likely that the complex actually belongs to that
period. The possible connection between these burial complexes and
the site at el-Khellaiyel (below), which overlooks them from the top of
Jebel Tammun is interesting.
Another remarkable architectural complex that resembles the
circular-built burial complexes of Bab edh-Dhra' (Harrison 2001) was
discovered at 'Iraq el-Hamrah (Site 44; Zertal 2008: site 189), but after
re-examining the site it seems that it was used as a dwelling, and not
for burial.
A plundered burial cave from the EB I (Tana Cave – Site 59) was
discovered on the slopes of the Samarian hills, near the sites of 'Ain
et-Tahtah and 'Ain Mta'a (Sites 54 and 58). We do not know if this is an
isolated cave, or part of a more extensive burial complex that belonged
to the large settlement at 'Ain Mta'a.
The main characteristics of the burial sites are:
– Multi-chamber shaft tombs with a vertical entrance (similar to
the burial style of the EB I at the Jericho10 and Bab edh-Dhra' sites
(Harrison 2001).
– Most are located on a gentle slope.
– Special finds that are absent from the surveys of settlement sites.
For example, grey burnished bowls that were found in most of
the funerary assemblages and at only one settlement site; red
burnished or trefoil amphoriskoi with a tall handle rising above
8
To this we must add the cemeteries discovered in the region of Tell Far'ah (North)
that were also part of the large burial complexes in the wadi.
9
The burial complex extended as far as the region of Tell Far'ah (North), where
three large cemeteries spread out around the tell were identified (Miroschedji 1993).
10
Most of the tombs at Jericho had only one chamber (Harrison 2001).
Figure 6.5. The EB I site at el-Khellaiyel (Zertal 2008: site 148).

112 chapter six
the rim, which are present in most funerary assemblages, and are
rare at the other sites, etc. The absence of Um Hammad style pot-
tery from the funerary assemblages is surprising, since it was very
common at the settlement sites.
El-Khellaiyel (Site 24; Zertal 2008: site 148) is a rare example of a (prob-
able) cultic location, and possibly also for burial in the EB I. It is located
on a high peak, in the middle of the Jebel Tammun ridge, looking out
over the Wadi Far'ah valley and the settlement and burial complexes
there. At the site, which was mainly occupied in the EB I (but there
are also finds from the IB, MB IIb, and LB), is a prominent pyramid-
shaped hillock 6 m high and 25 m in diameter, above the cliff on the
southern slope of Jebel Tammun. Remains of ash and burnt bones were
identified on the hillock, which is a unique phenomenon not found
elsewhere in the southern Levant. Approximately 100 m west of the
hillock is a broad house (5 x 25 m) made of very large stones. The struc-
ture is probably related to the hillock located to the east, and is part of
the complex. The remote location, far from sources of water on one
hand, and the breathtaking view and ritual/funerary features on the
other, suggest that this is no ordinary settlement site, and it seems to
be a funerary structure, or of a cultic nature. The ceramic finds indicate
an EB I presence with a high level of probability, mainly because of the
decorated Um Hammad style ware dating from the later part of this
period.
The uniqueness of the site stems from its extraordinary architectural
characteristics, its location, and the presence of ashes and remains of
animal bones on the pyramidal hillock. Most of the finds from the EB
I were collected near the large building and the hillock; hence the con-
clusion that site was founded and used mainly in this period.
Remarks Concerning the EB I Dwelling Unit

(Conclusions Drawn from the Excavation
of Sheikh Diab 2)
In 2007–2008 an excavation was conducted at the site of Sheikh Diab 2,
where large parts of an EB I village were exposed (details and excava-
tion report in Chapter 12). The excavation uncovered extensive dwell-
ing complexes composed of courtyards with buildings inside them, the
scale and shape of which are unusual in this period. Therefore we can
present new data about the settlement planning, the architecture of
the dwelling complexes and their units, the economy, and society, etc.
(studies of the construction in general during this period were pub-
lished by Braun 1989 and Golani 1999, and a study of the EB II was
published by Ilan 2001).
Surprisingly enough in all of the ‘large and complex’ excavations that
were conducted on the tells in the region and its surroundings it was
difficult to put together an overall settlement picture, or even a whole
picture of a complete dwelling unit – as was the case at the excavations
of Bab edh-Dhra', Tell Far'ah (North), Tell Um Hammad, Tell esh-
Shuna (North), Tel Beth Yerah, etc.11
The settlement planning on the one hand, and the basic dwelling
unit: its design, size, construction style and contents on the other, re-
flect the society and economy of the indigenous population.
The Settlement Plan and its Architectural Characteristics

Sheikh Diab 2 is a medium-sized unfortified site covering an area of
about 1.5 ha, dating to the middle of the EB I. The site is located on
a spur that slopes southwards above the Wadi Fazael river channel.
Dwelling complexes separated by alleys and squares were built on the
spur. A model of an irregular enclosure-type construction was identi-
fied with family units, each consisting of a covered room/s and a wide
courtyard (Fig. 6.6 and details below). So far seven such compounds
have been identified, and it appears that the total number of units is be-
tween 10 and 12. The size and shape of the complexes vary: the smallest
is about 150 m2, and the largest is presently about 500 m2 (the full extent
of the latter has not been exposed).
The alleys separating the dwelling complexes are 1 to 2 m wide. A
main alley runs through the centre of the spur, and secondary alleys
branch off of it between the complexes. The floor of the alley is natural
permeable chalk bedrock, which is extremely efficient at draining rain-
water and sewage. A similar phenomenon of constructing enclosures
with squares and alleys between them dating to the EB Ib was discov-
ered in the salvage excavations of the Israel Antiquities Authority at
Ashkelon-Barnea (Stratum III – Golani 2008); however the settlement
discovered at Sheikh Diab 2 is complete and undisturbed.
11
Parts of a large building ascribed to the EB Ib were discovered in the excava-
tions of Hebrew University expedition at Beth Shean (Mazar and Rotem 2009). In this
instance it is probably not a regular residential complex, rather a commercial-industrial
complex; thus it is not relevant to this discussion.
114 chapter six
Plan of the Dwelling Unit and its Architectural Characteristics

The basic dwelling complex at the site is an irregular enclosure com-
prised of two main elements:
1. The covered room/s – the rooms are four-sided and have rounded
corners, which are typical of the EB Ib in the north, and earlier
phases of the EB in the Jordan Valley12 (e.g. Tell Um Hammad
in the EB Ia – Helms et al. 1992: figs. 38–39). In an earlier phase
there was an elongated, elliptical ‘sausage-shaped’ unit at the site,
as found at Yiftah'el (Braun 1997) and Tyre (Ben-Tor 1989). These
are mainly characteristic of the north of Israel in the EB Ia. The
rooms are 4 m wide and 5 m long. Unlike the Chalcolithic period,
no rooms were found adjacent to the central room, and no inter-
nal partition was noted inside the rooms. The room was probably
primarily used for sleeping, and occasionally for storage, while
most of the household activities were performed in the courtyard.
2. The courtyard – the average area of the courtyard at Sheikh Diab
2 is 165 m2, and it is an essential component of the dwelling
complex. In the one instance that was checked at Sheikh Diab 2
the size ratio between the dwelling unit and courtyard was 1:9,
a figure that underscores the centrality of the courtyard in the
household’s activity. Apart from these activities, it seems that the
livestock were also kept there. The courtyards, like the alleys, were
founded on the natural chalk bedrock. The silos and the house-
hold’s large pottery vessels (pithoi, kraters and jars), which were
used for storage, were located in them.
Walls of the Dwelling Unit and Courtyard

The construction of the walls at the site resembles that of the Chalco-
lithic sites in the region. They are built of two rows of medium-sized
fieldstones with smaller stone fill and mud between (the walls are
60–85 cm thick). The main difference between the two periods is the
preference of the EB inhabitants for curved rather than straight walls
(particularly the outer enclosure wall of the dwelling complexes). In the
complexes that have been exposed so far at this site most of the walls
are curved, yet in each external wall there is at least one right-angled
corner (Fig. 6.6). No construction reason was found for building such a
corner, and it is not due to topographical considerations.
12
Golani (1999) believes otherwise, and suggests that this style characterizes the
transition between the EB I and EB II.
The walls were preserved to a maximum height of seven stone

courses (more than 1 m), and it seems that they were built of stone to
their entire height. The thickness of the walls indicates that the building
was probably just one story high. Some of the wall foundation trenches
were hewn into the chalk bedrock.
Floors
The floors in the covered rooms were made of tamped earth, some-
times combined with crushed limestone. Some sections, which were
paved with stone, were apparently used as storage surfaces or for cook-
ing/working. There were no floors per se in the courtyard other than
the natural bedrock.
Roofs
The dwelling units were covered, but no organic material remains used
as a covering or means to support the roof were found. The uniform
width of the dwelling rooms (4 m) is intentional, and it was apparently
roofed with organic material, probably wood.
Area of the Dwelling Units

Ethnographic studies have shown a direct link between the area of the
dwelling unit and the status and wealth of its owners (the larger the
unit, the greater the owner’s status and the more assets he has; see evi-
dence in Ilan 2001).
Table 6.1 shows the areas of the EB I dwelling units in the study re-
gion and the immediate vicinity based on the author’s adaptation of the
following plans: Tell Far'ah (North) – de Vaux 1969; Tell Um Hammad
– Helms et al. 1992.
The areas of the dwelling units indicate that a typical complex in-
cluded a single nuclear family, and the excavation provides us with a
complete picture of the size of the dwelling complexes and the court-
yards. We might assume, based on the different areas of the courtyards,
that the owners of the larger courtyards had a larger family or more
property than others (or at least they fulfilled a social function that
necessitated the use of a greater area).
Comparing the data from Sheikh Diab 2 with that of EB II Arad (Ilan
2001: Table 6.2) reveals fundamental differences: the average area of the
dwelling complex at Arad is 84 m2, as opposed to more than 180 m2 at
Sheikh Diab 2. The area of the room at our site is smaller (averaging 15
m2), versus 27 m2 at Arad. These differences apparently stem from the
116 chapter six
different characteristics of the sites – a densely crowded fortified settle-

ment of the EB II, as opposed to an unfortified settlement of the EB I.
Comparing the Fazael sites of the Chalcolithic with Sheikh Diab 2
(Table 6.2) is more relevant because we are dealing with two settlements
in the same region (Fazael Valley – a distance of less than 1 km from
each other), with a similar economy (both had a sedentary population
mainly engaged in grazing and agriculture).
Comparison between Fazael and Sheikh Diab 2 reveals the following
facts:
1. In both instances this was probabbly unit for a nuclear family and
an identical ecosystem.
2. The dwelling unit at the Fazael sites was significantly larger (about
four times the area) of that at Sheikh Diab 2.
3. The average areas of courtyards were similar.
4. The overall area of the dwelling complexes at Fazael was greater
than its counterpart at Sheikh Diab 2.
The different areas of the dwelling units might possibly indicate a
Area of Area of
Total area
Site Unit rooms courtyards
m2
m2 m2
Sheikh Diab 2 G 12 130 142
Sheikh Diab 2 I ? 200
Tell Um-Hammad Phase 13/3 EB Ib 20 ?
Bronze Ancien I (the
Tell el-Far'ah (North) very beginning of EB 20 ?
II)
Table 6.1. The areas of the EB I and EB II dwelling units in the study region and
the immediate vicinity.
Fazael site excavations Sheikh Diab 2 Arad

m2 m2 m2
Average room area 80 18 27
Average courtyard area 700 165 57
Total area 780 183 84
Table 6.2. Comparison of the dwelling unit areas from the excavations of the
Chalcolithic site at Fazael, the EB I site at Sheikh Diab 2, and the EB II site at
Arad.
the adjoining rooms at Sheikh Diab 2 indicates some sort of change in
large rooms at the EB II sites were intended for maintaining and feed-
117
or a change in raising and feeding animals in the EB I. The areas of the

transfer of some of the household activity from the covered units to the
ing livestock in the winter. If this supposition is correct, then the lack of
open ones. Ilan (2001) argued that some of the small rooms near the
the subsistence economy (a transition to more agriculture, see below),
D E F G H I J K L M N O P
19 19
A
-133.41
# L309
W -133.76
L3
31 -133.81 COM 5
0
08
-134.55 -133.95
18 # 18
-134.66
settlement patterns in the early bronze i period
-135.53
L307
W
31
-135.04
1
-134.38
Figure 6.6. The dwelling complexes at Sheikh Diab 2.

COM 4
17 17
-135.19
-136.55
-137.20 -136.56 -135.47
W3
W300 -138.35
L322 01 L303
#
L318
-136.13
L302 -136.52 -136.06
L323
W31
-138.25 -137
16 -140.04
-138.64
.29
#
-136.68
-135.63 16
L325 -138.70 -137.13
-136.16
S lope
L305
6
-140.56 -141.03
-141.08 -136.83
W3
-137.16
L324 # -137.35
-137.83 L317 L319
-138.05 -136.60
-141.00 -138.00
L304
06
-136.73
-139.56 -138.00 -138.30 -137.25
-136.94
-136.75 Stone
ky
W326 -136.88
Slides
oc
W
W32
R
30
1
0
COM 3 COM 6
15 15
13
-137.34
-140.56 -139.04
W3
-139.95
-139.45
L314
L312 -137.86 -139.54
-140.11 -140.27 -139.00 -138.53 -137.90
-139.68
W -139.83
-139.93
32 -139.26
-140.69
0 -138.00
-140.29
14 L315 14
-139.14
-138.47
L149
B'
-141.63 -140.85
-139.90 -137.07 # -139.12
-140.75
-139.72 L130
#
-139.90 # L138 L144
-139.28
#
W
-139.55 -139.55
W146
-139.27 14
W128
-139.45
L171 -139.73 7
L127 L148 -138.96 COM 7
13 -139.25 -139.30 -139.75 13
0s
#
-140.08
12 L139
-139.35 -139.75
-140.34 -139.32
W
W L129 U11 L145
146n
# -140.25
-139.91 L157
-140.20 -140.14
W122 L137
L152
W120s
L101 L133
-140.27
L163 -140.50
-140.51 -140.56 #
-141.21
L153 L161 -141.76
L119
L172 -141.20
#
U12 L126 W170 -141.13
-140.28
12 L125 -141.23
-141.20 COM 1 -140.75 L169 L150 -140.74 12
W187
-140.75 -140.48
-141.25 -141.29
L103a -140.89 L140
-141.06 -140.45
W
L104 L118 L165
12 1
# -140.83 -141.10
U10 L136 -141.24 L168
L162
W159
L162#-141.92 L155
B
L107 L160 -141.68 L113 -141.20 -140.84
L115 W103 -141.49 L112
-141.18
-141.42
L156 L164
-141.80 # -141.22 #
L123 L141 -140.98 L166
8 0e L151
10
-140.97
12 -141.27
-141.18
11 W -141.25
L100 -141.26 -141.35 -141.22
-141.48
W 11
-141.27
L105 -141.25 -141.51 -141.11
-141.53 Unexcavated -141.87
-141.26
-141.87
2
13
-141.88
L106 L102 W L116
-141.57
-141.55
W L154
W
W110
#
1 L134
15
L117 20s
-141.77
-141.88 -142.32
8
-142.04
L131 -141.18 L33 -142.70
-141.83 Unexcavated
32 L37
Surface
-142.40
Unexcavated -141.83 -141.85 W Fossil L34
32 L135 L44
W1
-141.37
-142.54 -142.81
-141.62
-141.87
COM 2 W4 -142.49
5m
10 -142.10 -142.75
3 L41 -142.85 10
L143 L35
# L161 -142.85 L45
-142.44
-143.27
L40
W38
#
L142 L39 -142.44
-142.50 -142.09
-142.93
2
W4
9 9
0
A'
118 chapter six
courtyards at both sites were similar.

If there is a correlation between the area of the courtyards and eco-
nomic wealth (see above), the assets of the nuclear family were similar
in both of the periods.
The multitude of silos at Sheikh Diab 2 constitute corroborative
evidence of a transition to an economy with more field crops (that still
included elements of pastoralism).
The data from the excavated EB I site Fazael 4 (Chapter 13) support
both the assumption about the transition to a field crop economy, and
the uniqueness of the dwelling complex architecture. In this site, situ-
ated in the close vicinity of Sheikh Diab 2, remains of similar storage
installations and curved walls were found.
Areas of the Sites

A breakdown of the area of the sites is quite problematic. In process-
ing this, only those sites were taken into account where it is reasonably
possible to estimate their size (based on architectural preservation,
prominent sherd scatters that can be delimited, etc.). The estimate is
approximate, particularly at the large sites in Wadi Far'ah. The con-
clusions should be cautiously accepted, while bearing in mind the
objective difficulties. Of the 44 sites with a medium or higher level of
probability, we were able to define the area of 38 (Fig. 6.7), and six were
defined as immeasurable.
As in the Chalcolithic, four main area groups were found:
Large sites, averaging about 10 ha in area. Five sites of this group were
discovered (13% of all measurable sites). This contradicts Esse (1991),
who contended that there were few large settlements in this period.
This group includes large unfortified and fortified settlements. The
former are located in the Wadi Far'ah flood plain (Sites 55–57, and 62)
and the fortified settlement is in the southern Beth Shean Valley (Tel
Shalem – Site 7).
Medium sites, 1–3 ha in area. Fifteen sites of this group were identi-
fied, which constitute 39.5% of all the sites. These include medium-
sized unfortified sites (Sites 13–14, 30, 35, 51, 54, 65, 89, 94, 96–98, and
108), the fortified settlement at er-Rjjum (Site 43), and the cemetery at
Jelamet el-Ahmar (A) (Site 38).
Small sites, 0.3–1 ha in area. Eleven sites of this group were identi-
fied in the study (29% of all the sites). They vary in type, and mostly
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
To Beth Shean
205 205
1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
4 (Wa ash)
3 di Shu b
W ab i s
200
ad i Y 200
13 7
Zebabdeh 14
River J
Mehula
195
17
195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 190
in
ufr j
24 Wadi K
i
185 2627 185
29 28
32 34 35
30
41 33 40
43
38 39
180
42 180
48
51 55
54 49 56
175
58 175
r qa
57 62
Ze
59
z
64
W
e
di
ad
65
Wa
iF
ar
'a
h
170 170
Majdal
Beni
Fadil
165 77 165
96 za
Fa e l
Wa
di 89 Wadi
River J
97 94 95 92 Ah
mar
160 98 160
or
an d
155 155
108 'Aujjeh
107
150 Unknown size 150
h
Up to 0.3 ha
jj e
'Au 0.3-1 ha
Wa di
1-3 ha
Larger than 10 ha
Nim r in
145 adi
WBoundary of the study 145
Modern village
Road
0 5 Wadi
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 6.7. Areas of the sites in the EB I.

120 chapter six
comprise small unfortified sites, cemeteries and a cult site.

Very small sites, up to 3,000 m2 in area. Seven such sites were discov-
ered constituting 18.5% of all the sites. They vary in type, and include
mostly small unfortified sites, open sites and burial sites.
The main conclusions derived from this analysis are:
– There is no obvious hierarchy in the areas of the different sites.
– The sources of water and potential farmland are key components
in the size and location of the sites: the larger sites are located on
the wadi flood plains and in the southern Beth Shean Valley, and
the medium-sized sites are on the wadi flood plains, or near the
major springs.
– Even the smallest sites are located near sources of water, unlike in
the Chalcolithic (when the small sites were relatively far from the
sources of water).
– A settlement centre developed in Wadi Far'ah. In addition to the
large sites in the eastern part of the wadi, which were already in-
habited in the Chalcolithic, the settlement in the western part of
the wadi became more important. This phenomenon reached a
peak in the EB Ib, and is manifested in the distribution of Um
Hammad vessels (Chapter 8). More than half of the EB I sites were
discovered in this region.
– There was significant settlement development, and a new wave of
settlements appeared on the slopes of the Samarian hills, charac-
terized by large settlements located near springs. The reasons for
this were probably economic, such as the establishment of olive
groves and vineyards as important components in the agriculture
of the hill country.
– The northern wadis – Nahal Bezeq and Wadi Malih, with Wadi
'Aujjeh in the south – were very sparsely inhabited in this period,
and it seems that most of the population was concentrated in
Wadi Far'ah.
– The total built-up area of settlement sites with a medium or higher
level of probability in the EB I was 95.3 ha.
Proximity of EB I Sites to Sources of Water

The proximity to sources of water is one of the main considerations in
settlement, and our purpose here was to check the tendency of sites to
be located near a source of water. Two groups of sites were checked: all
the sites with a medium or higher level of probability, and unfortified

or fortified settlement sites with a medium or higher significance level,
using GIS and a t-test (explanation in Chapter 4).
All the sites with a medium or higher level of probability had a sig-
nificant tendency to be located near sources of water (t-test at a sig-
nificance level P = 0.0000001). The average distance from the site to a
source of water was about 400 m.
Settlement sites with a medium or higher significance level had a
significant tendency to be located near sources of water (t-test at a sig-
nificance level P = 0.000004). The average distance from the site to a
source of water was about 210 m.
Hence the conclusion is that all the EB I sites tended to be located
near sources of water.
Spatial Distribution of EB I Sites

The analysis comprises two parts: the first – a statistical test of the ten-
dency of the sites to group together in settlement clusters. The second
is a subjective analysis of the reasons for inhabiting specific regions as
opposed to others.
A test of the index of dispersion (explanation in Chapter 4) of sites
with a medium or higher level of probability shows a significant ten-
dency to be located in clusters (ID > 1, P < 0.001). Hence, the distribu-
tion is not random but intentional, and the population had a tendency
to cluster in groups. This demonstrates that the geographic selection
was made consciously, the result of a totality of considerations (some of
which can be proved – e.g. the proximity to sources of water, and some
assumed – e.g. the proximity to arable regions).
Visual contact between settlement sites was also tested: 89% of the
settlement sites were in visual contact with at least one other site of the
same period. This figure also confirms the tendency to group settle-
ments together.
The location of the sites reveals two prominent geographical axes –
one running in an east-west direction and the other in a north-south
direction:
The first consists of three main units: the Jordan Valley, the desert
fringes, and the slopes of the Samarian hills. The second comprises the
following geographical units: the Beth Shean Valley, Wadi Malih, the
desert fringe of Samaria, Wadi Far'ah, the Sartaba ridge, and Wadis
122 chapter six
Ahmar, Fazael and 'Aujjeh.

There are major differences between the three geographical strips
that run along the east-west axis:
– The eastern strip – the southern Jordan Valley – was settled
mainly in the large flood plains of Wadi Far'ah, Wadi Fazael, and
in the southern Beth Shean Valley. Settlement in the Jordan Valley
was favourable, owing to the relatively numerous sources of water
and the proximity to level ground suitable for cultivation.
– The centre strip, which is the desert fringe, was sparsely inhabited
in this period, mostly in open sites (as a result of the distance from
sources of water and arable regions). The region is suitable for
grazing, and probably served as a route to the hilly regions.
– In the western strip – the slopes of the Samarian hills – the settle-
ments were mainly concentrated next to the springs. Settlements
were established there, which later, perhaps even at the end of the
period, became fortified cities (e.g. Khirbet Rahiyeh, Tel Za'anuni,
Khirbet Juraish – Sites 42, 64, and 96).
Major differences between the different geographical strips
along the north-south axis were identified:
– The southern Beth Shean Valley, which has a multitude of springs
and large areas with agricultural potential, was inhabited in all
the periods. A large fortified settlement was founded there dur-
ing the EB Ib (Tel Shalem – Site 7). It should be noted that this
strip becomes wider toward the north, to areas that are outside
the geographical limits of the current study.
– Wadi Malih was uninhabited, perhaps because of the high salinity
of the non-potable water in the wadi. The only site in the region
(Wadi edh-Dhb'ah – Site 17) is located in Wadi es-Sakut north of
Wadi Malih.
– The desert fringes of Samaria, between Wadi Malih and Wadi
Far'ah, were very thinly populated, and several open sites were
located there. This is probably because of the distance to sources
of water and arable land.
– Wadi Far'ah was very densely populated, particularly in its east-
ern and western sections, and more than half of the sites of the
period are concentrated there. There are a small number of sites
in its central part, between Bab ed-Dayyq in the east and Bab en-
Naqeb in the west. On the other hand, the western part of the
wadi became the centre of settlement for the entire region in the
later part of the EB I.
Figure 6.8. Distribution of the EB I sites in the western part of Wadi Far'ah.
Note that most of the sites were located on the seam between the spurs and
the valley, so that all of the farmland remained available for cultivation (as is
the case today). The burial and cultic sites are located on the southern slopes
of Jebel Tammun.
– The Sartaba ridge was uninhabited owing to the absence of water

resources and arable land.
– Wadi Ahmar and Wadi Fazael were densely settled in their
eastern parts, where there were numerous sources of water and
potential farmland. The western parts of these wadis were only
inhabited in the vicinity of springs. It was here that the EB II forti-
fied settlements were founded (Khirbet Juraish, Khirbet Rahiyeh
and possibly also Sheikh Mazar – Sites 64, 77, and 96) on earlier
settlement remains of the EB I. It is difficult to prove by means of
a survey when these sites were fortified.
– The desert fringes between Wadi Fazael and Wadi 'Aujjeh were
very thinly populated, with encampment sites only.
– Wadi 'Aujjeh was not as intensely settled as Wadis Fazael, Ahmar,
and Far'ah. There is no satisfactory reason for this phenomenon.
The large amounts of alluvium in the wadi apparently covered the
ancient habitation that was only partially identified in the sur-
veys. There is probably also a connection to Jericho, an important
fortified settlement in this period, and this was also an outlying
124 chapter six
region between the social units with their centre in Wadi Far'ah
and those in Jericho.
The main conclusions regarding spatial distribution are:
– The EB I sites had a tendency to group in settlement clusters.
– Water and land were the key factors in the selection of settlement
sites in this period.
– Three major settlement clusters were identified in the study re-
gion (the southern Beth Shean Valley, Wadi Far'ah, and Wadi
Fazael); whereas in each one of them there is a single site or block
of sites that was the focus of settlement in that cluster. Tel Shalem
was identified in the southern Beth Shean Valley; er-Rjjum and
Tell Far'ah (North) in Wadi Far'ah; and Khirbet Rahiyeh in Wadi
Fazael. There are usually several smaller settlements around them.
The settlement clusters are located anywhere between 20 and 40
km apart. This pattern, which seems to be a type of settlement
with tribal characteristics, was probably one of the causes of the
establishment of the fortified settlement in the EB Ib and EB II.
– The slopes of the Samarian hills were relatively densely populated
for ancient periods. Large sites were established near springs ('Ain
Mta'a, Khirbet Juraish, 'Ain Juraish, Sheikh Mazar, Khirbet Rahi-
yeh, 'Ain Duma, and 'Ain Rashash). Some became fortified at the
end of the period, or at the beginning of the next period (Khirbet
Juraish, Khirbet Rahiyeh), and others were abandoned during the
transition to the EB II, or at the start of that period ('Ain Mta'a,
'Ain Juraish, 'Ain Duma, and 'Ain Rashash). It is unclear whether
these sites were independent entities, or whether there was a con-
nection between them and the settlement clusters in Wadi Far'ah
(presumably), or in Wadi Fazael.
Topography and Orientation

Considerations regarding topography and orientation, and their role
in the location of the sites, are examined here. Only the sites with a
medium or higher level of probability were analyzed: these were di-
vided into settlement sites (unfortified/fortified) and all the sites, with
no differentiation.
Topography
We noted a preference for location on the slopes and edges of the valley
(62.5% of all the sites and 55% of the settlement sites were established
on edge of the valley or on its slopes). The sites on level ground, which
the settlers preferred in the Chalcolithic period, were abandoned (only
4% of the sites were located on a plateau). The first tells were appar-
ently founded in this period (18% of the settlement sites were located
on multi-period tells).
Locations on spurs, in ravines, and on hilltops constitute just 21% of
all the sites and 21% of the settlement sites. Fortified sites were founded
with no obvious dependence upon topography (Tel Shalem is on a pla-
teau, er-Rjjum on a hilltop, and Tel Za'anuni is a tell on a spur).
Orientation
Orientation (the direction of the slope) was only defined when it could
be clearly identified, and sites that were located on level ground and
tells were not taken into account for this test. The results showed a
preference for southern and eastern directions: 69% of all the sites face
south or east, while 63% of the settlement sites did so. This figure is not
accidental, and is indicative of a conscious decision that was taken at
the time the site was established (see Chapter 5).
Conclusions
– Considerations concerning topography and orientation were
taken into account in establishing the sites.
– A location on the slopes and edges of the valley in the wadi flood
plains and along the wadis was preferred (e.g. Wadi Far'ah – Fig.
6.8). Possible reasons for this might be a desire to leave area avail-
able for cultivation, to keep a safe distance from the wadi channel
which was subject to flooding, the building material available on
the slopes, and the natural cleaning and drainage of the slopes.
There is a striking similarity between the location and that of the
Bedouin encampments in the Jordan Valley today.
– The sites situated on the plain were abandoned during this pe-
riod, and in their place the inhabitants began relocating to higher
regions that controlled the wadis, or to the first tells.13
13
The author disagrees with Schaub’s contention (1982) that the inhabitants’ move
to higher ground was due to security reasons. True, the EB I sites relocated to higher
126 chapter six
– Most of the sites were established with an eastern or southern

orientation. A possible reason for this might relate to the move-
ment of the sun and its effect on plant life in a period that was
wetter than at present: the southern orientation in this region is
warmer than the northern one, it receives more direct and unin-
terrupted sunshine, and the vegetation in it is sparser. Hence the
settlers who established the sites might have preferred to keep the
northern orientation available for agricultural purposes (grazing
or crops). The direction of the wind was probably also a factor in
determining the location of the settlements in the region.
Single Periods Versus Continuity in the EB I Sites

This section examines the continuity between the EB I sites and the
Chalcolithic and EB II.
In seven of the Chalcolithic sites with a medium or higher level of
probability (20.5% of all the sites) there is also an EB I presence. In two
other sites the probability of an EB I presence is low-medium. Without
excavating and conducting a stratigraphic analysis of the finds it is not
possible to prove continuity at these sites.
The survey technique makes it difficult to subdivide the EB I into
phases when the transition from phase to phase is not successive. This
is likely to cause a deviation in the research results. Thus instances,
such as at 'Ain 'Aujjeh (Site 108), were identified where there was a
settlement at the site in an early phase of the Chalcolithic followed only
by a settlement dating to the EB Ib (without continuity). In such a case
there will probably be an error in the chronological segmentation, or in
recognizing the existence of the continuity.
A third (31.5%) of the EB I sites (with a medium or higher level
of probability) continued into the EB II, and 68.5 % of the sites were
abandoned by the end of the period. 80% of the EB I sites (with a me-
dium or higher level of probability) were established for the first time
in this period. Similar numbers were presented by Esse (1991: table 5)
for northern Israel, and by Joffe (1993: 46) for the Gilead.
areas, but a thorough understanding of the sites clearly shows that the change in eleva-
tion was not enough to provide protection against an enemy, so there must have been
other considerations for this. The fortified sites of the EB II (some of which might have
been already fortified in the EB I) were located at a significantly higher elevation, hence
the considerations concerning defence and topographic exploitation were presumably
key factors.
Hence, this was a time when numerous new settlements were

founded, most of which were at the foot of tells, or at sites that were
fortified in the EB Ib. The number of sites in the EB II indicates the
beginning of a settlement decline, which probably resulted ultimately
in a drastic change at the beginning of the IB (MB I/EB IV).
The Subsistence Economy in the EB I Sites

Analysis of the subsistence economy in prehistoric periods is based
on data derived from archaeological research data (primarily excava-
tions14) and different kinds of geographical information (soil, climate,
etc.) drawn from indirect sources and studies. Most of the data here
were collected from excavations, together with general geographical
data, relevant survey data from single-period sites, and information
from Jordan.
The economy was based mostly on a combination of field crops and
livestock. This assertion relies on the flint artifacts and a number of
faunal remains from Sheikh Diab 2, Fazael 4, and sites in Jordan. In
addition to this, trade, which is not manifested amongst the finds from
the excavations at Sheikh Diab 2 and Fazael 4, greatly impacted the
archaeology of the period in Israel (Milevski 2005; 2011).
Grazing and Livestock

The raising of animals through grazing was a key factor in the lives
of the residents, whereby 69% of the faunal assemblage was goats and
sheep – Capra/Ovis (Chapter 2). The implements used in processing
the animals and their products (mainly scrapers and cutting tools)
stand out prominently among the flint artifacts. This branch was also a
major part of the economy for the region’s residents (and still is today).
Even if the climate was wetter (Chapter 2), it was still quite suitable for
grazing.
From the standpoint of the kinds of animals, the proportion of cattle
(Bus taurus) increased and the proportion of pig (Sus domesticus) de-
creased during the EB I (Philip 2001: table 5.4).15 This change suggests
an increase in the importance of cattle as work animals, beginning in
14
The use of data from surveys is fairly limited because of the difficulty in ascrib-
ing surface finds to a specific period with a proper degree of probability.
15
Some researchers bring forward the decrease in the consumption of pig meat to
the end of the Chalcolithic period (Conclusion in Rowan 1998: 55).
128 chapter six
the middle of the EB I. The significant decrease in wild animals that

were hunted relative to previous periods indicates a transition to raising
more animals for meat (the most suitable of which were pigs).
No evidence of a population of nomadic shepherds (which is dif-
ficult to identify amongst the archaeological finds) was found, and it
seems that the sedentary population was engaged in grazing as part of
their subsistence economy.
The comparison between the sites at Fazael 2 (Chalcolithic) and
Sheik Diab 2 (within the limitations of the small sample: Fazael 2 N =
62; Sheikh Diab 2 N = 34), is interesting. The main animals at both sites
were goat/sheep, but their number was considerably greater at Fazael
2. Cattle were raised at both sites. At Fazael 2 there were wild animals
(fox, wild cat) that were absent from Sheikh Diab 2. At the latter, pigs,
which did not appear at all at Fazael 2, were dominant. Equines (Equi-
dae, probably donkeys) meanwhile also appeared only at Sheikh Diab 2.
Agricultural Crops
The main evidence is the sickle blades and silos, most of which were
discovered in the excavated sites and surveys. These indicate a change
in the EB I economy, and an increase in the importance of grain farm-
ing as opposed to grazing. Further evidence of this is the crushing and
grinding tools that were used in processing food, which were discov-
ered in the excavated sites and surveys alike. Presumably cattle were
used as work animals on the farms.
The prevalent agricultural crops were English wheat (emmer – Triti-
cum dicoccum), wheat (Triticum spp, 2 and 6 rows), barley (Hordeum
vulgare), legumes (lentils – Lens culinaris), flax (Linum usitatissimum),
and vetch (Vicia ervilia). The most common orchard crops were olives
(Olea europea) and vineyards (Vitis). The wild vegetation that was uti-
lized included tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), oak (Quercus sp.), pine (Pinus
halepensis), pennycress (Sinapis), hackberry (Prunus avium), jujube
(Ziziphus spina-christi), almonds (Prunus dulcis), and spiny burnet
(Poterium spinosum).
The plant varieties of the Chalcolithic and the EB I were extremely
similar. The difference between them is apparent in the widespread use
of several agricultural techniques that did not alter the biodiversity, but
did change the economy of the period. According to Philip (2001: 184)
the following techniques were either introduced or were more intensely
used: flood agriculture (also Mabry et al. 1996, and an opposing view
in Milevski 2011); utilization of animals to cultivate fields; processing

olives and grapes, and using donkeys as pack/work animals. In addi-
tion, there was an increase in agricultural output resulting from the
use of metal tools at the expense of flint implements (bifacial flint tools
such as the adze or awl, which disappeared from the tool assemblage
in the EB I, were replaced with more efficient metal tools),16 and the
introduction of the plough (Conclusion in Rowan 1998).
The penetration of settlements into the hilly regions of Samaria,
which was sporadically inhabited in the Chalcolithic period, is very
important. This change was probably a result of the orchard crops, es-
pecially olives and vineyards, grown in the hills of Samaria and on its
slopes.
Trade
Although no items of foreign provenance were found at Sheikh Diab 2
or Fazael 4, the period is known for active trading, and the Jordan Val-
ley has been referred to as “the backbone of exchange between northern
and southern Canaan” (Milevski 2011). According to Milevski the trade
relations of the Jordan Valley with the north of Israel were stronger
than the ties with the southern region, and Jericho was the regional
centre of control. Our study neither adds to nor detracts significantly
from this assertion.
Horwitz and Tchernov (1989) state that in every EB I site that was
excavated equine remains were discovered, particularly those of don-
keys. These were used, among other things, in the transportation of
goods (Ovadia 1992). Evidence of such trade is the Egyptian colonies
in Canaan, and the secondary administrative centres that were estab-
lished, mainly in relatively late phases of the EB I (e.g. Tell es-Sakhan,
which was an Egyptian administrative centre in Canaan, 'En Basor, Tel
Erani, the Tel Halif terrace [Miroschedji 2001; Gophna 1990; 1995b;
Amiran and van den Brink 2001; Amiran 1993; Kempinski 1992; Levy
et al. 1997; Alon and Yekutieli 1995; and additional information in
Braun 2005; Brandl 1992; Yekutieli 2007]).17 Further proof of trade is
the Egyptian serakhs that were found on storage vessels, mainly in the
south of Israel (van den Brink and Braun 2002; Schulman 1976; 1980,
16
The author disagrees with Philip on this issue because almost no metal tools
were found at the sites of the period (despite the fact they are easily recycled, it would
still be expected to find more such tools if they were used in the household).
17
It seems that the close ties with Egypt started at the beginning of the EB I, as
evidenced at the site of Taur Ikhbeineh (Oren and Yekutieli 1992).
130 chapter six
1989; Yeivin 1960; Amiran 1974; etc.). Canaanite finds from sites in
Egypt are also indicative of trade between the two regions. In all likeli-
hood the Canaanite exports to Egypt included mostly foodstuffs (Yeku-
tieli 1998), such as vineyard and olive products. It seems that bitumen
from the Dead Sea, close to the study region, was also traded (Connan
et al. 1992), as well as metal from the 'Arava. The produce was trans-
ported in sacks or EB I jars that were found at several Egyptian sites,
for example at Maadi (Rizkana and Seeher 1987), Minshat Abu Omar
(Kroeper 1988) etc., and Kroeper (1989) for more details. Imports from
Egypt to this region probably included mostly luxury items (e.g. Nile
shells and carnelian beads18 discovered in tombs at Tell Far'ah [North]
– de Vaux and Steve 1949 and at Jericho – Kenyon 1981: fig. 55: 1E).
Egyptian items were found in the Jordan Valley at Tel Beth Yerah in
the north (Brandl 1992) and Abu al-Kharaz and the tombs at Bab edh-
Dhra' in Jordan (Yekutieli 2007).
Copper and bronze were exported from the Sinai and the 'Arava,
where they were mined and cast, and from there marketed throughout
the southern Levant. The fundamental change in the metal trade from
the Chalcolithic period, is the standardization in the production and
extensive marketing to the entire southern Levant (Ilan and Sebbane
1989; Shalev 1994).
There is also some evidence of trade with Anatolia and the Orontes
Valley region; for example, 'En Esur (Yannai and Braun 2001). However,
it is surprising that there is almost no evidence of trade with Mesopota-
mia (despite the possibility of indirect influence in the field of glyptics).
No evidence of inter-regional commercial ties has been found so
far in surveys and excavations in this region. It seems that these ties
existed, but have still not been identified in the meagre archaeological
finds from this region.
The Transition from EB I to EB II in the Study Region

The nature of this transition in the Levant is of great significance. It
marks the transition from simple and proto-urban cultures to complex,
hierarchal cultures that may possibly be ‘urban’. It seems that the high
point of the process occurred in the last century of the 4th millennium
BCE, and it was probably related to the beginning of the First Dynasty
18
Carnelian beads could also have come from Makhtesh Ramon, or from a site that
has not yet been identified, and they are also quite common at Bab edh-Dhra' , south of
the study region (Milevski 2011: Chapter 9).
in Egypt, possibly during the reign of Aha and Djer (a discussion of the
chronology and history of the period is in Braun 1996). Some scholars
have reconstructed (similarly to our reconstruction) a limited settle-
ment process at the beginning of the period, significant growth in the
EB Ib, and a decline in the process at the beginning of the EB II (e.g.
Joffe 1993). Others have also discerned population migrations inside
and outside the region (e.g. Portugali and Gophna 1993). Joffe (1991)
assumed that the source of the development in the EB Ib was the trade
with the Egyptian market, and that the decline at the end of the pe-
riod stemmed from a diminished Egyptian interest in the Canaanite
economy, and the transfer of the commercial focus to Tyre. However,
there is no evidence of intensive trade between Egypt and Canaan in
the EB I, and therefore this supposition is hardly plausible. Greenberg
(2003) has suggested that the change was not uniform throughout the
southern Levant, and that each region should be examined separately.
For example, he viewed the abandonment of Megiddo and Beth Shean
to be a result of socio-political changes that stemmed from a change
in the nature of the settlement in the transition to the EB II, and their
geographic location on the margins of the main centre of power of the
EB II that was situated in the northern Jordan Valley (as manifested by
the sites at Dan, Hazor and Beth Yerah).
In the Jordan Valley and the desert fringes of Samaria about a third
(31.5%) of the EB I settlements continued into the next period. In
contrast, the other two-thirds (68.5%) were abandoned. In the EB II a
major crisis occurred in the scope of settlement, declining from 82 sites
in the EB I to just 24 sites in the EB II.
A destruction layer dating to the end of the EB I was identified in
a number of excavated sites close to the study region; for example, at
Tel Kitan (Eisenberg 1993), Bab edh-Dhra' IV (Rast and Schaub 2003),
and Tel Yaqush (Esse 1993). The fortified settlement at Tel Shalem was
deserted during the transition to the EB II, or in its initial phases, and
the importance of Tell Um Hammad diminished in the late EB I. The
evidence regarding Jericho is inconclusive: Rast and Schaub (2003)
contend that there is a destruction layer in Phase L (EB Ib), which the
excavators did not identify. It seems that the settlement at Tell el-Far'ah
(North) continued, as did that at Beth Yerah.
Major changes occurred in the southern Jordan Valley at the end of
the EB I and the beginning of the EB II. Almost all the main settlements
were deserted or destroyed, and the importance of others diminished
significantly. The process that transpired to the west was just the op-
132 chapter six
180 185 190 195 200 205 210

205
Modern village 205
Road
Wadi
Na h eq
a l Bez
ash)
43
(Wa
di Shu b
W ab i s
200
ad i Y 200
Zebabdeh 13
117 14
River J
Mehula
195 195
Wadi Malih
o rdan
Tubas
190 190
frin
Wadi Ku
ji
185 185
34
36
42 38 43
180
39 180
47
54 49 51
175 175
r qa
Ze
62
W
64
ad
e
di
iF
Wa
ar
ah
'
170 170
Majdal
Beni
Fadil
165 77 165
96 az
ael
Wa d i F Wad
River J
iA
160 98 h ma
r 160
or
dan
155 155
'Aujjeh
150 150
h
jj e
'Au
Wa di
i Nim r in
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 6.9. EB I sites that continued into the EB II.

posite – the settlements of the desert fringes and the eastern foothills
of Samaria continued to exist, and Tell el-Far'ah (North), Tell Za'anuni,
Khirbet Juraish, and Khirbet Rahiyeh reached the height of their power
during this period. This is in keeping with the research of Portugali and
Gophna (1993), who argue that during the transition from the EB I to
the EB II there was a decline in the population of the entire country,
except in the hill country, where the number of settlements and size
of the population were on the increase (there are signs of local migra-
tion from the valleys, the Shephelah and the coastal plain to the central
ridge).
An analysis of the reasons for this is difficult, in the absence of his-
torical sources. It was not proved, for example, that the destruction
levels at the end of the period were man-made, and were not caused by
a natural disaster of wide-ranging impact such as an earthquake. Most
of the data support the first conclusion: not all the settlements were
destroyed simultaneously (some prior to the transition to the EB II, and
some at the beginning of that period), and some settlements near the
destroyed sites were not affected at all.
The social structure in which the new EB II centres of power were
established and based, would seem to suggest that there was a struggle
amongst them during the transition between the periods. For example,
in the northern part of the study region the importance of the site at Tel
Shalem diminished and it was abandoned, and the hegemony appar-
ently passed to Beth Yerah. In the central Jordan Valley the focus was
apparently at Tell el-Far'ah (North), perhaps because er-Rjjum became
weaker. In the eastern Jordan Valley the importance of the site at Tell
Um Hammad decreased, and the local hegemony passed to the nearby
fortified settlement at Tell Abu Zigan (Helms et al. 1992).
The abandonment of the Jordan Valley started at the beginning of
the EB II, and the regional hegemony passed to the foothills of Samaria
and the hill country, which became the main centres of power.
CHAPTER SEVEN
COMPARISON OF THE SETTLEMENT PATTERN WITH THE

SETTLEMENT IN THE EASTERN JORDAN VALLEY AND THE
SLOPES OF THE JORDANIAN MOUNTAIN RIDGE IN THE
CHALCOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE I PERIODS
Introduction
This chapter compares the settlement pattern in the two periods on the
two sides of the Jordan. The area in the east, corresponding with the
western Jordan Valley, was examined: from the southern Beth Shean
Valley in the north (the Wadi Yabis drainage basin in the east), to the
regions corresponding to Jericho in the south (the vicinity of Teleilat
Ghassul north of the Dead Sea), and in the east to the slopes of the hills
of Gilead and the Jordanian mountain ridge.
Despite the topographical similarity between the two regions, they
differ in two respects geographically: the area of the eastern valley is
approximately six times greater than its neighbour to the west, with
considerably more land available for cultivation; and the eastern valley
is also richer in sources of water that are fed by the precipitation that
falls on the mountain ridge in Jordan.
Seemingly one would think this would indicate a much richer settle-
ment in the east, but there are two elements that Man is responsible for
which prevent the comparison:
1. Unlike the western Jordan Valley, where the same researchers
have surveyed the area for close to 20 years, only regional surveys
have been conducted in the eastern part. Most of the data were
gathered from old and new excavations and surveys, the resolu-
tion of which is not always known.1
2. Numerous sites from these periods were excavated in the east-
1
See for example the large differences in the number of sites that were discovered
in the Jordan Valley between Glueck’s surveys in the 1940s, those performed in the
same region in the 1970s (Joint Survey Project), and those that have been conducted
in recent decades (a partial list appears in Chapter 3, History of the Archaeological
Research). See also Philip’s attitude (2001: 189) regarding the quality of the surveys in
Jordan, and as a result of this the difficulty in understanding the settlement pattern in
the region, and Schaub’s attitude (1982) about the conclusions that can be drawn from
the meagre information in Jordan.
comparison of the settlement pattern 135
ern valley. This stems from its centrality and the importance of
the valley in the Kingdom of Jordan, whereas the western Jordan
Valley has almost always been considered a marginal region in
modern history (from both settlement and research standpoints).
Hence the Jordanian side of the valley is rich in excavations and poor
in comprehensive surveys, and the situation on the western side of the
valley is just the opposite. Because of the importance of surveys for our
purposes, the information from the other side of the Jordan should be
considered as incomplete, and this has implications on the results.
History of the Research

The study of the periods began with the excavations by the Pontifical
Institute at Teleilat Ghassul (Mallon et al. 1934). During eight seasons
of excavation remains of an unknown culture were exposed (which
the excavators themselves ascribed to the beginning of the EB). Of the
four settlement phases, the last one – Ghassul IV – is the stratum that
became the hallmark of the Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant
– i.e. the Chalcolithic Ghassulian culture.
Glueck’s extensive surveys in Jordan in the 1940s were published
(Glueck 1951),2 and these were followed by the survey and excavations
by Contenson and Mellaart in the Jordan Valley as part of the Point IV
Irrigation Project, when seven sites were excavated along the length of
the valley, among them the first excavations at Tell esh-Shuna, Tell Um
Hammad, Tell Abu Habil, and Tell Sa'adiya et-Tahta (Leonard 1992;
Contenson 1960; Mellaart 1962).
In 1967 Hennessy excavated at Teleilat Ghassul (1969) and exposed
nine strata that he identified, from the Pottery Neolithic to the Chal-
colithic. This excavation crystallized our understanding that the Chal-
colithic was not a short period, and that its origins were not external;
rather they stemmed from the preceding Neolithic periods. Hennessy
returned to the site in the 1970s, and continued investigating the early
phases.
In the 1960s a number of surveys were conducted in Jordan, the most
important of which was Mittmann’s (1970). The survey was carried out
in the northern part of the region, and particularly in the Jordanian
highlands. For our purposes the sites in the wadis descending from the
Jordanian plateau are important. In the mid-1970s a comprehensive
2
The survey was extensive, but the resolution was low, and numerous sites were
not discovered during this stage of the research.
136 chapter seven
survey was conducted in the eastern Jordan Valley – the Joint Survey
Project (Ibrahim et al. 1976; Yassine et al. 1988). This survey doubled
the number of known sites, and for the first time clearly identified the
settlement pattern characteristic of the Chalcolithic – locations situated
along the wadis descending from the mountains to the River Jordan.
Following the Joint Survey Project, researchers began conducting other
high-resolution surveys in the 1980s along some of the wadis. A partial
list of the principal publications from the relevant surveys carried out
in Jordan is: Wadi el-Arab (Kerestes 1977/78), Wadi Ziglab (Banning
et al. 1989), Wadi Yabis (Mabry and Palumbo 1988), Wadi Kufrinji
(Greene 1986), Wadi ez-Zarqa (Gordon and Villiers 1986; Kerestes
1977/78), Wadi Hasa (Papalas et al. 1997), and the vicinity of Deir Ala
(van der Steen 2004). Two of these wadis currently being surveyed or
awaiting final publication are a comprehensive survey in the Wadi ez-
Zarqa (Kaptij, pers. comm.), and a sample survey of caves along some
of wadis descending from the Jordanian plateau to the Jordan Valley
(Lovell, pers. comm.).
In the past two decades numerous excavations have been carried out
in this region; the most important of them from the Chalcolithic period
being Tell Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1993; Dollfus et al. 1988),
Pella and Jabel Sartaba (Bourke et al. 1998; Lovell 2000), al-Khawarij
(Lovell et al. 2006), and the renewed excavation at Teleilat Ghassul
(Bourke and Lovell 2004; Bourke 2002; Bourke et al. 2000, 2001; Lovell
2001; Seaton 2008).
The important excavations from the EB I are Tell Um Hammad
(Helms et al. 1992), Tell esh-Shuna north of the study region (Gus-
tavson-Gaube 1985; 1987; Baird and Philip 1994), Tell el-Handaquq
(North) (Mabry 1989; Mabry et al. 1996), Tell el-Handaquq (South)
(Chesson 1998), Kataret es-Samra (Leonard 1989), Jebel Abu Thawwab
(Douglas and Kafafi 2000), Tell es-Sa'idiyeh (Tubb et al. 1997), and Tell
Abu al-Kharaz (Fischer 1997; 2006).
The major problem with this impressive collection of excavations is
that only a few of them are complete scientific publications, and most
of the information has been conveyed verbally or in short articles and
synopses that do not provide an entire picture of the site.
The site data from the surveys and archaeological excavations in Jor-
dan are compiled in the Jordan Antiquities Database and Information
System (JADIS). Palumbo (1994) published data that provide us with
a general picture of the locations of the various sites in the region, and
allow comparison with the data from the western Jordan Valley.
The Chalcolithic Settlement Pattern of Jordan

The distribution of the Chalcolithic sites in the region is characterized
by their location along the interface between the wadis and the valley.
The large sites are dispersed along the major wadis, descending from
the Jordanian plateau, and near the agricultural areas of the valley.
Smaller sites are situated further up the wadis, where there is less land
available for cultivation. In fact, there is a site or cluster of sites from the
Chalcolithic at the mouth of every major wadi in the valley (analysis
and detailed list in Bourke 2001: 113). A check of the data from the
JADIS system, based on detailed maps in Palumbo (1994) shows that
as of the mid-1990s about 140 Chalcolithic sites had been identified
in this area (these are not subdivided into phases; thus there are also
phases that some researchers ascribe to the Pottery Neolithic which are
included in the tally and skew it; presumably only some of the sites
existed in the Chalcolithic).
According to Bourke (2001) and Dollfus and Kafafi (2001), 90% of
the settlements are small, and do not exceed 2 ha in area.
A lesser number of sites are located on the slopes of the mountain
ridge and along it. These are mostly small (not more than 1 ha), and are
distributed along the wadis descending to the Jordan Valley (Bourke
2001: 116). Recently Lovell suggested (2002) that the relocation up
on the mountain ridge was mainly due to a significant increase in the
growing of olives. The excavation of Site WZ121 near Tubna in Wadi
Ziglav (Banning et al. 1998) and the olive wood remains found in many
hearths at Tell Abu Hamid (Dollfuss and Kafafi 2001) support this view.
The settlement plan of Teleilat Ghassul can be discerned from the
parts of the site that were excavated (analysis based on Bourke 2001:
120). It is spread across and between several large mounds. The typical
dwelling unit consisted of a covered room with an average area of 25
m2, with an adjacent courtyard of up to 50 m2 in area (for a total area of
75 m2 per nuclear family dwelling unit). The houses were separated by
squares and narrow alleys. The plans of the various units are diverse, as
are the elements found inside them, and it does not seem that the settle-
ment or the units inside it were properly planned. At Tell Abu Hammad
(Dollfus and Kafafi 2001) the picture is somewhat different – the area
between the dwelling units is larger than at Teleilat Ghassul, and is not
as crowded.
138 chapter seven
The EB I Settlement Pattern in Jordan

Like the Chalcolithic sites, the large sites of the EB I are spread along
the banks of the wadis, at the interface between the mountain slopes
and the broad area of the valley. Philip (2001: table 5.6) shows there
is an EB site at the mouth of every major wadi. The number of sites is
slightly greater than that in the Chalcolithic period (the information is
partial, and therefore may be slanted).
Our information with respect to the mountain slopes is also incom-
plete. In various surveys a pattern is beginning to take shape of small
concentrations of sites along the wadis, and during the transition to the
EB II these were abandoned, and one central site is established in each
wadi (a phenomenon that was noted for example in the Madaba Plains
Project [Harrison 1997]).
Researchers who analyzed the EB settlement pattern in the Jordan
Valley (Harrison 1997; Philip 2001), knowing that the information
was incomplete, did not identify hierarchical systems between differ-
ent settlements. Hence it was suggested that the settlement pattern was
probably tribal, and based on interrelations between the sites and the
different tribes, without reliance upon regional centres (In this it is
different from patterns that were proposed for Israel and the southern
Levant, which included complex socio-economic development often
accompanied by regional centres or chiefdoms – e.g. Hanbury-Tenison
1986; Esse 1991; Finkelstein 1995). A check of the area of the sites that
were excavated indicates remarkable diversity (e.g. the area of Tell
el-Handaquq (South) is 15 ha; Tell Abu Hammad – close to 20 ha, in
contrast to the smaller ones such as Tell Abu al-Kharaz – 4 ha, Tell
es-Sa'idiyeh – 8 ha, and Tell el-Handaquq (North) – 7 ha; Philip 2001:
table 5.6). There seems to be an increase in the area of the sites (those
that were checked in the different excavations) compared with the pre-
vious period, within the limitations of the information that exists.
Fortified settlements started to appear in Jordan during the EB I.
Jawa, in the eastern Jordanian desert, was the earliest of these in the re-
gion (Betts 1991). Those on the mountain ridge Jabel al Motawuk (Prag
2001), and in the Jordan Valley Tell Abu al-Kharaz (Fischer 1997) and
Tell es-Sa'adiyah (Tubb et al. 1997) were apparently fortified. However,
most of the period’s sites were unfortified and spread across a large area
(Prag 2001). These settlements were not abandoned at the end of the
period, as happened to the unfortified settlements in the western Jor-
dan Valley.
Comparison of the Settlement Model

with the Western Jordan Valley
The number of sites that were discovered on both sides of the Jordan is
similar in both periods. In the author’s opinion this is due to three main
reasons: the discontinuity of the surveys in the Jordanian side of the
valley and partial coverage of the area; the reliability of the resolution
of the period segmentation in the Jordanian surveys; and the destruc-
tion of sites by intensive agriculture and modern construction (similar
to the situation in Wadi Far'ah on the western side of the Jordan). It is
unlikely that in the eastern Jordan Valley (which is larger and richer in
water and arable land) that the same number of sites would be found
as west of the river. It seems that many sites have been destroyed, or
are still awaiting discovery. The similarity of the material finds (pot-
tery, flint, and stone), together with the finds that apparently originated
in Jordan (e.g. the sandstone grinding stones that were discovered at
Sheikh Diab 2), are indicative of ties between the two regions. This is
not surprising in light of the fact that the River Jordan is not an impass-
able obstacle, and can be crossed at several fords.
Despite the large gaps in information, we can identify numerous
common characteristics, and points of difference, between the regions
and the different periods.
The common characteristics in the Chalcolithic period were:
1. The distribution of the sites in settlement clusters on the banks of
the wadis and at the interface between the wadi and the valley.
2. The large sites were located beside extensive agricultural areas
and a source of water.
3. There was a tribal social model without complex hierarchical sys-
tems.
4. Similar material artifacts.
The points of difference were:
1. Only 10% of the sites in Jordan are larger than 2 ha in area, and
most are much smaller. In contrast, approximately half of the sites
on the western side of the river are larger than 1 ha. Although
the comparison index is not the same, we can also add the basic
difference that exists in the pattern of the interior of the sites
(Table 5.2 in Chapter 5) – the area of each dwelling complex at
the excavated sites within the study framework is close to twice as
large as the sites in Jordan (Teleilat Ghassul and Tell Abu Hamid).
140 chapter seven
The distribution of the complexes in the area is also different – in

the Fazael complexes there are large spaces between the dwell-
ing units, compared with Teleilat Ghassul, where the complexes
are much more crowded (it seems that Tell Abu Hamid resembles
Fazael more than Teleilat Ghassul). Hence the Chalcolithic vil-
lages in the western Jordan Valley tended to be more widely dis-
tributed and built on large areas, unlike the information we have
about some of the sites in Jordan. This has direct implications on
the size of the population, as well as the effort required to cultivate
the soil.
2. The distribution of the other sites along the wadis that ascend to
the mountain ridge seems much more intense in Jordan, where
many sites were identified on the slopes and on the mountain
ridge itself. If the relocation up to the mountain ridge does indeed
stem from more intensive olive growing, then it is evidence that
on the eastern side of the Jordan this branch of the economy was
much more prevalent and important.
Despite the incomplete information from Jordan, no significant dif-
ference is apparent in the Chalcolithic period on the two sides of the
River Jordan, and the similarity of the material finds indicates contact
between the two regions. Some difference is evident in the area of the
sites and the nature of their spatial distribution. It seems that the reason
for the differences stems from the larger population on the eastern side,
and the area required to sustain it (in this period large unexploited land
reserves remained on the western side, particularly in Wadi Far'ah).
The common characteristics in the EB I are numerous; the main
ones being:
1. The sites are distributed on the banks of the wadis where the wadi
meets the valley.
2. The large sites are situated near extensive agricultural areas and a
source of water.
3. The number of sites increases compared with the Chalcolithic
period.
4. A tribal social model without complex hierarchical systems exists,
particularly in the first part of the period.
5. Fortifications first appear in the EB Ib.
6. There is a decrease in the number of sites in the transition to the
EB II.
7. The material artifacts are similar.
Despite the limited information about Jordan, there is no major dif-

ference apparent in the EB I on the two sides of the River Jordan. A
significant change occurs at the beginning of the EB II, when many of
the settlements on the western side of the Jordan cease to exist; whereas
this is not felt on the eastern side of the river.
In conclusion, despite the difference in a number of characteristics,
there is obviously considerable similarity between both sides of the
Jordan in the periods that this study addresses, and it seems that the
inhabitants of both regions maintained contact with each other. The
nature of these contacts is still insufficiently clear; however, we can as-
sume that there were at least commercial ties, family connections, and
possibly also tribal alliances.
CHAPTER EIGHT
THE POTTERY OF THE CHALCOLITHIC AND

EARLY BRONZE I PERIODS IN THE JORDAN VALLEY
AND SOUTHERN DESERT FRINGES OF SAMARIA
Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to present the characteristics of the ceramic
finds from the surveys and excavations. Although most of the study
deals with the spatial settlement pattern, there is significance to the
many pottery finds that are also connected to the settlement pattern
and what we determine from it.
In this chapter we will make a preliminary attempt at offering a re-
gional ceramic typology based primarily on surveys, including general
remarks about the pottery of the study region in the different periods.
Um Hammad ware, which is a regional group unique to the study area
in the EB I, will also be discussed.
Regional Pottery Typology

The data are based on the Manasseh Hill Country Survey collection,
with additional data based on the Survey of Ephraim, the Emergency
Survey, and also derived from the salvage excavation at Fazael (Porath
1985).
The aims of the typology are:
1. To become familiar with the predominant ceramic types and
those that are absent from the periods addressed in this study.
2. To create a database for referral from the Site Catalogue to the
finds in this chapter, in order to assist in analyzing the chrono-
logical characteristics and segmentation probability of each site.
To ensure the reliability of the typology, the criteria for a type were
determined as a regional periodic characteristic:
1. It must appear a number of times at a number of different sites.
2. It must appear at a site that is classified as having at least a me-
dium or higher level of probability.1
1
In exceptional instances types that appeared at sites that have only a medium
the pottery 143
3. Finds from single period sites were preferred.

Many types were not included in the typology due to a failure to
meet the criteria.
The finds were sorted into five categories:
1. Bowls.
2. Deep bowls, kraters and basins.
3. Holemouth jars.
4. Jars – including other types such as pithoi and amphoriskoi.
5. Miscellaneous – various items and characteristics such as chalices
and handles.
The main sub-types are defined in each category, and are presented
below graphically, with a description. For a more complete picture we
suggest also using the typologies that were presented from the excava-
tions conducted as part of the study.2
Ceramic Typology of the Chalcolithic in the Southern

Jordan Valley and Desert Fringes of Samaria
Bowls (Fig. 8.1)

Six types and sub-types of bowls were identified, although in the sur-
veys relatively few bowls were discovered compared to other vessels.
The bowls are thin, small and delicate, and their parts were difficult to
discern during the survey (for comparison – at 'Ein Hilu bowls consti-
tute 44% of all the finds and are the largest group, whereas the surveys
indicate that bowls are less than 5% of the finds at the site).
Type B1a (Fig. 8.1: 1–2): a deep bowl with straight sides inverted
near the rim. The rim is plain, sharp or bevelled. Sometimes there is
a red painted decorative stripe on the inside or outside of the rim, and
the outside of the vessel is occasionally slipped red. The bowl occurs
in various diameters, ranging from 10 to 25 cm. This bowl is very
common in the southern Jordan Valley and at many Chalcolithic sites
throughout the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.18: 26–30), Teleilat Ghas-
level of probability were also included, on the condition that they are known from other
regions, and are chronologically well-classified.
2
The two typologies have been separated because of the difference between the
pottery data from the survey and the excavations, and because the excavations at the
Fazael valley sites are still going on, and the final typology has not been completed for
each site.
144 chapter eight
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 6), Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig. 4.1:
4) and Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.2: 3).
Type B1b (Fig. 8.1: 3–4): a deep bowl with straight sides everted near
the rim. The rim is plain or sharp. It is usually not slipped, yet some-
times a slip appears in the form of a red stripe on the inside or outside
of the rim. The bowl occurs in various diameters ranging from 10 to 20
cm. This type of bowl is uncommon in the southern Jordan Valley, but
it appears at other Chalcolithic sites throughout the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.18: 24, 34), Shoham
(North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.10: 1–5), Gerer (Gilead and Goren
1995: fig. 4.3: 1), Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.2: 12) and
Tel Te'o (Eisenberg et al. 2001: fig. 6.1: 9).
Type B1c (Fig. 8.1: 5): a deep bowl with straight sides. The rim is
plain, or sharp, usually with a red slipped stripe on the inside or out-
side of the rim, and the outside of the vessel is occasionally slipped
red. The bowl occurs in different diameters ranging from 7 to 15 cm
(the larger type, which is common in Chalcolithic assemblages in other
regions of the country, was not found). This bowl is quite prevalent in
the southern Jordan Valley and at many Chalcolithic sites throughout
the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.19: 8, 10–11), Teleilat
Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 1, 5), Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002:
fig. 4.1: 2) and Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 6: 23–25).
Type B2 (Fig. 8.1: 6–7): a flat bowl with straight sides and a plain or
sharp rim. It frequently occurs with a red stripe on the inside of the rim
and less frequently on the outside. This is a large bowl with an average
diameter of 25 cm. This type of bowl is uncommon in the southern
Jordan Valley, but it appears at many Chalcolithic sites throughout the
country.
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 3), Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig.
6.12: 2), and Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 7: 11).
Type B3 (Fig. 8.1: 8): a very flat bowl with straight sides (platter-
like) and a rim that is usually plain. It is usually undecorated, and has
an average diameter of 30 cm. This type of bowl is uncommon in the
southern Jordan Valley, but appears at Chalcolithic sites throughout the
country.
Parallels: 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 12), Beer Sheva (Conten-
son 1956: fig. 7: 5) and additional parallels in Garfinkel 1998.
Type B4 (Fig. 8.1: 9): a small curved bowl/cup with incurved sides
the pottery 145
and a plain or sharp rim. Sometimes it is slipped with a red stripe on

the inside or outside of the rim. The bowl is small and has an average
diameter of 10 cm. It is common in the southern Jordan Valley, and
appears at a number of other Chalcolithic sites throughout the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.18: 21), Teleilat Ghassul
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.32: 4), 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 10) and Beer
Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 6: 22).
Deep Bowls, Kraters and Basins (Figure 8.2)

Five types and sub-types of deep bowls/basins were identified.
Type K1 (Fig. 8.2: 1–2): a deep basin with a straight flat, everted and
ledge-like rim. The rim is usually plain or rounded. Sometimes there
is a red stripe on the inside or outside of the rim. The diameter varies
and ranges between 20 and 45 cm. The vessel is common in the south-
ern Jordan Valley, especially in its northern parts, and appears at other
Chalcolithic sites.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.21: 8, 12; 4.29: 3), Teleilat
Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.34: 1) and Gesher, Qarantina (Covello-
Paran 1995: fig. 50: 15).
Type K2 (Fig. 8.2: 3–4): a deep basin with a flat, straight inverted rim.
The rim is usually plain with a channel/gutter on its inside. The vessel is
neither decorated nor slipped, and ranges from 20 to 50 cm in diameter.
This basin is common in the southern Jordan Valley, and also appears
at other Chalcolithic sites throughout the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.21: 21; 4.23: 14), Teleilat
Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.39: 4), 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 9: 8)
and Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.6: 2–3).
Type K3 (Fig. 8.2: 5–8): a deep basin with a straight diagonal rim
that is usually rounded or sharp. The average diameter is 35 cm, and
the vessel is frequently decorated with rope ornamentation. The type
sometimes occurs as a pithos and is also referred to as the ‘Jordan Val-
ley pithos’. The basin is very common in the southern Jordan Valley,
mainly in the northern part, and appears at other Chalcolithic sites.
Parallels: 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 9: 7), Nahal Qana (Gopher
and Tzuk 1996: fig. 4.6: 4) and especially in the Golan Heights (Epstein
1998: pls. 1–4) where the Golan decoration is very similar to the Beth
Shean decoration.
Type K4 (Fig. 8.2: 9–10): a deep bowl with straight sides and a
rounded or bevelled rim. The vessel is usually undecorated, and ranges
between 20 and 50 cm in diameter. The bowl is rare in the southern
146 chapter eight
Figure 8.1. Types of Chalcolithic period bowls – southern Jordan Valley and
desert fringes of Samaria.
the pottery 147
Figure 8.2. Types of large Chalcolithic bowls, kraters and basins – southern
Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
148 chapter eight
Jordan Valley, but is known from other Chalcolithic sites throughout

the country.
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.35: 2, 5), 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 9: 1) and
Gilat (Commenge 2006: pl. 10.11: 6).
Holemouth jars (Fig. 8.3)

Six types and sub-types of holemouth jars were identified (this is the
most common kind of vessel in the assemblage collected in the sur-
veys, constituting more than 50% of the finds). Based on the kinds of
clay used to make the holemouth jars, it seems that these vessels were
used for both cooking and storage. The Chalcolithic holemouth jars
are characterized by a relatively narrow form as compared to the wider
holemouth jars of the EB (see below).
Type H1 (Fig. 8.3: 1–4): this is the most common type in the study
region. It has inverted sides and a plain, rounded or sharp rim. The
holemouth jar occurs in a wide variety of diameters ranging from 8
to 40 cm. It is usually not decorated or slipped, but sometimes has a
slipped red stripe on the rim. This type is known from other Chalco-
lithic sites throughout the country.
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.36: 2–3), Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.14:
9–12) and Um Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 11).
Type H2 (Fig. 8.3: 5–6): a holemouth jar with slightly everted sides
and a plain or sharp rim occurring in a wide variety of diameters from
15 to 35 cm. Most vessels of this type are undecorated. It is common in
the southern Jordan Valley, and is known from other Chalcolithic sites
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 18, 20), Teleilat Ghas-
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.36: 4–5) and Cave V/49 (Eisenberg 2002: fig. 8:
20).
Type H3a (Fig. 8.3: 7–8): a large deep holemouth jar with a rim that
is either bevelled or folded slightly inward. It has an average diameter of
35 cm. Sometimes a plastic rope ornamentation or perforations occur
on the rim or the upper part of the vessel. This type is relatively rare,
and appears mainly in the northern part of the region, and is found at a
number of other Chalcolithic sites throughout the country.
Parallels: 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 10: 1) and Gilat (Commenge
2006: pl. 10.12: 1–2).
Type H3b (Fig. 8.3: 9–10): a small holemouth jar with a rim that is
the pottery 149
Figure 8.3. Types of Chalcolithic holemouth jars – southern Jordan Valley

and desert fringes of Samaria.
150 chapter eight
either bevelled or folded inwards. It has an average diameter of 12 cm,

and is usually undecorated. Unlike most of the holemouth jars of the
period, this type is more barrel-shaped, and its outside is reminiscent
of the holemouth jars of the EB I. This type exists at a number of other
Chalcolithic sites throughout the country.
Parallels: Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.18: 2, 8), Giv'at
HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.10: 1) and Gilat (Commenge
2006: pl. 10.17: 10).
Type H4 (Fig. 8.3: 11): a holemouth jar with an upright vertical rim
that is usually sharp. It has an average diameter of 15 cm, and is rare
in the study region, and exists at a number of other Chalcolithic sites
Parallels: Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.18: 7), Grar (Gil-
ead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.14: 3–5) and Cave V/49 (Eisenberg 2002:
fig. 8: 18).
Type H5 (Fig. 8.3: 12): a large holemouth jar with a diagonal rim,
usually sharp or plain. The rim is thinner than the body of the vessel.
It has an average diameter of 30 cm, and is rare in the study region,
although it exists at a number of other Chalcolithic sites throughout
the country.
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.36: 7), Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.18:
9) and Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.14: 2).
Jars (Fig. 8.4)

Five types and sub-types of jars from the Chalcolithic were identified.
Type J1a (Fig. 8.4: 1–3): a jar with a long neck that is straight or
inverted, and a flaring, plain or rounded rim. The rim diameter ranges
between 12 and 25 cm. The vessel is common in the study region, and
exists at other Chalcolithic sites.
Parallels: Nahal Mishmar (Bar-Adon 1980: fig. 3: 3–4), Teleilat Ghas-
sul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.40: 3), Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig.
6.7: 2) and Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.12: 4–5).
Type J1b (Fig. 8.4: 4–5): a jar with a long everted neck and a sharp,
plain or rounded rim. The rim diameter ranges between 10 and 20 cm.
The vessel is common in the study region, and exists at a number of
other Chalcolithic site.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.22: 12–15), Nahal Mish-
mar (Bar-Adon 1980: fig. 3: 7), Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig.
6.27: 3–7), Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.16: 4–6) and Um Qatafa
the pottery 151
Figure 8.4. Types of Chalcolithic jars – southern Jordan Valley

152 chapter eight
(Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 11).

Type J2 (Fig. 8.4: 6): a jar with a narrow neck and an everted rim.
It has an average rim diameter of 15 cm. The vessel is common in the
study region, and exists at numerous other Chalcolithic sites.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.22: 1–2), Nahal Mishmar
(Bar-Adon 1980: fig. 3: 2), Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.7:
3) and Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.16: 8, 10).
Type J3 (Fig. 8.4: 7): an amphoriskos with an upright or inverted
neck and a sharp or plain rim. There is often a herringbone decoration
on the body. The vessel has an average rim diameter of 7 cm. It is com-
mon in the southern part of the study region.
Parallels: Shoham (North) (Commenge 2005: fig. 6.21: 11), 'En
Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.22: 3) without a herringbone decora-
tion, Nahal Mishmar (Bar-Adon 1980: fig. 15: 1–7) with a herringbone
decoration, and Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig. 4.1: 11) without
a herringbone decoration.
Type J4 (Fig. 8.4: 8): a jar with a long straight neck and a thickened
rim, usually bevelled or plain. It is rare in the study region, but appears
at a number of Chalcolithic sites in the country.
Parallels: Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: figs. 4.40: 1, 5; 4.41: 1).
Miscellaneous (Fig. 8.5)

Basalt vessels (Fig. 8.5: 1–6): numerous basalt vessels were found.
Most common are those used in the various stages of food prepara-
tion (usually non-diagnostic). The most notable types that characterize
the Chalcolithic are the fragments of bowls with straight sides; carved
decorations which typify the Chalcolithic basalt production (triangu-
lar carvings on rims and the pedestals of basalt chalices [Amiran and
Porat 1984]); and chalices (pedestalled bowls) that are characteristic of
the period. The raw material was apparently produced from the deep
canyons of Wadi Far'ah and Wadi Maliah. The high incidence of basalt
vessels is not surprising, and presumably there was a basalt industry
in these regions. Another possibility, albeit less likely, is that the basalt
was brought from more distant mining and industrial regions (Jordan
or the Golan).
Handles (Fig. 8.5: 7–9): the lug handle is characteristic of the pe-
riod, and it appears in several sizes, with an inner diameter that ranges
from 0.5 to 6 cm. There are also loop handles (on large storage vessels
– particularly jars) and ledge handles. Contrary to what was previously
believed, ledge handles are fairly common in assemblages from the end
the pottery 153
Figure 8.5. Other common types from the Chalcolithic period – southern
Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
154 chapter eight
of the Chalcolithic, and are not just a phenomenon specific to the EB.
Ledge handles, usually on holemouth jars, were discovered in the sur-
vey and excavations (particularly at Fazael 2). The ledge handles of the
Chalcolithic are small, compared to the large and intricate handles of
the following period.
Chalices/pedestalled bowls (Fig. 8.5: 10–12): These occur in ceramic
and basalt alike. The most common type is the fenestrated chalice
which is often adorned with a rope ornamentation where the bowl is
connected to the pedestal.
Churns (Fig. 8.5: 13): Quite surprisingly, very few churns were dis-
covered during the course of the survey and excavations.
Ceramic Typology of the EB I in the Southern

Jordan Valley and Desert Fringes of Samaria
Bowls (Fig. 8.6)

Nine types and sub-types of bowls were identified, mostly locally pro-
duced. In addition, one type of pottery – grey burnished ware – origi-
nating from outside the study region, was also discovered, and it seems
to be present only in funerary assemblages. As opposed to the Chalco-
lithic period and conventional wisdom regarding the paucity of the EB
I assemblage, we have here a relatively wide range of bowl types. Some
continuity is apparent from the Chalcolithic period, especially in the
continued use of the bowls with straight sides (Types B1, see below),
and more use of various curved bowls.
Type B1a (Fig. 8.6: 1–2): a deep bowl with straight sides (continuing
the tradition of the Chalcolithic bowl) with a sharp, rounded or plain
rim. Sometimes the sides are slightly incurved, and the vessel is usually
undecorated. Unlike in the Chalcolithic, when a variety of sizes and
sub-types appear, in the EB only large bowls with an average diameter
of 25 cm appear. This type is uncommon in the EB I in the study region,
but it does occur at several sites in the southern Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.75: 2) EB Ib, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 8) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 22:
1–2) EB Ia, 3 Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 6: 5–6); (Braun and
Gophna 2004: fig. 17: 1, 7) EB Ia and 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 15:
16–17) EB Ia.
3
The identification of the ceramic assemblage that ascribes it to the EB I and not
the Chalcolithic is not agreed upon by all researchers (e.g. Braun and Gophna 2004:
220–222).
the pottery 155
Type B1b (Fig. 8.6: 3–4): a flat bowl with straight sides and sharp
or plain rim. It is usually slipped red on the inside and outside, and
has an average diameter of 10 cm. This vessel appears in EB I funerary
assemblages in the study region, and is also found at other EB I sites in
the southern Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.32: 19; 4.66: 1) EB Ia,
Ashkelon Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 22: 3); (Braun and Gophna 2004:
fig.17: 4) EB Ia.
Type B2a (Fig. 8.6: 5): a deep curved bowl with a plain, flat or bev-
elled rim that is sometimes thickened. It is usually undecorated, and
has an average diameter of 25 cm. The bowl is quite common in the
study region, as well as at other EB I sites in the southern Levant.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 212: 17) EB Ib,
Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 34: 7, 21–22) and at Bab edh-
Dhra' (Rast and Schaub 2003: fig. 7.3: 1, 5) EB Ib.
Type B2b (Fig. 8.6: 6–7): a deep bowl with upright, somewhat curved
sides, and a plain, flat or bevelled rim that is sometimes thickened. It is
usually undecorated, but sometimes there is a slightly raised decoration
(reminiscent of a lug handle) on the body. It has an average diameter
of 20 cm, and is common in the study region and at other EB I sites in
the Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.34: 15; 4.55: 1, 7) EB
Ia-b, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 12) EB Ib, and Nizzanim (Yeku-
tieli 2000: fig. 8.3: 11) EB Ia.
Type B2c (Fig. 8.6: 8): a deep curved bowl with slightly inverted sides
and a folded-in rim. It is usually undecorated, and has an average di-
ameter of 30 cm. The bowl is common in the study region, and is also
found at other EB I sites in the southern Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai 2006: fig. 4.35: 8, 22) EB Ia, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.2: 27–28) EB Ib, and Jericho (Kenyon and Holland
1982: fig. 35: 16).
Type B3 (Fig. 8.6: 9): a flat bowl with curved sides, a ledge rim, and
an average diameter of 12 cm. It is uncommon in the study region, but
is present at other EB I sites in the Southern Levant.
Parallels: Jebel Abu Thawwab (Douglas and Kafafi 2000: fig. 6.5:
6), Nizzanim (Yekutieli 2000: fig. 8.2: 2) EB Ia, and Khirbat Ilin Tahtit
(Braun 1996: fig. v.c.11: 5).
Type B4 (Fig. 8.6: 10): the most common type of bowl, curved with a
sharp or plain rim. It is usually undecorated, and has an average diam-
eter of 14 cm. It is also fairly common at other EB I sites in the southern
Figure 8.6. Types of EB I bowls – southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
the pottery 157
Levant.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.33: 11–15; 4.52: 10–11)
EB Ia-b, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 1) EB Ib, and Ashkelon Afri-
dar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 6: 4) EB Ia.
Type B5 (Fig. 8.6: 11–12): a bowl belonging to the Um Hammad fam-
ily. It is very common, especially in Wadi Far'ah. The vessel is curved
with a straight, ledge-like or bevelled rim. There are usually rope orna-
mentations on the body of the bowl. It has an average diameter of 22
cm.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 223: 11) EB Ib.
Type B6 (Fig. 8.6: 13–14): a knobbed bowl/chalice, grey-burnished.
It is rare, and appears primarily in funerary assemblages (the cemeter-
ies of Wadi Far'ah). The bowl is curved and the rim is folded out. It is
slipped grey, and decorated with knobs around the middle of the ves-
sel’s circumference. It is very common at numerous sites in the south-
ern Levant, and especially in the northern valleys (usually in the EB Ia).
A bowl identical to this does appear infrequently in the study region,
but instead of a grey slip it is slipped red.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.49: 3–10) EB Ia, Tell Um
Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 216: 5, 8) and Tell esh-Shuna (Con-
tenson 1960: fig. 9: 2).
Kraters (Fig. 8.7)

Eight types and sub-types of kraters from the EB I were identified, most
of which are in the Um Hammad style (see below, Types K1a–K1d).
Type K1a (Fig. 8.7: 1–2): an Um Hammad krater with relatively up-
right sides and a generally round outline. The rim is thickened, flat and
bevelled. Rope ornamentations appear on the body of the vessel, and
occasionally on the rim itself. It ranges from 25 to 50 cm in diameter,
and is fairly common in the study region, particularly in Wadi Far'ah.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 222: 1, 6, 8) EB Ib,
and Tell Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 1).
Type K1b (Fig. 8.7: 3–4): an Um Hammad krater with relatively up-
right sides and a generally round outline. The rim is thickened, flat and
bevelled and inverted. Rope ornamentations appear on the body of the
vessel, and occasionally on the rim itself. It has an average diameter of
30 cm, and is fairly common in the study region, particularly in Wadi
Far'ah.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 222: 3–4) EB Ib.
Type K1c (Fig. 8.7: 5–7): an Um Hammad krater with curved sides
Figure 8.7. Types of EB I kraters – southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
the pottery 159
and a generally round outline. The rim is thickened, flat and bevelled
and ledge-like, usually protruding diagonally from the outline of the
body. Rope ornamentations appear on the body of the vessel, and oc-
casionally on the rim itself. It ranges from 25 to 60 cm in diameter. It
sometimes occurs in a plain form, which does not belong to the Um
Hammad family (with no rope decoration, and the texture of the clay is
different). It is fairly common in the study region, particularly in Wadi
Far'ah.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.71: 11) EB Ia, does not
belong to the Um Hammad family.
Type K1d (Fig. 8.7: 8–9): an Um Hammad krater with upright sides
and a generally vertical outline. The rim is plain, flat or bevelled, and
sometimes ledge-like. Rope ornamentations appear on the body of the
vessel. It ranges from 25 to 55 cm in diameter. Sometimes this krater
appears in a plain form which does not belong to the Um Hammad
family (the texture of the clay is different). It is rare in the study region,
and appears mainly in Wadi Far'ah, but exists (not in the Um Hammad
form) at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.36: 6) EB Ia, not in the
Um Hammad form, and Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 18) EB Ib,
not in the Um Hammad form.
Type K2 (Fig. 8.7: 10): a deep krater with relatively upright sides,
and a plain or everted rim that forms a step, which usually does not
extend beyond the line of the body of the vessel. This krater is usually
undecorated, and has an average diameter of 35 cm. It is rare in the
study region, but does appear at other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.53: 2) EB Ib, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 17) EB Ib, and 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 16:
9).
Type K3 (Fig. 8.7: 11): a deep krater with diagonal sides and a folded-
out rim that extends from the line of the body. It is usually undecorated,
and has an average diameter of 20 cm. It is uncommon in the study
region, but does appear at other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.35: 7) EB Ia, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.4: 13) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig.
6: 8) EB Ia, and 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 16: 10) EB Ia.
Type K4 (Fig. 8.7: 12): a deep holemouth krater with a round outline
and thickened rim. It is usually decorated with a rope-like ornamenta-
tion near the rim and has an average diameter of 30 cm. It is fairly
common in the study region, and also appears at other EB I sites in the
160 chapter eight
country.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 254: 2), Yiftah'el
(Braun 1996: fig. v.c.1.c:7 – Type 56) EB Ia, and Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 39: 25).
Type K5 (Fig. 8.7: 13): a large shallow krater with slightly curved
diagonal sides. The rim is hammer-like, folded-in, and extends inward
from the body of the vessel. It is usually undecorated, and has an aver-
age diameter of 45 cm. The krater is rare in the study region, but does
appear at other EB I sites in the country. This type already appears in
Chalcolithic assemblages in the study region and also continues into
the EB II.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.35: 6, 23) EB Ia, Beth
Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.12: 20) EB Ib, and Tell Far'ah (North) (de
Vaux and Steve 1948: fig. 6: 21) EB Ib.

This is the most common vessel in the study region in the EB I (more
than 50% of the finds), of which 14 types and sub-types were identified.
Some slight continuity is apparent in the holemouth jars from the Chal-
colithic to the EB I (particularly Types H1a and H2c), and most of the
types continue into the EB II. Most of the vessels here were taken from
single-period sites of the EB I, and several are from sites that continue
into the EB II.
The EB I holemouth jars had an oblate and barrel-like form, unlike
the narrower Chalcolithic holemouth jars.
Type H1a (Fig. 8.8: 1): a narrow holemouth jar (continuity from the
Chalcolithic) with a plain or curved rim with an average diameter of 15
cm. It is rare in the study region, and also appears infrequently at other
sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.56: 14) EB Ib, Beth
Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 1–2) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Braun and
Gophna 2004: fig. 20: 1–3) EB Ia, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 21: 10)
EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 140: 1–4) EB Ia.
Type H1b (Fig. 8.8: 2): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form and
a plain or round rim, and an average diameter of 23 cm. It is common
in the study region, and also appears at other contemporary sites in the
country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.70: 9; 4.76: 3) EB Ia-b,
Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.5: 2–3) EB Ib, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985:
fig. 21: 11–12) EB Ia, and Bab edh-Dhra' (Schaub and Rast 2000: fig.
the pottery 161
4.2: 4) EB Ia.
Type H1c (Fig. 8.8: 3–4): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form and
a sharp and inverted rim with an average diameter of 25 cm. It usually
has an incised decoration of short stripes on or below the rim. It is
common in the study region, and appears at other sites in the country.
without the incised decoration, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 22: 8) EB
Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 146: 1) EB Ia.
Type H2a (Fig. 8.8: 5): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form and a
plain thickened, bevelled or round rim with an average diameter of 25
cm. It is common in the study region, and also appears at other sites in
the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.56: 1–3; 4.69: 2) EB Ia-b,
Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 5) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Braun
and Gophna 2004: fig. 20: 5) EB Ia, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
1992: figs. 143: 5, 6; 169: 2, 6) EB Ia, and Bab edh-Dhra' (Schaub and
Rast 2000: fig. 4.5: 13–14) EB Ib.
Type H2b (Fig. 8.8: 6): a holemouth jar with a narrow form and a
sharp thickened or plain rim with an average diameter of 25 cm. It
is common in the study region, and also appears at other sites in the
country.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 141: 2) EB Ia, and
Tell esh-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig. 11: 1) EB Ia.
Type H2c (Fig. 8.8: 7): a very narrow holemouth jar with a thickened
bevelled rim and an average diameter of 20 cm. It is rare in the study
region, but does appear at other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 12) EB Ib, Beth Yerah
(Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 14) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004:
fig. 7: 11) EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 155: 12)
EB Ib.
Type H3 (Fig. 8.8: 8): a small narrow holemouth jar with a flat, bev-
elled inverted rim with an average diameter of 16 cm. The vessel is rare
in the study region, but does appear at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.43: 10) EB Ia, Tell Um
Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: figs. 143: 5–6; 170: 6–7) and Jericho (Ke-
nyon and Holland 1982: fig. 39: 9).
Type H4 (Fig. 8.8: 9–13): various size holemouth jars belonging to
the Um Hammad family (rim diameter 15–40 cm). Most have a barrel-
like form and bevelled rims. The Um Hammad type of rope decoration
usually appears on the rim and body. These are common only in the
162 chapter eight
Figure 8.8. Types of EB I holemouth jars – southern Jordan Valley

the pottery 163
Figure 8.8. (continued) Types of EB I holemouth jars – southern Jordan

Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
164 chapter eight
study region, and are not found elsewhere in the southern Levant.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms 1987: fig. 9: 2; Helms et al. 1992:
figs. 162; 234: 1–3) EB Ib.
Type H5 (Fig. 8.8: 14–16): a holemouth jar with a barrel-like form
and a thickened and rounded rim with a thin ridge. It has an average
rim diameter of 28 cm. It is very common in the study region, and also
appears at other sites in the country.
Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 13) EB Ib, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985:
fig. 22: 3–6) EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 158:
2–5) EB Ib.
Type H6 (Fig. 8.8: 17): a small holemouth jar with a barrel-like form
and a flat ridged rim with an average diameter of 14 cm. There is usu-
ally an incised decoration or rope ornamentation on the rim. The vessel
is rare in the study region, but does appear at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.44: 13; 4.46: 2) EB Ia,
Tell esh-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig. 11: 4) EB Ia, Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 40: 5) and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig.
148: 1).
Type H7 (Fig. 8.8: 18): a holemouth jar with a channelled rim with an
average diameter of 28 cm. It forms a kind of thin ridge at the top of the
vessel’s rim. The type is common in the study region, and also appears
at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.44: 2) EB Ia, Qiryat Ata
(Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 9) EB Ib, and Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004:
fig. 7: 10) EB Ia.
Type H8 (Fig. 8.8: 19): a barrel-like holemouth jar with an inverted
rim with an average diameter of 20 cm. It is rare in the study region,
but does appear at other sites in the country. This type also appears in
Chalcolithic assemblages in the study region (Type H3b of the Chalco-
lithic, Fig. 8.3).
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.42: 15–17) EB Ia, Qiryat
Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.6: 2–3) EB Ib, Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig.
2.13: 20) EB Ib, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 153: 1–8)
EB Ia.
Type H9 (Fig. 8.8: 20): a barrel-like holemouth jar with a very thick
flat rim. It has an average diameter of 16 cm and forms a kind of thick-
ened neck for the vessel. It is rare in the study region, but does appear
at other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.46: 9, 12; 4.58: 14) EB Ia,
Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 23) EB Ib, Tell Um Hammad (Helms
the pottery 165
et al. 1992: fig. 147: 3, 8) and Beth Shean (Braun 2004: fig. 3.11: 8).
Jars (Fig. 8.9)

Twelve types and sub-types of EB I jars and amphoriskoi were identi-
fied. Continuity from the Chalcolithic period is apparent in some of
the types (J2a, J4a, J4b). Many of the types also continue to appear in
the EB II (therefore most of the types were defined from single-period
sites of the EB I).
Type J1a (Fig. 8.9: 1): an Um Hammad type jar with a long neck and
a flat rim that extends outward. Rope ornamentations usually appear
on the rim, neck and body. It has a rim diameter of 18 cm. This type is
common in the study region.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 187) EB Ib, and
Beth Shean (Braun 2004: pl. I: 3).
Type J1b (Fig. 8.9: 2–4): a jar from the same family, with a narrow
neck and flat rim that extends outward. Rope ornamentations occur on
the rim and neck of the vessel. It has an average rim diameter of 20 cm,
and is common in the study region.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 203: 5–6) EB Ib.
Type J1c (Fig. 8.9: 5): a jar from the same family, with a long neck and
flat rim that extends in and out from the line of the body. Rope orna-
mentations occur on the rim and neck of the vessel. It has an average
rim diameter of 15 cm, and is common in the study region.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 189: 1, 4) EB Ib,
and Tell Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 2).
Type J1d (Fig. 8.9: 6–7): a jar/amphoriskos in the Um Hammad
form or a regular amphoriskos. It is characterized by a long neck and
a prominently everted rim. Sometimes there is rope ornamentation on
the neck below the rim. The rim diameter ranges from 8 to 18 cm. The
type is rare in the study region, but does appear at other sites in the
country.
Parallels: Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 190) EB Ib, Tell
Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1948: fig. 5: 9), 'En Esur (Yannai et
al. 2006: figs. 4.38: 6, 7; 4.58: 8, 9) EB Ia-b, not from the Um Hammad
family, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.8: 11,16) EB Ib, not from the Um
Hammad family, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 175:
8–9) EB Ia, not from the Um Hammad family.
Type J2a (Fig. 8.9: 8–10): a jar with an everted neck and rim and an
average diameter of 15 cm. There is also a pithos with an identical form
that has a rope decoration on the rim. This is a continuation of Type J2
166 chapter eight
Figure 8.9. Types of EB I jars – southern Jordan Valley

the pottery 167
Figure 8.9. (continued) Types of EB I jars – southern Jordan Valley

168 chapter eight
from the Chalcolithic. It is common in the study region, and is found at

numerous other sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.37: 16–19; 4.39: 1; 4.57:
1) EB Ia-b, Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.16: 4–5) EB Ib, Ashkelon
Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 9: 5–7) EB Ia, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig.
20: 9, 11) EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: figs. 175: 2–3;
202: 9–10) EB Ia-b.
Type J2b (Fig. 8.9: 11–13): a jar/pithos with a long neck and a folded-
out rim, with an average diameter of 18 cm. This type became one of
the main types of jars in the EB II. It is common in the study region,
particularly at the desert fringe sites of Samaria, and is also found at
numerous other EB I sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.76: 10) EB Ib, Qiryat
Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.13: 11, 14) EB Ib, Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig.
2.15: 16) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 8: 1, 3) EB Ia, 'En
Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 23: 7) EB Ia, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
1992: fig. 207: 1–3) and Jebel Abu Thawwab (Douglas and Kafafi 2000:
fig. 6.4: 5).
Type J3 (Fig. 8.9: 14): a jar/pithos (rail rim pithos) with a narrow
neck and a thickened, plain or round rim, with an average diameter of
25 cm. Sometimes there is an incised decoration on the rim (similar
to the decoration on the holemouth jars). It is uncommon in the study
region, but does appear at a number of sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.71: 10) EB Ia, without
the incised decoration, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.13: 17) EB Ib,
without the incised decoration, Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 9)
EB Ib, without incising, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 176:
6) EB Ia, without incising, and Tell Iktanu (Prag 2000: fig. 5.3: 7).
Type J4a (Fig. 8.9: 15–17): a jar with a long neck and a slightly everted
rim, 12 to 23 cm in diameter. There is often rope ornamentation on the
neck below the rim. This vessel is a continuation of Type J1b from the
Chalcolithic. It is common in the study region, and appears at other
sites in the country.
Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.4.38: 11–17) EB Ia, Qiryat
Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.9: 4) EB Ib, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
1992: fig.178: 3–6) EB Ia, and Jebel Abu Thawwab (Douglas and Kafafi
2000: fig.6.4: 1).
Type J4b (Fig. 8.9: 18–19): an amphoriskos with a narrow neck and
an everted rim, with an average diameter of 7 cm. It is uncommon in
the study region, and appears mainly in burial assemblages but is also
the pottery 169
present at a number of sites in the country.

Parallels: 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.38: 21; 4.41: 6; 4.60: 5,8)
EB Ia-b, Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.8: 4) EB Ib, Beth Yerah (Getzov
2006: fig. 2.14: 2) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 9: 16–17)
EB Ia, 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 19: 17) EB Ia, and Tell Um Hammad
(Helms et al. 1992: fig. 193: 10–16).
Type J5a (Fig. 8.9: 20): an amphoriskos with an inverted neck, plain
rim, and a high loop handle extending above the rim, with an average
diameter of 17 cm. It is usually slipped red, and is sometimes burnished.
The type is uncommon in the study region, and appears mainly in fu-
nerary assemblages, but is found at a number of sites in the country.
Parallels: Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.8: 1) EB Ib, Beth Yerah (Get-
zov 2006: fig. 2.14: 2) EB Ib, Jawa (Helms 1987: fig. 7: 7), Tell Far'ah
(North) (de Vaux and Steve 1969: 119, fig. 1: 20).
Type J5b (Fig. 8.9: 21–22): an amphoriskos with an everted neck,
a plain or sharp rim, and a high loop handle above the rim, with an
average diameter of 10 cm. It is usually slipped red, and is sometimes
burnished. This type is rare in the study region, and appears mainly in
funerary assemblages, but is found at a number of sites in the country.
Qiryat Ata (Golani 2003: fig. 4.8: 2–3) EB Ib, Ashkelon Afridar (Kha-
laily 2004: fig. 10: 3) EB Ia, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig.
209: 14–15) and Tell Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1969: 119, fig.
1: 13–14).
Miscellaneous (Fig. 8.10)

Handles (Figure 8.10: 1–8): several styles of the ledge handle are charac-
teristic, the most prominent being the wavy handle and smooth handle.
Frequently the handles are decorated with thumb impressions or a cut
design that resembles triangles. The handles are affixed horizontally
or at a slight diagonal to the body of the vessel. There are also loop
handles, on the large storage vessels, particularly jars, and several lug
handles.
Basalt vessels (Fig. 8.10: 9–10): relatively few were found compared to
the Chalcolithic. The most common types are vessels used to prepare
food (and which are mostly non-diagnostic). Noteworthy among the
types characteristic of the EB I are the bowls with straight sides and an
everted rim (Amiran and Porat 1984; Braun 1990). The raw material
is available in the deep ravines in Wadi Far'ah and Wadi Malih, where
there was presumably an industry engaged in the production of basalt
170 chapter eight
Figure 8.10. Other common EB I types – southern Jordan Valley

and desert fringes of Samaria
the pottery 171
vessels.
Chalices/pedestalled bowls (Figure 8.10: 11): these were found only in
ceramic. The most popular type was the fenestrated chalice.
Remarks about the Chalcolithic and EB I

Pottery in the Study Region
Chalcolithic
The holemouth jars are the most common vessels, of which the hole-
mouth jar with a narrow body and plain rim is common (Type H1, Fig.
8.3). This vessel constitutes approximately half of the vessels identified
in the surveys and excavations.
1. Other frequent vessels are bowls with straight sides and a red
slipped stripe on the rim (Types B1, B2, Fig. 8.1), kraters with a
straight or diagonal ledge rim (Types K1–K3, Fig. 8.2) and jars
with a small flaring rim (Type J2, Fig. 8.4).
2. The following types are almost completely absent from the assem-
blages:
a. Cornet (except for a single item from the Fazael 2 excavations,
and items discovered at Tell Sheikh Diab and in Mellaart’s ex-
cavation at Jiftlik). In addition, the use of this vessel diminishes
north of Teleilat Ghassul (where the cornet is very common).
b. Figurines – although an area of about 400 m2 was excavated,
and dozens of Chalcolithic sites were surveyed, no figurines
of any kind were found. It is difficult to assume that these are
almost completely absent from the study region, and they are
probably concentrated in cultic complexes that have not yet
been discovered, reinforcing the idea of public practice rather
than a household one.
3. Lug handles and loop handles are extremely common, but ledge
handles, which were previously considered a hallmark of just
the EBA, already begin appearing in the Chalcolithic. The ledge
handles of the Chalcolithic period that appear on large storage
vessels are small and horizontal, and are sometimes decorated
with thumb impressions. These are reminisent of the PN and
early Chalcolithic pottery traditions.
4. Slip and Decoration – contrary to popular opinion only a very
small minority of the vessels are decorated or slipped (the slip ap-
pears on about 2% of the assemblage that was examined, and there
172 chapter eight
are plastic or other decorations on fewer than 1% of the vessels).

A red stripe frequently appears on the rim (on 85% of the slipped
vessels) and coarse thumb-fashioned rope ornamentations mostly
appear on kraters and large basins (75% of the decorated vessels).
5. There is some difference between the survey assemblages from
the southern Beth Shean Valley and those from the region of Wadi
Far'ah and the Fazael Valley. This is manifested, for example, by
the multitude of kraters and large basins in the southern Beth
Shean Valley, and a decrease in their numbers towards the south.
6. Petrographic analyses4 (a small sample from 'Ein Hilu and Fazael
2) showed that most of the vessels were produced in the imme-
diate proximity of the sites (from a marine formation belonging
to the Lower Cretaceous which is common in the wadis east of
Samaria), and were not brought from afar. This is similar to the
situation at other Chalcolithic sites in the southern Levant (e.g.
Shiqmim – Goren and Gilead 1987: 414).
7. The pottery in the southern Beth Shean Valley, especially the
kraters/basins/pithoi with rope ornamentations (Type K3, com-
pare with pls. 1, 2, 7, and 11 in Epstein 1998) somewhat resemble
the Golan ceramics from a typological standpoint (the fabric is
entirely different), but the amount of rope ornamentations in the
Golan exceeds that of the survey assemblages in the southern
Beth Shean Valley.
8. The following Chalcolithic types do not continue into the EB I:
– Churns,
– The red stripe decoration on bowls with straight sides; the
bowls continue into the EB without the decoration (the red
stripe decoration appears infrequently on the hemispherical
bowls),
– Large basins/pithoi with ledge rims and coarsely decorated
thumb impressions on the body of the vessel.
In conclusion, the pottery of the Chalcolithic in the study region is
similar to that of other regions in the Southern Levant. The absence of
certain types might indicate a regional difference, but most of the types
are widespread and the difference is not great. The situation is different
in the EB I – see below.
4
By Y. Goren, Tel Aviv University.
the pottery 173
EB I
1. The most common type is the holemouth jar, constituting more
than half of the vessels in the surveys and excavations. Especially
common are the holemouth jars with an oblate/barrel-like body
(Types H1, H2a, Fig. 8.8) and those with a ridge (Type H5, Fig.
8.8).
2. Also common are curved bowls (Types B2, B4, Fig. 8.6), kraters
with a straight rim, especially in the Um Hammad style (Types
K1a–K1c, Fig. 8.7), jars with a tall neck and flaring rim (Type J2b,
Fig. 8.9) and jars with an everted rim (Types J2a, J4a, Fig. 8.9).
3. The region is especially characterized by Um Hammad pottery
ware (see below).
4. Unlike other parts of the southern Levant, and contrary to the
belief that the EB I assemblage is poor, there are relative many
varieties of types. The number of types is greater than that of the
Chalcolithic period, which is thought to have a more diverse ma-
terial culture. This was checked in the totality of surveyed sites
and in the number of types at each site. The difference in the va-
riety of bowls and kraters is particularly conspicuous.
5. The following types are almost completely absent from the survey
and excavation assemblages:
a. Line Grouped Painted Ware: only two such items were found:
one in a survey at Tana Cave, and the other in the excavation at
Sheikh Diab 2. These vessels, mainly characteristic of the south
of the country (Amiran 1969: 49), appear in small numbers
in Jordan at Tell esh-Shuna (Leonard 1992: pl. 12: 7), in large
numbers at Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1983: figs. passim),
and at 'Ai in the EB II (Callaway 1980). The latter are close to
our study region.
b. Only a few red burnished vessels appear, mainly in the funer-
ary assemblages.
c. Grey Burnished Ware/Esdraelon Ware, characteristic of the EB
I in the north of the country, appears in the study region almost
exclusively in the burial assemblages in Wadi Far'ah. We should
mention that these vessels were discovered in the Hasmonean
palaces in Jericho (Pritchard 1958: pl. 37), which is not a burial
site and is located to the south, as well as at Tell Far'ah (North)
(de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 12). Such vessels were also dis-
covered in Jordan, for example at Tell Um Hammad (Leonard
174 chapter eight
1992: pl. 24: 1–5) and at Tell esh-Shuna (Leonard 1992: pl. 8:
1–2). The infrequency of these vessels seems to indicate that
the study region is the southern edge of their distribution. Pe-
trographic analyses of two of the knobby grey burnished bowls
discovered in the Manasseh Hill Country Survey in the cem-
eteries of Wadi Far'ah at el-Maqbarah (Site 27) and Maqbarat
en-Nuseriyyeh (Site 26), showed that the raw material is in-
digenous. It was collected at the Lower Cretaceous outcrops
that also exist in Wadi Far'ah itself. Therefore, despite its being
the southern distribution boundary, the vessels were produced
in local workshops in eastern Samaria (see similar results of
tests conducted by Goren on vessels from Tell Far'ah (North)
and from the site at Aqrabaniyeh – Goren 1990). The vessel
was primarily made as a funerary offering, but it is also found
in small numbers in domestic assemblages at Tell Um Ham-
mad and Tell Far'ah (North). The only type of grey burnished
bowl whose only provenance is the cemeteries of Tell Far'ah
(North) and Aqrabaniyeh is called ‘Wright’s Type 2’,5 and it was
not found in other funerary assemblages in the region (other
burial sites in Wadi Far'ah and Qa'un). Hence this is appar-
ently a micro-localized phenomenon that is rare in the study
region in particular, and in the country in general (as opposed
to parallel studies that attribute importance to this type, despite
its being found at just two sites: e.g. Louhivuori 1988: 309, and
Milevski 2011: chapter 3). This phenomenon substantiates the
possibility of local production of grey burnished bowls in Wadi
Far'ah.
d. Egyptian style vessels characteristic of the south of the country.
e. Unique vessels that were found at Bab edh-Dhra' that are char-
acteristic east of the Dead Sea and in the northern 'Arava.
f. Folded ledge handles of the EB I in the south of the country
(although such vessels were found in Herodian Jericho, south
of the study region: Pritchard 1958: pl. 29: 4–5).
g. Bow rim pithoi of the EB I in the north of the country.
h. Bowls with an omphalos base were discovered only in the
burial assemblages in Wadi Far'ah. Their major concentration
was found at Tell Far'ah (North). Their presence in burial as-
5
Two types of this vessel are known: a bowl with a flattened base and a fenestrated
chalice (both are slipped but not burnished, unlike the other types of this family). Ac-
cording to Wright (1958) this type is characteristic of EB Ia.
the pottery 175
semblages (de Vaux 1951: figs. 4–5, 7) suggests that this is a

type that was specifically intended for funerary assemblages
(it was also discovered in tombs in the region, at 'Ai and in
Givatayim – details in Braun (1996: 206).
i. Rail rim pithoi (Type J3, Fig. 3.9), a northern type in the EB I.
Recently researchers have set the southern limits of its distribu-
tion at Tel Kitan and Tel Shalem in the southern Beth Shean
Valley (Braun 1996: 199), but finding it in survey sites in the
southern Jordan Valley, Jelamet el-Ahmar (B) and at Bab ed-
Dayyq in Wadi Far'ah, and 'Ain Duma in the southern desert
fringes of Samaria, and in the excavations at Sheikh Diab 2,
extend its southern distribution to Wadi Fazael.
j. Crackled Ware vessels characteristic of the Jezreel Valley, and
particularly Tel Beth Yerah.
6. Slip and decoration – some of the domestic vessels were deco-
rated, but most of the vessels in the domestic assemblages were
not slipped (a slip appeared on less than 1% of the assemblage
that was examined, and a plastic or other decoration appeared
on about 7% of the vessels). Red slip was common, usually on the
entire vessel (in 95% of the slipped vessels). Also common was
the delicate plastic rope ornamentation of the Um Hammad fam-
ily, especially on kraters, holemouth jars and jars (about 75% of
the decorated vessels). Also common were incised stripes (usually
diagonal) on the rim or the shoulder, and the addition of a plastic
ridge (thin or thick) on the rim, below the rim or on the body.
7. Grain Wash/Band Slip decoration, characteristic mainly in the
north of the country, was common in the north of the region (the
southern part of the Beth Shean Valley), but it also appeared in
the south (e.g. Sheikh Diab 2). There were many variants to the
technique, and it is not always possible to differentiate between
the classic decoration and painted stripe decorations of other
kinds (for example Braun 1996: 198). It seems that the decoration
was most prevalent in the latter part of the period and continued
also, albeit with less frequency, later (in the study region it ap-
peared at el-Makhruq in the EB II). Recently it was found in an
EB III assemblage at Khirbat ez-Zearqon in Jordan (Genz 2000).
8. In relatively early phases of the period the Splash and Drip style
decoration was common, which was done by randomly splattering
red paint primarily on large vessels. A similar entire holemouth
jar was found at Sheikh Diab 2, and an identical one was found
176 chapter eight
at Jiftlik (Leonard 1992: pl. 1: 24, 26). The decoration already

appeared in Jordan in the Chalcolithic period (e.g. at Tell Abu
Hamid – Vaillant 1989: fig. 31 and at Tell Abu Habil—Leonard
1992: pl. 21: 1–2, 4, and 16), but it is mostly common in the EB I
(e.g. at Tell esh-Shuna—Gustavson-Gaube 1985: fig. 9: 24, 25, 27
and at Jericho – Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 37: 22; 1983: fig.
46: 4, etc.).
9. In the absence of a fossil directeur and because of limited assem-
blages, it is difficult in a survey to distinguish between the end of
the Chalcolithic and the beginning of the EB I. Without excavat-
ing it is also impossible to differentiate between the later phases
of the Chalcolithic (such as Fazael 2) and the beginning of the EB.
The picture changes completely during the EB I with the appear-
ance of Um Hammad pottery family.
10. Petrographic analyses of vessels from the Sheikh Diab 2 site and
a group of Um Hammad and grey burnished vessels proved that
most of the vessels were produced near the sites where they were
found. They are apparently made of clay derived from the Lower
Cretaceous outcrops, from Wadi Far'ah or other wadis in eastern
Samaria east of the Far'ah anticline.
The source of another, more limited group, from Sheikh Diab 2
is the Taqiye marl of the Pliocene epoch, common at the EB sites
in the south of the country. It is difficult to distinguish a more
precise source for this group.
11. Several types from the Chalcolithic continued into the EB I (for
example Types B1, H1a, H2, J2a, J4a, J4b) but most of the types
were new. Many of the EB I vessels (particularly bowls, jars and
holemouth jars) also continued to the next period. The Um Ham-
mad ware (see below) was an exception. Curiously, these are
typologically similar to the Chalcolithic Golan ware, and do not
continue into the EB II.
12. Some believe (Louhivuori 1988: 307 based on Tell Far'ah [North];
Braun 1996: 184) that the southern Jordan Valley was a separate
entity, or the border of a sector between two cultures of the period:
the ‘northern’ culture (characterized primarily by grey burnished
ware types), and the southern (which was mainly characterized
by Grain Wash). Our research shows that the infrequency of
these types negates the use of them in defining the boundaries
between these amorphous entities. The central southern Jordan
Valley certainly seems to us to be a region with a unique cultural
the pottery 177
phenomenon (that is expressed in Um Hammad ware), but its

implications are still not completely clear (see discussion below).
In conclusion, the EB I pottery in the study region is somewhat different
from that in other regions of the southern Levant. It is interesting that
the types known from Kenyon’s excavation in Jericho (Kenyon 1979:
66–67) do not characterize the sites of the southern Jordan Valley and
desert fringes of Samaria. This is surprising because of the proximity of
Jericho to our southern border, but most of the Jericho assemblages are
from tombs, which are different from ordinary pottery ware (Louhi-
vuori 1988: 39 arrived at a similar conclusion). It therefore seems that
the funerary vessels had a special status, and most of them were not
very common in household assemblages.
The Um Hammad phenomenon in our region is remarkable (see
below). Petrographic analyses, together with dozens of sites with such
vessels, show that the centre of the phenomenon was in Wadi Far'ah
itself, and not in Jordan, where Tell Um Hammad is located.
Comparison of the pottery of three excavated sites: 'Ein Hilu,

Fazael 2, and Sheikh Diab 2
This section presents a preliminary analysis of the comparison of the
ceramic finds excavated at three sites in the Jordan Valley that consti-
tuted a certain sequence from the Chalcolithic ('Ein Hilu) through the
end of the period (Fazael 2) until the EB I (Sheikh Diab 2).
A check of the frequency of the types at the different sites raises the
following points:
1. Bowls are common at the Chalcolithic sites (44% of the finds at
'Ein Hilu and 47.8% at Fazael 2), and are infrequent at Sheikh
Diab 2 (22.8% only).
2. At Sheikh Diab 2 the large vessels (pithoi, jars and holemouth
jars) constitute close to 80% of the finds – significantly higher
than the Chalcolithic sites.
3. Churns, which are characteristic of the Chalcolithic, were only
found at 'Ein Hilu. A single fragment of a cornet was found (Fazael
2).
A check of the surface treatment of the vessels at the different sites
raises the following points:
1. At Fazael 2 the slip and plastic decorations were totally insig-
nificant, and the surface of the vast majority of the finds was not
178 chapter eight
treated.
2. At 'Ein Hilu red slip (5.2% of the finds – mainly as a line on bowl
rims) was much more common than the plastic decoration (0.4%).
3. At Sheikh Diab 2 the frequencies of plastic decorations and slip
were similar (2.1% and 1.9% respectively). The most decorated
vessel was the holemouth jar, which in the Chalcolithic sites was
usually not decorated.
4. The rope ornamentation was the common plastic decoration at
the Chalcolithic sites; whereas in the EB I incised diagonal stripes
on or near the rim, which did not exist in the Chalcolithic, was the
prevalent decoration.
5. A red slipped stripe on the rim that was common at 'Ein Hilu,
and to a lesser extent at Fazael 2, does not occur at Sheikh Diab 2,
where the complete slip of the vessel was prevalent.
These data show great changes in decorative styles between the periods.
A check of the typological continuity raises the following points:
1. The ‘V-shaped’ bowl occurred at the three sites, but was signifi-
cantly more frequent in the Chalcolithic sites.
2. The curved or hemispherical bowls occurred at the three sites, but
increased in frequency as the Chalcolithic progressed.
3. Jars with flared rims occurred at the three sites, but were more
common at Fazael 2 and Sheikh Diab 2.
4. A wide variety of holemouth jars characterized the three sites.
The most unusual phenomenon was the relatively narrow body at
'Ein Hilu and the widening of the upper part of the vessel as the
Chalcolithic progressed.
These data show that the main types in the different period assem-
blages also continued in the subsequent periods, and presumably there
was morphological continuity between the periods on a macro level,
and on a micro level changes were adopted and consumer priorities
changed in each period.
In addition, it is important to mention that almost no complete ves-
sels were found at the Chalcolithic sites, and that the preservation is
better at Sheikh Diab 2 and vessels were found in situ.
Analysis of the data shows the ceramic assemblage from 'Ein Hilu to
be typical of the Ghassulian Chalcolithic (the frequency of ‘V-shaped’
bowls, narrow body holemouth jars, churns, spoons, a slipped red
stripe [‘lipstick’] on the rim, rope-like plastic ornamentation, etc.), that
of Sheikh Diab 2 as characteristic of the EB I (the frequency of bowls
the pottery 179
with curved or hemispherical sides, holemouth jars with wide barrel-

like bodies, red slipped bowls, a high frequency of jars with everted
rims, amphoriskoi, etc.), and that of Fazael 2 as a unique assemblage
with different characteristics from the other two sites. The following
elements characterize the Fazael 2 assemblage:
1. Paucity of slip and decoration.
2. Includes types characteristic mainly of Chalcolithic assemblages,
but some of the types continued into the EB I.
Hence we can assume that the assemblage from Fazael 2 is a Chalco-
lithic assemblage on the verge of transitioning to the EB. Further exca-
vation at the site and enlargement of the ceramic assemblage will aid
in more precisely determining this site’s location on the seam between
the periods.
The Um Hammad Pottery
Introduction6
The most common type of pottery associated with advanced phases of
EB I in the region of the southern Jordan valley and the desert fringes of
Samaria is a highly distinctive family or group known as Um Hammad
Ware, or Proto-Urban D (PUD) Ware (de Miroschedji 1971: 34–37).
To date, this kind of pottery was thought to be concentrated mostly
around the eponymous site of Tell Um Hammad in the eastern Jordan
valley (de Miroschedji 1971; Braun 1996). This study presents new evi-
dence which suggests that this ware was dispersed over a considerably
larger region than previously thought.
History of Research
Decorated vessels of this class of pottery were first identified in a sur-
vey by Glueck (1951), and in surveys and excavations conducted by de
Contenson (1960) and Mellaart (1962) at Tell Um Hammad esh-Sherqi
in the Jordan Valley east of the river. It was Mellaart (1966) who intro-
duced the term ‘Um Hamad esh-Sherqi Ware’, which eventually came to
be known as Um Hammad Ware. De Miroschedji (1971), followed by
Hanbury-Tenison (1986), referred to the style as PUD, supplementing
6
This chapter is based on a paper published by the author in the Palestine Explora-
tion Quarterly 142(2) (Bar 2010). An on-line version of this journal can be viewed
in www.maneypublishing.com/journals/peg and www.ingentaconnect.com/content/
maney/peg.
180 chapter eight
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
205 205
1 Wadi Shubash
3
2
200 4 200
34
Riv e r J o rda n
5
195 195
di Mali h
Wa
190 190
35
TELL
EL-FAR'AH
185
(NORTH) 6
185
7 8
9 10
15 11
12
14
16 13
180 180
17
18
19
20
175 175
22 21
a
rq
e
W 23 iZ
ad 24
d
Wa
25 i Fa
26 r'a
Wa h
170 di 170
A hmar TELL
UM HAMMAD
165 165
28 27
Ri v
29
e r Jor
160 Wadi F 160

az
ael
da
n
155 155
150 150
Wadi 'Auj
jeh
145 145
0 5
km JERICHO 0 50
km
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 8.11. Map of the distribution of Um Hammad pottery in

the southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of Samaria. Site
numbers corresponed to those in Table 8.1.
the pottery 181
it to Kenyon’s ethnic (i.e. pottery = people) identifications associated

with EB I ceramic types (Proto-Urban A, Proto-Urban B and Proto-
Urban C) of the southern Levant.
Number Site Indicative

Site in map Catalogue sherds Main types Region
(Fig. 8.11) number (N)
Beth Shean
Khirbet Qa'un (1) 1 1 3 H4
valley
Beth Shean
Qa'un Cemetery 2 3 2 H4
valley
Beth Shean
Tell Qa'un 3 4 3 H4, K1a, K1c
valley
Beth Shean
'Ain ed-Deir 4 11 1 K1c
valley
Khirbet Wadi Desert
5 17 11 B5, H4
edh-Dhb'ah fringes
el-Khellaiyel 6 24 36 B5, K1a-c Wadi Far'ah
B5, K1a-c, H4,
Khirbet 'Ain Farr 7 30 32 Wadi Far'ah
J1c
Tell Miski 8 32 12 K1a, K1c, H4 Wadi Far'ah
Khirbet Murassas 9 33 8 K1a, B5 Wadi Far'ah
Tell Shibli 10 34 5 Wadi Far'ah
'Ain Shibli 11 35 5 K1c Wadi Far'ah
Ras Bilam ez-Zef 12 36 3 Wadi Far'ah
Jelamet el-Ahmar B5, K1a, H4,
13 38 25 Wadi Far'ah
(A) J1b, J1d
Jelamet el-Ahmar B5, K1a-d,
(B) H4, J1b
ed-Dweir 15 40 41 K1c-d, H4 Wadi Far'ah
Mughur 'Id 16 41 20 K1c, J1b Wadi Far'ah
Tell Za'anuni 17 42 28 K1a, H4 Wadi Far'ah
Khirbet
18 47 1 B5 Wadi Far'ah
Basaliyyeh
Khirbet Wadi J1a, J1d, H4,
umm-Wated K1c, B5
Desert
'Ain Mta'a 20 54 52 K1a-c, H4, J1c
fringes
Kaziyet el-Ratrut 21 56 2 Wadi Far'ah
Desert
el 'Ain et-Tahta 22 58 1 K1c
fringes
Far'at ej-Jiftlik 23 62 19 K1c, J1a Wadi Far'ah
el-Makhruq 24 63 1 Wadi Far'ah
182 chapter eight
Number Site Indicative

Site in map Catalogue sherds Main types Region
(Fig. 8.11) number (N)
Desert
Khirbet Juraish 25 64 6 K1c
fringes
Desert
'Ain Juraish 26 65 12
fringes
Desert
Khirbet Rahiyeh 27 96 5 J1a-b
fringes
Desert
'Ain Duma 28 97 20 K1c
fringes
Desert
'Ain Rashash 29 98 34 K1a
fringes
Er-Rjjum 30 43 7 H4, B5 Wadi Far'ah
Khirbet Wadi
31 48 5 K1c Wadi Far'ah
el-Joffe
Shunet el- J1a-b, H4,
Masna'ah K1a, K1c, B5
Mantaket Wadi
33 57 19 H4, K1a-c, B5 Wadi Far'ah
Zeit
Beth Shean
Tell Abu Sus 34 14 1 K1d
valley
Zertal
Abu Loz 35 2008, site 4 Wadi Far'ah
187
Total 523
Table 8.1. Distribution of Um Hammad pottery in the study region.
Um Hammad Ware – Definition and Typology

This class or ‘family’ of Um Hammad Ware, which includes several
morphological types, fulfils several of Rice’s (1987) designations for
traditional definitions of archaeological ‘wares’. These include excel-
lently crafted forms and well-levigated fabrics, ranging in colour from
shades of red to dark brown and grey. Um Hammad Ware includes
bowls, kraters, and holemouth and other jar types. All are characterized
by thick walls, decorated rims and unique rope ornamentations applied
to the bodies of the vessels. Also identified with this class are numer-
ous vessel fragments, especially ledge handles with wavy or indented
edges, or with rope-like applications (e.g. de Miroschedji 1971: pl. 15).
However, such features on their own are not exclusively associated with
Um Hammad Ware. They are also found on ledge handles in a variety
of fabrics on vessels not of this class.
the pottery 183
While re-analysing the finds from the latest surveys in the region,
the author noticed the dominance of this ware in recovered assem-
blages, especially at sites in the Wadi Far'ah catchment area. This class
of pottery was absent from several large, known cemetery sites in the
region, suggesting that it was probably a local commonly used (i.e. non-
luxury) ware.
The following are descriptions of the major morphological types of
Um Hammad Ware. These descriptions are based on a sample of pot-
tery sherds recovered from surveys.
Bowls
Bowls in this class (Fig. 8.12: 1–2) tend to be somewhat squat, with gen-
tly curving walls and widened, flattened or slightly bevelled rims with
mean diameters of about 22 cm. Most examples are ornamented with
rope-like decoration. At Tell Um Hammad, these are best represented
in Helms’ Genre 51 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 223: 11).
Kraters and large bowls

Four types of kraters and large bowls are known in the assemblage of
Um Hammad Ware.
Type K1 (Fig. 8.12: 3–4) has a rounded contour and a relatively steep
wall. The rim is thickened, flattened and cut; sizes range between 25
and 60 cm in diameter. Rope ornamentation appears on the bodies of
such vessels, and frequently on their rims. The type is known at Tell Um
Hammad as Genre 50 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 222: 1, 6, and 8) and at Tell
el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 1).
Type K2 (Fig. 8.12: 5–6) is notable for its steep sides and slightly in-
verted, thickened rim. It has a diameter of about 30 cm, suggesting that
most examples were rather deep in proportion to their width. Rope
ornamentation was usually applied to the body of these vessels, and
occasionally to their rims. Parallels are found at Tell Um Hammad in
Genre 50 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 222: 3–4).
Type K3 (Fig. 8.12: 7–9) is notable because the rim of this type of
vessel extends beyond the width of its wall, is particularly thick, and is
either flat or bevelled. Examples range in diameter between 25 and 60
cm. The bodies of these vessels bear the distinctive rope ornamenta-
tion of this ware on their exterior walls, and occasionally on their rims.
Parallels are found at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1948:
fig. 5: 13).
Type K4 (Fig. 8.12: 10–11) is notable because this krater type has a
184 chapter eight
very steep wall that is slightly incurving at the rim. The rim is either
pinched or folded outward to thicken it. This type has not been previ-
ously published in assemblages of Um Hammad Ware.
Holemouth jars
There is considerable variation in holemouth rims within this group
(Fig. 8.12: 12–16). Some are bevelled and slope inward, while others
are guttered. Most are thickened, and some have a small, external ridge.
Rope ornamentation, characteristic of Um Hammad Ware, appears
mostly on their rims, or as a ridge affixed to their bodies. Parallels are
found in Genre 12 (Helms 1987: fig. 9: 2; Helms et al. 1992: figs. 162;
234: 1–3) at Tell Um Hammad and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux
and Steve 1948: fig. 6: 7; 1969: 294, fig. 5: 18, 20, 22, and 29).
Jars
Several jar types of this ware have been described.
Type J1 (Fig. 8.12: 17, 19) has a long neck and a flat everted rim with
a diameter of about 18 cm. Extant fragments of such vessels suggest
that they were tall and narrow, with relatively thick walls and everted
rims that extend well beyond the thickness of their walls. Rope orna-
mentation appears in varying densities on these jars. Parallels are found
at Tell Um Hammad in Genre 17 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 187) and at
Beth Shean in Stratum XVI (Braun 2004: pl. I: 3).
Type J2 (Fig. 8.12: 18) has a narrow neck and a flat, everted rim with
a diameter of about 20 cm. Rope ornamentation was usually applied
to the rims and necks of these jars. Parallels are known from Tell Um
Hammad in Genre 27 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 203: 5–6).
Type J3 (Fig. 8.12: 20) has a mean diameter of 15 cm, with a long neck
and a flat rim that protrudes both externally and internally. Character-
istic rope ornamentation is found mostly on rims and necks. Parallels
are found at Tell Um Hammad in Genre 17 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 189:
1, 4) and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 2).
Type J4 (Fig. 8.12: 21) has a long, narrow upper body and a promi-
nent everted rim with a mean diameter of 16 cm. Rope ornamentation
is found just below the rim. Parallels are found at Tell Um Hammad in
Genre 18 (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 190) and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de
Vaux and Steve 1948: fig. 5: 9).
Kraters were the most common type of vessel in the assemblage,
constituting 43 % of the recovered pottery. Most of these are Types
K1 and K3, each of which comprised 20.5 % of the assemblage. Jars,
the pottery 185
making up 11.5 % of the assemblage, are less well represented. The

relatively large proportion of holemouth jars made of this ware, 24 %
of the assemblage, indicates that they were also popular. Notably, hole-
mouth jars and kraters were ubiquitous at the sites examined, while the
distribution of bowls, constituting 17 % of the assemblage, was more
limited. Rather interestingly, bowls were not encountered at sites south
of Wadi Far'ah, suggesting parochial patterns of distribution for this
particular type.
Type No. of indicative sherds % of all sherds

Bowl 23 17
K1 28 20.5
K2 7 5
K3 28 20.5
K4 2 1.5
Holemouth jar 32 24
J1 5 4
J2 6 4.5
J3 2 1.5
J4 2 1.5
Total 135 100.0
Table 8.2. Um Hammad pottery – breakdown according

to number and type.
The chronology and distribution of Um Hammad ware are as follows:

Um Hammad Ware, unknown in EB Ia deposits in the region (at
Tell esh-Shuna, Tell Um Hammad, Jericho, etc.) and elsewhere, makes
its first appearance in the EB Ib strata at Tell Um Hammad (Helms et
al. 1992) and at Tell el-Far'ah (North) in the Énéolithique Récent (i.e.
Chalcolithique Supérieur) deposits (de Vaux and Steve 1947: fig. 2: 1).
These are today identified as EB I. Since no vessels of this type have
been found at sites associated with EB II occupations, its chronological
range may be understood as completely within the time span of EB Ib.
While this ware is best known from the reports of Tell Um Hammad
and Tell el-Far'ah (North), it has since been discovered at 35 additional
sites, most of which are located within the Wadi Far'ah catchment area
(Fig. 8.11). In addition, isolated examples of the ware have been discov-
ered at sites such as Tulul Abu el 'Alayiq, Beth Shean XVI (Braun 2004:
Figure 8.12. Um Hammad typology in the southern Jordan Valley and desert fringes of
Samaria.
the pottery 187
Figure 8.12. (continued) Um Hammad typology in the southern Jordan

Valley and desert fringes of Samaria.
pl. I: 3), 'Affula (Gal and Covello-Paran 1996: fig. 5: 8), 'Ai (Callaway
1972: fig. 34: 7) and Tell es-Sultan/Jericho (examples from Garstang’s
excavation are stored in the Rockefeller Museum, Jerusalem).
This ware is not found at all sites within this region. It was notably
absent from Tel Shalem in the southern Beth Shean Valley (dated to
the end of the EB Ib [Eisenberg 1996]), and from Sheikh Diab 2 in the
Fazael valley, 20 km north of Jericho (Chapter 13 — also dated to EB
Ib). This pottery has not been found at any site in Samaria west of the
Tell el-Far'ah (North)–'Ai line.
Reported finds of Um Hammad Ware from Jordan are mostly from
sites near Tell Um Hammad (e.g. Mafluq and Ruweiha — Helms et al.
1992: 394; fig. 257: 1–3) or slightly to the north (e.g. at Kataret es-Samra
— Leonard 1989; Tell el-Handaquq — Mabry 1989). Charloux (2009)
claims that this ware has also been found at Tell es-Shuna, Tell Ikatanu,
188 chapter eight
and Khirbet Sheikh Mohammed. In recent surveys in the region of

Wadi Zerqa, only one additional site, ‘field 128 and vicinity’ (E. Kaptijn,
pers. comm. 2009), yielded this type of pottery. Its recorded distribu-
tion suggests that it was not widely distributed east of the River Jordan.
Our research indicates that its centre of distribution was in the
western part of Wadi Far'ah, in the region between the sites of Jelamet
Ahmar and Tell el-Far'ah (North). This suggests a geographic ‘core’ of
intensive utilization, and a ‘periphery’ of lower density. The source of
the ware may have been one or more ateliers located somewhere in the
western region of Wadi Far'ah. Lesser quantities of the ware reached the
‘periphery’, which appears to extend southwards only to the environs of
Wadi Fazael (Fig. 8.11). Northwards, it apparently extends to just south
of the Beth Shean Valley. Isolated examples of this ware are known to
have made their way as far as the Beth Shean Valley in the north and
Tulul Abu el 'Alayiq in the south.
Petrographic Analyses7
A small sample, including ten sherds of Um Hammad ware from dif-
ferent sites in the southern Jordan valley and desert fringes of Samaria,
was selected for petrographic analysis.8 All sherds belonged to one cat-
egory of fabric composed of diversified shales or shale-rich clay with
ferruginous ooliths9, quartz and calcite crystals. Their matrices were
rather silty (about 2–5% or more by volume). Some samples exhibited
a dark colour, probably resulting from reducing firing conditions, and
an abundance of iron oxides in the clays. Tempers in this group di-
versified shales, whose colours in thin section, ranged from black to
light yellow. Quartz, usually badly-sorted, angular to sub-rounded,
and reaching a coarse grain size of up to 1 mm, was widespread in all
samples. Also common were calcareous rock fragments, both calcite
crystals and limestone. In some cases, several types of fossil, including
Orbitolina sp., occurred within the limestone fragments. This is typical
of the Lower Cretaceous marine formations of Samaria and Galilee. In
Jordan, these formations outcrop along the Rift valley from Wadi Zerqa
to the Wadi Feinan area. A typical attribute of this fabric group was the
appearance of many opaque ooliths, identified under reflected light as
7
By Y. Goren, Tel Aviv University.
8
These were taken from sites 3, 6–9, 13, 14, 22, 23 and 27; see map in Figure 8.11.
9
Ooliths are spherical to elliptical bodies, 0.25 to 2 mm in diameter, which may
or may not have a nucleus, and have concentric or radial structures. In this case, some
ooliths are developed around quartz grains, while others have no internal structure.
the pottery 189
being formed of haematite and limonite. All these fabric attributes sug-
gest that the probable provenance for the clay used in this ware was in
Lower Cretaceous formations, most likely those in eastern Samaria in
the area of Wadi Far'ah.
The Similarity of Um Hammad Ware to Chalcolithic

Pottery of the Golan – a Chronological Anomaly
S. Helms, who encountered Um Hammad Ware in some quantity in his
excavations at the eponymous site, wrote the following:
As we have noted [. . .], the repertoire is purely Chalcolithic in form and
decoration; only the production technique is different: it is better. [. . .]
It is not far-fetched, nor inappropriate, to hypothesize that repertoire R6
represents a living Chalcolithic tradition which must have existed some-
where in the land, at the same time as the so-called EB I culture.
(Helms et al. 1992: 144)
Indeed, there is an extraordinary decorative and typological similarity
between this very distinctive ware, dated to the EB Ib, and certain pot-
tery types associated with Chalcolithic culture of the Golan. So striking
are the morphological similarities, that the question of some type of
continuity in tradition must be addressed:
The most obvious characteristic of the Golan pottery is rope orna-
mentation, which appears mostly on medium and large-sized vessels. It
is applied to large parts of vessels (from the neck on down to just above
the base) in horizontal strips and at rather close intervals. Often a verti-
cal or wavy line decoration is added to the horizontal one. Similar orna-
mentation also appears on handles of vessels (Epstein 1998; Garfinkel
1999: 276–278). This rope-like ornamentation is not encountered in
the Ghassulian-Beer Sheva Chalcolithic potting traditions, but a very
similar use of rope decoration is found on some examples of Um Ham-
mad Ware. Indeed, it is one of the special characteristics that define this
parochial EB I ware.
These similarities suggest a possible connection between these two
pottery traditions. Um Hammad Ware fabrics are, however, better levi-
gated and better fired than the Chalcolithic pottery of the Golan. These
differences were probably functions of the quality of raw materials read-
ily available to potters and/or superior pyrotechnology. Notably, Um
Hammad Ware is quite unlike most Chalcolithic pottery types found in
the same general region, with one exception, a type of oversized pithos
that has some general morphological affinities with Golan Chalcolithic
190 chapter eight
vessels and Um Hammad Ware. This is an outsized pithos type, but

with much less variation in vessel morphology, decorated with larger,
more crudely fashioned and somewhat less crowded horizontal bands
of rope ornamentation. These immense pithoi have been found at Abu
Hamid (Corbeletto 1989: 33), Tel Kitan (Eisenberg 1993: 878) in the
Beth Shean valley, and in survey sites at el-Jobeh, 'Ain Buleibil (Sites 10
and 15) and additional sites. Its southernmost point of distribution is
Tell Abu Hamid (Dollfus and Kafafi 1986: 233).
Although there are pronounced differences in fabrics and techno-
logical details between the Chalcolithic pottery of the Golan and the
somewhat late EB I Um Hammad Ware, the latter tradition bears some
similarities which are striking enough to suggest an association. This
might suggest that the earlier tradition was extraordinarily long-lived,
but remained dormant for some time (during EB Ia), only to reappear
much later. This possibility is bolstered by radiocarbon determinations
from one of the Golan sites, which suggest a much closer chronological
proximity between the Golan Chalcolithic and the EB I. The radiomet-
ric dates from the site of Rasm el Harbush (Carmi et al. 1995) appear to
indicate that the Chalcolithic culture of the Golan came to an end about
the middle of the 4th millennium BCE. These dates, recalibrated by us,
are shown in Table 8.3 and Fig. 8.14.
There are two primary caveats concerning validity of these assays for
dating the site: All these assays were derived from olive-wood charcoal.
Because of the ‘old wood effect’, dates derived from these remains rep-
resent only a terminus post quem; Based on Epstein’s report on Rasm
Harbush, it is difficult to accept a sequence of 500 years for the com-
munity’s existence over such a substantial span of time, as there is no
evidence for longevity of this settlement (Epstein 1998) For example,
House P is shown to have undergone no significant changes: its excava-
tion yielded neither evidence of architectural additions, nor phasing
during the lifetime of the structure (Epstein 1998: 42–45). This picture
is at odds with the results of the two 14C samples (RT 525 and RT 1866)
taken from the same house, which are widely disparate in their results.
This means that one or other, or both, of these dates may not correctly
indicate the time span of the site’s occupation. However, if the dates
which suggest that the occupation of Rasm Harbush continued until
well within the first half of the 4th millennium BCE are correct, then
the supposed gap between the Chalcolithic and EB Ib is substantially
reduced.
In the Chalcolithic period, with the exception of some presence in
the pottery 191
the vicinity of Jelamet Ahmar (Sites 39, 44), the western area of Wadi
Far'ah was practically uninhabited. The EB Ia settlement in this area
is sparse, and includes mainly the sites of Tell el-Far'ah (North) and
a group of cemeteries located on the southern slope of Jebel Tamun
(Sites 26–28). During EB Ib, the western reaches of Wadi Far'ah became
the centre of settlement in the southern Jordan valley north of Jericho.
Such a growth in population, from one site in Chalcolithic to 16 sites
in EB Ib, would be virtually impossible were it based only on natural
birth increase. The most likely explanation for this huge augmentation
is migration. The Um Hammad Ware is so similar to Golan Chalco-
lithic pottery that it suggests the possibility of some immigrants com-
ing from the Golan and bringing their ceramic traditions with them,
especially since no other source or inspiration for this very distinctive
typology has been identified (Helms et al. 1992: 108). This explana-
tion is supported by ethnographic studies which show that population
movements between regions are frequently accompanied by a transfer
of ceramic traditions (Wood 1990).
In light of the above evidence, we hypothesize that toward the middle
of the 4th millennium BCE some part of the Golan Chalcolithic pottery
traditions reached the Wadi Far'ah region, and were adopted by the
later EB I inhabitants, for whom the Um Hammad Ware later became
the predominant pottery tradition.
However, there are some difficulties with this hypothesis. For one,
it does not explain how the tradition survived through the long early
phases of EB I, particularly as there is no record of its manifestation
anywhere, even at sites of that period in the Golan. It is found neither
at Tell Um Hammad nor at Tell el-Far'ah (North), where it appears in
great quantities in the succeeding period. As noted above, there are
anomalies in the radiometric dates for the Golan Chalcolithic culture,
which appear to suggest that this tradition lasted for an inordinately
long span of time. These dates are not supported by evidence of strati-
fied deposits at any of the sites. This hypothesis also fails to explain
the lack of additional fossiles directeurs of the Chalcolithic culture of
the Golan (such as basalt pillar figurines) in the same contexts as Um
Hammad Ware. These arguments certainly weaken the hypothesis of a
Chalcolithic inspiration for this ware. At this stage of research, its ori-
gins remain something of a mystery. Possibly further investigations and
additional data, perhaps from the Golan region, or from the environs of
Wadi Far'ah, will elucidate this matter.
192 chapter eight
Figure 8.13. Examples of Chalcolithic pottery from the Golan (1–4) and the
southern Beth Shean Valley (5–7).
the pottery 193
Figure 8.13. (continued) Examples of EB I pottery from Wadi Far'ah (8–13).
Figure 8.14. Calibrated 14C dates from sites in the Golan Heights.
194 chapter eight
14
C age ± 1σ Calibrated date BCE Calibrated date BCE
Material
year BP ± 1σ ± 2σ
4320– 4300 (1.6%)
RT 525 Charcoal 5270 ± 140 4400–3750 (95.4%)
4260–3960 ( 66.6%)
RT 1862 Charcoal 4945 ± 65 3790–3650 (68.2%) 3950–3630 (95.4%)
4040–4020 (2%)
RT 1863 Charcoal 5130 ± 70 3990–3910 (34%) 4150–3700 (95.4%)
3880–3800 (32.2%)
3700–3510 (64.9%)
RT 1866 Charcoal 4810 ± 90 3780–3360 (95.45)
3400–3380 (3.3%)
Table 8.3. Calibrated 14C dates from sites in the Golan Heights.
Conclusions
Um Hammad Ware is a distinctive type of pottery that was popular
in the middle of the southern Jordan valley, and at sites on the desert
fringes of Samaria in the EB Ib. Petrographic analysis shows that this
ware was produced locally, perhaps in the Wadi Far'ah region. This
ware is so distinctive in its fabric and typology, and so different from
other EB I wares and types, that its inspiration remains obscure. Its
overall appearance suggests that its roots are probably in the pottery
traditions associated with the Chalcolithic culture of the Golan.
The distribution of the Um Hammad ware is characterized by a dense
centre in the western part of Wadi Far'ah, between the sites of Jelamet
Ahmar and Tell el-Far'ah (North), where this ware was probably manu-
factured. The absence of K1 and K4 type kraters at Tell Um Hammad
also reinforce this supposition as these would have been expected to
appear at the site if the main production centre was on site or nearby.
The central location in Wadi Far'ah of the Um Hammad Ware sug-
gests possible boundaries of a unified cultural region in the EB Ib. Its
northern boundaries did not extend beyond Wadi Far'ah, and to the
south it was bounded by Wadi Fazael. To the west, it reached the east-
ern slopes of the Samaria hill country. Less is known about the extent of
its distribution east of the River Jordan, where archaeological surveying
has been less intensive.
The many vessels of this ware found at Tell Um Hammad and its
vicinity point to the possibility of a specialty workshop located east of
Wadi Far'ah. This suggests that this ware was well established on both
sides of the Jordan, but may not have spread in significant quantities
into the highlands above and beyond its major tributaries.
CHAPTER NINE
'EIN HILU – A CHALCOLITHIC SITE

ON THE DESERT FRINGES OF SAMARIA
Introduction1
During February-June 2006, an excavation was conducted at the site of
'Ein Hilu. The site (Israel Old Grid Map ref. 1981/1922, 40 m below sea
level) was discovered during the survey of the Manasseh Hill Country
in 1988, and was recorded in Volume II of the survey report (Zertal
2008: 557–561). The site’s size was estimated to be 1.2 ha, and traces of
walls were visible on the ground. In October 1988, a small trial excava-
tion was conducted at the site under the direction of Zertal. The partial
remains of a broad house were exposed, and indicative finds that were
dated to the Chalcolithic period were retrieved. A decision was made to
continue the excavation as part of the author’s PhD thesis.
Environmental Background
The site is located on a hill slope overlooking the Wadi Malih fault,
east of the modern Tubas-Mehula-Beqa'ot Junction, and west of the
convergence of the desert fringes of Samaria and the Jordan Valley
(Figs. 9.1–9.2). The spring of 'Ein el-Hilu, from which the site receives
its name, is located some 500 m north-east of the site. This is the only
fresh water source in the vicinity.
The site is situated in a semi-arid region with present-day average
annual rainfall of about 250 mm (Shachar 1995: 28). The site is domi-
nated by Irano-Turanian vegetation; the flora consisting mostly of an-
nual garigue with a few, mainly small, bushes. No trees are found here
(Sabah 1992), and the only tall shrub is the Ziziphus spina-christi.
The dominant geomorphological formation in the area is the Far'ah
Anticline, which borders the Shechem Syncline to the east. This anti-
cline is the northern continuation of the Judah and Ephraim chain of
anticlines. It is defined by a broad, subterranean axis and a relatively
1
This chapter is based on a paper published by the author and others in the Journal
of the Israel Prehistoric Society (Bar et al. 2008).
196 chapter nine
narrow upper axis. The slanted blocks of the Far'ah Anticline slope
moderately west, while the eastern branch drops sharply towards the
Jordan Valley. The anticline is intersected by faults, forming river val-
leys and wide ravines. The longest of these faults underlies the valley of
Wadi Far'ah. The site of 'Ein Hilu is situated about 20 km to the north
of Wadi Far'ah in the valley of Wadi Malih. Thus, the site is set within
a hilly terrain incised by deep wadis running from the Samaria hills
in the west to the Jordan Valley in the east. South of the site, there is
a small valley of 30 ha. North-east of the site, along the banks of Wadi
Malih, more terrain is available for dry farming.
The area to the west of the northern part of the Far'ah Anticline
and the desert fringes of Samaria is conspicuously devoid of Chalco-
Figure 9.1. General location.

'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site 197
Figure 9.2. Aerial view.
lithic sites, and there are none in Wadi Malih. The nearest Chalcolithic
settlements are Sites 76 and 99: the first is a small site 4,500 m2 in area,
situated in esh-Shaqq valley, 3 km north of 'Ein Hilu; while Site 99 is a
scattering of sherds 6.5 km to the west.
Two clusters of Chalcolithic sites are found north and west of the site:
the first in the southern Beth Shean Valley (many sites were found in
the region south of Tirat Zvi by Zori [1962] and Zertal [2005]), and the
second in the Zababdeh-Tubas valleys in the Samarian hills, discovered
by Zertal (2008). It can be assumed that one of the routes connecting
the Beth Shean Valley and the Jordan Valley to the Zababdeh-Tubas
valleys passed through Wadi Malih and the site of 'Ein Hilu.2
2
Another possible route was via Wadi Shubash, about 9 km north of Wadi Malih.
198 chapter nine
The Renewed Excavation

The main excavation area (Area B) was dug with the aim of both clean-
ing and re-excavating parts of the previous excavations. A test pit was
opened in a new area (Area C), adjacent to Area B, to try to decipher
the stratigraphy of the site. Prior to the excavation, a nearly complete
structure (Area E) was found some 80 m south of the previous site
boundaries (Fig. 9.3), and it was decided to excavate it for its architec-
tural interest.
Stratigraphy
Three strata, dated to the Chalcolithic period, were discovered in Areas
B and C. These are described briefly below:
Stratum 3
The earliest stratum of the site. The sparse data gathered only in Area
C do not allow greater precision. A single radiocarbon sample which
provides a terminus post quem was dated to the third quarter of the 5th
millennium BCE (see below). A paved stone floor partly excavated in
Area C was found below the brick wall and the floor of Stratum 2.
Stratum 2
A later stratum, still in the earlier phases of the Chalcolithic period:
the limited data gathered in Areas B and C do not allow greater preci-
sion. In Area B, two floors, a wall and three installations were found
within a small 2×3.5 m area (Fig. 9.4). These were found below the
main structure of Stratum 1 (Figs. 9.5–9.6). In Area C, a brick wall and
what appears to be an adjacent floor were found in a 2.5×3.5 m area
below the open courtyard adjacent to the main structure of Stratum 1.
Stratum 1
The main stratum excaveted at the site, dated to the second half of
the 5th millennium BCE. The dating was based upon ceramic typol-
ogy and a single radiocarbon sample from Area B which provides a
terminus post quem for the early construction phase of Stratum 1 (see
below). The large building in Area B incorporated at least two phases
of construction. Area C was probably a courtyard exterior to the large
building. Area E is possibly from the same chronological horizon, since
it exhibits a similarity in wall construction methods and ceramic typol-
ogy.
Figure 9.3. General plan and the excavation areas.

H I J K L
Figure 9.4. Areas B and C, Stratum 2. Light grey indicates later strata.
Unexcavated
Area C
9 Unexcavated 9
-62.86
L468
chapter nine
A'
L143
-62.85 F143b
-63.05
-63.08
L143a
0
W14
F143b
#
A
B
-62.96
#
10 L45
2 10
B'
W4
-62.85 35 L105
# L453
L463
F467
Unexcavated Area B t Unexcavated
11 11
0 4
m
200
H I J K L
Area B
Area B is situated in the centre of the site, and work consisted of clean-
ing, probing, and expanding the 1988 excavation area. The method
used here differed from that of the other areas. Firstly, accumulation
and debris from the 1988 operations had to be cleared (collapsed baulks
and material washed into the area). Next, the first layer of potentially
ancient sediment (considered as surface material) was removed. Only
after probably late intrusive material had been removed did we begin to
both excavate the remains of the baulks and deepen the lower limit of
Figure 9.5. Area B, Stratum 2, looking eastwards.
LEGEND
Comp Brown Fill
NW Loose Brown Fill SE
0 50
-61.5 cm
L426
-62.0
L409 W423
W418
-62.5 L427
L429
U N E X C AVAT E D
L452a L452 L452b L452b
-63.0
Figure 9.6. Area B, Section B–B`, Strata 1 and 2. Location shown in Fig. 9.8.
202 chapter nine
the excavation. This situation caused two problems:

1. Since much of the sediment excavated was not sieved (sieving
using a 6 mm mesh was done in Area B only in selected sealed
loci), collection of data regarding the lithics and fauna was only
partial.
2. Most of the material recovered came from secondary deposits.
Loci in primary deposition with in situ materials were found only
in a few locations.3
The size of the excavated area was about 120 m2, and two strata (1, 2)
were exposed:
Stratum 2
Stratum 2 (Fig. 9.4) was exposed in a very limited area in Square K10.
Wall 435 consisted of a stone foundation supporting bricks (average
width 50 cm). A tamped earth floor (L467) abuts the wall from the
west. On the surface identified to the east (L452, Fig. 9.5) the remains
of three stone-built installations (one of them lined with pottery frag-
ments) were found. Stratigraphically, these installations are located
below the foundation of Wall 418 ascribed to Stratum 1 (Fig. 9.6).
The finds from Stratum 2 in Area B are scant, including two hole-
mouth jar rims, a krater rim, a lug handle, and a number of flat bases
that are consistent with the known material culture of the Chalcolithic
period.
Stratum 1
The main element in this stratum is a large building 7×12 m, delim-
ited by Walls 422, 423, 432 (Figs. 9.7–9.8), its northern boundary is
unknown. It is divided into three longitudinal rooms separated by
double walls (W418, 420). The western room was probably a closed
rectangular courtyard (delimited by Walls 418, 423, 432, and 434). The
middle room (between Walls 418 and 420, Fig. 9.9) and the eastern one
(between Walls 420 and 422, Fig. 9.10) were divided by partitions into
a number of smaller secondary rooms/cells. Some of these cells were
paved with stone (Loci 407, 415), and may have been used for storage.
The main entrance into the building was not identified. Such an
entrance was probably in the southern part of Wall 432, in the centre
of the longitudinal line of the rectangular building, in an unexcavated
3
The main Loci of the primary deposition in Area B are: 19, 414, 429, 431, 433,
452, 467, 470.
area. Another possibility for the location of the entrance may be in the
vicinity of Locus 413, which postdates the first construction phase of
the building. An interior entrance (Locus 464, Fig. 9.11) identified in
Wall 420, is paved with small and medium stones. These were set in
place at a slight incline to overcome a 20 cm difference in elevation
between Rooms 470 and 427.
The walls of the building were preserved to a height of three stone
courses. In a few places the remains of clay bricks were preserved on the
stone courses. In most cases the floors that were definitely identified
are located at the elevation of the upper part of the first stone course.
Thus one can assume that the lower part of the wall was built of stone,
and its upper part was made of bricks (the stone construction contin-
ued to a height of about 50 cm above the level of the identified floors).
The exterior walls range between 80 and 100 cm in thickness. There are
considerable differences in the interior walls, which range between 40
and 110 cm thick. The method of construction employed is identical
in most cases, with two rows of large and medium stones, and a fill of
small stones and soil deposited between them. Large monoliths (up to
1 m high) were incorporated in the stone construction of the walls (e.g.
Walls 3 and 420, Fig. 9.9). In most cases floors were made of packed
earth. In some of the smaller rooms the floors were made of flat slabs
whose underlying niches were probably used for storage.
While later alterations were identified in the structure, their order of
construction was impossible to determine (see plan of the developed
stage of Stratum 1 in Fig. 9.12).4 They include Wall 416, which parti-
tions the large paved room into two smaller paved spaces, and Wall
417, which partitions the area between Wall 418 and Wall 420 into two
smaller spaces: a stone paved installation (Locus 413), and the room
adjacent to it (Locus 441).
A small, irregularly-shaped courtyard (Locus 443), accessed by an
alley/corridor (Locus 456), was identified north of the main building.
4
These later alterations were distinguished from the original building construction
phase because:
1. W416 is built from small stones in a manner completely different from the other
walls of the building. When its eastern part was excavated we found that floor
407 continued below it.
2. W417 is a late alteration, because its base is higher than the living surface of
adjacent L410 and 427.
3. L413 is a late alteration, because its base is higher than the living surface of the
loci around it.
4. L441 is a late alteration, because it overlaps earlier W432.
204 chapter nine
Figure 9.7. Area B, main building, looking north-east.
Near the surface south of the corridor are paved areas, the nature of
which is unclear (Locus 442): they are separated from Corridor 456 by
a thin wall (Wall 4). Three rooms/cells were also unearthed north of
this alley: Room 9, a paved rectangular room probably used for stor-
age, and Rooms 457 and 459 (only the southern part of the latter was
excavated).
The finds from Stratum 1 in Area B are typical of the Chalcolithic
period. Noteworthy among the ceramic assemblage are the holemouth
jars, shallow and V-shaped bowls, churns, and lug handles. Few finds
were discovered outside the main building, in the area of the corridor
and the rooms/paved surfaces next to it. This is mainly due to erosion
stemming from the proximity of the stratum to the surface level, and
the fact that most of this part of Area B had been excavated in 1988.
A radiocarbon date (RTT 5442, see discussion below) from the
sealed Locus 468 (below stone paved Floor 407), gives a terminus post
quem for the foundation phase of the structure between 4530 and 4230
BCE calibrated (95.4% probability).5
5
This is quite problematic due to its long span of years, and falls around the transi-
tion from the middle phases (D–E) to the late phases (C–A+) of Teleilat Ghassul, and is
205
H I J K L
#
W448
L445
47
-62.19 -62.32
W4
L403 -62.08
-62.42
-62.09 -62.47 L402
Figure 9.8. Areas B and C, foundation phase.

-62.42 W44 L415
9
#
Light grey indicates earlier or later strata.

L454 -62.44
9 L405 9
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site
21
L407
-62.14
W4
W42 L112
L438 2 -62.50 -62.14
-62.28 -62.55
L127
-62.47
L455 #
-62.64 -62.00
-62.70 -62.38
L459 L124
W420
-62.67 #
-62.35 -62.64 L121
W
51
-62.65 45 L414 A'
W4
8 L437
0
W42 L470 L106
46
L443 -6 2.85 0 -62.55
W
-62.35
-62.74 -62.70
L412
-62.41 L128
L18
5
W3 -62.71 -62.80 L135
W42
L457 -62.72 L410
W2
-62.83
-62.32 W41 -62.67
-62.51 8 B .M.
L131
-62.78 -62.67 -62.26 -62.08
-62.48 L464 L134
L9 L409 L135
-62.72
A
B
W41 L427
4
W43
-62.80 8
-62.69 L6 -62.70 #
10 10
3
W42
L456 L442 #
-62.49
-62.69 -62.64 # L408 -62.72 -62.60
L433 L426 B' L105 L118
-62.49
L429 L129 L114 L130
-62.68
-62.32
-62.67 -62.55 Area C
W4
-62.57
W
46 -62.48
1 -62.61 L125
W4
32 L431
-62.72
Area B t
Unexcavated
23
W4
-62.34
11 11
0 4
m
H I J K L
Figure 9.9. Area B, central part of building, Figure 9.10. Area B, eastern part of building,
looking north. looking north.
Figure 9.11. Area B, L464, looking east.

207
H I J K L
W448
L445
47
-62.19 -62.32
W4
-62.42
Figure 9.12. Areas B and C, progressive phase.

-62.09 L402
-62.42 W44 L415
9
L454
# -62.21
-62.44
9 -62.60 L405 9
'ein hilu – a chalcolithic site
21
L407
-62.14
W4
Light grey indicates earlier strata.

W42 L112
L438 2 -62.50
-62.28 L127
-62.47 #
-62.64
-62.38
6
L459 L124
W41
W420
-62.67 #
-62.35 -62.64 L121
W
51
-62.65 -62.27 L414
45 A'
W4
8 L437 -62.76
0
W42 L470 L106
46
L443 -6 2.85 0 -62.55
# -62.50
W
-62.35
L413
L412 9
-62.74 -62.70
W41
-62.41 L128
L18
5
W3 -62.71 -62.80 L135
W42
-62.39
L457 -62.63 -62.37 -62.72 L410
W2
-62.83
46 -62.32 W41 -62.67
7
8 B .M.
W4
-62.51 L131
W41
-62.78 -62.67 -62.26 -62.08
W418 L134
L466 -62.48 L464
L9 # -62.80 L409 L135 Area C
9
-62.83
43
-62.72
A
-62.70 B
W41 L427
4
-62.35
W43
L436 -62.75 Rocks in 8
-62.37 Disorder
-62.69 L6 -62.76 L441
10 10
3
-62.64
W42
L456 -62.81 L426 #
-62.49
-62.69 -62.64 L408 L429
-62.60
L433 B' L105 L118
-62.49 L114
W4 L129 L130
-62.68 32a -62.32
L444 -62.67 -62.55
W4
23
-62.29
50
-62.59
W4
-62.59
W4
L125
W4
-62.34 32 L431
-62.58
Area B t
Unexcavated
-62.34
11 11
0 4
m
H I J K L
208 chapter nine
Area C
A probe (about 25 m2, Squares L9, L10) was opened here in order to
understand the local stratigraphy, and to compare it to the finds from
Area B. After reaching the possible ‘living surfaces’ of Stratum 1, we
decided to narrow the excavated area and dug further only within a
2.5×3.5 m deep section. Sterile sediment was reached after excavating
through 2 m of archaeological deposits (see Section A`–A in Fig. 9.13).
Stratum 3
This stratum was reached only in this area. The remains of a stone pave-
ment (Floor 145, Figs. 9.14–9.15) with average accumulation of about
15 cm of habitation level and organic material can be ascribed to the
stratum. The finds mostly include burnt pottery sherds, among them a
bowl rim, a holemouth jar rim, a ceramic weight, and two flat bases. In
light of the preliminary data this small assemblage can be ascribed to
the Chalcolithic period.
A radiocarbon date (RTT 5443) from Locus 144a (accumulation of
organic material found on Floor 145), gives a date for a late use of Floor
145. This date, 4540–4240 BCE calibrated (95.4% probability), falls in
the same time span as the date from Area B. The excavation continued
below Floor 145 (Locus 146) to a further depth of about 30 cm in the
natural deposits devoid of any archaeological artifacts.6
Stratum 2
The meagre architectural remains of a mudbrick wall (Wall 140, Fig.
9.16) and remains of a tamped earth floor mixed with mudbrick mate-
rial can be ascribed to this stratum. This material probably collapsed
from Wall 140 (Locus 143b). The artifacts recovered from the floor
include five bowls, a jar, a lug handle, and a rim with rope ornament, all
consistent with the material culture of the Chalcolithic period.
Stratum 1
The most striking element of this stratum is the outer face of Wall 423,
belonging to the main building in Area B, Stratum 1. This wall survived
to a maximum height of three courses (about 50 cm). Another element
in the stratum is the fragmentary remnant of a large stone pavement
in the general time-scale of the sites of Abu Hamid (again between the middle and late
phases), Beer Sheva, Shiqmim and the Golan (Lovell 2001: 45, 219).
6
Apart from three small non-diagnostic body sherds.
that has survived in the eastern part of the probe (Loci 128, 135, Fig.
9.17). This pavement abuts Wall 423 at the elevation of the lower part
of its second course (similarly to the pavements of Stratum 1 inside the
main building in Area B). Considering the limited area exposed, the
artifacts in Area C are numerous, diagnostic, and some of them were
found in situ. Noteworthy among them are the bowls (11 items), jars,
and holemouth jars. A ceramic spoon was also found.
Figure 9.13. Area C, Section A–A`. Location shown in Fig. 9.8.
Figure 9.14. Area C: Stratum 3, Floor 145, looking west.

H I J K L
Figure 9.15. Area C: Stratum 3. Light grey indicates later strata.

Unexcavated
9 Unexcavated 9
chapter nine
A'
-63.93
L144
F145
# Area C
L144a
F145
A
B
10 10
B'
L105
Unexcavated Unexcavated
11 11
0 4
m
210
H I J K L
Figure 9.16. Area C: Strata 1 and 2, looking west.
Figure 9.17. Area C: Section A–A’.

212 chapter nine
Area E
The excavation of Area E, about 120 m south of Areas B and C, and
outside the known boundaries of the ancient settlement (Fig. 9.3), was
conducted using a 5×5 m quadrant system. A single building attrib-
uted to the Chalcolithic was exposed here (Figs. 9.18–9.19). From an
architectural standpoint this structure is quite unique, and includes a
combination of known Chalcolithic elements. Due to the proximity of
the living surfaces to the bedrock (we reached bedrock at an average
depth of 20 cm), all the material recovered and the sediments were
treated as surface finds, and sieved only in a few selected loci where in
situ material was found.7
The building includes a spacious rectangular broad room (5.5×12 m,
Fig. 9.20) whose southeastern part was eroded away (its known bound-
aries are delimited by Walls 303, 304, 309). The room is divided into
an open rectangular area where an installation was unearthed (Locus
319a), and a possible diagonal opening (Locus 325). The installation,
made of small slabs arranged in a circle, and adjacent loci in the north-
ern part of the broad room, were the only places in Area E where in situ
material was found. The opening is paved with large stones arranged
along a diagonal axis. The door socket (Fig. 9.21) indicates a door in-
stalled inside the wall, apparently opening inwards. Three stones ar-
ranged as a small bench (Locus 327) were discovered near the entrance,
adjacent to the wall.
The walls in the broad room, as in all of Area E, are almost identical.
They are constructed of two rows of stones one course high. This sug-
gests that they may have been a stone foundation, probably intended for
mud-brick walls. These did not survive because of their proximity to
the surface. The walls are 70 to 100 cm thick, having identical masonry:
two rows of large and medium stones with a fill of small stones and soil
(the same style as employed in Area B, Stratum 1). Exceptions to this
are Walls 304, 306C and 312, which were thickened for some unclear
reason (it cannot be determined if this occurred when the building’s
foundations were laid, or as a later alteration).
In the north-western part of the broad room is a rectangular room (4
x 5 m.), divided by a partition (Wall 328) into two secondary cells (Loci
302 and 307). A number of square rooms are built up against this room
(Fig. 9.22). One (Locus 310) built against it to the south has been se-
verely damaged by erosion. All that survived of this room are two walls
7
These were Loci 316, 319, and 322.
(309 and 321) and a paved surface of small stones (Locus 315) that
probably served as a foundation for an upper pavement or as a floor.
North-west of the cell in the broad room another rectangular room
(Locus 305, 4×5 m.) is identical to the cell in the broad room. A wall
(330) extends from the northern wall of this room to the north. The
remains of a pavement made of small stones were unearthed where the
walls meet. Identical pavement remains were also discovered north of
Locus 307, probably a courtyard partly delimited by Walls 330 and 303.
Another room (Locus 300), partially eroded and irregular in shape,
is east of Room 305. This room is apparently paved with small- and
medium-sized stones, with a large flat stone at its centre, presumably
supporting a column for a roof. In the north-eastern part of this room
Walls 306a and 306c seem to reflect a different phase, due to their dif-
ferent orientation.
The ceramic finds from Area E are characteristic of the Chalcolithic
period. Outstanding among them are various kinds of holemouth
vessels and shallow bowls, some red-slipped. Other diagnostic items
include the handle of a churn and a ceramic spoon. A flat oval ceramic
weight and a shallow stone bowl were also found.
It seems that the building in Area E is equivalent to Stratum 1 in
Areas B and C. The reasons for this conclusion are:
1. The wall building material and masonry in Area E and in Stratum
1, Areas B and C are identical. Both are completely different from
that of Stratum 2 of Areas B and C.
2. The similarity in ceramic finds points to the same conclusion.
Most of the ceramic sub-types found in Area E also appear in
Areas B and C, Stratum 1. At the same time, 50% of the sub-types
found in Stratum 2 do not appear in Area E (Table 9.3).
AA AB AC AD
L301
-63.40
W3
06C -63.17
-63.28
-63.12
-63.30
1 L300 1
6A
L332 L300
W30
W306B
-63.34 # -63.15
W330 -63.32
-63.10 -63.01
-63.00
-63.25 Unexcavated
Figure 9.18. Area E: general plan.

L329 W306D
L305A
-62.98
-63.11
L331 -63.19
-63.62
-63.29
chapter nine
-63.06 W312 L318 -63.10 L326

L305 -63.02 L317
-63.15 -63.06 -62.83 L325 -62.88
L 313 L327 -62.96 L317 -63.17
L323
2 2
W303
-62.98
W304 L316
-63.01 -62.93
L316
L302 L302 L319A
L316A L320
-62.90 -62.89 L311
-63.16 L319 -63.03
W328
Unexcavated L322
-62.88
Unexcavated L316
-63.14 Unexcavated
W308
-62.80 -62.80
-63.03
L324 -62.90
L307
W309
-62.72
W309
3 L310 3
W321
L314
-62.93
L310
-62.66
L315
-62.83 0 4
-62.76 -62.83
m
214
AA AB AC AD
Figure 9.19. Area E: looking south.
Figure 9.20. Area E: the broad room, looking north-east.

216 chapter nine
Figure 9.21. Area E: entrance to the broad room, looking south.
Figure 9.22. Area E: rooms adjacent to the broad room,

looking south.
The Ceramic Assemblage8

A total number of 3,778 pottery sherds were found and analyzed in the
excavation (Table 9.1). Because of the small amount of in situ material
recovered during the excavation, it was decided to compile a typology
of the main forms presented. A sample of 167 diagnostic pottery sherds
was chosen to classify the vessel forms and produce a typology (Table
9.2). This typology is based on Stratum 1 pottery (including Area E),
unless otherwise noted.
Total Applied
Perfo-
Stratum Area Total deco- % Painted % ornamen- % %
rated
rated tations
1 B 1572 57 3.6 50 3.2 6 0.4 1 0.06
C 1087 94 8.7 88 8.1 4 0.4 2 0.02
2 B 144 7 4.9 6 4.2 0 0 1 0.7
C 290 26 9.0 22 7.6 2 0.7 2 0.7
3 C 67 7 10.5 7 10.5 0 0 0 0
E 618 44 7.1 43 7.0 1 0.2 0 0
1 2659 151 5.7 138 5.2 10 0.4 3 0.1
2 434 33 7.6 28 6.5 2 0. 5 3 0.7
3 67 7 10.5 7 10.5 0 0 0 0
Table 9.1. The pottery of 'Ein Hilu, totals and subdivisions.
Class Stratum 1 % Stratum 2 % Stratum 3 % Area E % Total %

B 55 44 12 70 1 50 5 22 73 44
H 29 23 2 12 1 50 13 57 45 27
JR 34 27 3 18 3 13 40 24
CH 6 5 1 4 7 4
SP 1 1 1 4 2 1
Table 9.2. The pottery of 'Ein Hilu,

subdivided into main typological classes and strata.
8
This section was written by O. Cohen and S. Bar, University of Haifa.
218 chapter nine
TYPE S1 S2 S3 E TYPE S1 S2 S3 E
B1a 2 1 2 H1 9 6
B1b 4 2 H2 7 1
B1c 3 2 1 1 H3 10 1 4
B2 17 1 H4 1
B3 3 1 H5 3 2 1
B4a 5 JR1 1
B4b 1 JR2a 7
B4c 16 3 JR2b 3
B5 1 JR3a 19 2 2
B6 3 2 JR3b 3 1 1
B7 1 JR4 1
B8 1
Table 9.3. The pottery of 'Ein Hilu,

subdivided into sub-typologies and strata.
Type S1 % All %
B1a 2 4 5 7
B1b 4 7 6 8
B1c 3 5 7 10
B2 17 31 18 25
B3 3 5 4 6
B4a 5 9 5 7
B4b 0 0 1 1
B4c 16 30 19 26
B5 0 0 1 1
B6 3 5 5 7
B7 1 2 1 1
B8 1 2 1 1
Table 9.4. Bowl sub-types.

Typology
Bowls and kraters

This is the most abundant group identified at the site. Seventy-three
bowl rims of this class were found, constituting 44% of the ceramic
finds. Most of the bowl fragments (55 sherds) were found in Stratum 1
(Table 9.4). A single bowl fragment was found in Stratum 3.
Type B1a (Fig. 9.23: 1–3) Shallow bowls characterized by a straight
wall and tapered rim. The average diameter of these bowls is 15 cm,
and in most cases they are undecorated. Bowls of this type are some-
times treated with a brown or red slip on the interior or exterior. Five
sherds of this type were found at the site. Parallels to this sub-type were
reported for the Chalcolithic of Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.32:
2) and Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: Fig.10.12: 3–4). Another parallel from
the Middle Chalcolithic was found in Tel Tsaf, Stratum I (Gophna and
Sadeh 1988–1989: fig. 9: 11).
Type B1b (Fig. 9.23: 4–5) Shallow bowls characterized by a splayed
wall and a rim folded out and rounded. Their average diameter is 12
cm, and most are not decorated. Six sherds of this type were found.
Parallels to this sub-type also occur in Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001:
fig. 4.32: 3).
Type B1c (Fig. 9.23: 6–7) Large shallow bowls characterized by a
splayed wall and a tapered rim. They range from 18 to 25 cm in di-
ameter, and are slipped red on the interior and exterior. Seven sherds
of this type were found. Parallels to this sub-type are known from 'En
Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 15) and 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
4.19: 17).
Type B2 (Fig. 9.23: 8–10) Large, deep bowls characterized by a
straight, diagonal wall and a tapered rim. These range from 18 to 30 cm
in diameter, and are often slipped on the interior and exterior, or are
decorated with a red band on the rim. Sometimes they are completely
undecorated. Eighteen sherds of this type were found, 17 of which were
recovered from Stratum 1. This type of bowl, one of the commonest,
both at 'Ein Hilu and throughout most of the known Chalcolithic as-
semblages, also appears in the early Chalcolithic phases, and continues
to appear in the EB I. Parallels to this type occur in Teleilat Ghassul
(Lovell 2001: figs. 4.32: 7; 4.33: 2), Tel Te'o VI (Eisenberg et al. 2001: fig.
6.1: 3), Shoham (North) Cave 4 (van den Brink and Gophna 2005: fig.
6.12: 2), Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.8: 1–2) and Fazael 2 (Chapter 10:
Fig. 10.12: 2).
220 chapter nine
Type B3 (Fig. 9.23: 11–12) Large shallow bowls characterized by an

everted wall, rounded or tapered rim and a flat base. These are wide
bowls with an average diameter of 25 cm, sometimes slipped red on the
interior and exterior, or decorated with a red stripe on the exterior of
the rim. Four such sherds were found. Parallels to this type are known
from Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.4: 2), Giv'at HaOranim
(Scheftelowitz and Oren 2004: fig. 3.3: 7) and Beer Sheva (Contenson
1956: fig. 9: 1).
Type B4a (Fig. 9.23: 13–14) Small shallow rounded bowls with a ta-
pered rim and average diameter of 13 cm. In most cases they are not
slipped. Five sherds of this type were found. Parallels to this sub-type
are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 6) and Shoham
(North) Cave 4 (van den Brink and Gophna 2005: fig 6.11: 22).
Type B4b (Fig. 9.23: 15) Small deep rounded bowls with a tapered
rim and an average diameter of 9 cm. They are often slipped on the
interior and exterior, yet also often found without a slip. Parallels to this
sub-type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.31: 2),
Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and Oren 2004: fig. 3.4: 7) and Gesher
(Kovello-Paran 1995: 50: 21).
Type B4c (Fig. 9.23: 16–18) Large deep rounded bowls with a tapered
rim and an average diameter of 20 cm. They are either slipped on the
interior and exterior, with a red stripe on the rim, or not slipped at all.
Nineteen sherds of this type were found, 16 from Stratum 1. This is the
commonest bowl at 'Ein Hilu. Parallels to this sub-type are known from
Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: figs. 4.33: 5; 4.34: 7), Giv'at HaOranim
(Scheftelowitz and Oren 2004: fig. 3.3: 2) and Shoham (North) Cave 4
(van den Brink and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.12: 9).
Type B5 (Fig. 9.23: 19–20) Large shallow bowls with a cut rim. The
vessel found in Area E is slipped red on the exterior and interior, with a
red stripe on the rim. Its diameter is 30 cm. Parallels with a horizontal
cut rim are known from Gesher (Kovello-Paran 1995: 50: 4) and Umm
Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 8).
Type B6 (Fig. 9.23: 21–23) Deep bowls with a diagonal wall and a flat,
sometimes guttered, rim. The upper part of the rim is often decorated
with rope ornamentation or a ridge. The average diameter of the bowls
is 24 cm, and they are not slipped. Five sherds of this type were found.
Parallels to this type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig.
4.34: 1–2), 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: figs. 8: 19; 9: 5; the rim of one of
the parallels is decorated with a wavy pattern), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10:
fig. 10.13: 14), Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: fig. 11.8: 16) and Giv'at HaOranim
(Scheftelowitz and Oren 2004: fig. 3.4: 4).

Type B7 (Fig. 9.23: 24) A very coarse bowl with a thick everted wall,
rounded rim and thick flat base, 18 cm in diameter. A single sherd was
found in Stratum 1. This bowl was probably used as a crucible, as sup-
ported by XRF tests, which revealed traces of Ca (» 2%), Fe (0.7%), Zn
(» 0.015%), and Ti (not determined quantitatively).9 Parallels to this
type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and Oren 2004:
fig. 3.3: 8–9).
Type B8 (Fig. 9.23: 25) A bowl with a diagonal upright wall and a
ledge rim. Its exact diameter is not known (greater than 65 cm). There
is a rope decoration on the exterior of the rim. One sherd of this type
was found in Stratum 1. Parallels to this type are known from Cave
V/49 (Eisenberg 2002: fig. 7: 13–14) and Gilat IIC (Commenge 2006:
pl. 10.8: 6–7).
No. Locus Basket Description

Coarse, reddish-brown (exterior and interior) clay and core,
1 143a 1050
red, white and grey (calcite) grits
Coarse, brown (exterior and interior) clay and core, red and
2 300 3000
black grits
Medium fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay and core,
3 316 3044
grey and white grits. Brown slip and burnish (interior)
Medium fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core,
4 135 1035 black and white grits. Red wash (interior and exterior).
Traces of burning (exterior)
Coarse, light brown (exterior and interior) clay, black core,
5 143 1045
red and white grits
Coarse, light brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core,
6 144 1047
grey and white grits. Red paint (exterior and interior)
Coarse, light brown (exterior and interior) clay and core,
7 301 3002 grey and white grits. Red slip and burnish (exterior and
interior)
Well fired, brown (interior and exterior) clay, grey core, red,
8 431 4029 white and grey (calcite) grits. Red paint on rim and brown
slip
Medium fired, pinkish to orange (interior and exterior) clay,
9 128 1033 grey core, red, shiny and white grits. Red paint (on rim,
exterior). Traces of burning (exterior)
Underbaking, brown clay (exterior), grey core, many grey
10 443 4037 (calcite) and white (quarts) grits. Traces of burning (interior
and on rim exterior)
9
The XRF tests were conducted by S. Shalev and S. Shiltein at the Weizmann In-
stitute of Science in Rehovot.
222 chapter nine

Medium-well fired, light brown (exterior and interior)
11 305a 3041 clay, grey core, and red, black, grey and white grits. Brown
(exterior) and red (interior) paint
Medium-well fired, reddish brown (exterior and interior)
12 414 4015 clay, grey core, red, white and grey grits. Red paint (interior
and on rim, exterior)
Well fired, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay, red
13 128 1036
core, red, white and grey grits
Medium fired, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay,
14 407 4012
brown core, yellow and black grits
Well fired, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay, red
15 143 1045 core, red, white and grey grits. Red paint (exterior and
interior)
Well fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay and core, red,
16 142 1044
white and grey grits
Medium fired, light brown (interior) and brown (exterior)
clay, grey core, red, white, grey, black and shiny grits. Red
17 429 4027
paint on rim (interior and exterior). Brownish slip (interior
and exterior). Traces of burning (exterior)
Medium fired, black (exterior) and brown (interior) clay,
18 433 4028 grey core, red and white (quartz) grits. Red paint interior
and on upper part exterior
Coarse, brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core, grey,
19 310 3013
red and white grits. Red paint (exterior and partly interior)
Coarse, light brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core,
20 316 3027
grey, red and white grits
Coarse, red (exterior) and brown (interior) clay, grey core,
21 119 1037
white grits. Rope decoration (on rim exterior)
22 453 4041
white and grey grits
Well fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core,
23 128 1036
white (quartz) and grey (calcite) grits
Coarse, brown (exterior and interior) clay and dark brown
24 400 4010
core, red, white and shiny grits. Traces of burning (interior)
Coarse, brown (exterior and interior) clay and dark brown
25 14 185 core, red, white and shiny grits. Traces of burning (interior)
Rope decoration (on rim exterior)
Supplementary table to Figure 9.23.

Figure 9.23. Bowls and basins.

224 chapter nine
Figure 9.23. (continued) Bowls and basins.

Holemouth jars
This is the second most common group of vessels at the site. Forty-five
holemouth jar rims were found, which constitute 27% of all of the iden-
tified sherds. Most of the fragments (29 sherds) came from Stratum 1,
yet in Area E this type of vessel is the most common (57%).
Type H1 (Fig. 9.24: 1–4). This is the commonest type of holemouth
jar at the site (along with type H3). The holemouth jar has a thickened
rim whose upper part is sometimes cut. Two sub-types of this vessel
were found: one 10–15 cm in diameter, and a larger type 18–25 cm in
diameter. The holemouth jars are never decorated or slipped. Fifteen
sherds of this type were found, 9 in Stratum 1 and the rest in Area E.
Parallels to this type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig.
4.36: 2, 6), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: Fig. 10.14: 6), Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig.
11.9: 4) and 'En Esur IV(Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 21).
Type H2 (Fig. 9.24: 5–7) A holemouth jar with an inverted wall and
a cut rim, 22 cm in diameter. A number of examples were found with
an intricate rope decoration on the rim and body of the vessel. Eight
sherds of this type were found, 7 in Stratum 1. Examples of this type
already appear in the Early Chalcolithic period (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
4.6: 15, 16). Parallels to this type are known from 'En Esur Va, IV (Yan-
nai et al. 2006: figs. 4.24: 19; 4.30: 22), Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
and Oren 2004: fig. 3.10: 8), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: fig. 10.14: 2) and
Gilat I–IIA (Commenge 2006: pl. 10.12: 1–2).
Type H3 (Fig. 9.24: 8–9).This is the commonest type of holemouth
jar at the site (with Type H1). It has a slightly inverted wall and a ta-
pered rim. Some examples exhibit a ridge below the rim. The average
diameter is 25 cm. These vessels are not slipped or decorated. Fifteen
sherds of this type were found, 10 of them in Stratum 1. Parallels to this
type were found in Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig. 4.3: 4) and
Fazael (Porat 1985: fig. 6: 4).
Type H4 (Fig. 9.24: 10) A holemouth pithos with an inverted wall
and a folded-out rim. The rim has a rope decoration (pie crust). The
vessel is 38 cm in diameter. One sherd of this type was found in Area E
at the site. Parallels to this type were found in Tel 'Ali Stratum 1A: Item
13 (Sussman 1990).
Type H5 (Fig. 9.24: 11–12) A holemouth jar with an inverted wall
and tapered rim, 10–22 cm in diameter. Five sherds of this type were
found. Parallels to this type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell
2001: fig. 4.40: 2), Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 3: 11) and 'En Esur
IV (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 18).
226 chapter nine

Medium fired, red (exterior) and brown (interior) clay,
1 114 1016 red core, red and black grits. Potter’s wheel marks on rim
(exterior and interior)
Well fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core,
2 431 4029
white, shiny and grey grits. Traces of burning (exterior)
Well fired, red (exterior) and brown (interior) clay, grey
3 429 4027
4 316 1027
brown core, red, white and grey grits
Medium fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay, red, white
5 433 4028 and grey grits. Traces of burning (exterior and interior).
Rope decoration (exterior)
Coarse, brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core, white
6 455 4046
and grey grits
Medium fired, brown (exterior and interior) clay, red, white
7 433 4028 and grey grits. Traces of burning (exterior and interior).
Rope decoration (exterior)
Coarse, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay and core,
8 319 3029
red, white and black grits
Coarse, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay and core,
9 145 1047
red, white and black grits
Coarse, reddish-brown (exterior and interior) clay, brown
10 305 3005 core, white and black grits. Reddish-brown slip (exterior and
interior). Rope decoration (on rim exterior)
11 429 4024 red, white and grey grits. Traces of burning (on exterior and
interior rim)
12 411 4014
grey and white grits. Traces of burning (exterior)

Figure 9.24. Holemouth jars.

228 chapter nine
Jars
This is the third most common class at the site, following closely be-
hind the holemouth jars. Forty jar rims were found, constituting 24%
of all of the ceramic finds that were identified. Most of the jar fragments
(34 sherds) were found in Stratum 1.
Type Jr1 (Fig. 9.25: 1) An intact, elongated biconical jar with a flat
base and tapered everted rim. A pair of large lug handles is affixed to
the body. Traces of vertical combing appear on the upper part of the
vessel. It is 62 cm high and its rim diameter is 12 cm. A single example
of this type of vessel was discovered in Stratum 1 at the site. No parallels
to this type were found, although the body of the jar is very similar to
the Gilat torpedo-shaped jars (Commenge 2006: pls. 10.35: 1; 10.34: 3).
Type Jr2a (Fig. 9.25: 2–4) A jar with an upright wall and tapered,
cut or thickened rim, and average diameter of 10–22 cm. The jar is
sometimes treated with a red slip on the interior and exterior, but is not
slipped in most cases. Seven sherds of this type were found, all of them
in Stratum 1. Parallels to this sub-type are known from Teleilat Ghassul
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.40: 1, 5) and Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and
Oren 2004: fig. 3.13: 5).
Type Jr2b (Fig. 9.25: 5–6) Jars with a slightly inverted wall and a ta-
pered or rounded rim, 13 cm in diameter. One example (Fig. 9.25: 6)
of this type of vessel is slipped on the upper portion of the interior and
exterior. Three sherds of this type were found, all in Stratum 1. Parallels
to this sub-type are known from Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.41:
2), 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 14) and Cave 49/V (Eisenberg
2002: fig. 8: 24).
Type Jr3a (Fig. 9.25: 7–9) A jar with an inverted wall and tapered,
diagonal or everted rim. Its diameter ranges from 15 to 28 cm. In most
cases, it is not slipped, although a red slip rarely appears on the exte-
rior. Twenty-three sherds of this type jar were found, 19 in Stratum 1.
Parallels are known from Shoham (North) Cave 4 (van den Brink and
Gophna 2005: fig 6.27: 11), Tel Te'o VII–VI (Eisenberg 2001: fig. 6.4:
11), Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.14: 8), Teleilat Ghassul (Lovell
2001: fig. 4.41: 5), Fazael 2 (Chapter 10: Fig. 10.15: 14) and 'En Gedi
(Ussishkin 1980: fig. 10: 6).
Type Jr3b (Fig. 9.25: 10–12) A small jar (amphoriskos/cup) with an
inverted wall and a pointed, diagonal or everted rim, and an average
diameter of 8 cm. The jar is sometimes slipped red and in one case (Fig.
9.25: 10) it is decorated with a reticulated pattern. Five sherds of this
type were found. Parallels to this sub-type are known from 'En Esur IV
(Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 15), Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002: fig.
4.1: 10) and Cave V/49 (Eisenberg 2002: fig. 8: 22).
Type Jr4 (Fig. 9.25: 13) A jar with a convex wall and an everted rim,
12 cm in diameter, and exterior treated with a red slip. One example
of this type was found in Stratum 1. Parallels are known from Grar
(Gilead and Goren 1995: fig. 4.15: 1), Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
and Oren 2004: figs. 3.12: 6; 3.13: 7) and Umm Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill.
3: 10).

Coarse, reddish (interior and exterior) clay, grey core, grey
1 19
(calcite material) and white grits
Coarse, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay, brown
2 129 1037
3 429 4027 light brown core, red, white, black and grey grits. Red paint
on rim (exterior and interior). Traces of burning (exterior)
Well fired, reddish brown (exterior) and pale brown
4 427 4030 (interior) clay, grey core, red, white and grey grits. Traces of
burning (exterior)
Under baking, brown (exterior and interior) clay, black core,
5 464 4063
red grits. Traces of burning (exterior and interior)
Well fired, very light brown (exterior and interior) clay and
6 427 4022 core, grey, white, black and shiny grits. Reddish brown paint
(exterior) and red slip (interior)
Well fired, pale brown (exterior and interior) clay, pale
7 413 4017 brown and black core, white, red and grey grits. Traces of
burning (exterior)
Well fired, pale brown (exterior and interior) clay, white and
8 412 4016
grey grits. Traces of red (and dark green) paint (exterior)
9 143 1045
red, white and shiny grits
10 106 1009
white and grey grits. Traces of red paint (exterior)
11 307 3022
grey and white grits
Medium fired, light brown (exterior and interior) clay and
12 452 4040 core, white, grey and red grits. Red paint (exterior and
interior)
Medium fired, reddish brown (exterior and interior) clay
13 433 4028
and core, red, white and grey grits. Red paint

230 chapter nine
Figure 9.25. Jars.

Churns
Seven fragments of churns were discovered (Fig. 9.26), six in Stratum 1.
All the fragments are similar, representing churns with curved bodies
and large lug handles attached at the ends. One of the churns (Fig. 9.26:
2) is decorated with an abstract red painting. Another smaller churn
has an incised lug handle (Fig. 9.26: 3). The neck of an upright churn,
with a tapered rim, was also found. The outer wall is slipped red and
there is a red stripe on the interior of the rim (Fig. 9.26: 7). Parallels are
known from many sites, e.g. Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 9: 7–8).
No. Locus Description

Coarse, light brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core, red, white
1 313
(chalk?) grits
Well fired, reddish-brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core, grey,
2 414
red and white grits. Red paint and traces of burning (exterior)
Medium-well fired, reddish-brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey
3 427
core, grey, red and white grits. Traces of burning
Coarse, reddish-brown (exterior and interior) clay, black core, grey,
4 429
red and white grits. Traces of burning (exterior)
Medium fired, reddish-brown (exterior) and black (interior) clay,
5 437
brown core, red and white grits. Traces of burning (exterior)
Well fired, reddish-brown (exterior) and light brown (interior) clay,
6 433
black-grey core, red and white grits. Traces of burning (exterior)
Coarse, light brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey core, red, white
7 407
and black grits. Red paint (exterior and on rim, interior)

232 chapter nine
Figure 9.26. Churns.
Spoons
Parts of two ceramic spoons (Fig. 9.27: 3–4) were found. The spoons
are round, with a plain rim, and are slightly more than 5 cm long. Paral-
lels to this type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and
Oren 2004: fig. 3.16: 10) and Umm Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 4: 4).
Ceramic weights
Four ceramic weights of two distinct types were found. Two of the
weights are possibly biconical loom weights (Fig. 9.27: 1–2), perforated
from both sides. They are 3–4 cm wide and 2.5–4.0 cm long. Parallels
to this type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz and Oren
2004: fig. 6.2: 1–3).
Two are spindle weights (Fig. 9.27: 7–8) shaped like flat discs with a
round hole in the centre. They are 4–5 cm in diameter and are 1–2 cm
thick. Parallels to this type are known from Giv'at HaOranim (Scheft-
elowitz and Oren 2004: fig. 6.2: 5–7).
No. Locus Type Description

Loom Coarse, light grey clay and core, white, red and grey
1 316
weight grits. Traces of burning (exterior)
Loom
2 452 Coarse, light brown clay and core, white and shiny grits
weight
Medium fired, light brown (exterior and interior) clay,
3 128 Spoon grey core, white grits. Traces of burning (exterior and
interior)
Coarse, black (exterior) and light brown (interior) clay,
4 311 Spoon black core, red, white and shiny grits. Traces of burning
(exterior)
Well fired, reddish-brown (exterior and interior) clay,
Decorated
5 122 brown core, white and shiny grits. Two reed imprints
sherd
(exterior). Yellow wash (exterior)
Decorated Well fired, light brown (exterior and interior) clay, grey
6 135
sherd core, grey and white grits. Imprints on surface (exterior)
Spindle Coarse, brown (exterior and interior) clay and core,
7 145
weight small black grits
Spindle
8 129 Soft limestone
weight
Well fired, light brown (exterior and interior) clay and
Decorated
9 129 core, white, grey and red grits. Red paint (exterior and
jar
on shoulder, interior)

234 chapter nine
Figure 9.27. Miscellaneous.

The Ceramic Fabric

The fabric of a sub-sample of sherds was examined visually. The pri-
mary purpose of this examination was to identify the kinds of tempers
in the clay, and to understand the function of certain vessels.
Much of the clay used to make the 'Ein Hilu vessels contains numer-
ous red, black, grey and white inclusions. Mica was also identified. The
clay is mostly coarse, but there are also well fired vessels, mainly bowls
(Types B2, B4, and B6) and jars (Types Jr2, Jr3).
The colour of the fabric ranges from light to dark brown: sometimes
there are remnants of soot on the sherd, implying that it was used for
cooking. Generally, the inclusion of shells (calcite) or chalk (quartz)
in temper indicates that a vessel was used for cooking. Examination of
the sherds that indicate cooking (whether by the addition of quartz or
calcite temper, or from traces of soot or burning) reveals the follow-
ing: among the bowls, the B2 (3 sherds) and B4c (2 sherds) vessels may
have been used in cooking. Other sherds of the bowl class that were
identified as possible cookery vessels belong to Types B1a, B6, and B7.
Among the jars, Type Jr2a (3 sherds) is a vessel that may have been used
for cooking. Holemouth jars of Types H2 (2 sherds) and H5 (2 sherds)
were probably used for cooking. Another sherd of this class was identi-
fied and belongs to Type H1. Examination of the artifacts suggests that
both open and closed vessels were used for cooking.
Petrographic Analysis10
A small selection of sherds from Stratum 1 of Areas B and C was sub-
mitted for petrographic analysis. The results of the analysis revealed
two separate groups:
Group 1 – Marine Lower Cretaceous

Pottery composed of diversified shales or shale-rich clay with ferrugi-
nous ooliths, quartz and calcite crystals. The matrix is rather silty (usu-
ally about 2% by volume or more). The temper of this group contains
diversified shales, ranging from black to light yellow in thin-section.
Quartz is widespread in all cases, usually badly-sorted, angular to sub-
rounded, reaching a coarse grain size of up to 1 mm. Also common
are calcareous rock fragments, both as calcite crystals and limestone.
Within the limestone fragments, in some cases, several types of fossils
10
The petrographic analysis was made by Y. Goren, Tel Aviv University.
236 chapter nine
occur, including Orbitolina sp., which is typical of the marine Lower

Cretaceous formations of Samaria and the Galilee. A typical attribute of
this group is the appearance of many opaque ooliths, determined under
reflected light to be composed of haematite and limonite. Provenance:
Lower Cretaceous formations most probably of eastern Samaria (Wadi
Far'ah, Wadi Malih).
This group is the most common in 'Ein Hilu, and therefore strength-
ens the assumption that, as in the cases of other Chalcolithic sites (e.g.
Shiqmim – Goren and Gilead 1987), most of the material used for pot-
tery production was brought from the vicinity of the sites (probably
from Wadi Malih which runs by the site).
Group 2 – Taqiye marl (one sample – a jar)

This fabric is distinguishable to the naked eye by its whitish or yellow-
ish colour that tends to appear greenish-grey at higher firing tempera-
tures (above about 700°C). However, the estimated firing temperatures
in this case (according to structural changes of various minerals) are
far lower, and the whitish shade dominates the sherd. Microscopi-
cally, this fabric is characterized by light, highly calcareous clay (marl),
containing foraminifers and iron oxides (with limestone and dolomite
sand temper). The microfaunal assemblage within the matrix, when
identified, is usually of Palaeocene age. Based on its mineralogical and
micropalaeontological affinities, this clay is identified as marl of the
Taqiye Formation of the Palaeocene age (Goren et al. 2004: 256–258,
with references and further discussion). The exact provenance of this
vessel cannot be determined.
Decoration
Three kinds of decorations were identified on the ceramics from 'Ein
Hilu: paint (slip), plastic decoration, and perforation (Table 9.1).
Painted decorations, were applied after firing, either painted with a
brush, or by immersing the vessel in the paint. Red and brown are the
only colours that were identified on the sherds from 'Ein Hilu. Painting
with a brush was used mostly on open vessels (bowls), or on the exte-
riors of closed vessels (primarily holemouth jars). The ‘lipstick’ design
painted on the rims of the vessels, also characteristic of the Chalcolithic
period, is the most common painted decoration on the ceramics from
the site. A very large number of sherds (216) decorated with paint were
found, 138 of which were recovered from Stratum 1, and 43 from Area
E. One example of a reticulated pattern (Fig. 9.25: 10) is reminiscent

of the decorations on the vessels from Tel Tsaf (Gophna and Sadeh
1988–1989; Garfinkel et al. 2007) and Kataret Es-Samra (Leonard
1989), from earlier phases of the Chalcolithic.
Plastic decorations were probably applied to the vessels when they
were in the leather-hard state, the stage before they were fired. Primar-
ily, sherds with rope ornamentation were found at the site. A total of 12
sherds with applied decorations were discovered, 10 in Stratum 1.
Like the plastic ornamentation, perforated decorations were prob-
ably added to the surface of the vessel prior to firing, when it was still
leather-hard. Six sherds decorated with perforations were found at the
site.
Overall, decorated vessels were relatively uncommon at the site. Of
the sherds that were found in Stratum 1 only 5.6% were decorated in
some manner (Table 9.1). The data regarding the finds from Stratum
2 (7.6%) and Area E (7.1%) are similar and not significantly different
from that of Stratum 1. It is interesting to note that despite the small
number of finds from Stratum 3, 10.4% of the sherds are painted.
Pottery Spatial Analysis (Fig. 9.28)

Spatial analysis was performed only for Stratum 1, Areas B and C, as the
small-scale exposure of Strata 2 and 3 was not large enough for analysis,
and Area E lacks material relevant to this procedure. The analysis is
based upon selected artifacts from in situ deposits (mainly floor de-
posits) and a minimum number of individuals. The analysis is used to
identify special activity areas.
Two areas within the excavation contained most of the finds suitable
for the analysis: the possible inner courtyard between Walls 423, 432,
434 and 418 in Area B, and the outer courtyard south of Wall 423 in
Area C.
The inner courtyard contained a large amount of pottery vessels
which had probably leaned against, or were placed alongside Wall 432.
In a 1×4 m section adjacent to Wall 432, we found three churns, four
holemouth jars, four jars and four bowls, all lying horizontally on the
packed earth floor. On the other side of the same courtyard, along Wall
418, an area of similar size produced only one jar and one bowl. Room
441, to the north-west of the inner courtyard, housed in situ remains of
two jars and one holemouth jar.
The longitudinal rooms separated by Walls 418 and 420 (Loci 427,
238 chapter nine
W422
L106
W449
W451
# L470
L414
W421
#
# L415 L128
W416
L407
L438
W420
L427
W417
L410
L412 W425
W419
L413 W418 W418 L114
W423
#
L129
Rocks in
W418 Disorder L125
W434
L429
L19
39
L441
W4
L433
W423
# L431
W432
W432a
L444
W450
Area B
0 2
Jar Churn Holemouth Bowl/Krater Spoon m
Figure 9.28. Pottery spatial analysis (schematic sketch).
410, 412, and paved Locus 413) contained small amounts of ceramic
material (fragments of two vessels each), that were not in situ. Paved
Rooms 407 and 415 (in the eastern part of the building) contained no
in situ material, but the unpaved Room 414 and 470 (actually two parts
of the same room) contained in situ crushed vessels. These include one
churn, one holemouth jar, one jar and one bowl. The rooms and alley
north-west of Walls 421 and 439 were excavated in 1988: our excava-
tion only cleaned them, and therefore we are unable to use this part of
Area B in our analysis.
The outer courtyard, south of Wall 423 in Area C, contained an in-
teresting distribution of vessels similar to that of the inner courtyard.
Most of the vessels were found alongside Wall 423 (11 bowls, 7 jars,
and 3 holemouth jars). Further from the wall (moving southwards) the
density of vessels declined rapidly.
The results of the spatial analysis are:

1. Vessels were usually set alongside walls, not left in the middle of
living spaces. This was probably done to save space. The conve-
nience of leaning heavy vessels against the walls (and possibly
against each other) may also have been a factor.
2. Paved rooms were not used for storage in ceramic vessels. Perish-
able containers (such as sacks) were probably utilized for storage
in these rooms.
3. Large storage containers were kept mainly in courtyards.
4. Vessels of different types were found together (we did not find
preferred locations for specific types of vessel).
5. The inner courtyard in Area B was the only suitable place for
sleeping during winter when sleeping outside was not possible
(the other rooms are simply too small). However, we do not have
any proof as to whether the inner courtyard was roofed or not.11
The Lithic Assemblage12

This chapter includes a short report of the flint artifacts and tools of 'Ein
Hilu, including the assemblage of the surface finds of the Manasseh Hill
Country Survey (Winter 2008: 658–659), the finds from the excavation,
some additional test squares, and surface collection conducted at the
site prior to the excavation itself.
A wide variety of everyday activities can be executed by flint tools.
During proto-historic periods, the toolkit included tools mainly for
handicraft, food processing, agricultural, ad hoc and special purposes;
hence the tool groups were divided accordingly (Table 9.6). With the
onset of the Metal Ages the share of tools needing percussion, such as
flint axes and chisels, declined gradually, while the share of tools used
for cutting, such as sickle blades, increased accordingly (summarized
by Rosen 1997: 156–158; figs. 7.8–7.9).
The methodology used and the interpretation of the impact of the
finds on society are not conventional, and are dealt in detail in Bar 2008.
11
No traces of roofing (such as burnt wood or bases for columns) were found in the
excavation, although the author believes that at least all the small rooms were roofed. A
possible exception is the horizontal slab found in the middle of a room in Area E – L300
(see Figs. 9.18, 9.22).
12
This section was written by H. Winter, University of Haifa. For a full report of the
lithic assemblage see Bar et al. 2008.
240 chapter nine
The Assemblage
The groups are defined here according to our methodology (Winter in
Bar et al. 2008: 191–208).
1. Waste – pieces unusable for further use;
2. Debitage (prefabricated blanks) – artifacts fit for use without fur-
ther modification, or as blanks for secondary shaping of tools;
3. Specific tools shaped by secondary modification (flaking, retouch,
or polish).
As most small artifacts, such as chips and chunks, were not picked up
during the different surface collections, only finds from the excavation
were included in Table 9.5, providing a clear picture of the deviation
between Group A – waste and Group B – debitage.
Waste and debitage

The proportions of the two groups of artifacts are reasonable compared
to other contemporary sites, but a discussion of this issue is beyond the
scope of this publication (Winter in Bar et al. 2008).
Area B C E Total
Group N N N N %
A. Waste 277 298 41 616 68.8
B. Debitage 117 99 64 280 31.2
Total 394 397 105 896 100.0
Table 9.5. Waste and debitage.
Tools
This group includes all artifacts which were shaped by secondary treat-
ment (flaking, retouch, or polish) in order to prepare a specific tool
type. These artifacts are usually larger and easier to detect; hence the
artifacts of this group from the different surface collections were also
included.
The group is divided into sub-categories according to the function
they were possibly intended for, thus providing indications for the life-
style and economy of the community.
As the surface assemblage yielded only relatively few items collected
at random, the summary figures of tools (Group C) were affected only
marginally. In these collections there were somewhat fewer handicraft
tools, and scraping tools were slightly more abundant. Apparently no

different mode of activities was indicated.
An attempt was made to find subsistence and functional similarities
to other contemporary sites; and five excavated sites for which more or
less comparable figures were available were chosen. The comparison
was based on the overall figures of the studies, but the artifact catego-
ries were regrouped according to their functions and our list. Group C
tools are presented here for comparison.
The figures demonstrate the difficulty in comparing assemblages
from different sites, and clearly show the differences in excavating,
sieving, sampling, and analysis methods.
At Tel Te'o VI–VII no chips were reported, a typical phenomenon of
selective recovery (Gopher and Rosen 2001: 49), thus perhaps increas-
ing the percentage of cores and primary elements (Gopher and Rosen
2001: table 4.1, 50). The Giv'at HaOranim assemblage also included
very few chips, again as the result of selective recovery (Barkai 2004:
87). The totally sieved (2 mm mesh sieve) excavation of Grar (Gilead
et al. 1995: 6), points to a high share of cores (8.1%) and primary ele-
ments (27.4%) in the assemblage (Gilead et al.1995: table 5.3, 277). At
Shiqmim, where all sediments were sieved through a 3 mm mesh sieve
(Levy and Rosen 1987: 282), cores were more than twice as frequent as
chips. Primary elements were not reported separately (Levy and Rosen
1987: 282–283, table 10.1, 291). Assemblages can be different as a re-
sult of different ecological settings, different climatic conditions, and
chronological time gaps, all these resulting in different lifestyles and
economies. However, different excavation and recording routines are
also reflected in the assemblages. These problems demonstrate that a
reliable comparison is nearly beyond reach. The sites with comparable
frequencies are apparently only Grar (Gilead et al. 1995) and Gilat
(Rowan 2006: table 11 a, b, 526).
Remarks on the Sickle Segment Collection

Special attention should be paid to both the presence and the shape
of sickle elements. Generally, the shape, dimensions and technological
details are similar to those from other contemporary sites. Dorsal back-
ing is most common, and double truncation occurs in about two-thirds
of the items; other pieces have at least one truncation and one snap. All
pieces, except one, had sickle sheen, and most of them fine dorsal re-
touch on the cutting edge. Unlike the situation in the later Chalcolithic
sites in the Fazael Valley, only one Cananean sickle blade was found. The types and
fabric present mainly match those reported from other Chalcolithic sites.
1996 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007

Site 'Ein Hilu Square Square Total
Surface Surface Square I
B, C, E II III
Number/percentage N % N % N % N % N % N % N %
Category
a.Hammering
Hammer-stone 4
Total a. 4 3.5 4 2.5
b. Heavy tools
Adze 2 3 1
Chisel 2 1
Total b. 2 7.1 5 4.4 2 40.0 9 5.5
c. Carving and shaping
Burin 14 3
Notch 7 23 1 1
Denticulate 6
Total c. 7 25.0 43 37.7 4 57.1 1 14.3 55 33.7
d. Perforating
Borer 1 6
Awl 1 1 1
Total d. 2 7.1 7 6.1 1 14.3 10 6.1
e. Scraping
Endscraper 7 5 1 1 2
Sidescraper 1 1
Rounded/transversal
1 1
scraper
Fan scraper 2
Total e. 7 25.0 9 7.9 1 20.0 1 14.3 1 14.3 3 60.0 22 13.5
f. Tilling
Pick 1
Total f. 1 0.9 1 0.6
g. Reaping
Sickle segment +
10 2 1
fragments
Reaping knife 1
Total g. 11 9.6 2 40.0 1 14.3 14 8.6
h. Cutting
1996 2007 2007 2007 2007 2007
Site 'Ein Hilu Square Square Total
Surface Surface Square I
B, C, E II III
Number/percentage N % N % N % N % N % N % N %
Retouched (or backed)
5 9
flake
Retouched fragment 1
Backed knife 1 2 1 1
Total h. 7 25.0 20 17.5 1 14.3 1 14.3 29 17.8
i. Food preparation
Chopper 1
Total i. 1 0.9 1 0.6
j. Undefined function
Microlith 3 1
Truncation 3 8
Ad hoc + multiple +
2 1
trimmed
Total j. 3 10.7 13 11.4 2 40.0 18 11.0
Total 28 100.0 114 100.0 5 100.0 7 100.0 4 57.1 5 100.0 163 100.0
Table 9.6. Summary of 'Ein Hilu tool collections, including all excavation areas and surface
collections.
'Ein Hilu 1. Tel Te'o 2. Giv'at
Site 3. Grar 4. Shiqmim 5. Gilat Total
B, C, E VI-VII HaOranim
Number/
N % N % N % N % N % N % N %
percentage
Category
a. Hammering
Hammer-stone 4
Total a. 4 3.5 4 0.1
b. Heavy tools
Axe 7 71 14 54 133
Adze 3 10 27 38 ++
Chisel 2 ++ 3 4
Total b. 5 4.4 17 11.6 71 6.7 44 6.3 96 5.7 133 3.4 366 4.8
c. Carving and
shaping
Burin 14 26 4
Notch 23 2 363 144 718 50
Denticulate 6 4 ++ 23 97 26
Total c. 43 37.7 6 4.1 389 37.0 171 24.6 815 48.3 76 1.9 1500 19.7
d. Perforating
Borer 6 5 45 37 177 385
Awl 1 ++ ++ ++
Needle awl /
21
micro borer
Total d. 7 6.1 5 3.4 45 4.3 37 5.3 177 10.5 406 10.4 677 8.9
e. Scraping
Endscraper 5 4 37 43 255 183
Sidescraper 1 12 29
Rounded scraper 1
Fan scraper 2 3 7 8 108
Micro endscraper 30 237
Total e. 9 7.9 7 4.8 37 3.5 92 13.2 263 15.6 557 14.2 965 12.7
f. Tilling
Pick 1
Total f. 1 0.9
g. Reaping
Sickle segment +
10 20 99 166 39 581
fragments
Reaping knife 1
Total g. 11 9.6 20 13.6 99 9.4 166 23.9 39 2.3 581 14.8 916 12.0
h. Cutting
'Ein Hilu 1. Tel Te'o 2. Giv'at
Site 3. Grar 4. Shiqmim 5. Gilat Total
B, C, E VI-VII HaOranim
Number/
N % N % N % N % N % N % N %
percentage
Retouched (or
8 16 46 42 260 159
backed) blade
Retouched (or
9 29 244 1459
backed) flake
Retouched
1 84 76
fragment
Backed knife 2 14
Total h. 20 17.5 59 40.1 374 35.6 118 17.0 260 15.4 1618 41.3 2449 32.2
i. Food preparing
Chopper 1 12 61
Total i. 1 0.9 12 0.7 61 1.6 74 1.0
j. Undefined
function
Microliths 3 28 40 24 108
Truncation 8 1 13
Ad hoc+
multiple+ 2 32 9 14 377
trimmed
Total j. 13 11.4 33 22.4 37 3.5 67 9.6 24 1.4 485 12.4 659 8.7
3917
Total 114 100.0 147 100.0 1052 100.0 695 100.0 1686 100.0 100.0 7611 100.0
+++
% of total
1.5 1.9 13.8 9.1 22.2 51.5 100.0
assemblage
+ Miscellaneous pieces were excluded

++ Added to previous category
+++ Prismatic blades and limestone artifacts were excluded.
Remarks: (1) Gopher and Rosen 2001: table 4.2; (2) Barkai 2004: table 7.4; (3) Gilead et al. 1995: table
5.8; (4) Levy and Rosen 1987: table 10.1; (5) Rowan 2006: table 11.1a (figures in table 11.15 differ slightly
from those in table 11.1a).
Table 9.7. Inter-assemblage comparison of tools, including all sites and levels.
246 chapter nine
Summary and Conclusions

'Ein Hilu is located at the fringes of the desert in a geographical setting
different from sites in more temperate areas. Despite the rather small
flint assemblage, the presence of most tool categories characteristic of
the Chalcolithic period confirms the dating of the radiometric analysis.
The comparison to other contemporary sites shows some differences
in the composition of the tool-kit. These differences could be explained
by the different geographical settings, resulting in different emphases
in economic activities, and a tool-kit in accordance with local needs.
However, it should be considered that different excavation and record-
ing routines make a reliable comparison practically impossible.
At 'Ein Hilu the economy was apparently based on herding and ag-
riculture (cereal cultivation as indicated by the presence of sickle seg-
ments and grinding tools – see section below).
The relative scarcity of bifacial core tools and the lack of axes in-
tended for heavy wood work, such as tree-felling, compared to sites
located in different ecological niches may tentatively point to an envi-
ronment with fewer trees. The use of bronze axes seems less plausible,
as no hint was found that such axes were present at any time at the site.
The sources of raw flint were not located, but the scarcity of cores
and primary elements may indicate that primary flint-knapping rarely
took place in the excavated areas.
Figure 9.29. Area B collection.

1, 2 – cores; 3 – bladelet core; 4 – notch; 5 – axe/adze.
248 chapter nine
Figure 9.30. Area B collection (continued).

1 – denticulate; 2 – borer; 3 – burin; 4, 5 – borers; 6 – end scraper; 7 – fan
scraper (fragment); 8 – thumbnail scraper; 9 – backed bladelet; 10 – side
scraper.
Figure 9.31. Area C collection.

1, 2 – chisels; 3 – end notch; 4 – burin; 5 – backed bladelet point; 6 – bladelet;
7 – end scraper; 8, 9 – rounded scrapers.
250 chapter nine
Figure 9.32. Area C collection (continued).

1 – hammer stone; 2 – burin; 3 – rounded scraper; 4 – denticulate; 5 – backed
knife; 6 – borer; 7 – notch.
Figure 9.33. Surface finds.

1 – adze; 2 – chisel; 3 – rounded scraper; 4 – backed knife.
252 chapter nine
Figure 9.34. Sickle collection.

Backed sickle segments – 1, 3–5 (Area B), 7–9 (C), 10–12 (Surface); 2 –
Cananean sickle segment (Area B); 6 – reaping knife (Area B).
The Stone Tool Assemblage13

The stone tool assemblage of 'Ein Hilu comprises 48 items (Tables
9.8–9.12), of which the majority are grinding implements. These were
retrieved from all excavation areas, and were found on floors, in fills,
and on the surface. In this report we describe the outlines of the stone
assemblage with the hope that future excavation and further studies
will contribute to our understanding of the roles of stone tools for the
Chalcolithic communities in the desert fringes of Samaria. Despite its
size and preservation, this assemblage is the only published Chalco-
lithic assemblage from the desert fringes of Samaria. Thus, this account
is aimed primarily at describing the stone assemblage, and presenting
relevant data.
Grinding Tools (Tables 9.8–9.11)

The vast majority of the tools found at the site are grinding tools. They
were divided, based on the characteristics of the grinding surfaces,
into two main types: lower, ‘passive’ grinding tools, and upper, ‘active’
grinding tools. Further division into sub-types was done according to
the general morphology of the item.
Lower grinding tools (Fig. 9.35: 1–5; Tables 9.9–9.10)

The lower grinding stones (N = 18) are made primarily of porous, ve-
sicular basalt (N = 12). Other raw materials include limestone (N = 2),
sandstone (N = 3), or unidentified raw material (N = 1). These were
found whole (N = 3) or fragmented (N = 15), and only a small portion
seem to represent large items.
Most of the broken lower grinding stones were broken both across
their widths and their lengths (Fig. 9.35: 1–2), which was probably the
reason for their discard. A few show smoothing or other modification
on their bases (non-active surfaces), and some still bear pecking marks.
Most items exhibit smoothing on their grinding surfaces. These include
a quern fragment, grinding slabs (N = 12, Fig. 9.35: 1–4), a polishing
slab, and three pallets (Fig. 9.35: 5). Most of the grinding surfaces are
convex, while a few tend to be flat. Two of the pallets are whole, and are
5.6–5.8 cm long, 3.6–4.2 cm wide, and 1.3 cm thick. Both weigh 100 g,
and have convex-concave cross-sections. Grinding/smoothing appears
on 80–100% of the grinding face.
13
This section was written by D. Rosenberg, University of Haifa.
254 chapter nine
Upper grinding tools, mullers and burnishers

(Figs. 9.35: 6; 9.36: 1–4; Tables 9.9, 9.11)
The upper grinding elements (N = 14; 29.1% of the stone assemblage)
include two items made of compact, fine-grained basalt, porous basalt
(N = 6), limestone (N = 4), and sandstone (N = 2). These were found
whole (N = 4), or damaged (N = 10). Damaged tools are fragments
lacking large parts of the original tool (usually broken across the width
of the item), or items missing small parts.
Typologically, seven sub-types were distinguished. One-hand
(18.5×14.5 cm) oval manos with plano-convex cross-sections (Fig.
9.35: 6); small round, bi-plano rubber/burnisher (Fig. 9.36: 1); plano-
convex mano fragments (N = 3); fragments of bi-plano manos (N =
2); amorphous rubbers (N = 2), short squat pebble-muller/burnisher;
and elongated, thick pebble-muller/burnishers (N = 3, Fig. 9.36: 2–4).
While some of these show a greater degree of modification, finish
and possibly standardization (Fig. 9.35: 6), others, specifically muller/
burnishers, are pebbles modified probably through use only (Fig. 9.36:
1–4). Most items (N = 12, 25%) have one grinding surface, while two
items have two. Most grinding surfaces are flat (N = 10, 71%), three are
convex and one is amorphous. For all items length ranges between 7.2
and 18.5 cm, width between 3.7 and 14.8 cm, and thickness between
2.1 and 6 cm. Only two items bear clear polish on their active surfaces.
The sandstone items are made from yellow or pinkish sandstones. One
burnisher has flaking scars, and it is possible that this item was also
utilized for pounding.
Vessels (Fig. 9.36: 5–7; Tables 9.8–9.9)

The four vessels found are made of fine-grained compact basalt (N =
2), limestone (N = 1) and unidentified raw material (N = 1). All were
found broken. These include a crudely made and finished globular
door-socket (Fig. 9.36: 5), a V-shaped bowl with a flat outer base and
rounded rim (Fig. 9.36: 6), and a solid-base pedestal (Fig. 9.36: 7). The
latter lacks most of its upper part, and thus the specific characteristics
of the bowl are missing. It has a raised or protruding line encircling the
neck at the point where the bowl and base meet. Both bowl and base
widen outwards from the neck. A shaped depression characterizes the
lower part of the base, and it bears flaking scars. Both these character-
istics are typical of similar items from other Chalcolithic sites in Israel
(Rowan 1998).
Type/raw Compact Porous Uniden-

Limestone Sandstone Total %
material basalt basalt tified
Lower grinding
12 2 3 1 18 38
stones
Upper grinding
2 6 4 2 14 29
stones
Vessels 2 1 1 4 8
Perforated
2 2 4
items
Flaked pieces 2 2 4
Various items 2 3 1 2 8 17
Total 6 19 14 6 3 48
% 13 40 29 13 6 100
Table 9.8. Breakdown of the stone tool assemblage.
Preservation Whole % Broken %

Lower grinding stones 3 17 15 83
Upper grinding stones 4 29 10 71
Vessels 4 100
Perforated items 1 50 1 50
Table 9.9. The stone assemblage – preservation rates among

the grinding tools.
Lower Grinding Stones

Sub- Quern Grinding Large, plano-convex Polishing Rectangular Total
type fragment slab grinding slabs slab pallets
N 1 10 3 1 3 18
% 6 56 17 6 17 100
Table 9.10. Lower grinding tools – sub-types.
Upper Grinding Stones

Medium-
Round-
small (one Short, Fragments
small, Amor- Elongated- Fragments
Sub- hand), squat- of a plano-
bi- phous thick of bi-plano Total
type plano- thick convex
plano rubbers pebble manos
convex pebble manos
manos
manos
N 2 1 2 1 3 3 2 14
% 14 7 14 7 21 21 14 100
Table 9.11. Upper grinding tools – sub-types.

256 chapter nine
Perforated Items (Tables 9.8–9.9)

Two perforated objects were found. These include a weight fragment
and a whorl, possibly of a spindle. The weight is crudely made of lime-
stone, and the break cuts through the aperture or drilling. The aperture
with a minimum diameter of 1.2 cm was drilled from the opposite fac-
ets, with drilling marks still apparent.
The other item is a rounded whorl with a shaped flat facet, made of
pinkish limestone. The aperture is slightly off-centre, and has relatively
straight sides. This was probably a modification of the original biconic
drillings. Thus, the middle of the drilling has the about the same diam-
eter as the openings. Smoothing is apparent on both faces.
Flaked Pieces (Table 9.8)

Two flaked pieces were found, made of limestone. These are thick squat
pebbles bearing flaking marks. One is whole, 2.8×4.6×5.7 cm, and the
other is broken, bearing scars on its perimeter.
Various Items (Fig. 9.36: 8–9; Table 9.8)

The eight items in this group are made of fine-grained, compact basalt
(N = 2), limestone (N = 3), sandstone (N = 1), and unidentified raw
material (N = 2). These include a rounded pebble, probably a hammer-
stone (Fig. 9.36: 8); a flat pebble bearing two opposed drillings (Fig. 9.36:
9); a small oval pebble bearing one concave active face, 3–4 mm deep
and a convex, slightly flattened base; a basalt pebble that may have been
used as a small anvil (9.8×7.6×3.6 cm); an oval basalt pebble pointed
at one end (16×7.8×5.8 cm); a limestone slab bearing flaking marks; a
sandstone piece, probably part of an abrading tool (11.1×4.8×2.9 cm);
and a fragment of an unidentified purplish raw material.
The Stone Assemblage – Discussion

Although small, the stone assemblage of 'Ein Hilu suggests several ob-
servations bearing implications for the understanding of life in the hilly
flanks of the eastern Samaria fringes during the Chalcolithic period.
The stone assemblage seems to be an echo of the well-known stone
industries of the Ghassulian-Beer Sheva cultures known from many
sites in Jordan and Israel. Nonetheless, several components seem to be
missing here (fenestrated stands, decorated bowls and others), which
does not appear to be an outcome of the scale or mode of the excava-
tions at the site. Furthermore, it seems that this assemblage also bears
some affinities to the stone industry of the Golan (Epstein 1998).
Selection of raw materials suggests the predominant use of locally
available stone, although stone from greater distances is also present.
Grinding dominates the assemblage, and evidence for pounding is rare.
Within the grinding paraphernalia a distinction should be made be-
tween large (probably food-processing) grinding tools made of basalt
Figure 9.35. The stone assemblage – Part 1.

258 chapter nine
Figure 9.36. The stone assemblage – Part 2.

Lower Upper
Perforated Flaked Various
Locus grinding grinding Vessels Total
items pieces items
stones stones
1 2 2
14 2 2
19 1 1 2
24 1 1
104 1 1 2
128 2 2
129 1 1
135 1 1
142 1 1
199 1 1
300 1 1
305 1 1 2
306 2 2
307 1 1
311 1 1
314 1 1
316 1 1 2
329 1 1
429 2 2 4
431 2 2
433 2 1 3
438 1 1 2
443 1 2 3
447 1 1
455 1 1
457 1 1
460 1 1
468 1 1
470 1 1 2
4007 1 1
Total 18 14 4 2 2 8 48
% 37.4 29.6 8.4 4.1 4.1 16.4 100
Table 9.12. Breakdown of the stone tool assemblage by loci.

260 chapter nine
and limestone, and usually smaller items, frequently made of limestone

pebbles and sandstone. The latter were probably used for a variety of
tasks, not necessarily related to food preparation. Other items repre-
sented in the stone assemblage suggest that additional tasks may have
been aided by the use of stone implements.
The Faunal Remains14

Animal bones were collected by hand-picking, while dry and wet sift-
ing through 5 mm mesh was done in selected loci. Zooarchaeological
and taphonomic analysis procedures follow Raban-Gerstel et al. (2008).
Identified specimens were examined and scanned for preliminary ta-
phonomic observations, and coded anatomically and taxonomically in
an electronic database. Morphological markers aided differentiation
between closely-related species. Separation of sheep (Ovis aries) from
goat (Capra hircus) was based on morphological criteria of selected
bones (following Boessneck 1969). Sheep and goat skeletal elements
that could not be identified as to species were combined in a sheep/goat
category. Separation of wild boar from domesticated pig was based on
metrical analysis of selected cranial elements (data from Haber 2001
and Hongo and Meadow 1998). Similarly, the separation of aurochs
from domestic cattle was based on morphometric analyses. Measure-
ments of fully ossified bones were taken following von den Driesch
(1976).
The faunal remains of 'Ein Hilu encompasses domesticated livestock
and wild game. The distribution of identified animal bones from Stra-
tum 1 at both excavated areas is shown in Table 9.13, and Table 9.14
presents the animal bones found in Stratum 2.
A total of 107 complete and fragmentary identified bones were de-
rived from the different strata and areas of excavation of 'Ein Hilu. Most
of the bones retrieved are from Area B (NISP = 77). Area C comprised
26 identified bones and Area E had the smallest number of identified
bones (NISP = 4). The most significant occupational stratum at all
areas of excavation is Stratum 1. This stratum was found to comprise
the most abundant bone assemblage (91 of the identified bones, 85% of
total NISP). On the other hand, Stratum 2 consists of only 12 identified
bones (11% of total NISP), while Stratum 3 is even more meagre, and
contains only four identified bones (unfused distal femur and scapula
14
This section was written by N. Raban-Gerstel and G. Bar-Oz, University of Haifa.
of sheep/goat, proximal ulna of cattle, and a molar tooth of pig). The

absence of apparent functional differences among strata and the small
sample sizes of Strata 2 and 3 do not allow detailed study of intra-site
patterning of species distribution. Nevertheless, a striking difference
is apparent in the distribution of mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella),
which is the second most abundant taxon in Stratum 1, and completely
absent from Stratum 2.
As in many Chalcolithic sites from the central and northern parts
of the Jordan Valley (cited in Grigson 1995a: table 1; see also Lev-Tov
2000) the subsistence of 'Ein Hilu was based predominantly on four
domesticated ungulate taxa: cattle, sheep, goat and pigs. In addition, it
includes a significant representation of game species, predominantly of
gazelle bones, which compose almost 30% of the Chalcolithic assem-
blage (Fig. 9.37). The only other game animal is represented by a single
bone of Cape hare (Lepus capensis). The relative high representation of
gazelle bones in the assemblage indicates the significant role of hunting
for the Chalcolithic occupants of the site.
The most abundant livestock species at both phases are sheep and
goat (Ovis aries, Capra hircus). Cattle constitute a minor portion of the
Chalcolithic assemblage. On the basis of taxonomically distinctive fea-
tures, both sheep (Ovis aries) and goat (Capra hircus) are represented
in Stratum 1, and it appears that goat remains outnumber sheep. In
Stratum 2 only two goat bones were identified, but this most probably
results from the small sample size.
Pig remains were identified in all occupational strata. Only a single
third molar of a mandible enabled distinguishing whether the pig origi-
nated from a wild or domesticated individual. The length of the tooth
(33.27 mm) was shorter than the length of a small wild boar female from
Anatolia, Turkey (39.36 mm; data from Hongo and Meadow 1998).
This may suggest that the pigs of 'Ein Hilu were domesticated (i.e. Sus
scrofa domesticus). Similarly, comparison of the pig tooth length from
'Ein Hilu with tooth measurements of modern wild boar (5 females and
14 males) from northern Israel strengthens this observation (Haber
2001; table 7.5.3). This comparison also reveals that 'Ein Hilu pigs fall
below the lower range of the recent wild boar population (Table 9.15).
The current sample is too small for a detailed morphometric analy-
sis of cattle remains. Still, the few measurements that could be taken
indicate the presence of at least a single small-sized animal. Since the
mean and range of the measurements are smaller than those of recent
domestic cattle (Bos taurus), it seems reasonable to assume that the 'Ein
262 chapter nine
Hilu specimens represent completely domesticated animals, a devel-

opment that was fully completed in the southern Levant by the later
phases of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (e.g. von den Driesch and Wodtke
1997; Horwitz 2003; Horwitz et al. 1999).
The small samples of 'Ein Hilu bone assemblages preclude rigorous
reconstructions of livestock and wild game demographic profiles. Nev-
ertheless, it seems that the major excaveted Chalcolithic occupational
phase (Stratum 1) is overrepresented by adult sheep and goat individu-
als. The bone assemblage completely lacks deciduous teeth, and only
a few unfused bone specimens were found (Table 9.16). A different
trend appears for the pig remains. Out of the six identified bones from
Stratum 1, two were found to belong to young individuals under the
age of 24 months. However, keeping in mind the small assemblage, it
seems that pigs were culled differently from sheep and goat, and were
slaughtered at a young age. This indicates that pig-raising was oriented
toward meat, while sheep and goat seem to be more related to a second-
ary product-based economy (Grigson 1995a).
Bone surface modifications found include two cases of carnivore
gnawing or chewing that were found on a mandible and humerus of
sheep/goat. These traces were most probably caused by dogs. Evidence
of butchery marks was found on three specimens: metacarpal and horn
of sheep/goat, and an ulna of cattle. In addition, a single sawed horn
of sheep/goat and a bone point made on a sheep/goat tibial shaft (Fig.
9.38) were found in the same context in Area B. Finally, burnt bones
were also almost completely absent, and were observed only on two
identified bone specimens, a gazelle humerus from Stratum 1 and a
sheep/goat femur from Stratum 2.
Lepus capensis 1% Bos taurus 5.3%

Sus scrofa 6.2% Ovis aries 2%
Capra hircus 5.3%
Gazella gazella 27.1%
Capra/Ovis 52.1%
Figure 9.37. Distribution of animal taxa from 'Ein Hilu, Stratum 1.

Conclusions
The faunal sample from the excavations at the Chalcolithic site of 'Ein-
Hilu is small, but significant, as it provides new data from a well-strat-
ified site. The bone assemblage includes the remains of both livestock
and wild game species, indicating that the Chalcolithic economy was
based on both hunting and husbandry. The almost exclusively hunted
species in the assemblage is the mountain gazelle.
The small percentage of young individuals of sheep and goat, and
the fact that the few cattle remains derive only from adult individuals,
suggest that livestock animals were raised and exploited primarily for
their secondary products (i.e. dairy products and wool for sheep and
goat; milk and labour for the cattle). Similar data are known from addi-
tional Chalcolithic sites in the Negev (e.g. Grigson 1995a; 1995b; 2007).
The fact that dairying was a major component of the 'Ein Hilu Chal-
colithic economy is supported by the presence of ceramic churns that
were found across the site. On the other hand, it seems that the culling
strategy of pigs was different. As they lack any secondary products, they
were raised solely for their meat and, therefore, were slaughtered at a
young age.
The economic strategy attested from the analysis of the 'Ein Hilu
Chalcolithic assemblage combines both hunting activities and raising of
livestock, including pigs. The latter result may be a consequence of the
fact that it was feasible to raise pigs in addition to herding sheep, goats,
and cattle. Therefore, it seems that the site was a permanent settlement.
Significantly, raising of pigs attests to the presence of water sources in
the vicinity of the site (see discussion in Hesse 1990). In addition, the
abundance of gazelle remains demonstrates the role of hunting among
the inhabitants.
Bos Ovis Capra Capra/ Gazella Sus Lepus
taurus aries hircus Ovis gazella scrofa capensis
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
NISP
MNE
Head
Horn 4 2 1 1
Occipital 1 1
Mandible Ramus 1 1 4 3
Mandible teeth 6 3 1 1 3 1
Maxilla teeth 8 2 1 1
Body
Atlas 1 1 2 2
Axis 2 2
Ver: Cervical 1 1 1 1
Ver: Thoracic 2 1
Ver: Lumbar 3 1
Forelimb
Scapula 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
Humerus
1 1 1 1
proximal
Humerus distal 2 1 4 3
Radius proximal 1 1
Radius distal 1 1
Ulna 1 1 1 1
Metacarpus distal 1 1 1 1 1 1
Metacarpus
1 1
proximal III
Hindlimb
Pelvic 3 2 1 1
Femur 1 1
Tibia shaft 1 1
Tibia distal 2 2
Astragalus 1 1
Calcaneus 3 1
Metatarsus
3 2 2 1
proximal
Toes
Phalanx 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
Phalanx 2 2 1 2 1 1 1
Phalanx 3 1 1
Metapod cond. 2 2
NISP 5 2 5 50 26 6 1 95
NISP – % 5.3 2.1 5.3 52.6 27.4 6.3 1.1 100.0
MNI 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 11
Table 9.13. Number of identified specimens (NISP), minimum number of element (MNE) and
minimum number of individuals (MNI) of each taxon represented in Stratum 1.
Capra hircus Capra/Ovis Sus scrofa
NISP MNE NISP MNE NISP MNE
Head
Horn 1 1
Occipital 1 1
Mandible ramus 1 1
Mandible teeth 2 1 1 1
Forelimb
Humerus distal 1 1
Femur distal 1 1
Hindlimb
Pelvic acetabulum 1 1
Femur distal 1 1
Toes
Phalanx 1 1 1
Metapod cond. 1 1
NISP 2 6 4 12
NISP – % 16.7 50.0 33.3 100
MNI 1 1 1 3
Table 9.14. Number of identified specimens (NISP), minimum number of element (MNE)
and minimum number of individuals (MNI) of each taxon represented in Stratum 2.
N Range Average
L L L
'Ein Hilu 1 33.27 33.27
Modern wild boar 19 34.29–45.38 39.83
Table 9.15. Measurements of the single swine tooth compared to modern wild
boar from northern Israel (5 females and 14 males). Tooth measurements (in
mm) taken by Haber (2001).
Species Unfused bones No. Total Identified Bones %

Gazella gazella Humerus proximal 1 26 4
Capra/Ovis Calcaneus 2 57 7
Metapod distal 1
Phalanx 1 proximal 1
Sus scrofa Metacarpal III proximal 1 6 33
Phalanx 1 proximal 1
Table 9.16. Number of unfused bone and the total identified bones of each
species represented in Stratum 1.
266 chapter nine
Figure 9.38. Sawn horn of sheep/goat and a bone point made of

sheep/goat tibia from Stratum 1.
The Malacological Remains15

The excavation yielded the remains of three bivalve species (Table 9.17):
one seashell – Glycymeris incubrica (Glycymeridae family); one right
bivalve of Unio terminalis (Unionidea family), and a number of small
fragments identified as mother-of-pearl (nacre). Due to their fragmen-
tary state it was difficult to identify the species. None of the identified
remains exhibit any indications of human manipulation.
Molluscs found in archaeological sites may provide useful information
concerning the cultural and culinary habits of the former inhabitants
(Claassen 1998). However, in this assemblage, the small number of
finds provides little information.
There is only one seashell which is of Mediterranean origin:
Glycymeris incubrica, well known from other Chalcolithic sites across
Israel, such as Grar (Bar-Yosef Mayer 1995), Gilat (Bar-Yosef Mayer
2006), and Shoham (North) (Mienis 2005). Although there is only one
specimen, it may be that this shell was probably collected by the site’s
inhabitants while visiting the Mediterranean seashore, 65 km from
15
This section was written by E. Dan, University of Haifa.
Species Area Locus Layer Remarks Preservation Origin

Large specimen,
Glycymeris Naturally
E 316 1 natural holed Mediterranean
incubrica abraded
umbo
Slightly
Unio
B 16 1 Right bivalve broken outer Fresh-water
teminalis
lip
Mother-of- Species cannot Dozens of Fresh-water/
C 139 1
pearl be identified fragments Red Sea
Table 9.17. The malacological finds.
the site, or by means of exchange. Since the Glycymeris incubrica was

collected dead from the seashore, it was not used as any kind of food.
However since it was naturally perforated it may have served as a bead.
The fresh-water shells were probably collected from the spring of
'Ein el-Hilu (500 m from the site), the Jordan (4.5 km from the site),
or perhaps from the Sea of Galilee. Unio terminalis is known from the
Chalcolithic site of Gilat (Bar-Yosef Mayer 2006).
Mother-of-pearl originating in different sources, including local
fresh-water creeks, the Nile, and the Red Sea, is known from other
Chalcolithic sites, such as Shoham (North) (Mienis 2005), Grar (Bar-
Yosef Mayer 1995), Abu Matar (Perrot 1955), and others (Bar-Yosef
Mayer 2006). However, due to the paucity of malacological remains, it
is not possible to draw any kind of conclusions concerning their origin
or function at the 'Ein Hilu site.
Radiocarbon Dates16
Two wood samples were collected from two different excavation areas,
and submitted for radiocarbon dating. Sample RTT 5442 was collected
from a sealed locus (L468) below a floor (L407) in Area B. Sample RTT
5443 was collected from the primary deposition of organic remains on
Floor 145 in Area C.
The samples, both charred wood, were pretreated to remove possible
environmental contamination represented by inorganic carbon and
humid substances, according to the procedure presented in Yizhaq et
al. (2005). After pre-treatment the loss of material was quite high, with
16
This section was written by E. Boaretto, Radiocarbon and Cosmogenic Isotopes
Laboratory, Kimmel center for Archaeological science, Weizmann Institute.
268 chapter nine
only 28% and 14% (by weight) material left from RTT 5442 and RTT
5443 respectively. Such low sample recovery indicates that the charcoal
had undergone severe diagenesis. The cleaned material was oxidized
in vacuum to CO2. The content of carbon in the pre-treated material,
determined after the oxidation step, was about 70% carbon by weight.
Due to the small size the samples were prepared as graphite for the
measurement using the accelerator mass spectrometry technique.
The information about the sample type, collection position, radio-
carbon age, calibrated age, and stable carbon isotopes ratio is given in
Table 9.18. Radiocarbon ages in the third column are expressed in 14C
year BP (Before Present) according to convention (Stuiver and Polach
1977) with the standard deviation (± 1σ). Calibrated ages are deter-
mined for ± 1σ (68.2% probability that the correct age is included in
that interval), and for ± 2σ (95.4% probability that the correct age is in-
cluded in that interval). The calibrated intervals were determined using
the OxCal v. 3.10 of Bronk-Ramsey (Bronk-Ramsey 1995; 2001), and
the calibration data in Reimer et al. (2004). The probability distribu-
tions of the calibrated ages are presented in Figure 9.39.
Based on the radiocarbon age and the standard deviation, the two
samples are the same age, and the calibrated age ranges include the third
quarter of the 5th millennium for the ±2σ. Because only two samples
were dated, it is not possible to determine a chronological sequence
of the strata. Both samples are wood charcoal, and therefore because
of the ‘old wood effect’ the dates can be treated only as terminus post
quem. The time effect due to the nature of the samples can be different
in the two cases. A possible conclusion that can be based on the two
radiocarbon dates is that the site was most probably occupied during
the second half of the 5th millennium BCE.
14
C age ± 1σ Collection δ13C
# TYPE Calibrated date BCE
year BP site ‰ PDB
68.2% probability:
'Ein Hilu.
4450– 4320 (63.3%)
Area B,
RTT 5442 Charcoal 5515 ± 75 4290–4260 ( 4.9%) -24.2
L468,
95.4% probability:
B 4066
4530–4230
68.2% probability: 'Ein Hilu.
4460–4330 Area C,
RTT 5443 Charcoal 5535 ± 75 -26.2
95.4% probability: L144a,
4540– 4240 B 1051
Table 9.18. Radiocarbon dates.

Figure 9.39. Probability distribution of calibrated ages for samples RTT 5442
and RTT 5443.
270 chapter nine
General Conclusions
The excavation of 'Ein Hilu uncovered the remains of a Chalcolithic
settlement in the northern desert fringes of Samaria. As this is the only
site to have been excavated in this area, this study sheds new light on
the lifestyle and subsistence economy of the Chalcolithic people who
inhabited this virtually unexplored region.
The site includes at least three distinct habitation strata dating to
the Chalcolithic period. Stratum 1, the main habitation strata, dates to
the third quarter of the 5th millennium BCE. Lower phases excavated
probably date a little earlier in the same chronological horizon.
The inhabitants of 'Ein Hilu were permanent settlers employed in
a subsistence economy based on herding mixed with agriculture, and
possibly hunting and pastoral nomadism. This conclusion is based
upon the following evidence and analyses:
1. 'Ein Hilu is distinguished by its massive, planned architecture. The
fact that pigs were raised at the site further supports this conclusion, as
does the prevalence of handicraft flint tools, used for the production of
household utensils.
2. The bone assemblage includes both livestock and wild game spe-
cies. This indicates a possible combination of both hunting (mountain
gazelle – although the absence of arrowheads in the flint assemblage
remains an enigma) and livestock husbandry economy. Herding seems
to have been an important activity, as indicated by the high propor-
tion of cutting and butchering tools in the flint assemblage. The small
percentage of young sheep and goats, and the few remains of cattle de-
rived only from adult individuals, suggest that livestock were raised and
exploited primarily for secondary uses. These include dairy and wool
production for sheep and goats, and labour and milk production for
the cattle. This is further supported by the churns and weights in the
ceramic assemblage. In contrast, the culling strategy of pigs leads to the
conclusion that they were raised probably for their meat only.
3. Cereals, either wild or cultivated, were exploited to some extent.
This emerges from the modest number of flint sickle segments. Since
the waters of Wadi Malih are saline, the most suitable land for agri-
culture was located within the 30 ha valley to the south of the site. We
presume that only seasonal annual varieties were exploited, due to the
limited availability of fresh water and fertile soil.
'Ein Hilu’s location differs from the pattern explored by the author in
other Chalcolithic sites in the lower Jordan Valley and the desert fringes
of Samaria. While other villages tended to develop in valley fringes,

near water sources and at low geographic positions, 'Ein Hilu is situated
high above the Wadi Malih Valley, and about 500 m from the nearest
water source. Probable advantages of the site’s unusual location include
the collection of stones from the neighbouring rocky hilltop that could
have been used as building materials for the local houses; and the high
position offering distant views and a cooling breeze in the hot summer.
Another possible reason is the location half-way between the large sites
of the Beth Shean and Jordan Valleys to those of the Zababdeh-Tubas
valleys in the Samaria hills.
The excavation exposed a number of architectural features unknown
(or rare) in the southern Levant, though other common traits are found
in the site. The broad house is a well-known architectural feature in
Chalcolithic societies. However, unique to 'Ein Hilu is the partition of
these houses into many smaller units (as found in Area B, Stratum 1),
and the addition of more than two rooms to the sides of the broad room
(as found in Area E).
Floors were made of flat slabs (whose underlying niches were prob-
ably used for storage) or packed earth. The walls of the buildings stand
to a height of up to three stone courses. In several places, the clay bricks
preserved on the stone courses indicate brick walls. In most cases,
floors were situated at the upper level of the first stone course. Thus,
we can assume that the bottom part of the wall was built of stone, and
its upper reaches were made of brick (stone construction was found up
about 50 cm above the level of the floors).
The thickness of most of the exterior walls ranged between 80 and
100 cm, with identical construction in most cases: two rows of large
and medium stones, with a fill of soil and cobbles deposited between
them.
The ceramic corpus of the excavation sheds new light on the types
and forms of household utensils in the Chalcolithic society in this un-
explored region.
The excavation at this site, together with further exploration of the
lower Jordan Valley, mainly in the Fazael valley (see chapters 10–11
below), adds important new data regarding our knowledge of the Chal-
colithic period in this vast area.
CHAPTER TEN
ONE OF THE LATEST CHALCOLITHIC SITES OF THE

JORDAN VALLEY? FAZAEL 2: PRELIMINARY REPORT
OF THE 2007–2008 EXCAVATION SEASONS
Introduction1
The first two seasons of excavations at Fazael 2 (map ref. old Israel Grid
1913/1618) were conducted during February–May 2007 and February
2008.2 The site was selected for excavation for the following reasons:
1. It is located in the centre of a large group of Chalcolithic sites
in Wadi Fazael, one of the main settlement regions in the Jordan
Valley during that period.3
2. Preliminary survey data indicated that this is a very late Chal-
colithic site, dating from close to the elusive transitional phase
between the Chalcolithic and EB I periods.
3. Modern destruction, caused to parts of the site by bulldozers, has
rendered some elements especially vulnerable to degradation,
making excavation a priority.
The site is situated along the edge of the valley in Wadi Fazael, and
extends west from the Fazael settlement along both sides of the old
road to Ma'ale Ephraim (Figs. 10.1–10.2). The size of the ancient site is
presumed to be about 20 ha, and includes a number of non-contiguous
secondary sites spread along the northern bank of the ancient river
channel in Wadi Fazael (Fig. 10.2).4 The segment that was excavated
(Fazael 2) is located on the south-eastern slope of a rocky spur that
1
This chapter is based on a report accepted for publication by the Journal of the
Israel Prehistoric Society - Bar et al. in press.
2
The excavation was directed by the author, with assistance from Ziv Leiba and
Ari Levi (administration), Haim Winter (flint), Dror Ben-Yosef (stone), Nili Liphshitz
(dendrochronology), Sapir Haad (illustrations), Elisabetta Boaretto (14C analysis), Mi-
chael Eisenberg and the Zinman Institute of Archaeology of the University of Haifa
(scientific and logistic support), the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (scientific and
logistic support), and the Jordan Valley Regional Council (logistic support).
3
Two of the sites were partly excavated and have been published: Porath (1985)
and Peleg (2000).
4
In the absence of architectural contiguity between the small mounds it was de-
cided to define them for the time being as separate sites. One of the aims of future
research at the site will be to ascertain if the different sites are in fact one large site.
fazael 2: preliminary report of the 2007–2008 seasons 273
was damaged by earthmoving work between the end of the 1960s and
during the 1970s.
The site was first described briefly by Porath (1985), and in 2006, an
in-depth survey was conducted at the site within the framework of the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey. Small mounds with building remains
are scattered throughout the area, apparently randomly. Some of these
180 190 200

170 170
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Wa d
Yafit
i A
hm
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z
Fazael 2
160 Fazael 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 10.1. General location map.

274 chapter ten
Figure 10.2. The Fazael Valley. Satellite photograph of the various Chalcolithic
sites that have been identified, and the presumed area of ancient settlement.
Source: Google Earth.
Figure 10.3. General view, looking north, 2007.

small mounds had been damaged by mechanical equipment.

The excavation area is located 200 m north of the current Wadi
Fazael river channel. Judging from the distribution of the Chalcolithic
sites, it seems that the wadi’s original channel was located south of the
current streambed, where a broad, inactive river channel is visible (Fig.
10.2).
It was decided to excavate the most damaged area of the site, where
wall remains were visible on the surface (the north-western part of the
site).
Stratigraphy And Architecture

The excavation (about 170 m2) focused on a building whose north-
eastern part was damaged by modern earthmoving activity. Three
strata were discovered: two early strata (2 and 3) from the Chalcolithic
period, and one upper layer (1) that was not dated (see below).
Stratum 3
Stratum 3 (plan in Fig. 10.4 and Section A–A’ in Fig. 10.5) was only ex-
posed in a limited area in Squares C 1 and C 2. The remains of two pits
which had been dug in the ancient raised conglomerate surface were
exposed (L68, L79; Fig. 10.7). The pits averaged 45 cm in diameter and
40 cm deep. The meagre remains of two hearths with an average diam-
eter of 24 cm were found near the pits. Scant finds were collected near
1 2 3
A -201.38
A'
L79 L54 L68
-200.89 L61
F78 -200.92
L48
-201.42 F63
F63
Hearth L66
C C
L120
-201.09
0 5m
1 2 3
Figure 10.4. Plan of Stratum 3.

276 chapter ten
A
-200.6
A'
L31 L38 W9
-200.8 L17
W10 W14 W12
-201.0 W74 W10
W9
-201.2 L61 L48
L48 L45
L61 L68
-200.4 L66
Section A-A
B
-200.0
W15 B'
-200.2 L5 L5 W9
-200.4
L18 L25
L36 W41
-200.6 L30 L37
Section B-B
Legend
C Conglometate
-200.0 C' Dark brown
-200.2 L6 L5
-200.4
L19 W15 L18 Light brown
L26 L30
-200.6 F35
0 2m
Section C-C
Figure 10.5. Sections A–A’, B–B’, C–C’.
Figure 10.6. General view, looking east, 2007.

the pits and hearths, primarily from the raised conglomerate surface.
These finds included pottery characteristic of the Chalcolithic culture
(Fig. 10.17).
Stratum 2
The main element of Area A was exposed in this stratum: a broad house
of area 62 m2. The structure is divided into two rooms (a southern
room – Unit 1 and a northern room – Unit 2) and includes a courtyard
(Unit 3) of unknown size (Fig. 10.8).
The southern room (Unit 1, Fig. 10.6), delimited by Walls 74, 12, 11,
10 and 9, is 7 m long and ca. 4 m wide, and covers an area of 28 m2. Its
north-eastern corner had been destroyed by earthmoving equipment.
In the centre of the western wall are the remains of a wall stump (W14)
which postdates the first construction phase of the building. Its func-
tion is unclear.
The walls of the room were preserved to a height of three stone
Figure 10.7. Stratum 3: Pit (L68) dug into conglomerate

(L63). Note the wall of Stratum 2 (W9).
278 chapter ten
courses. In several places, remains of mudbrick material were pre-

served on top of the stone courses. Habitation layers (tamped earth
floors) were identified at the elevation of the upper part of the first
stone course; hence we assume that the wall was built of mud bricks laid
on top of stone courses. The outer walls of the building range between
80 and 100 cm thick. In most cases, they were both constructed of two
rows of medium and large stones, with a fill of small stones and soil
deposited between them. Infant burials were found beneath the floor in
the two northern corners of the southern room (see below).
The northern room (Unit 2, Fig. 10.9), delimited by Walls 64, 12,
11, and 9, is 8.5 m long, about 4 m wide, and covers an area of 34 m2.
The entrance to the building, paved with flat stones (Fig. 10.9), was in
the eastern wall (W11) and included a stone socket on the inside of the
opening. The walls of the northern room were constructed identically
to those of the southern room, although no mud bricks were found in
1 2 3 4 5
0 5m
L108
L118
W64
-200.43 -200.00
A A
L101
L100
-200.11
B
#
L104
-200.41 L105
L19
L26 L18
L30
F35 # Unit 3
-200.57 L18
B L25 B
L22 F51 L36
-200.40 -200.56 L37
L44 L50+F51
L55 # L52
-200.48
L5 L115
-200.72 L56 -200.47
L117
-200.63 #
-200.28
L24 L67
-200.93 # -200.86
-200.75 -200.45
W41 -200.48 L65
W10
A
W9 W9 W9 -200.45
W14
-200.68
L49 -200.40 -200.33 A'
-200.62 L58
W64
-200.38
W74
L73 -200.83 -200.88

-200.70 W60 L59
B'
L45
L3 L42
-201.07 L71 L109 L46 L106
-200.96 L17 L109 L112
L29 L16 L114 -200.39
L23 -200.69
-200.90
C Unit 1 L27 Unit 2 C
-200.80 L2 L32 -200.54 L39 L102
L4 L21 L103
-200.80 L62 L110 L107
W12
L8 L28
-200.84 L106
L111 L112
-201.09 L34 L33 L123
L57 L47 L75
L72 -200.66
-200.93
-200.82 -201.00 -200.51
L39
W11
W11
D -200.76 -200.89 D
1 2 3 4 5
Figure 10.8. Plan of Stratum 2, 2008.

Figure 10.9. Stratum 2: Unit 2 during the excavation, looking north-east. Note
the building entrance.
this room. Wall 64 continues from the north-western corner in a west-

erly direction, beyond the limits of the room, and possibly forms part
of the building’s inner courtyard. Wall 11 continues from the north-
eastern corner in a northerly direction beyond the limits of the room,
abutting another courtyard.5 This extension is yet to be excavated.
Other construction phases that are later than the first were noted in the
building of Stratum 2, but it was not possible to ascertain the order of
their construction. These include Walls 41 and 60 (the first may be a
bench or an installation in the courtyard, and the second resembles the
threshold of an opening that leads into the courtyard).
The courtyard (Unit 3, Fig. 10.10) is west of the main building, and
borders the western walls of the broad room and Wall 64. Its south-
ern and western walls have not yet been located, and it is not certain
whether it was a closed or open courtyard. Two occupation levels, parts
of which were paved, were found in Square B (F35, L26; Fig. 10.10).
There were about 20 cm of deposits between them, indicating at least
5
This Chapter presents the results of the first two seasons only. By the time that
this book was in press, additional excavations at the site had exposed parts of a very
large 620 m2 courtyard house (Bar in press a, b).
280 chapter ten
Figure 10.10. Wall (W15) from Stratum 1 above the paved levels of the court-
yard in Stratum 2 (Loci 26, 35).
two phases of activity in the courtyard (see Section C-C’ in Fig. 10.5).
Wall 64 continued from the north-western corner of Unit 2 in a
westerly direction for at least 14 m. It is 85 cm thick, and constructed
using the same masonry technique as the rest of the building. Wall
64 enclosed part of a large courtyard whose walls are partly exposed
on the surface. This courtyard extends to the north and east of the
building(Bar in press a, b).
The finds from Stratum 2 are characteristic of the later phases of
the Chalcolithic period (see below). Four 14C dates from the occupa-
tion level of this stratum (see below) coincide with the onset of the first
quarter of the 4th millennium BCE. This site is therefore one of the
latest Chalcolithic period settlement sites in the Jordan Valley.
Stratum 1
All that remained in this stratum was a wall (W15, plan in Fig. 10.11,
picture in Fig. 10.10, and sections in Fig. 10.5) excavated in Square B2.
Its remains continued beyond the limits of the excavation area. This
wall was 100–120 cm thick, and survived to a height of one course
1 2 3 4 5
Y Y
Z Z
-200.08
L122
L121
L113 A
A -200.24
-200.00
6
11
W
-200.11 C
B
15
-199.99
W
-200.22
C
'
B B
-200.26
-200.41
0 5m
C C
1 2 3 4 5
Figure 10.11. Plan of Stratum 1.
only. A possible extension to this wall (Wall 116) was found abutting its
north-eastern face. These walls, preserved up to the surface, postdate
the other elements in the excavation, and were recorded about 30 cm
higher than the latest floor in the courtyard of Stratum 2 (see Section
C–C’ in Fig. 10.5). No datable material was found abutting these walls,
and it is not known when they were constructed, though no post-Chal-
colithic artifacts have thus far been found at the site.
Two features (Loci 121, 122) which were excavated in Square A 4
share the same approximate base height as walls 15 and 116, and are
definitely later than Stratum 2 living surfaces. Therefore, I chose to
relate these features to Stratum 1. They seem to be rectangular instal-
lations, one of which (L121) is paved with small pebbles. No datable
material was found near these features.
282 chapter ten
The Ceramic Assemblage

During the excavation and afterwards, 8,545 pottery sherds of at least
4 cm2 were gathered and counted, mostly from Stratum 2. The indica-
tive items (397 rims) show that the most common types of vessels were
bowls and basins (190 items, 47.9% of the finds), followed by holemouth
jars (134 items, 33.7%), and jars (73 items, 18.4%). The jars include 11
amphoriskoi (2.7% of all the finds and 15% of the jars), and 9 pithoi
(2.2% of all the items and 12% of the jars).
Surface treatment of vessels show that, of the sherds counted, only 18
items (0.002%) were slipped (13 items have a red stripe on the rim and
five items have a red slip on the entire body). An examination of the
plastic ornamentation shows that 92 items (0.01% of finds) underwent
some sort of plastic treatment (36 items have rope ornamentations, 38
are incised or have diagonal ribbing, and 16 have thumb impressions
on the lug or ledge handles).
All of the items inspected were handmade, apart from a small group
of straight-sided bowls which were probably fashioned on a slow wheel.
This conflicts with accounts of the latest phases of the Chalcolithic
period at the sites of Modi'in and Soham (North), probably from the
same chronological horizon as Fazael 2, which show that wheel-thrown
straight-sided bowls were not common in the latest phases of the Chal-
colithic period (V. Roux, personal communication).
The pyrotechnology of vessels from this site was not consistent.
Well-fired examples were found alongside poorly-fired items. Not sur-
prisingly, the smaller open vessels, mainly bowls, were usually better
fired than closed vessels and large basins.
Stratum 2
Bowls, basins and cups (Figs. 10.12–10.13)6

Bowls with straight sides were the most conspicuous types in this
stratum, occurring in a variety of forms and sizes (with diameters of
7–25 cm): deep (Fig. 10.12: 1–2, 5); shallow (Fig. 10.12: 3–4); with a
slightly inverted rim (Fig. 10.12: 8) or a slightly everted rim (Fig. 10.12:
7, 10–12). In about half of the cases the rim was decorated with a red
stripe (‘lipstick’, Fig. 10.12: 3, 8–9), which was the most common (and
nearly unique) slipped decoration in the repertoire.
6
Parallels for all of the types appear in the tables attached to the figures.
Carinated bowls with S-shaped profiles (Fig. 10.12: 13–19) were also
common in the assemblage. Most were undecorated. This bowl-type
is usually considered a late type in the Chalcolithic repertoire, and is
common in late assemblages, such as Soham (North) or Modi'in.
Not common in Chalcolithic assemblages, flat shallow bowls (else-
where referred to as platters – Garfinkel 1998) were also found in this
stratum. Specimens of this type were mostly undecorated, and occurred
in different sizes (with diameters of 18–28 cm).
Hemispherical bowls were also found at the site (Fig. 10.13: 1–7). In
most cases these were undecorated and of varying size (with diameters
of 7–18 cm). While this form is common in Early Bronze Age sites, it is
also found in many Chalcolithic assemblages.
Deep and narrow cup-like bowls were also found (Fig. 10.13: 8–11),
including a number of types that are morphologically similar (with an
everted rim) but with different decorative styles. For the most part, they
were not slipped, though a few specimens were slipped on the inside
and outside of the vessel (Fig. 10.13: 11). Incised herringbone patterns
were a fairly common bowl decoration in this group (Fig. 10.13: 9).
Wide, deep basins and very large bowls (28–74 cm in diameter; Fig.
10.13: 12–20) were common, appearing in many different varieties, and
were very rarely slipped or decorated.

The holemouth jar with a plain rim (Fig. 10.14: 1–7) is the commonest.
This group is divided into long, narrow holemouth jars (10–20 cm in
diameter) and flatter, oblate holemouth jars (15–30 cm in diameter).
Other holemouth jars include those with a rim that is pinched at the
peak (Fig. 10.14: 8–9), with a spout (Fig. 10.14: 10), with a rim thick-
ened on the inside (Fig. 10.14: 11–12), or with a cut and inverted rim
(Fig. 10.14: 13–14). Holemouth jars are not slipped or decorated.
Jars (Fig. 10.15)

These vessels are characterized by their folded-out rims and lack of slip
(Fig. 10.15: 1–8, 12). Jars vary in size. Very large jars have a rim diam-
eter of 28–55 cm, with a wavy decoration on their rim (‘pie-crust’ – Fig.
10.15: 2, 4–5, 7). Smaller jars (amphoriskoi) (Fig.10.15: 8–9) are similar,
but have an average rim diameter of 12 cm. There is also a jar type with
a short upright rim (Fig. 10.15: 14), a jar type with an elongated neck
that is slightly everted (Fig. 10.15: 13), and a few amphoriskoi with a
slightly everted rim (Fig. 10.15: 15–19).
284 chapter ten
Handles, plastic ornamentation and varia (Fig. 10.16)

The most common type of handle in this assemblage is the lug handle
which occurs in two sizes: small, 5–8 cm long (Fig. 10.16: 1–2, 4–5)
and large 15–22 cm long (Fig. 10.16: 3). In almost half of the cases the
lug handle was decorated with a rope ornamentation or thumb impres-
sions.
The flat ledge handle (Fig. 10.16: 7–8), whose decoration is identical
to that of the lug handle, is less common in this assemblage. It does not
resemble the Early Bronze Age types and tends to be much smaller in
size.
The knob handle (Fig. 10.16: 6) is not common in the assemblage. In
most instances the knob is small, circular and no more than 3 cm wide.
The overwhelming majority of the assemblage is undecorated (only
0.01% of the finds were decorated). Most common are the incised or
ribbed decorations (Fig. 10.16: 14–15, 18), particularly the herringbone
pattern or floral motif. Also noteworthy are the geometric decorations
that were probably used as potter’s marks (Fig. 10.16: 16–17). Also
common are crude rope ornamentations (Fig. 10.16: 9–13) that were
made mostly by the potter pressing a plastic strip on the body of the
vessel with his finger.
The bases of the assemblage were all simple flat bases (Fig. 10.16:
20–22). A base of a cornet was also noted (Fig. 10.16: 19).
Stratum 3 (Fig. 10.17)

The ceramic finds from Stratum 3 were meagre, with only a few indica-
tive items: nonetheless, it is possible to identify a number of types:
Bowls and basins

As in Stratum 2, the bowl with the straight side stands out. It appears in
a variety of forms and sizes (diameter 8–22 cm): straight sides and deep
(Fig. 10.17: 5, 7); or shallow (Fig. 10.17: 2–3); with a slightly inverted
rim (Fig. 10.17: 3, 8); or slightly everted rim; etc. The red stripe on the
rim (Fig. 10.17: 2) occurs less often than in Stratum 2.
A carinated bowl with an S-shaped profile also occurs (Fig. 10.17:
6) that is uncommon and undecorated. There are several deep basins
with everted (Fig. 10.17: 9) or inverted rims (Fig. 10.17: 8). These are
widespread in Stratum 2. The hemispherical bowl and the cups that are
common in Stratum 2 do not appear here.
Holemouth jars
The six rims from Stratum 3 are of different types, and some do not
appear in Stratum 2. These include holemouth jars with a plain or cut
rim (Fig. 10.17: 10–12); a cut and thickened rim that is inverted (Fig.
10.17: 13); a thickened rim that is bevelled and inverted (Fig. 10.17: 15)
and a holemouth with a gutter on the rim (Fig. 10.17: 14).
Jars
Noteworthy among the jars: a jar with an everted diagonal rim (Fig.
10.17: 18) and two amphoriskoi, one with a slightly everted neck (Fig.
10.17: 17) and the other with a rim that is folded out (Fig. 10.17: 16).
The latter two are known from Stratum 2. The large jars from Stratum
2 do not appear in the Stratum 3 assemblage.
Handles and Decorations

A lug handle and two plastic rope ornamentations were found in Stra-
tum 3 (Fig. 10.17: 19–21).
Discussion of Pottery
A general typological similarity exists between the two strata, despite
the small sample from Stratum 3. In Stratum 3 the absence of the large
jars, cups and the hemispherical bowls, which are characteristic of
Stratum 2, stands out. Another exception is the unique holemouth jars
which appear only in Stratum 3. Types, such as the churn, which are
well known in many assemblages of the Chalcolithic period, are com-
pletely absent here.
There is some similarity between Fazael 2 and the other Chalcolithic
assemblages from the Jordan Valley (particularly Teleilat Ghassul Strata
I–IV, 'Ein Hilu and 'Ein Gedi – see the attached tables), but there are also
differences. For example, at Fazael 2 there is a relatively large number
of hemispherical bowls and large jars with wavy rim decorations, and
a very low frequency of slips and plastic ornamentation. This possibly
stems from the fact that the site is later than the three aforementioned
sites.
It should be noted that the handles and the decorations that were
found at Fazael 2 and Shoham (North) are almost identical. The matter
should be re-examined in the future when the catalogue of types from
Fazael 2 is expanded in the coming excavation seasons.
286 chapter ten
Figure 10.12. Stratum 2 – bowls.

No. Description Parallels

Coarse reddish clay, red core, white Fazael (Porath 1985: fig. 3: 7);Umm
1
inclusions Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 9)
Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 8: 1–2;
Reddish clay, reddish core, white
2 Teleilat Ghassul, Late Chalcolithic
inclusions
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4. 31: 5)
Teleilat Ghassul , Late Chalcolithic
Light coloured clay, light coloured core,
3 (Lovell 2001: fig. 4. 31: 3); 'En Gedi
red slip on outside and inside of the rim
(Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 8)
'Ein Hilu 2
4 Light coloured clay, light coloured core
(Chapter 9: Fig. 9.23: 2)
Coarse reddish clay, red core, white
5
inclusions
Coarse reddish clay, red core, white
6
inclusions
7
red slip on inside of the rim
8
red slip on inside of the rim
Light coloured clay, light coloured core, Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.8:
9
red slip on inside and outside of the rim 3–5)
12
red slip on inside and outside of the rim
Light coloured clay, grey and white Shoham (North) (van den Brink
13 inclusions (quartz and calcite), and Gophna 2005: fig.6.3: 5); Umm
excellently fired Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 3).
Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.8:
Coarse clay, light coloured core, white 7–8), Fazael (Porath 1985: fig. 3: 3);
14
and grey inclusions (calcite and quartz) Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002:
fig. 4.1: 4)
Coarse clay, light coloured core, white Umm Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 6);
15 and grey inclusions (calcite and quartz), Teleilat Ghassul B (Lovell 2001: fig.
well fired 4. 33: 6)
Coarse clay, light coloured core, white
16
and grey inclusions (calcite and quartz)
17
18
19
288 chapter ten

Coarse clay, white and grey inclusions
20
(mostly quartz), poorly fired Fazael (Porath 1985: fig. 4: 3);
Course light yellowish clay, white and Shoham (North) (van den Brink
21 grey inclusions (mostly quartz), remains and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.11: 11);
of painting on the rim? Poorly fired Gesher (Covello-Paran 1995: fig.
Coarse clay, white and grey inclusions, 57: 3)
22
poorly fired
23 (mostly quartz), red slip on inside and
outside of the rim
Supplementary table to representative items from Figure 10.12.
Figure 10.13. Stratum 2 – bowls, basins and cups.

Figure 10.13. (continued) Stratum 2 – bowls, basins and cups.

290 chapter ten

Coarse reddish clay, grey core, white,
1
grey and black inclusions, poorly fired
Coarse clay, white and grey inclusions,
2 Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.8: 21)
poorly fired
3 Coarse clay, grey inclusions, poorly fired Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.8: 11)
Teleilat Ghassul, Late Chalcolithic
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4. 32: 4); 'En Gedi
Coarse reddish clay, grey core, white,
4 (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 10); 'En
grey and black inclusions, poorly fired
Esur, Late Chalcolithic (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4. 30: 17)
'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 9);
'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.23:
5 Reddish fabric, grey core, grey inclusions 13); 'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic
(Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.18:
18–19)
Reddish clay, grey core, grey inclusions,
6
well fired
Reddish fabric, reddish core, white
7 'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic (Yannai
inclusions, well fired
et al. 2006: fig. 4.18: 18–19)
Fazael (Porath 1985: figs. 3: 11;
Coarse reddish clay, white and grey 4: 13); 'En Esur Late Chalcolithic
8 inclusions (quartz and calcite), poorly (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 8–9);
fired Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
2004: fig. 3.2: 14)
Light coloured clay, grey and white
9
Coarse light coloured clay, grey core,
10 black and light grey inclusions, poorly
fired
Light coloured clay, white and grey
Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002:
11 inclusions, red slip on the outside and
fig. 4.1: 9, 12)
inside, poorly fired
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.33: 4); 'En Gedi
Light coloured clay, grey core, white and (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 11); Fazael
12
grey inclusions, well fired (Porath 1985: fig. 3: 8); 'En Esur,
Late Chalcolithic (Yannai et al.
2006: fig. 4.21: 2)
Coarse reddish clay, grey core, large Shoham (North) (van den Brink
13
white and grey inclusions, poorly fired and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.13: 1)

'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: fig. 9.23:
23); 'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic
14 (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4. 20: 3);
(mostly quartz), poorly fired
Nahal Qana (Gopher and Tzuk
1996: fig. 4. 1: 21)
Coarse clay, black core, black inclusions, Beer Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig.
15
poorly fired (charred fabric). 8: 4)
Coarse clay, black core, black inclusions,
16
poorly fired
Coarse clay, black core, black inclusions,
17
poorly fired
18
(mostly quartz)
19
(mostly quartz), poorly fired
Coarse reddish clay, grey core, large
20
white and grey inclusions, poorly fired

292 chapter ten
Figure 10.14. Stratum 2 – holemouth jars.


Coarse red clay, grey core, white, grey and
1
black inclusions
Coarse clay, white and grey inclusions,
2
poorly fired Teleilat Ghassul, Late Chalcolithic
(Lovell 2001: figs. 4.36: 8; 4.38: 1;
Light coloured clay, grey core, white and
4.39: 1); Fazael (Porath 1985: fig.
3 grey inclusions (mostly calcite), remains of
4: 6); Shoham (North) (van den
soot on the outer part of the vessel
Brink and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.18:
Coarse red clay, red core, white and grey 12, 14)
4
inclusions, poorly fired
Coarse red clay, grey core, white and grey
5
inclusions (calcite and quartz)
Coarse light coloured clay, Light coloured
core, grey, white and black inclusions
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.36: 9); 'Ein Hilu
6 (mostly calcite and quartz), poorly fired,
2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.24: 1); Gesher
remains of soot on the outer part of the
(Covello-Paran 1995: fig. 57: 20)
vessel
Coarse light coloured clay, Light coloured
7 core, grey, white and black inclusions Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: fig. 11.9: 2)
(mostly calcite and quartz), poorly fired
Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: fig. 11.9: 4),
Coarse red clay, red core, numerous large Teleilat Ghassul, Late Chalcolithic
8
white and grey inclusions (mostly calcite) (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.41: 4); 'Ein
Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.25: 8)
Coarse red clay, red core, numerous large
9
white and grey inclusions (mostly calcite)
Teleilat Ghassul A (Lovell 2001:
Coarse light coloured clay, grey core, grey fig. 4.38: 7); Shoham (North) (van
10 and black inclusions (calcite and quartz), den Brink and Gophna 2005:
poorly fired fig. 6.7: 1); Giv‘at HaOranim
(Scheftelowitz 2004: fig. 3.5: 1)
Coarse clay, white chalky inclusions, Teleilat Ghassul, Late Chalcolithic
11 poorly fired, remains of soot on the inside , A (Lovell 2001: figs. 4.38: 2; 4.37:
and outside of the vessel 6); Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.9:
1, 6–7), Fazael (Porath 1985: fig.
12 Coarse red clay, grey core, black inclusions 4: 8)
Coarse Light coloured clay, grey core,
Cave V/49 (Khalaily 2002: fig. 8:
13 numerous grey and white inclusions 16)
(quartz and calcite), poorly fired
Coarse Light coloured clay, grey core,
14 numerous grey and white inclusions

294 chapter ten
Figure 10.15. Stratum 2 – jars.

Figure 10.15. (continued) Stratum 2 – jars.

Coarse red clay, grey core, grey and
1
black inclusions, poorly fired
Coarse clay, Light coloured core, grey Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.9: 9),
2
inclusions, poorly fired Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995: figs.
4. 15: 2–3; 4.16: 1); Shoham (North)
Coarse clay, Light coloured core, grey
3 (van den Brink and Gophna 2005: fig.
6.21: 4); 'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic
Coarse clay, Light coloured core, grey (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.30: 1); Giv'at
4
inclusions, poorly fired HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: figs.
Coarse pale yellow clay, Light coloured 3.13: 1; 3.15: 4)
5 core, white and grey inclusions
(mostly calcite), poorly fired
Coarse clay, Light coloured core, grey
6
Light coloured clay, Light coloured
7
core, white and grey inclusions
Light coloured clay and core, white Shoham (North) (van den Brink and
8 and grey inclusions (quartz and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.28: 4); Beer Sheva
calcite) (Contenson 1956: fig. 1: 3)
296 chapter ten

Reddish-brown clay, Light coloured
Nahal Qana (Gopher and Tzuk 1996:
9 core, black-and-white inclusions
fig. 4.4: 11); Fazael (Porath 1985: fig.
(quartz and calcite)
5: 3)
Coarse red clay, grey core, white and (Lovell 2001: fig. 4.39: 5); 'En Esur,
10
grey inclusions Late Chalcolithic (Yannai et al. 2006:
fig. 4.23: 8)
Shoham (North) (van den Brink and
Coarse red clay, red core, red and grey
11 Gophna 2005: fig. 6.21: 5); Beer Sheva
(Contenson 1956: figs. 1: 7–8; 4: 15)
'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic (Yannai
Coarse red clay, red core, grey et al. 2006: fig. 4.23: 9, 12–13); Giv'at
12
inclusions, poorly fired. HaOranim (Scheftelowitz 2004: fig.
3.12: 11)
Light coloured clay, Light coloured
13
core, white and grey inclusions.
Fazael (Porath 1985: fig. 4: 9); Shoham
(North) (van den Brink and Gophna
Light coloured clay and core, white
14 2005: fig. 6.21: 12); Beer Sheva
inclusions
(Contenson 1956: fig. 3: 6); 'Ein Hilu
2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.25: 7)
Coarse Light coloured clay, white and Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.9: 13),
15 grey inclusions (calcite and quartz), Teleilat Ghassul A (Lovell 2001: fig.
poorly fired 4.40: 6); Fazael (Porath 1985: fig. 5: 6)
Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.9: 11),
16 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 10: 8);
and grey inclusions
'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.25: 6)
Coarse Light coloured clay, white and
17 grey inclusions (calcite and quartz),
poorly fired
Coarse red clay, grey core, white and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.30: 5); 'Ein Hilu
18
grey inclusions (mainly calcite) 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.25: 6); Cave V/49
(Khalaily 2002: fig. 8: 24)
19 and grey inclusions, red slip on the
outside and inside

Figure 10.16. Stratum 2 – varia.

298 chapter ten
Figure 10.16. (continued) Stratum 2 – varia.

Coarse light coloured clay, red core, white
1
and grey inclusions (quartz and calcite)
2 Red clay, grey core, black inclusions Shoham (North) (van den Brink
and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.31: 2–6);
Coarse Light coloured clay, light coloured Grar (Gilead and Goren 1995:
3 core, numerous white and grey inclusions fig. 4.19: 15); Giv‘at HaOranim
(mostly calcite), poorly fired (Scheftelowitz 2004: figs. 3.13: 1;
3.12: 11)
4
5
and grey inclusions
Coarse red clay, light coloured core, white
6 and grey inclusions (mostly calcite),
poorly fired

Grey clay and core, white and grey
Shoham (North) (van den Brink
7 inclusions (calcite and quartz), poorly
and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.32: 5)
fired
Fazael 7 (Chapter 11: Fig. 11.10:
Coarse very light coloured clay, light 2), 'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic
8 coloured core, white and grey inclusions (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4. 27: 5);
(calcite), poorly fired Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
2004: fig. 3.18: 6–7)
Coarse yellow clay, red core, black, white
9 and grey inclusions (especially large -
mostly calcite), poorly fired
Coarse very light coloured clay, light
10 coloured core, white and grey inclusions
(calcite), poorly fired
11
and grey inclusions
Coarse very light coloured clay, light
12
coloured core, grey inclusions, poorly fired
13 inclusions (quartz and calcite), poorly
fired
light brown clay, brown core, white and
14 grey inclusions (quartz and calcite), well
and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.3: 7)
fired, slip remains?
Yellow clay and core, grey and white Shoham (North) (van den Brink
15
inclusions (mostly calcite). and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.3: 5)
Coarse red clay, black core, black glittering Shoham (North) (van den Brink
16
inclusions and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.33: 5–7)
17 inclusions (quartz and calcite), poorly
fired
Red clay and core, black and grey
18
19 Coarse red clay, red core, grey inclusions.
Coarse Light coloured clay, red core, white
20
Red clay and core, black and grey
21
inclusions
22
and grey inclusions

300 chapter ten
Figure 10.17: Stratum 3 – pottery.


Red clay and core, grey inclusions
1 et al. 2006: fig. 4. 28: 19); 'En Gedi
(mostly calcite)
(Ussishkin 1980:fig. 8: 6)
Red clay and core, grey and white
2 inclusions, slip on inside and outside of
(Lovell 2001: fig. 4.32: 3)
rim
Coarse red clay, light coloured core, grey 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 8: 9);
3
inclusions (mostly calcite), poorly fired 'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.23: 13)
Teleilat Ghassul C (Lovell 2001: fig.
Red clay and core, white and grey 4.33: 2); 'En Esur, Late Chalcolithic
4 inclusions (calcite), remains of a slip on (Yannai et al. 2006, fig: 4.28: 7);
the outside? Giv'at HaOranim (Scheftelowitz
2004: fig. 3.3: 7)
Coarse red clay, grey core, numerous Shoham (North) (van den Brink and
5
white and grey inclusions, poorly fired Gophna 2005: fig. 6.13: 5)
Fazael (Porath 1985: fig. 3: 3);
6 Red clay and core, grey inclusions Kissufim (Goren and Fabian 2002:
fig. 4.1: 4)
Coarse light coloured clay, light
coloured core, numerous white and grey Teleilat Ghassul A (Lovell 2001: fig.
7
inclusions (quartz and calcite), poorly 4.31: 6)
fired
Coarse red clay, light coloured core,
8 numerous white and grey inclusions
Gophna 2005: fig. 6.13: 1)
Teleilat Ghassul + A (Lovell 2001:
Coarse red clay, light coloured core,
fig. 4.32: 9); 'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9:
9 numerous grey inclusions (quartz and
Fig. 9.23: 22); Cave V/49 (Khalaily
calcite), poorly fired
2002: fig. 7: 10)
Teleilat Ghassul, Late Chalcolithic,
A (Lovell 2001: figs. 4.36: 8; 4: 38:
10 Black core, grey inclusions, burnt fabric
1; 4: 39: 1); Fazael (Porath 1985: fig.
4: 6)
Coarse red clay, red core, white and grey et al. 2006: fig. 4.24: 9, 16); Nahal
11
inclusions, poorly fired Qana (Gopher and Tzuk 1996: fig.
4.6: 5)
Coarse red clay, grey core, white and
12 Umm Qatafa (Perrot 1992: ill. 3: 14)
grey inclusions
Red clay, Light coloured core, grey
13 Cave V/49 (Khalaily 2002: fig. 8: 16)
302 chapter ten

Coarse red clay, grey core, white and
14 grey inclusions, remains of soot on the
outer part of the vessel
Coarse red clay, red core, white and grey
15 'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.24: 6)
Light coloured clay and core, numerous
16 and Gophna 2005: fig. 6.28: 4); Beer
Sheva (Contenson 1956: fig. 1: 3)
Light coloured clay in core, grey 'En Gedi (Ussishkin 1980: fig. 10: 8);
17
inclusions 'Ein Hilu 2 (Chapter 9: Fig. 9.25: 6)
Red clay and core, white and grey Teleilat Ghassul A (Lovell 2001: fig.
18
inclusions, poorly fired 4.40: 6)
Light coloured clay, red core, white and
19
grey inclusions, poorly fired
Red clay, light coloured core, numerous
20
Red clay, grey core, white and grey
21
inclusions, remains of soot, poorly fired


The assemblage of Fazael 2 is quite unique, since it exhibits traits of
both Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age assemblages. The 2,297 flint
artifacts collected were mainly discovered at Stratum 2 (1,963 artifacts).
Cores and waste from the production of flakes, blades and tools were
present, and even though there were few hammer-stones, all the other
components of an organized industrial process producing serial prod-
ucts were present (see Table 10.1), alongside a variety of tools, mainly
including notches, borers, sickles and scrapers of all kinds (Fig. 10.18).
Most surprisingly, the bifacial tools, so common in almost every Chal-
colithic assemblage, are completely absent here.
Among the finds at Fazael 2 were numerous sickle segments. Sickle
blades have been discussed widely, as summarized by Rosen (1997:
44–60). Sickle morphology and hafting methods changed over time,
and the morphology of the segments can serve as both cultural and
chronological indicators. Apart from two blades from Stratum 3, all
sickle and Canaanean blade fragments originated from Stratum 2. The
examination of the sickle assemblage suggested the presence of new
flaking technologies alongside traditional means of secondary shaping
of the segments (for a detailed study of the Canaanean technology at
Fazael 2, see Bar and Winter 2010).
Fifty-eight sickles of diverse types were present in the assemblage.
Forty-three (74.1%) were produced by the Canaanean technology usu-
ally attributed to the Early Bronze Age (Rosen 1983: 20; 1997: 46, 59,
60). These pieces have a trapezoidal or pyramidal cross-section, and
most were produced from high quality, fine grained, light brown, eas-
ily flaked material. Nine sickle segments (15.5%) are typically Chalco-
lithic, with a prismatic cross-section, abrupt backing and truncations.
Six fragments (10.4%) could not be identified. The proportion of short
sickle fragments is quite high (29.3%), and many of these should also be
attributed to the Canaanean group according to their cross-section and
the similarity of the flint. The abundance of small fragments precluded
a length analysis. The maximum width of the measured Chalcolithic
type segments falls within the range of 8–15 mm. The Canaanean types
were within the range of 8–29 mm, 50% of these within the range of
16–29 mm—dimensions that clearly differed from the Chalcolithic
7
This section was written by H. Winter, University of Haifa. The data presented
here are based only on the assemblage of the 2007 season. The analysis of the sickle
collection is based on the items collected in the 2007-2008 seasons.
304 chapter ten
types. The figures for the Canaanean types conform to those summa-
rized by Rosen (1989: 208) for Early Bronze Age sites.
Additional attributes to be considered are backing and truncations.
All Chalcolithic types were backed and had at least one truncation (Fig.
10.19: 1–2). A feature quite rare in the Canaanean technology, present
in six of the Canaanean sickles (14%), is the backing in the traditional
Chalcolithic mode (described in Rosen 1997: 48): four of these (9.3%)
had at least one truncation (Fig. 10.19: 3–4, 6–7).
The typical Chalcolithic sickle segments were produced from flint of
different qualities and colours, but in a few cases typically Chalcolithic
backed pieces were produced from the same light brown, high quality
flint as the Canaanean pieces (Fig. 10.19: 3–4, 6–7, 9).
A Canaanean blade core (Fig. 10.20) was found on the surface
adjacent to the excavation area. According to its shape and composi-
tion it is part of the Canaanean industry, produced from fine-grained,
light brown tabular flint, with a single striking platform. Tabular flint
seems relatively rare for the production of Canaanean blade cores in
Israel (Rosen 1997: 46), but it is reported from Titriş Höyük in Tur-
key (Hartenberger et al. 2000: 55). At both Fazael and Titriş Höyük
the single striking platform was carefully prepared by the removal of
flakes across both the width and length of the edge. The end opposite
the striking platform was prepared by carefully detaching flakes from
both cortex-covered surfaces in order to create a sharp ridge. This kind
of preparation was also observed at Har Haruvim (Rosen 1997: figs.
10.3.5.8–1; 10.3.6.8–1, 2; Shimelmitz et al. 2000: figs. 3a, 4).
The presence of Canaanean technology, linked with the fact that no
celt tools were present in the assemblage, could lead to a possible con-
clusion that the assemblage should be attributed to the Early Bronze
Age. This thesis is contradicted by the fact that typical backed Chalco-
lithic sickles were also present. For this dilemma there could be three
reasonable answers: 1) The assemblage originates from a local tradi-
tion. 2) The site should be located in a time of transition from the Chal-
colithic to the EBA. 3) The Canaanean technology had already been
introduced in the latest phases of the Chalcolithic period of the Jordan
Valley. In view of the excavation data the author believes that the third
option is the most probable.
In a recent paper, Milevski, Fabian and Marder (2011) claimed that
the presence of the Canaanean technology at the site might be the result
of an EB I flint workshop being located in open spaces between the
Chalcolithic houses. They based their hypothesis merely on the pres-
ence of some EB I sites in localities in the Fazael Valley, and Canaanean

cores which were found “dispersed on topsoil” (Milevski et al. 2011:
157–158). They further claimed that the radiometric dates from Fazael
2 place the site in the middle of the Chalcolithic period, and not close to
its end. The writers disregarded the fact that the Canaanean pieces were
found in the same loci as typical Chalcolithic backed pieces, and that
no waste materials of the primary flaking process typical of Canaanean
blade production were found in the excavation or nearby. In addition
these scholars’ claims of Canaanean cores “dispersed on topsoil” is mis-
leading, since the total number of cores found within the entire Wadi
Fazael mouth, where it debouches into the Jordan Valley, comprises
two examples! Thus, in the opinion of the present authors, there is no
viable body of evidence to support the existence of a workshop mak-
ing use of Canaanean technology in the ruins of Fazael 2, especially as
the burden of proof must lie with those arguing for it. Their claim that
the radiocarbon determinations of Fazael 2, with termini post quem of
about 4000 BCE (see below), point to a date in the middle of the Chal-
colithic period is also debatable (e.g., Gilead 2007, 2009; Kerner 2010,
Braun et al. 2013).
306 chapter ten
Flint assemblage Stratum 2 Stratum 3

% of total % of total
Group A – Waste n n
Stratum 2 Stratum 3
Core 52 2.65 1 0.55
Primary flake 200 10.2 16 8.8
C.t.e. 3 0.15
Chunk 315 16.02 39 21.42
Chip 715 36.43 60 32.97
Total group A 1285 65.5 116 63.74
Group B – Debitage
Flake 433 22.1 38 20.8
Blade 48 2.45 4 2.2
Bladelet 42 2.15 6 3.29
Total group B 523 26.7 48 26.39
Group C – Tools
Hammer-stone 2 0.1
Burin 5 0.26
Notch 40 2.04 1 0.55
Denticulate 2 0.1 1 0.55
Borer 11 0.57 3 1.65
Awl 3 0.15
End scraper 7 0.35 3 1.65
Side scraper 5 0.26
Rounded scraper 1 0.05
Transverse scraper 1 0.05 1 0.55
Fan scraper 2 0.1
Micro end scraper 1 0.05
Sickle segment 21 1.07 2 1.09
Reaping knife 1 0.55
Retouched (or backed) blade 16 0.82
Retouched (or backed) flake 12 0.61 2 1.09
Retouched fragment 2 0.1
Backed knife 7 0.35
Microliths (retouched) 3 0.15 2 1.09
Truncation 2 0.1 1 0.55
Ad hoc, multiple, trimmed 12 0.61 1 0.55
Total group C 155 7.7 18 9.87
Total 1963 100 182 100
Table 10.1. Lithic assemblage. The data presented in this table are based only on
the clearly defined loci. Artifacts from disturbed or mixed loci were excluded
from the statistics.
Figure 10.18. Lithic assemblage. 1, 2: End scrapers; 3: Burin on a Canaanean

blade; 4: Burin; 5, 6: Bladelets; 7, 8: Borers; 9, 10: Fan scrapers; 11, 12: Retouched
blades; 13, 14: Notches.
308 chapter ten
Figure 10.19. Sickle elements. 1: Backed and truncated sickle segment

(Chalcolithic type); 2: Backed and truncated sickle segment (Chalcolithic
type); 3: Backed and truncated sickle segment on Canaanean blade segment;
4: Backed and truncated sickle segment on Canaanean blade segment; 5:
Canaanean reaping knife with bilateral sheen; 6: Backed and double truncated
Canaanean sickle segment; 7: Backed and double truncated Canaanean sickle
segment; 8: Canaanean reaping knife with unilateral sheen; 9: Canaanean
sickle segment with bilateral sheen; 10: Canaanean reaping knife with bilateral
sheen (Bar and Winter 2010: fig. 6).
Figure 10.20. Canaanean blade core.

Twenty-eight stone objects were found that were used for production
and in industry, as well as a haematite pendant. All were found in, and
ascribed to, Stratum 2, except for one that was recovered from Stratum
3. The items were made of hard stone: indigenous limestone (15 items),
basalt (8 items), Nubian sandstone (2 items) and haematite (1 item).
This assemblage presents a preliminary picture of the Chalcolithic
stone vessels in the southern Jordan Valley, which is likely to contribute
to our understanding of daily life at the site.
The stone objects will be discussed below according to their types:
Stone mortars (Fig. 10.21: 3, 5–6).

Four mortars were found, two deep and two shallow. The deep mortars
are made of hard limestone and were used with pestles for the coarse
pounding of food products. One of the items is a square mortar with a
cupmark, 10 cm in diameter and 5 cm deep, at its centre. Another item
is round with a cupmark, 12 cm in diameter and 5 cm deep, at its centre.
Both mortars were found broken. Parallels that date to the Chalcolithic
period were found in the Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XXXVIII: 4, 6, 8) and
8
This section was written by D. Ben-Yosef, University of Haifa.
310 chapter ten
at 'En Esur (Rowan 2006: fig. 6.6: 2). The shallow mortars are made of
hard limestone pebbles, 3.0–3.5 cm in diameter and ca. 1 cm deep. It
seems that they were used for delicate crushing. Parallels were found in
the Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XXXVIII: 7, 9).
Pounders (Fig. 10.21: 9)

Two intact stone pounders were found in Area A. One is ascribed to
Stratum 2 and is fairly square in shape, except for one side worn away
by pounding. The other, which is ascribed to Stratum 3, is a large heavy
pounder that has a somewhat round shape: it seems all of its sides were
used. These items were made of hard limestone, and were probably
used for pounding and crushing during the preparation of food. Paral-
lels were found in the Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XLI: 15).
Pestles (Fig. 10.21: 8)

Two broken items were found that are made of basalt: both have round
lateral cross-sections. One is conical, and the other has a straight body
and an elliptical head. Parallels were found in the Golan (Epstein 1998:
pl. XLI:25).
V-shaped bowls (Fig. 10.21: 2)

Six fragments of V-shaped basalt bowls were found: two are pointed
upright rims and the rest are body fragments 1.0–1.5 cm wide. All the
bowls were made of hard dense grain basalt, except one which was
made of Nubian sandstone. Parallels were found at 'En Esur (Rowan
2006: fig. 6.1: 4–7), Shoham (North) (Rowan 2005: figs. 9.6: 7; 9.7: 3–4;
9.8: 1, 2), and the Golan (Epstein 1998: pls. XXXIV: 6, 8–9, 11–12).
Querns
Two broken items were found: an upper stone made of basalt, and a
lower stone made of Nubian sandstone. Both are in a poor state of pres-
ervation, and it is difficult to reconstruct their original shapes.
Discs (Fig. 10.21: 4)

Two basalt discs were found, apparently made of basalt bowl fragments
in secondary use. All sides of the discs were smooth, thus rendering
them elliptical. Amiran believed that similar discs from Arad in the
Early Bronze Age were used as stoppers (Amiran et al. 1978: 58, pl. 80:
1–4). Parallels were found at Shoham (North) (Rowan 2005: fig. 9.3: 1,
3) and at Teleilat Ghassul (Lee 1973: LB511a).
Stones with perforations (Fig. 10.21: 7)

Two limestone pebbles were drilled 0.5–1.0 cm deep to form small
thimble-like symmetrical recesses. It is difficult to determine for sure
what they were used for (see Rowan 2005: 115) and thus there are a
number of theories: the object broke when attempting to drill a hole
through it; it was discarded after an attempt at turning it into a loom
weight, or it was used as a ‘kindling stone’ for lighting fire with the aid
of a dry branch that was twirled inside the thimble-like recess.9 Paral-
lels were found at Shoham (North) (Rowan 2005: fig. 9.5: 2-3) and the
Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XLIII: 13, 18–19).
Elliptical stones with a biconical perforation (Figs. 10.21: 11, 13)

Five such items made of limestone (four broken and one intact) were
found, apparently used as loom weights. Parallels from the period were
found in the Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XLIII: 1–6, 8, 10–12).
Socket
One socket made of hard limestone was found in situ (L39, Fig. 10.8),
for use in a door hinge. The cupmark in it is 6.5 cm in diameter and 3
cm deep.
Mace Head? (Fig. 10.21: 10, 12)

Two items were found: one is a broken votive elliptical mace perforated
lengthwise, made of hematite. The other is a basalt mace, damaged
from striking and wear. Parallels were found at 'En Esur (Yannai 2006:
fig. 7.4: 2) and the Golan (Epstein 1998: pl. XLIII: 26).
Haematite pendant (Fig. 10.21: 1)

A haematite pendant was found in Stratum 2, L44. The item is trap-
ezoidal and slightly oval. The fragment measures 1.3 x 1.5 cm and is 4
mm thick. A herringbone pattern is incised on its convex side, and two
conical holes are drilled through it from the concave side (marks left
by the circular drilling are visible on the concave side of the pendant).
Parallels of this kind of pendant that are made of other materials,
such as limestone, mother-of-pearl, slate and bone, were found at
numerous sites from the Chalcolithic period onwards. For example:
9
See Milevski’s proposal in this matter (Edelstein et al. 1998: 72, fig. 5.16: 2–4).
312 chapter ten
Figure 10.21. Stone Artifacts.

Shiqmim (Levy 1987: figs. 6.12: 1–2; 14.14: 2, 5), Cave of the Treasure
(Bar-Adon 1980: 152), Abu Matar (Perrot 1955: fig. 20) and Kissufim
Road (Bar-Yosef 2002: fig. 7.1: 6, 9, 11).
The 28 stone artifacts that were found in the excavation date to the lat-
est phases of the Chalcolithic period, and attest to work done at the site.
The finds point in the following directions:
– The predominant raw material from which the objects are
made is limestone (14 items) followed by basalt (8 items), Nu-
bian sandstone (2 items and haematite (1 item). Limestone and
basalt are found near the site (e.g. basalt from the region of
Wadi Far'ah): however, the closest source of Nubian sandstone
is east of the River Jordan in the vicinity of the city es-Salt, east
of the Dead Sea. The presence of this type of stone at Fazael is
indicative of ties between the two sides of the Jordan, as is the
haematite, which also comes from afar (Egypt/Jordan?).
– The stone objects show that much of the food was processed by
crushing, and a smaller amount was ground.
– Two loom weights were used in weaving, and attest to the exis-
tence of this craft at the site.
Metal Tools
Three metal objects were found during the excavation: a broken copper
chisel; a broken copper piece identified as a possible base of a crown;
and a copper axe (Fig. 10.22).10 Although not yet fully studied, these
items are typical Chalcolithic craftsmanship, and therefore support the
idea that this site is well within the Chalcolithic continuum.
Figure 10.22. Copper axe.
10
The metal assemblage has not yet been studied. The tools and material were pre-
liminarily analyzed by S. Shalev, University of Haifa. The copper axe was found in the
2009 season, and is briefly presented here because of its similarity to the axes from the
Nahal Mishmar hoard.
314 chapter ten
The Faunal Remains11

A total of 61 complete and fragmentary identified bones were derived
from the excavated area at Fazael 2. The assemblage is dominated by
sheep and goat which comprise over 80% of the identified bones. On
the basis of taxonomically distinctive feature of some bone epiphyses
it appears that both sheep and goat are represented at the site. The as-
semblage also contains a small amount of cattle bones (<10%) and the
remains of additional species living in and around human villages, such
as fox (Vulpes vulpes) and felids. The felid bone could not be identi-
fied with much certainty, and it could represent any of the local species
found to date in the region (wild cat, Felis sylvestris; jungle cat, Felis
chaus) or domestic cat (Felis cattus). Lastly, a single crab claw, most
probably of Potamon potamios, the most common freshwater crab in
permanent aquatic sources of the Jordan Valley, was found.
There are few surface modifications, and no signs of consumption
and butchery activities were found. In addition, none of the bones was
found burnt. Only a single second phalanx of a sheep/goat bore the
remains of a carnivore tooth puncture. The size of the tooth puncture
suggests that it was made by a dog/wolf-sized animal. This indicates
that some of the remains were discarded soon after their abandonment.
The bone assemblage is too small to allow detailed analysis of ana-
tomical representation or age structure. However, we combined the ele-
ments into meat refuse (long bones, scapula and pelvis) and butchery
waste (hooves/toes, lower limbs, heads and neck). It appears that the
occurrence of sheep and goat represents a mixture of both wastes, and
there is no discrepancy between gourmet portions (upper limbs and
axial skeleton) and less meaty elements (skull, lower limbs and hooves).
The anatomical representation is interpreted, therefore, as reflecting
the disposal of butchered carcasses.
The small faunal assemblage did not allow the reconstruction of
mortality profiles. However, bone epiphysis fusion reveals that most
long bones of sheep and goat derived from young individuals. Two
mandibles (right and left) were found with fully worn dP4, attesting
that these individuals were slaughtered at the age of approximately 12
months. The cattle remains are of immature individuals. These patterns
suggest that animals were raised and exploited primarily for their meat.
11
The section was written by G. Bar-Oz and N. Raban-Gerstal, University of Haifa.
Capra Capra/ Ovis Vulpes

Bos sp. Felis sp.
hircus Ovis aries vulpes
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Head
Horn 2 1
Mandible ramus 1 1 1 1
Mandible teeth 4 4 2 2 1 1
Maxilla teeth 3 3
Body
Atlas 1 1
Axis 1 1
Ver: Cervical 2 1
Ver: Thoracic 1 1
Ver: Lumbar 1 1
Rib 1 1 1 1
Forelimb
Scapula glenoid fossa 2 2 1 1
Radius proximal 4 3 1 1
Ulna proximal 1 1
Ulna distal 1 1
Metacarpus proximal 1 1 1 1
Hindlimb
Pelvic 5 2
Tibia distal 1 1 1 1
Astragalus 1 1 2 2
Calcaneus 2 1
Metatarsus proximal 1 1
Toes
Phalanx 2 5 4
316 chapter ten
Capra Capra/ Ovis Vulpes

Bos sp. Felis sp.
hircus Ovis aries vulpes
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Metapos condyle 1 1 3 3 1 1
NISP 4 1 46 3 5 2 61
NISP – % 7 2 75 5 8 3 100.0
MNI 1 1 2 1 1 1 7
Table 10.2. Faunal assemblage.
Burials
Two burials were discovered in the corners beneath the floor of the
building (Stratum 2), one in a jar, and the other lacking a burial con-
tainer. Apart from its enhancing the general mortuary corpus, this is
a contribution of rare preservation, which makes it possible to recon-
struct important aspects of the burial process.12 From the standpoint
of methodology and technology of the analysis, the CT developed by
the Philips Company,13 was used here for the first time, and thereby
precluded the need for actually excavating the jar and its contents.
The jar burial contained an infant no more than six months old, and
the second burial contained a foetus. Both were primary burials inten-
tionally placed beneath the floors in the northern corners of unit 1.14
The burial jar was in secondary use, and the rim was intentionally
retouched so that it could be buried immovably upside down, beneath
the floor. The base of the jar was also retouched so as to insert the in-
fant. The rim was sealed with a clay stopper. This is the only evidence
of clay used as a stopper in jar burials (Fig. 10.23).
The infant that was inserted inside the burial container was placed
in a foetal position, bent over on the stopper and the side of the vessel
(Figs. 10.23-10.24). The CT examinations did not reveal any funerary
offerings, except for a tiny copper object less than a centimetre in size,
12
The analysis of this burial is still in progress. For a preliminary report see Eshed
and Bar 2012. For additional photographs of the burial see Chapter 5.
13
The author wishes to thank the Philips Company for the assistance they provided
in the examinations.
14
The southern corners of the building were destroyed, and it was impossible to
ascertain whether there were also burials beneath the floor.
Figure 10.23. CT of the infant burial. Note the light-coloured clay stopper
on which the infant is resting, and the intentional retouching of the rim
and the base.
probably a bead (?). This object was observed on the skull of the infant.
An upper lid for the burial vessel was prepared from the base of another
jar. The lid was retouched so that it would fit exactly when placed on
the two small ledge handles of the burial jar.
The burial container was found filled with earth.15 It is still unclear
whether the vessel was intentionally filled, or if soil had slowly pen-
etrated in through cracks in the jar from the time of the interment until
it was exposed in the excavation. At the time of interment stones and
pottery sherds were intentionally placed beneath the bottom of the jar
(where the original rim was) in order to stabilize it on the ground.
15
It is not possible to determine if the jar was buried when the building was con-
structed (a construction offering?), or during the course of its use.
318 chapter ten
Figure 10.24. CT of the infant burial.
This analysis has made it possible for us to identify a number of

preliminary characteristics in infant burials in the Chalcolithic period:
– The burial is primary, unlike burials in caves and ossuaries, which
are almost always secondary.
– The burials occurred in a container that was primarily not specifi-
cally designed for this purpose, but it is apparent that before the inter-
ment the jar was prepared for use as a burial container.
– It is obvious that the container was placed very carefully in a
planned spot: it was intentionally placed upside down, with its opening
toward the bottom (Ties to the earth? Possibly an image of a foetus in
the womb before birth? etc.). It was sealed with a stopper to prevent the
contents from dropping out; and it was stabilized by arranging stones
and sherds around the rim.
Radiometric Dates
Four charcoal samples were sent to the Weizmann Institute in Rehovot,
Israel, for radiometric analysis16. They were taken from loci in Stratum
2 (Table 10.2).
The results of the samples from Stratum 2 are very similar, giving
an average calibrated terminus post quem date of about 4000 BCE (Fig.
10.25). The date is probably later (toward the middle of the first quarter
of the 4th millennium BCE), in light of the double curve of the graph of
the carbon emitted in the cases that were checked.
These are among the latest published dates for the Chalcolithic
period in the Jordan Valley, and are similar to the reliable dates from
Teleilat Ghassul and Tel Abu Hamid. Later dates, from settlement sites,
have only been received from the Golan sites (Carmi et al. 1995) and
from Shiqmim (Burton and Levy 2001), but these are in dispute (Gilead
1994).
14
C age ± 1σ δ13C
RTT TYPE Calibrated date BCE Sample ID
year BP ‰ PDB
68.2% probability:
4230–4190 (13.8%)
L72, B188,
5629 Charcoal 5285 +/-45 4170–4040(54.4%) -26.5
Hearth
95.4 % probability:
4240–3980 (95.4%)
68.2% probability:
4045–3965 (68.2%)
95.4% probability:
5630 Charcoal 5205+/-45 L47, B152 -25.3
4230–4190 ( 4.2%)
4170–4090( 9.4%)
4080– 3940 (81.8%)
68.2% probability:
4040–4010 (22.2%)
4005–3950 (46.0%)
5631 Charcoal 5175+/-5 95.4% probability: L32, B145 -24.9
4160–4130 (1.6%)
4060–3920 (83.7%)
3880–3800 (10.1%)
68.2% probability:
4040–4010 (22.2%)
4005–3950 (46.0%)
5632 Charcoal 5175+/-45 95.4% probability: L23, B123 -26.7
4160–4130 (1.6%)
4060–3920.(83.7%)
3880–3800 (10.1%)
16
The analysis was made by E. Boaretto, Radiocarbon and Cosmogenic Isotopes
laboratory, Kimmel center for archaeological science, Weizmann Institute.
320 chapter ten
Figure 10.25. Graph of radiometric dates.
Table 10.3. Radiometric dates.
Dendrochronology17
During the course of the excavation 11 samples of charred wood were
treated and examined in the Botany Laboratory in the Institute of Ar-
chaeology of Tel Aviv University. The identification of the species of
the tree was based on the three–dimensional structure of the lignin as
examined by a microscope in these sections, comparing them with sec-
tions that were prepared from modern trees and shrubs.
Ten of the samples were tamarisk, and one was a shrub that belongs
to the beet family, which was not possible to identify more precisely.
The tamarisk was the main fuel used by the residents of the site, and it is
possible that it was also incorporated in the building masonry (perhaps
as part of the roof: however, no beams were found and it is not possible
to prove this supposition).
17
The dendochronology finds were analyzed by Nili Liphschitz of the Botanical
Laboratories of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.
General Conclusions
Fazael 2 is a key site to understanding the latest phases of the Chalco-
lithic period in the Jordan Valley.
Its main characteristics are:
– The radiometric dates place it among the latest settlements in the
Jordan Valley, and it was contemporary with the end of the settlement
in the Beer Sheva Valley.
– The site is spread across the northern ancient bank of Wadi Fazael
(a location that is similar to the sites of Wadi Far'ah, Grar, etc.). Its
original area is estimated at 20 ha.
– The spatial and residential architecture is different from that of
the excavated Chalcolithic sites in the region. The distribution of the
residential complexes is more extensive, unlike that at Teleilat Ghassul,
and the buildings include large spacious units that are not characteristic
of other sites in the region. Comparing this site to the nearby Fazael 7
site (Chapter 11) and to the surveyed Fazael 5 site, verifies the notion
that a new type of building is attested in the Fazael valley – the large
multi-courtyard building, where each complex size is about 1,000 m2
(Bar in press a, b).
– The flint artifacts attest to the beginning of the use of Canaa-
nean blades at the end of the Chalcolithic period, which is contrary
to accepted opinion that ascribed their appearance to the EB I. This
Canaanean blade technology was employed coevally with traditional
Chalcolithic modes of flint knapping, suggesting a transitional phase in
the development of lithic technology.
Since Stratum 2 at Fazael 2 exemplifies both Chalcolithic and EBA
lithic traditions, it is tempting to propose that this lithic co-existence
represents a cultural transition of wider scope – an intermediate phase
between the two periods. The ceramic material, while overwhelmingly
Chalcolithic, does feature some EB I traits that might support such a
conclusion. Even so, nothing in the pottery necessarily belongs to the
EB I. The radiocarbon dates, although few, place this stratum squarely
in the latest known phases of the Chalcolithic.
Thus, based on current evidence, Stratum 2 at Fazael 2 should be re-
garded as a very late Chalcolithic site – one of the latest in the southern
Levant. It may signify the end of a Chalcolithic/EB I transitional phase,
stretching from about 3900 to 3600 BCE, the latter date being the earli-
est widely accepted for the EB Ia.
CHAPTER ELEVEN
THE EXCAVATIONS AT FAZAEL 7 – ONE OF THE LARGEST

DWELLING COMPLEXES FROM THE CHALCOLITHIC PERIOD
IN THE SOUTHERN LEVANT
Introduction
In February 2009 an excavation was conducted at Fazael 7 (map ref.
Old Israel Grid 1914/1615), a Chalcolithic site located in the Jordan
Valley, about 20 km north of Jericho (Fig. 11.1).1 The site was selected
for excavation within the framework of a regional study dealing with
a large group of Chalcolithic and EB I sites located in the Wadi Fazael
flood plain. This was one of the principal areas of settlement in the
Jordan Valley during these periods.
The vast Chalcolithic settlement, which the site was part of, extends
from the modern-day settlement of Fazael to the west, along both sides
of the old road toward Ma‘ale Ephraim. It covers an area of about 20
ha, and is divided into non-contiguous secondary sites: Fazael 1, Fazael
2, Fazael 5, Fazael 7 (named by the Manasseh Hill Country Survey),
and the salvage excavations of Porath (1985) and Peleg (2000) within
the precincts of the modern village. These sites were located on the
northern bank of the ancient riverbed of Wadi Fazael (Fig. 11.2). The
site that was excavated and is discussed here is located on level ground
north of the riverbed, near the village’s western fence.
In the centre of the site is a prominent mound. Remains of an ex-
tremely wide broad house were visible at the time the site was discov-
ered during the survey. Three courtyards of different shapes adjoined
the building – a square one that extended to the east, and two rect-
angular ones to the north and north-west. Another, smaller, mound
was identified on the security road of the modern village east of the
main mound. The ceramic finds recovered from the survey of the two
mounds were ascribed to the Chalcolithic period. Meagre wall remains
1
The excavation was directed by Shay Bar and Uri Davidovitch, with assistance
from Ronny Zuckerman (drafting and fauna), Ari Levy (administration), Haim Winter
(flint), Sapir Haad (figures: plans, sections and finds), Michael Eisenberg, and the Zin-
man Institute of Archaeology (scientific support), the Manasseh Hill Country Survey
(scientific and logistical support) and the Jordan Valley Regional Council (logistical
support).
the excavations at fazael 7 323
were also ‘floating’ on the surface level on top of the main mound, and a
few body sherds of vessels dating to the Late Roman period were found
around them. It seems that a temporary agricultural structure stood
there at this time. That building was not excavated in the 2009 season,
and is not discussed in the current report.
180 190 200

170 170
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Yafit
Wa d
iA
h m
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z Fazael 7
Fazael
160 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 11.1. General location map.

324 chapter eleven
Figure 11.2. The northern Fazael Valley. Aerial photograph showing the
Chalcolithic sites identified in the region. The presumed area of the ancient
settlement, correct as of 2008, is shown by the solid line.
Stratigraphy and Architecture (Figs 11.3–11.7)

The 2009 excavation season focused on the southern part of the broad
house (particularly Squares L10, M10 and M11). Two trial squares
were also opened in the corner of the large square courtyard (Squares
I11,I12) and in the north-western corner of the broad house (Square
J10). This was with intention of understanding the architecture and
stratigraphy of the broad house and the outline of the large courtyard
adjacent to it.
A single stratum dating to the Chalcolithic period was identified
throughout the excavation. Habitation levels in the building were only
found in Square L10, about 1.5 m below the surface level. The excava-
tion in the rest of the area did not reach that depth.
The Broad House (Figs. 11.3–11.7)

This structure (8 x 15 m; 120 m2) is one of the largest buildings in the
southern Levant from the Chalcolithic period. Its massive construction

included stone walls up to 1 m thick, which were preserved to a height
of 1 m. The absence of any evidence indicating mud-brick construc-
tion, and the large amount of stone collapse, seem to suggest the struc-
ture was built entirely of stone. In order to span a width of 8 m, another
wall was built along the building’s longitudinal axis, which divided the
structure into three or four units, and provided support for the roof. At
present, we have no information regarding the function of the build-
ing. It should be mentioned that other buildings excavated at the site
(Porath’s salvage excavation, 1985, and the author’s excavation of Fazael
2), and some of the buildings that were measured in the Manasseh Hill
Country Survey (at Fazael 5 just to the west of Fazael 7 – see Site 92)
were of a similar size. For this reason we can propose a new residential
model in the Chalcolithic period: an extremely large courtyard build-
ing intended for an extended family.
The building’s four perimeter walls were identified in the excavation
(W1 in the west; W33 in the north; W2 in the south and W4 in the
west). The partition wall that divides the building down its centre (W7)
and another wall, which divides the southern portion of the building
into two rectangular units (W16), were also excavated. The latter prob-
ably provided support for the roof of the structure. So far, no secondary
phases or additions have been identified, and it seems that the entire
building was constructed in a single phase. The entrances to the build-
ing have not yet been located.
Two habitation levels were reached in Square L10. A layer of tamped
soil (at an average elevation of -211.45 m) was revealed at a depth of
about 1.5 m between Walls 1, 7 and 16. This was identified based on
the remains of two stone hearths (L40, L41; Fig. 11.7) about 40 cm in
diameter. The bottoms of the hearths were made of burnt stones, and
were embedded 5 cm below the habitation level. In this layer, as was the
case elsewhere in the excavation areas, no other in situ finds were iden-
tified. What may have been a built installation or a pavement made of
medium-sized stones (average elevation -210.89 m) was located north
of Wall 7. The level in Square L10 and this pavement are located on
both sides of the partition wall (W7), and at present there is no expla-
nation for the striking difference in the elevation between them (more
than 50 cm).
During the course of the excavation in Square L10 post-deposition
processes that occurred in this part of the building after it was aban-
doned were discerned. Fine-grained greyish fill was identified above
326 chapter eleven
the habitation level in L34, and above the fill were remains of the stone
collapse (L32) from the building (Fig. 11.6). These layers were overlain
with a layer of disturbed fill that had a coarse-grained texture. From
this point on an unknown period of time elapsed after the house was
abandoned, during which a dusty-grained layer about 15 cm thick ac-
cumulated. Above this layer came more stone collapse, followed by the
stones of the walls that fell in somewhat diagonal horizons near the
walls. It seems that these were part of a rapid process, because of the
horizontal stratification that was noted. Disturbed, irregular fill ap-
peared above the collapse phase during a period when the building’s
remains slowly disintegrated, and the later construction occurred on
the surface level.
The Square Courtyard (Fig. 11.3)

A square courtyard measuring 20 x 21 m (about 420 m2) was located
west of the main building. The following walls were identified in the
courtyard: an eastern wall that was shared with the broad house (the
southern part of W4 and the northern part of W27); a southern wall
(W3) that extended from Wall 4 in the building and was excavated in
Square M11; a northern wall (W23) that was excavated where it formed
a corner with Wall 27; and a western wall (W46) that has not yet been
checked. These walls, which were up to 1 m thick, were built of me-
dium and large fieldstones, and have enormous boulders incorporated
in them, each of which is estimated to weigh more than 1 ton. During
this season the courtyards located to the west and north were not exca-
vated, and in the square courtyard (L14 in Square M11, L38 in Square
L11 and L26 in Square I12) only fill was removed, without reaching its
ancient level. Thus the square courtyard was constructed together with
or immediately after the broad house.
Other Courtyards
Two other courtyards that have a rectangular outline were identified on
the surface, located to the north and north-east of the square courtyard.
The first one extends north-east of the meeting of Walls 23 and 46 of
the square courtyard. After a distance of about 10 m it turns west and
parallel to Wall 23 of the square courtyard, for a distance of about 25 m
(until adjoining Wall 24, which constitutes the continuation of Wall 27
in Squares G12, H12). In this way another space covering a presumed
area of about 400 m2 was enclosed. The second courtyard is a continu-
M L K J I H
L11
-211.35 L15 L32 -211.00
L34 W1 L5 L31
-210.90
W1
L29
10
L6 L41 -210.89 -210.88
10
-211.31 -211.54
L9
#
-211.42 L11 L34 W7 L8
W33
W2
W16 L30 L39 L10

L34 L40 L17
0 10
m
L36 -209.71
-210.49
19
W16
W
L13
L12 -210.57 W
11
-211.37
-210.82 20 11
W4
Entrance?
W4 -210.00
L28
L37
-211.60 -210.80 -211.46
L14 W27
-211.17 L38
W24
-211.70 -210.86 -211.40
W23
-211.87
-211.15
L26
L25
W3
-211.16
12 12
-211.63
13 13
14 14
15 15
W46
16 16
0 5m
M L K J I H
Figure 11.3. Survey plan before excavation (top right) and general plan of the 2009 season.
328 chapter eleven
Figure 11.4. View of the site looking east, 2009.
ation of the first courtyard to the west, and its eastern wall is W24. At
present the area of this courtyard is still unclear.
These two courtyards were built of the same masonry as that of the
square courtyard. So far no openings have been identified in the array
of courtyards.
The presumed area of this complex, including the main broad house
and the three adjacent courtyards, is approximately 1,500 m2. It is sig-
nificantly larger than any domestic or other complexes known to us
until now in the Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant2. However,
it is still unclear how we should interpret the irregularity of its size and
massiveness.
2
Banning noted a few large dwelling units in Tell 3 at Teleilat Ghassul (Banning
2011: 72), but these are based on the Pontifical Biblical Institute excavations at the site
(Mallon et al. 1934; Koeppel 1940), and are not conclusive.
Figure 11.5. View of the site looking north, 2009.
Figure 11.6. South-western room, looking west, 2009.

330 chapter eleven
Figure 11.7. Hearth (L40), 2009.

A total of 1,727 pottery sherds with a surface area greater than 4 cm2
were collected and sorted. Seventeen of these are body sherds dating to
the Late Roman period, which are ascribed to the temporary structure
that stood on the mound in the centre of the site. These sherds will not
be discussed in this report.
The following is a preliminary report on the ceramic finds that were
recovered during the first season of excavations.
An analysis of the diagnostic items (rims – 78 items) shows that the
most common vessels are bowls (39 items, 50% of the finds); followed
by holemouth jars (18 items, 23% of the finds); basins (12 items, 15.5%
of the finds) and jars (9 items, 11.5% of the finds). All of the bases were
flat.
The most prevalent types of handles in the assemblage are lug han-
dles (8 items) and loop handles (7 items). In addition, two flat handles
were found (Fig. 11.10). The flat handle in the assemblage is not sur-
prising, and such handles were found nearby at Fazael 2 (Chapter 10:
Fig.10.16). The lug handles occur in two sizes: small (4–6 cm) and large
(15 cm). The small ones are especially common and both are typical of
the Fazael sites during this period.
Nine of these diagnostic items (eight bowls and one jar, 11.5% of the
finds) were slipped and have a red stripe on the rim. Plastic ornamenta-
tion is infrequent: a single body sherd adorned with rope ornamenta-
tion, a knob ornamentation and a sherd decorated with incised stripes
were found.
Bowls (Fig. 11.8)

The most common bowl is the straight-sided bowl, ranging in diameter
between 7 and 40 cm. This occurs in a variety of shapes and sizes: as a
deep bowl with thin sides (Fig. 11.8: 1–2), with a slightly everted rim
(Fig. 11.8: 3–5), or as a deep wide vessel with a thick side (Fig. 11.8:
10–11). Some of the bowls were decorated with a red stripe on the rim
(‘lipstick’, Fig. 11.8: 3–5).
Bowls with an S-shaped profile (Fig. 11.8: 6–7) are also a frequent
occurrence. For the most part they are decorated with a red stripe on
the rim.
The globular bowl, 20–37 cm in diameter, appears mainly as a shal-
low bowl (Fig. 11.8: 8–9) or wide deep bowl (Fig. 11.8: 12–13). It often
has a cut rim.
Numerous wide, deep bowls/basins appear that are 30–55 cm in di-
ameter and are characterized by a flat protruding rim (Fig. 11.8: 14–16).
They are neither slipped nor decorated.
Jars and holemouth jars (Fig. 11.9)

The holemouth jars are usually narrow and deep. The two main groups
are: large holemouth jars that have a wide opening (with a maximum
rim diameter of 50 cm), and smaller holemouth jars that have a narrow
opening (7–13 cm). Holemouth jars with a plain or thickened rim (Fig.
11.9: 1–3, 6–7) are common. Occasionally the rim is pinched upward
(Fig. 11.9: 4) or inverted (Fig. 11.9: 5). With just one exception (Fig.
11.9: 8), no slipped or decorated holemouth vessels were found.
The most common type of jar rim is everted (Fig. 11.9: 9–11, 13).
The jars are divided into those with short (Fig. 11.9: 9) and long necks
(Fig. 11.9: 10–11). Another type is a jar that has an upright rim (Fig.
11.9: 12). In the absence of complete jars it is unclear whether they had
plastic ornamentations or some other kind of decoration.
332 chapter eleven
The pottery assemblage is similar to that of nearby Fazael 2, which

is more diverse. Nevertheless, there are differences in types that do not
appear at both of the sites. Thus the broad deep basins with flat pro-
truding rims were not found at Fazael 2. No shallow flat bowls, deep
bowls/cups, broad shallow holemouth jars, holemouth jars with spouts,
jars decorated with pie-crust ornamentation and amphoriskoi were
found at Fazael 7.
The assemblage excavated at Fazael 7 is still meagre at this stage of
the research; however, the short distance between the sites and the sup-
position that they are all part of one large site, calls for further com-
parison.
Figure 11.8. 2009 season: bowls.

Figure 11.8.(continued) 2009 season: bowls.

334 chapter eleven
Figure 11.9. 2009 season: holemouth jars and jars.

Figure 11.10. 2009 season: varia.
The Stone Tool Assemblage

Two limestone items were identified: a round grinding pebble (Fig.
11.11: 1) and a round stone with a biconical perforation (Fig. 11.11: 2).
The scant amount of finds may stem from the fact that a limited area
was excavated, and that we did not reach the habitation levels in most
of the excavation.
Figure 11.11. 2009 season: stone artifacts.

336 chapter eleven
Methodology
The material was initially sorted into three main groups:
A. Cores and debitage.
B. ‘Half-finished’ items. Items that are lacking secondary treatment,
such as flakes, blades and bladelets. Tools can be prepared from
these by means of retouching (secondary knapping), or they can
be used for various tasks without further knapping.
C. Retouched tools: items from Group B that underwent secondary
knapping (retouching) in order to render them a suitable shape
for their intended function. They are classified according to a ty-
pological list based on morphology and possible functions.
In our opinion, the group of tools (C) should be further sorted if
possible. This is based on the specific tasks that are indicative of the
economy and lifestyle: field-work, wood-working, butchery, etc. The
principles of the method are described elsewhere (Bar 2008: Section
5.5.7). The percentages of the main groups (A, B, C) were calculated
based on their relative part of the total assemblage. The percentages of
the different categories in the main groups were based on their part of
the entire group.
The origin of the raw material was not studied; however, the flint
was brown or grey, of poor or mediocre quality, and many of the faces
of the products were irregular. Items made of fine-grained, light brown
flint were rare. A Munsell colour test of the flint was not done.
The Assemblage (Table 11.1)

Group A – debitage and cores (83.1%). The cores that were found (N
= 4, 0.15% of all the debitage) were small. Three of them are brown
flint and one is light grey flint with dark stripes. One of the cores was a
tiny microlith core, and another was a core on a coarse primary blade.
Since the debitage and primary items were found in the same loci as
the cores, as well as in other loci, it seems that not all of the cores were
discovered in the excavation. Seven hundred and ninety-four items per
core is clearly an unreasonable amount. The primary items constituted
7.1% of the group. No core debitage items were found.
Group B – flakes and blades (16.0%). The industry produced mostly
3
This section was written by H. Winter, University of Haifa.
flakes (72.6% of Group B), most of which were small, about 3 cm long.
The average measurement along the knapping axis of ninety flakes
that were selected at random from Locus 11 was 3.05 cm. Only three
items were 6 cm long and two were 5 cm long were measured amongst
this group. The cores from which these items were knapped were not
found. The few blades (7.5%) in the assemblage were short, and many
were broken. The quantity of bladelets was relatively high, constituting
20.6% of Group B. These were usually short, and some were broken.
Even though several short fragments with a trapezoidal cross-section
(with two ridges on the back of the item) or a triangular cross-section
(with one ridge on the back of the item) were found, it is not possible
to determine if these were produced using Canaanean technology. No
blades were found that were clearly produced employing this technol-
ogy in the 2009 season.
Group C – tools (0.8%). The number of tools is extremely small. Most
were produced from small flint items, involving a minimal investment
of secondary treatment (retouching), probably in order to perform an
immediate task. Due to their small number it was not possible to sort
them further according to tasks. The two sickle blades indicate grain-
harvesting but the scope of this particular activity is unclear. One of the
sickle blades had a retouched back, truncation and sickle sheen – clearly
a Chalcolithic type. The second was knapped on a thin bladelet of fine
quality light brown flint; it has a trapezoidal cross-section, truncation
and sickle sheen.
Discussion
The total number of items (N = 3,176) is relatively large and shows that
flint was used as a raw material to produce items for everyday use. The
presence of knapped flint products from the three main groups (A –
debitage, B – ‘half-finished’ products, C – retouched tools) shows the
existence of a flint industry. The nature of the finds is that of a not very
advanced industry from the standpoint of production technology and
the selection of raw material. The almost complete absence of pounders
suggests that these may have been kept elsewhere, in places that have
not yet been located.
The small number of cores is remarkable. Judging by the quantities
of items from Groups A and B it seems that not all of the cores were dis-
covered in the excavation. In the loci where the material was wet-sifted
the large quantity of chips altered the proportions between the groups
338 chapter eleven
of items compared with those in which the material was only collected
or dry-sifted. For this reason the loci cannot be compared with respect
to the nature and scope of the activity connected to the treatment and
use of the flint.
The amount of half-finished products, particularly flakes and a few
blades, which were not retouched (N = 509, 16.0%) is rather consider-
able. Due to the small number of retouched tools it seems that at least
some of the flakes were an end-product and were used for various pur-
poses. No analysis was done of the use-marks on them.
Such a small number of tools (N = 27, 0.8%) is unusual for an exca-
vated site. Except for a single fragment of a fan scraper and two sickle
blades, there are no diagnostic tools. The few other tools that were
produced are of poor quality, and were knapped from inferior brown
or grey flint that is unsuitable for preparing large items. The industry
produced mostly small flakes and a relatively large amount of debitage.
All of the tools, apart from the broken fan scraper and the sickle blades,
are ascribed to a group that is produced with a minimum amount of ef-
fort, and have been defined as ad hoc tools (Rosen 1997: 34, 158–159).
Based on the ceramic finds, the site is ascribed to the Chalcolithic
period, but in the absence of core tools – axes, adzes and picks – it is
anomalous. In addition, the small number of sickle blades and tools in
general makes one wonder. These tools were probably kept in areas that
have not yet been excavated, or it may be related to an orderly abandon-
ment of the site, whereby all of the valuable tools were taken away.
It should be mentioned that no signs of a Canaanean blade industry
were found at Fazael 7 in the first season of excavations described here,
but in the final phases of preparation of this book they were found in
the 2011 season of excavation at the site. The Canaanean blade indus-
try first appeared in the region in the latest phases of the Chalcolithic
period (Bar and Winter 2010: 33–47), and this site is an addition to the
previously published blades from Fazael 2.
The small assemblage does not allow for a functional analysis of the
tools and for studying the life-style of the population. The only sickle
blade with sickle sheen is indeed a Chalcolithic type, but conclusions
cannot be drawn from just a single item.
Figure 11.12. 2009 season: flint artifacts.

Locus / Category 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 25 26 29 30 31 32 34 35 39 Total N %
Group A – Waste
Core 2 1 1 4 0.15
Primary element 8 3 3 19 6 86 4 8 9 5 1 3 11 9 12 187 7.1
Chunk 3 3 2 20 8 100 4 12 2 9 2 18 1 3 9 196 7.4
Chip 9 2 24 66 585 137 777 16 53 1 34 4 207 140 104 93 2252 85.3
Group A – sub-
17 5 30 71 624 151 965 24 73 12 48 3 7 1 236 141 116 115 2639 83.1
total
Table 11.1. 2009 season: the flint assemblage.

Group B – Debitage - (Semi-finished products)
Flake 8 12 12 16 36 24 108 3 30 6 31 1 2 19 2 29 15 1 15 370 72.6
Blade 2 4 4 19 1 1 2 2 1 2 38 7.5
Bladelet 4 2 3 11 6 28 18 3 2 1 6 6 6 5 101 20.6
Group B – sub-
10 16 14 19 51 34 155 3 48 6 35 3 1 3 27 2 37 21 2 22 509 16
total
Group C – Tools
Scraper 2 3 1 6 22.2
Fanscraper 1 1 3.7
Awl 2 2 7.4
Borer 2 2 7.4
Retouched flake 1 2 3 11.1
Retouched blade 1 1 3.7
Sickle element 1 1 2 7.4
Notch 1 2 1 1 1 1 7 25.9
Truncation 2 2 7.4
Hammer stone 1 1 3.7
Varia 1 1 3.7
Group C – sub-
1 1 3 13 4 3 1 1 1 28 0.9
total
Total 27 22 44 91 678 185 1133 27 125 18 83 9 1 10 1 264 2 179 137 2 138 3176 100.0
The Faunal Remains4

The faunal assemblage consists of 88 bones. The analysis results are
reported below.
Methods
Bones were collected during the excavation from a 5 mm mesh used to
sift 10% of the excavated sediment. The bones were cleaned in water.
When further cleaning was necessary, 5% acetic acid was used.
The anatomical and taxonomical identification was performed at the
lowest possible taxonomic level according to the indicative parts and
regions. Bones not identified at a taxonomic level were documented ac-
cording to the following body size groups: small, representing animals
such as rabbits; medium, representing animals such as goats, sheep and
gazelle; large, representing animals such as cattle and equids. Differ-
entiating domestic sheep and goat was not possible, therefore, these
remains were pooled and referred to as sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis). In
one case, differentiation was possible according to Zeder and Lapham
(2010). For cattle, at the present stage of research, it is not possible to
determine whether the cattle bones represent domesticated animals
or not. Remains of Bos taurus - a domesticated species of this family,
were documented at neighbouring sites in the Jordan Valley in the later
phases of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (Grigson 1995a); therefore,
we cannot rule out the presence of this species at Fazael 7.
The total number of identified bones (NISP) is given as counts and
as percentage of the assemblage as a whole. The minimum number of
elements (MNE) is given for each species and group size.
Aging of all species was based on long bone fusion and dental wear
stages, following Silver (1969) and Grant (1982).
All bones were examined for surface modifications resulting from
human activities (e.g. cutting, burning and breaking), animal activities
(e.g. gnawing, predation and digestion) and other factors (e.g. weather,
vegetation and pathologies). The recording of the surface modifications
was conducted following Binford (1981) for cut-mark descriptions,
Stiner et al. (1995) for stages of burning, and Behrensmeyer (1978) for
weathering stages of damage.
4
This section was written by R. Zuckerman, University of Haifa.
342 chapter eleven
Description of finds
A total of 88 bones and bone fragments were identified and recorded
(Table 11.2). The prevalence of the undifferentiated caprine category
of sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis) and mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella) is
high, constituting about 60% and about 30% respectively of the total as-
semblage. Cattle (Bos sp.) and equids (Equus sp.) were considerably less
represented at about 3% and 5% respectively of the total assemblage.
Sheep/goat remains exhibited a slight predominance of meat-rich
body elements (e.g. long bones, scapula, pelvis). A similar proportion
of meat-rich to meat-poor elements indicates that complete carcasses
were butchered/consumed on the site. For gazelle, mostly meat-rich
body elements were present, probably indicating that these animals
were killed and butchered at a distance from the site.
Only 14 sheep and goat bones were complete enough to assess age;
therefore, reliable mortality data could not be obtained. Based on bone
fusion stages and tooth-wear patterns, all caprine were killed at an age
of 0.5 years and consumed on the site. For gazelle, there was a radius
bone of one older individual, approximately 3 years old. Slaughter of
animals at a young age suggests that animals were raised and exploited
for meat. Breakage and fracture patterns of the long bones suggest that
most of the bones (about 73%) were broken close to the time of the
animal’s death, perhaps due to human activity, rather than a result of
long-term external processes.
Evidence for butchery was found on two bones (on gazelle’s p. radius
and on caprine’s d. humerus). According to Binford (1981) this butch-
ery damage is a result of dismemberment of the carcass (Table 11.3).
Burned bones were recorded according to six stages, as described by
Stiner et al. (1995). Table 11.3 shows that about 25% of the identified
bones were burnt, about 90% of these being extensively burned. The
main concentrations of burnt bones were identified in the vicinity of
the two hearths discovered in Square L/11.
Only a few bones (about 10% of the total assemblage) presented a
slight surface modification caused by weathering. Surface modifica-
tions resulting from animal activities (e.g. gnawing) were found on only
two humerus bones. Based on these results and the weather marks, it
seems that the bones were buried within a relatively short time, which
prevented their extensive exposure to animal activity.
In summary, the preliminary conclusions presented here suggest a
mixed economy of domestic animal husbandry (sheep/goat and prob-
ably cattle) and wild animal hunting (mountain gazelle). This combi-
nation is known from other Chalcolithic sites in the northern Jordan
Valley (Chapter 9; Bar et al. 2008).
Slaughter of sheep/goat at a young age suggests that the animals were
raised and exploited for meat. The mountain gazelle, the only animal
that was hunted, played an important role in the economy of the site.
The paucity of cattle and equid bones hampers our understanding of
their role and contribution to the Fazael 7 population during the Chal-
colithic period.
Further excavations will expand the data base and shed light on the
components and nature of the economic basis of the site, as reflected by
the faunal assemblage.
Capra Capra/ Gazella Medium Equus

Bos sp.
hircus Ovis gazella size sp.
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Head
Horn 1 1
Mandible 2 1 1 1
Mandible teeth 1 1 2 2
Body
Atlas 1 1
Axis 1 1
Ver: Cervical 1 1
Ver: Thoracic 1 1
Ver: Lumbar 3 3
Rib 2 2
Forelimb
Scapula 2 2 2 2 2 2
Humerus 1 1 6 4 4 4 1 1
Radius 5 3 1 1
Ulna 1 1 1 1
Metacarpus 4 2 4 3 1 1
Hindlimb
Pelvic 4 3 2 2
Femur 4 3 1 1
344 chapter eleven
Capra Capra/ Gazella Medium Equus

Bos sp.
hircus Ovis gazella size sp.
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Tibia 5 4 4 4
Astragalus 1 1
Metatarsus 1 1
Toes
Phalanx 1 5 5 1 1
Phalanx 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
Phalanx 3 1 1 1 1
NISP 2 1 52 25 4 4 88
% NISP 2.27% 1.14% 59.09% 28.41% 4.55% 4.55% 100.00%
MNI 1 1 3 3 1 1 10
Table 11.2. Total number of identified bones (NISP), minimum number of

elements (MNE) and minimum number of individuals (MNI).
No. of % of
% Total
damaged damaged Total %
NISP
bones bones
Cut-marked* Dismemberment 2 100.00 2.27 2 2.27
Gnawed 2 100.00 2.27 2 2.27
Slightly burned (1) 1 4.55 1.14
Lightly burned (2) 1 4.55 1.14
Burned** Fully carbonized (3) 9 40.91 10.23 22 25.00
Localized (4) 6 27.27 6.82
>half calcined (5) 5 22.73 5.68
Stage 2 7 77.78 7.95
Weathered*** 9 10.23
Stage 3 2 22.22 2.27
Fresh 11 73.33 11.36
12 13.64
Fracture Dry 1 6.67 1.14
New 4 100.00 4.55 4 4.55
Table 11.3. Bone-surface modifications.

* Binford 1981
** Stiner et al. 1995
*** Behrensmayer 1978
General Summary
In Fazael 7 a new and unknown settlement model that dates to the later
phases of the Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant was found.
Parts of a residential complex were excavated, including a building and
courtyards, whose size and manner of construction are unknown in
this period. The built and covered area totals 120 m2, and it is one of the
largest roofed structure of the period discovered to date. Splitting the
unit into two rectangular spaces by means of a wall in order to cover an
8 m span is also an innovation. At this point in the research it is already
apparent that three different courtyards adjoin the main building. In
addition, such a number of courtyards covering an area in excess of
1,000 m2 is unprecedented.
There are several characteristic types that are missing from the typi-
cal ceramic assemblage, such as the churn, cup, and cornet. The flint
assemblage, which is surprising in its paucity and lack of bi-facial tools,
is atypical of the Chalcolithic period. The reason for these phenomena
probably stems from the limited scope of the excavation.
The characteristics of the site make it unique, but for now it essen-
tially appears to be domestic. The economic data indicate a combina-
tion of growing field-crops, grazing sheep/goats, and hunting (which is
uncommon in the period). In this way Fazael 7 is analogous with the
Chalcolithic site of 'Ein Hilu in Wadi Malih, which was excavated by
the author (Chapter 9), and there too the economy was composed of
these three factors.
The great similarity in the architecture and the proximity to other
sites in the Fazael Valley (e.g. Fazael 2 and Porath’s salvage excavation)
indicate a large village spread across the flood plain of the wadi, cover-
ing a presumed area of about 20 ha. However, the minor differences be-
tween Fazael 2 and 7 may possibly indicate that the latter site is slightly
earlier than the former one. These questions may possibly be answered
in future excavation seasons.
CHAPTER TWELVE
SHEIKH DIAB 2 – AN EARLY BRONZE AGE I PERIOD

HAMLET IN THE JORDAN VALLEY
Introduction1
During February, March and September 2007 and April 2008 excava-
tions were conducted at the site of Sheikh Diab 22 (Old Israel Grid ref.
1904/1616), located in the Jordan Valley, on a spur along the edge of
Wadi Fazael, about 20 km north of Jericho (Fig. 12.1), and 1 km west of
the settlement of Fazael.
The site was discovered in 2000, within the framework of the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey, and has not yet been published. The
site’s name derives from the nearby Tell es-Sheikh Diab.
This chapter presents the results of the excavation, and analyses the
main archaeological finds, putting them into the broader geographical
and cultural framework of the period.
The ancient remains cover a presumed area of 1.5 ha. The buildings
are spread across the middle of the site and on the slopes of a steeply
sloping spur (see Section A-A’ below), formed of limestone chalky rock
belonging to the Mount Scopus group, and desert travertine soil. The
hilltop at trig. point E.P. -86 overlooks the site from the south-west, as
does the top of the spur on which the site is located (Fig. 12.2). Wadi
Fazael flows by the northern slope of the site, and Fazael Springs are
located about 2 km to the west. The EB I site of Fazael 4 (Chapter 13) is
located across the wadi channel to the north. A large area on both sides
of the wadi channel east of the site is flat, which allows agriculture and
grazing.
1
This Chapter is based on a paper published by the author and others in the Jour-
nal of the Israel Prehistoric Society (Bar et al. 2011).
2
The excavation was directed by Shay Bar, with assistance from Ziv Leiba,
Hagar Ben-Bassat, Barak Verker and Eyal Dan (area supervision), Ophir Dror-Katz
(administration), Yonatan Liberzon (surveying), Haim Winter (flint), Guy Bar Oz
and Noa Raban-Gerstel (fauna), Dror Ben-Yosef (ground stone tools), Sapir Haad and
Inbal Bar (plans, sections and illustration of artifacts), Michael Eisenberg and the Zin-
man Institute of Archaeology (scientific support), the Manasseh Hill Country Survey
(scientific and logistic support), the Kinneret College on the Sea of Galilee, and the
Jordan Valley Regional Council (volunteers and logistical support).
sheikh diab 2 – an eb i hamlet 347
The site includes a large number of building remains, walls, and

courtyards scattered across the slopes, and is covered with alluvium.
The eastern part of the site has been damaged by construction activity.
Sites attributed to EB I are common in the lower Jordan Valley and
include Jericho, 20 km to the south of the site (e.g. Kenyon and Holland
1982), Tell Um Hammad, 15 km to the north-east (Helms et al. 1992),
180 190 200

170 170
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Wa d
Yafit
i A
hm
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z Sheikh
Diab 2
160 Fazael 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 12.1. General location of Sheikh Diab 2.

348 chapter twelve
Tell el-Far'ah (North), 25 km to the north (e.g., de Vaux 1949), and

more than 50 newly discovered unexcavated sites (Chapters 6; 15).
During the two excavation seasons it was decided to open four dif-
ferent areas (Fig. 12.3):
Area F, in the upper (western) part of the site, where the remains of
a building are located at surface level.
Area G, the main area of excavations, in a region where the slope of
the spur diminishes and the remains of many walls are visible.
Area H, building remains located in the north-eastern part of the
site.
Area I, remains of other residential complexes situated west and
north-west of Area G.
Stratigraphy and Architecture

So far about 425 m2 have been excavated in the four areas of the site.
The entire middle of the site was also cleared of sundry stone collapses
(in the area shown in Fig. 12.4) in order to sketch the walls visible on
the surface. The tops of the walls were cleaned so that they could be
drawn, and in order to better understand their outline.
Figure 12.2. Photograph of the site looking south. Note the gradient of the slope,
the topographical difference, and the locations of the different excavation areas.
Figure 12.3. Survey plan of the site, overlaid with a schematic of the excavation
areas. Based on the Manasseh Hill Country Survey unpublished map.
A'
Figure 12.4. Plan of the excavation areas and the secondary units in the centre of the site
19 19
A
-133.41
# L309
W -133.76
L3
31 -133.81 COM 5
0
08
-134.55 -133.95
18 # 18
-134.66
-135.53
L307
W
31
-135.04
1
-134.38
COM 4
Note the differences in elevation along the slope of the spur.

17 17
-135.19
-136.55
-137.20 -136.56
Figure 12.5. Section A-A’ in the centre of the site.

-135.47
L322 W 301 L303
W300 -138.35
#
L318
-136.13
L302 -136.52 -136.06
L323
W31
-138.25 -137
16 -140.04
-138.64
.29
#
-136.68
-135.63 16
L325 -138.70 -137.13
-136.16
S lope
L305
6
-140.56 -141.03
-141.08 -136.83
W3
-137.16
L324 # -137.35
-137.83 L317 L319
-138.05 -136.60
-141.00 -138.00
L304
06
-136.73
-139.56 -138.00 -138.30 -137.25
-136.94
-136.75 Stone
ky
W326 -136.88
Slides
oc
W
W32
R
30
1
0
COM 3 COM 6
15 15
13
-137.34
-140.56 -139.04 W132
W3
-139.95
-139.45
L314
L312 -137.86 -139.54
-140.11 -140.27 -139.00 -138.53 -137.90
-139.68
W -139.93
(Areas G, I).
-139.83
32 -139.26 W120
-140.69
0 -138.00
-140.29
14 L315 14 W103
-139.14
-138.47
L149
B'
-141.63 -140.85
-137.07
W121
-139.90 # -139.12
-140.75
-139.72 L130
#
-139.90 # L138 L144 W122
-139.28
#
W
-139.55 -139.55
W146
-139.27 14
W128
-139.45
L171 -139.73 7
L127 L148 -138.96 COM 7
13 -139.25 -139.30 -139.75 13 W122
0s
#
-140.08
12 L139
-139.35 -139.75
-140.34 -139.32
W
W L129 U11 L145
146n
# -140.25
-139.91 L157 W120
-140.20 -140.14
W122 L137
L152
W120s
L101 L133
-140.27
L163
-140.51 -140.56 #
-141.21
L153 L161 -141.76
-140.50
L119
L172 -141.20
#
U12 L126 W170 -141.13
-140.28
W128
12 L125 -141.23
-141.20 COM 1 -140.75 L169 L150 -140.74 12
W187
-140.75 -140.48
-141.25 -141.29
L103a -140.89 L140
-141.06 -140.45
W
L104 L118 L165
12 1
# -140.83 -141.10
U10 L136 -141.24 L168
L162
W159
L162 #
-141.92
L155
B
L107 L160 -141.68 L113 -141.20 -140.84
L115 -141.80 W103 -141.49 L112 #L156 #
-141.18
-141.42 L164
L123 L141 -140.98 -141.22
L166
8 2 0e L151
10
-140.97
1
-141.18
11 W L100 -141.26 -141.35 -141.22
-141.25
-141.48
W
-141.27
11
-141.27
L105 -141.25 -141.51 -141.11
-141.53 Unexcavated -141.87
-141.26
-141.87
2
13
-141.88
L106 L102 W L116
-141.57
-141.55
W L154 W300
W
W110
#
1 L134
15
L117 20s
-141.77
-141.88 -142.32
8
-142.04
L131 -141.18 L33 -142.70
-141.83 Unexcavated
32 L37
Surface
-142.40
Unexcavated -141.83 -141.85 W L34
32 L135 Fossil L44
W1
-141.37
-142.54 -142.81
-141.62
-141.87
COM 2 W -142.49
5m
10 -142.10 -142.75
43 L41 -142.85 10
L143 L35
# L161 -142.85 L45 W310
-142.44
-143.27
L40
W38
#
L142 L39 -142.44
-142.50 -142.09
5m
-142.93
2
W4
9 9 W310
0
A'
W311
0
A
-133
-135
-145
-140
The site was settled during the first part of the EB Ib. Even so, other
architectural phases were identified within this period:
1. In Area G (Complex 1) it seems that an elliptical, sausage-shaped
structure (more characteristic of the EB Ia in the north of the
country [Braun 1997]) predated the construction of the residen-
tial complex that dates to the EB Ib.
2. In Area I layers of fill were found below the first course of the
interior walls inside Complex 3.
3. In several other places, particularly in Area G, it seems that there
were additions and changes that belonged to the last habitation
phase of the site.
It is important to note that all indicative finds within these architec-
tural phases were dated to within the span of the EB I, and no in situ
material predating the onset of the EB Ib period was found.
Area G
An area of 250 m2 was excavated in the main excavation area at the site
(Plan in Fig. 12.6, Sections in Figs. 12.5 and 12.7). This area is located
in the centre of the site, where the slope is moderate and numerous wall
remains are visible at the surface level. A residential complex (Complex
1) consisting of four built units (Units 10–13) was entirely excavated.
The western part of another building (Complex 2) was also excavated,
as were an alley that links them, and sections of alleys between Com-
plex 1, Complex 3 and Complex 6. All of the ceramic artifacts recovered
from Area G date to EB I (see below).
The following is a description of the various architectural units.
Complex 1 (Figs. 12.6–14, 12.16)

This is a roughly circular residential complex and courtyard. It extends
over about 140 m2, and was completely excavated (except for 4 m2 in
Unit 11 in Square J13 left for future research). This complex constitutes
a fine example of a residential unit at the site in EB Ib. Complex 1 was
divided into four secondary units with open areas between them.
Unit 10 (Fig. 12.9)

This unit consists of a room about 3.7 m wide and 4.5 m long, covering
an overall area of about 16 m2. It is located in the southern part of Com-
plex 1, and is delimited by Walls 103, 121 and 120s. Its northern corners
are curved similarly to the corners of the buildings of EB Ib in the north
352 chapter twelve
H I J K
B'
A
-139.90 # -137.07 L149 -139.12
-139.72 #
L130 -139.90
L138 W
# L144 147
-139.55 #
-139.28 -139.55
-139.27 -138.96
W128 -139.45 L171 -139.25
-139.73
13 L127 13
L148
W146 #
-139.35
0s
-140.08
-140.34
12 L139 -139.32
W
-139.75
W L129
14
U11 L145
6n
-139.91 -140.14 L157 -140.25
-140.20 #
U12
W122 L137 L152
# -140.
-140.56 -140.50
C'
L161
L133 -140.51 L163
-141.21 -141.76
#
L119 L101 -141.13 W170
L153 L126
L125
12 -141.20 -141.20 L172 -141.23 L150 -140.28 12
-140.74
-140.75 -140.48 COM 1 -140.75
L169
C
-141.25 -141.29
-141.06 -140.45 W187
-140.89
L140 L165
W
W120s
#
121
-140.83 -141.10
L118
L162 U10 -141.24 L168
9
L136
15
L164
W
L103a #
-141.92 L166 L155
B
L104 -140.84
L107 L162 L113

-141.68 -141.20 -141.13
L115 L160 -141.18
L123 -141.42 W103 -141.49 L112 L156
#
# U13
L141 -141.22
-141.80 -140.98
8 -141.22
10 -141.18
L100 -140.97 -141.35 e
W -141.48
L105 -141.26 120 L151
11 -141.25
-141.51 -141.11
W -141.27 11
-141.53 -141.25 -141.27
-141.26 Unexcavated
-141.88 -141.87
-141.87
-141.57 2
L106 L102
W L116 -141.55 13 L154
W
W
# 12
0s
15
-141.77 L134
8
-141.88
-142.04
Unexcavated
W110
-141.18
L117 -141.83
L131
-141.83 -141.85
Surface
32
Unexcavated W1
-141.37 L135
-141.87
10 -142.10
COM 2 10
L143-141.62
32 L161
W1
#
-142.44
#
L142
-142.50
0 5m
A'
H I J K
Figure 12.6. Plan of Area G.

B
-139.00
-139.50 L138
W146
-140.00
L139 Balk
-140.50 L161
B'
-141.00 L140
Balk
-141.50 Stone/Rock
Brown Soil
-142.00
0 3m
Figure 12.7. Area G: Section B–B’. Location is shown in Fig. 12.6.

of Israel. W103 is bonded into the wall of the complex (W120s), and
it seems that they are contemporary. Three different occupation levels
were found in this unit:
1. In the late phase the habitation level in the room consisted of
tamped earth, and a large holemouth jar and animal bones were
found on it in situ.
2. In an earlier occupation phase of the building the southern part
was paved with flagstones (L162 in Fig. 12.9). No distinct habita-
tion level of this phase was discerned in the northern part of the
building.
3. In the earliest phase of the building a few pottery sherds and flint
items were found on the level of the natural bedrock (this phase is
possibly contemporary with the early phase [2]).
This is the only place in Complex 1 where different habitation levels
were identified within the same unit. This unit, which was probably
roofed, may have functioned as a sleeping and storage room in the
complex.
Unit 11 (Figs. 12.8, 12.10)

This unit consists of the remains of a room (Walls 146, 146n) at least
10 m wide: its exact width is not known, as its eastern wall did not
survive. This is an elliptical, ‘sausage-shaped’ residential unit, which is
more characteristic of EB Ia in the north of Israel. It is abutted from
the south by the courtyard’s peripheral wall (W120s), which postdates
the first construction phase of the unit (Fig. 12.8). The courtyard’s pe-
ripheral wall (W120e) abuts this unit from the east near the entrance
to Complex 1. It seems that at first an elliptical structure stood there,
which went out of use at some point, and whose eastern walls were dis-
mantled when the courtyard wall was constructed (the western wall of
the building became part of the courtyard wall). The outline of the early
building probably ran the length of the bedrock terrace in the centre of
Complex 1, and Wall Stump 170 is probably part of this eastern wall.
For some reason the southern part of W146 was not dismantled. This
apparently served as a kind of niche or partition, the function of which
is unclear, on the bedrock terrace inside the complex.
The artifacts from this unit found on the bedrock belong to the lat-
est use phase of the unit, during the EB Ib, when it was part of the
courtyard in the western part of Complex 1. No datable material was
found that can be associated with the earlier phase of this unit. The
354 chapter twelve
walls in this unit were preserved to a height of more than 1 m (up to

seven courses in some places), and the large quantity of stone collapse
attests that the walls, which rose to an even greater height, were built of
stone to their entire height. The builders cut deep foundation trenches
in the chalk bedrock for the walls. It should be noted that this construc-
tion method is very unusual for masonry of the EB I in the southern
Levant. It was probably used because of the soft easily carved rock at
the site. The north-western part of Wall 146n collapsed (Fig. 12.10),
and the foundation trench (L171) was exposed to a depth of at least 30
cm. The habitation level in Unit 11 was more than a metre lower than
the habitation level in Alley 138 to its west (Section in Fig. 12.7). Unit
11 is an example of two different architectural phases. These suggest an
earlier stratum whose remains have not yet been exposed in the rest of
the excavation areas.
Unit 12 (Figs. 12.9, 12.11–13)

This unit consists of the remains of a round building (W122) about 2.5
m in diameter, which was probably used for storage (silo). It was located
Figure 12.8. Area G: General view from the west (Winter of 2007, between the
two excavation seasons).
in a depression in the natural bedrock south of the high terrace of Unit

11 and west of the covered room of Unit 10 (Location in Fig. 12.8). The
structure, which was not hewn into the bedrock, but was erected on the
surface level, was preserved to a height of 1.2 m (seven stone courses),
and it seems that it was built of stone to its entire height. An opening
was located in its northern part (Fig. 12.11), and its bottom was filled
with an accumulation of more than 5 cm of powdered charcoal (L153),
indicating that it contained organic material (Fig. 12.13 – left, and sec-
tion in Fig. 12.12). When the organic material was cleared away two
shallow cup-marks were found on the bedrock floor (L172; on the right
in Fig. 12.13). It is unclear whether they were used together with the
round building, or they predate it.
Unit 13 (Fig. 12.14)

This unit consists of the remains of a round structure (W159) 50 cm in
diameter, reminiscent of Unit 12, which was apparently also used for
storage. It was built in a depression in the natural bedrock next to the
wall of the complex (W120e), in its north-eastern part. The structure
was only preserved to a height of two stone courses. Its bottom and
Figure 12.9. Area G: General view of the southern part of the excavation area,
including Units 10 and 12 and part of the area between them.
356 chapter twelve
walls were set on the natural chalk bedrock.
Courtyard (Fig. 12.8)

A few architectural elements were found in the open area between the
different units: W170, which was probably part of the elliptical struc-
ture of Unit 11, Wall Stump 187 in the northern part of Complex 1,
and the entrance to the complex (see the section below on the wall of
the complex). The courtyard constitutes more than 75% of the area
of Complex 1, and probably served a number of purposes, including
storage, animal shelter, and household activities. The courtyard did not
have a roof, and the habitation level in it was situated on the natural
chalk bedrock. Certain areas in the courtyard were lower than others,
but unlike at the time when the walls of the courtyard were prepared,
there is no evidence that the bedrock level was prepared at all. There
were no in situ finds in this courtyard: thus no specific utilization areas
were noted.
The Complex/courtyard wall (Figs. 12.8, 12.10, 12.15)

This wall’s main purpose was to separate the public areas (alleys,
Figure 12.10. Area G: Unit 11. Note the differences in elevation between the
alley (L138) and the habitation level (L139), and the preservation of the walls
to a height of approximately 1 m.
Figure 12.11. Area G: Unit 12 – entrance to the silo during and after
excavation.
C
-140.40
C'
W122
L101
-141.00
W122
Black Ash
Red Soil
-141.60 L153 Dark-Brown Soil
0 1m
Figure 12.12. Area G: Section C-C’ – inside the silo in Unit 12.
Figure 12.13. Area G: Note the organic material on the bottom of the silo (to
the left) and the shallow cup-marks in the chalk bedrock (to the right).
358 chapter twelve
squares and open spaces) from the individual holdings (private spaces
and property) of the residents of Complex 1. The wall was built iden-
tically to the walls of the site: two rows of medium-sized fieldstones,
and fill consisting of smaller stones with mud between them. The wall
was 70–90 cm thick, and was preserved to a maximum height of seven
courses. The original height of the wall is not known, but it presumably
stood to a height of at least 1 m above the level of the alleys (This sup-
position stems from the extent of the stone collapse in the vicinity of
the walls, and from a comparison with the height of animal corrals in
the Bedouin camps in the vicinity of the site today).3 Its general outline
was curved, and it had one perpendicular corner for which there is no
structural explanation. The wall was not built as a single homogeneous
unit; rather it was a collection of segments that are described below.
1. W120s. The southern and south-western section of the wall was
well preserved. Its western part abutted W146. W108, which was
later than the first construction phase of the complex, abutted it
on the outside.
2. W146 and W146n. The western and north-western section of the
wall was also well-preserved. This segment was part of Unit 11
(see above), a relatively early phase in the site. In Square J13 the
wall had collapsed from its foundation trench, which was hewn
into the chalk bedrock, and had toppled into Unit 11.
3. W120e. The north-eastern section of the wall was rather poorly
preserved, and most of it did not survive above the height of a
single course. In the area of L134 (the alley separating Complex 1
from Complex 2) the main part of the wall had collapsed into the
alley. This wall apparently abutted W146n from the east. It was in
this part of the wall that the outer opening to Complex 1 and the
stone socket were located.
Complex 2 (Fig. 12.6)

These are the remains of a unit that was probably another residential
complex. It extends east of Complex 1, and its function is still unclear.
It is composed of a western wall (W132), which forms a corner with a
northern wall (W158). W132 abuts W10 in the south-eastern part of
the building. The limited area that was excavated, probably an open
courtyard, contained a very large quantity of artifacts found in situ on
the surface of the bedrock, large storage vessels in particular.
3
This height prevents the sheep or cattle escaping from the animal pen.
Figure 12.14. Area G: The silo in Unit 13.
Figure 12.15. Area G: The alley between Complex 1 and Complex

6. Note the collapsed wall (W146n), east of its foundation trench,
which is hewn into the chalk bedrock.
360 chapter twelve
Alley and courtyard between Complex 1 and Complex 2

An alley (L131, 134, 151) and a closed courtyard (L106, 143) were ex-
posed in the area between Complex 1 and Complex 2. The level of the
alley was on the chalk bedrock, which was not levelled in this part of
the site (even though in the past the large depression in the middle of
the alley [L134] was probably filled with soil to level it). A large quantity
of stone collapse that was probably part of W120e, which had caved in,
was found in the alley. The alley continued south into a closed court-
yard bounded by W108 and W110. It seems that this closure occurred
sometime after the initial phase of Complex 1, because W108 abutted
W120s in the western corner of the courtyard. The stratigraphic con-
nection between W110, which delimits the courtyard from the south,
and Complex 2 is still unclear (Hence the question arises: Is the court-
yard earlier than Complex 2, or is it a closure that was made after Com-
plex 2 was built?).
Numerous non-in situ finds were recovered from the bedrock sur-
face. Noteworthy among them is a stone vessel, probably part of a lime-
stone tournette, which was found lying upside-down next to W110.
Figure 12.16. Area G: Reconstruction (drawn by Vera Damov).

Alleys between Complex 1 and Complex 3, and between Complex

1 and Complex 6 (Figs. 12.8, 12.15)
Alleys and part of the square (L138), which linked the different com-
plexes in this area, were excavated in the western part of Area G, between
Complex 1 and Complex 3, and between Complex 1 and Complex 6.
In every instance the living level was situated on the chalky bedrock.
It seems that sometimes the bedrock was prepared or levelled to some
extent in order to ease the traffic in the alleys, and included part of the
courtyard walls as foundation trenches (Fig. 12.15, in which W146n
had toppled from its foundation trench [L171] outward on to the chalk
bedrock of the alley [L144]).
The finds in the alleys included a few flint implements and ceramic
artifacts that were not in situ.
Area I
An area in the centre of the site, where the incline of the slope begins
(Location in Figs. 12.2–12.3, general plan in Fig. 12.17 and a general
section which shows the gradient of the slope in Fig. 12.5). So far only
90 m2 of this large area have been excavated in trial squares along the
eastern part of the site’s slope. The remains of five residential complexes
(Complexes 3–7) were found in various states of preservation. The ce-
ramic artifacts from Area I date to EB Ib (see below).
The various architectural units of Area I are described below.
Complex 3 (Figs. 12.17–12.18)

This is an irregular, elongated residential complex with a curved outline
that extends over about 220 m2. It is bordered in the west by Complex
4, in the north by Complex 6, and in the east by Complex 1. So far only
small areas have been excavated.
This complex, like the others, is divided into a covered building (in
the centre of the courtyard) and a vast open space. In all of the sections
of the excavation it became clear that the activity in the courtyard oc-
curred on the chalk bedrock; whereas in the covered area more than
one stratigraphic phase was noted.
In the north-western part of Complex 3 the wall (W300) of the com-
plex, the alley (L302) opposite Complex 4, and the courtyard surface
(L304) on the bedrock inside Complex 4 (Square H16) were excavated.
Here too, a noticeable difference in elevations was observed between
the levels of the alleys and the lower residential complexes (Fig. 12.18).
19 19
A
-133.41
# L309
W -133.76
L3
31 -133.81 COM 5
0
08
-133.95
18 -134.55 # 18
-134.66
-135.53
W
L307
31
-135.04 1
-134.38
COM 4
17 17
-135.19
Figure 12.17. Plan of Area I.

-138.35 -136.56 -136.55
-137.20 -135.47
W3
W300
L322 01 L303 L318
# -136.13
-136.52
-140.56 L302 -136.06
L323
W31
-140.04 -138.25 -13 -136.68
16 7.2 -135.63 16
-138.64 9
L325 # -137.13 -136.16
Rock
-138.70
-141.08 L305
6
-141.03 -136.83
-137.16
# -137.35
W3
L324 L317 L319
y
-137.83 -136.60
-141.00 -138.00 -136.73
L304
06
-139.56 -138.00 -136.94 Stone
-138.30 -136.75
W326 -137.25 -136.88
-138.05 Slides
Sl
W pe
W
30
o
0
321
COM 3 COM 6
15 15
13
-140.56 -137.34 -139.04

-139.45
W3
-139.95
L314
L312 -137.8 -139.54
-140.11 -140.27 -139.68 -137.90
W -139.83 -139.00 -138.53 -139.93
-140.69
32 -139.26
0 -138.00
-140.29
14 L315 14
-139.72 -139.14
-139.90 -138.47
-141.63 -139.90 L149 -140.85
B'
-137.07 # -139.12
-140.75 L130 L144
# # L138
-139.28 #
-139.27 W
-139.55 -139.45 -139.55 W146 14
L171 -139.73 7
W128 L127 COM 7
13 L148 -138.96 -139.30 -139.75 13
0s
#
-140.08 -139.25
0 5m 12 -139.35 L139
-139.32
W
W L129
-140.34
U11 L145 -139.75
146n
#
-139.91 L157
-140.20 -140.14 -140.25
D E F G H W122 I
L137 J L152
K L M N O P
20s
L101 L133
-140.27
L163
-140.51 -140.56 #
A few pottery sherds were found in situ on the surface of the bedrock;
noteworthy among them being a large clay stopper (Fig. 12.27: 12).
Portions of square (F16) were excavated south of this point in order
to understand the outline of the wall of the complex (W300). The wall
was exposed here, and occupation levels were revealed in an alley
(L322) and inside Complex 3 (L323).
South of this point another quarter square (D16) was excavated in
order to understand the course of the courtyard wall. This was identi-
fied in the western corner of the square, but its continuation from this
point on still remains unclear (particularly the connection with W320
– the eastern wall of the courtyard). In this section two complete hole-
mouth jars were found in situ, one of which was inside a hewn recess in
the chalk bedrock (L325; Fig. 12.24: 1–2). Another wall stump (W326)
was discovered, and near it was an in situ stone door socket.
Another trial square (F14, F15) was excavated in the south-eastern
part of Complex 3. Remains of a wall (W313) discovered here may have
been part of a large covered unit (together with an unnamed wall which
was located on the surface level to the north). The wall survived to a
height of one course only, which was higher than the level of the chalk
Figure 12.18. Area I, south – alley (L302) between Complex 3 and Complex 4.
364 chapter twelve
bedrock. Hence the artifacts on the bedrock level at this point predate
the construction phase of the wall: however, no changes were discerned
in the ceramic artifacts between these levels. In this region the wall of
the courtyard (W320) collapsed to the south, in the direction of the
natural slope.
Complex 4 (Figs. 12.17–12.18)

This is an elongated irregularly-shaped residential complex, the area
of which is unknown. It is bordered on the north by Complex 5, on
the north-east by Complex 6, and on the east by Complex 3. So far two
small sections of it have been excavated (in Squares H16, H18). The
complex is surrounded by courtyard walls (W301, W310) built identi-
cally to the other walls. The general outline of its walls is curved, but
there is a right-angled corner in its eastern part. The meagre ceramic
finds are similar to the artifacts which characterize the site.

Wall 311 is curved, and apparently belongs to another residential com-
plex that has not yet been studied, located on the slope of the site north
of Complex 4 and west of Complex 6. In a small section that was exca-
vated in Square H18 a wall (W311) was noted that was preserved to a
height of one course only. It had collapsed from its foundation trench
(L309), which was cut into the chalk bedrock.

Complex 6 is a very complicated residential area situated along the
slope of the spur, north of Complex 3, east of Complex 5, and north-
west of Complex 1. The area of the complex is not known for certain,
but it seems to be approximately 500 m2 (the largest complex at the
site). Numerous partition walls were observed on the surface level, but
without excavation it is difficult to estimate the exact area of the com-
plex and the nature of the internal units. The courtyard wall was clearly
identified along the surface level in the southern and eastern parts of
the complex, but its location in the north and west is insufficiently clear
(it seems that its northern outline extends across the edge of the cliff
above Wadi Fazael).
Two small sections of the complex were excavated: the first in Square
K13, where W147 was cleaned, and a small section of the bedrock sur-
face was exposed inside the square (L149); and the second in Square
I16, where two sections of walls (W316, W321) were excavated, as
well as three surfaces on the bedrock level between them. One surface
(L317) is a square located between this unit and Complexes 3 and 4, and
the other two (L318, L319) are habitation levels on the chalk bedrock,
whose function and location inside the complex are not understood.
This complex has only undergone preliminary study, and it requires
further investigation.

This complex consists of the remains of a wall on the other side of the
alley, south of Complex 6. Hence, there probably existed another com-
plex on the flat part of the spur, parallel to and north-east of Complex
1. Area H (see below) is probably part of this complex. Neither its area
nor its internal units are known.
Area H
This area extends over a single excavation square in the eastern part of
the site, towards the end of the spur, and above the Wadi Fazael escarp-
ment. It is possible that this area is part of Complex 7, but this supposi-
tion requires further study. In the flat area on the site in the eastern
part of the spur there were probably four adjacent complexes (the three
Complexes, 1, 2, 7, are discussed above, and another one remains unin-
vestigated, east of Complex 7 and north of Complex 2 – compare with
the plan in Fig. 12.4).
Four wall sections were found in Area H (Figs. 12.19–12.20): W42 –
a courtyard wall almost 1 m thick that extends along a north-south axis,
and continues in a straight line for a further 10 m south of the excava-
tion square; W38 – a curved wall preserved to a height of two courses
above the habitation level to its south; W32 – a partial inner wall that
disappears in the southern part of the excavated area; and W43 – a
short section of wall in the centre of the square. The nature of this wall
is unclear, and it is not stratigraphically connected to the other known
walls.
Three other elements were discovered in the excavation (Figs.
12.19–12.20): a rock-hewn installation in the north-eastern corner of
the square (L41); a 30 cm-deep refuse pit located between W42 and
W43 with a plethora of ceramic material, and a few Canaanean sickle
blades within; and habitation Level L44, apparently an inner courtyard
in the centre of the square, which includes a tamped soil surface that
abuts the surrounding walls. A large ammonite fossil was found sunken
366 chapter twelve
Figure 12.19. Plan of Area H.
Figure 12.20. General view of Area H, looking north.

as part of the living surface of the courtyard, probably as a decorative

element, and two very small hearths were located close by.
These elements reinforce the impression that Area H is part of an
inner courtyard of a residential unit.
Area F
This area was excavated because a building was preserved on the surface
level, at the highest point of the site. In the excavation an oval building
(Figs. 12.21–12.22) 10 m2 in area was discovered. It was built of several
small and medium-sized stones in an entirely different manner from
the rest of the buildings and walls discovered at the site. No datable
diagnostic material was found.
The building was partitioned into two equal parts. The remains of
another wall (W8), the nature of which is unclear, were located to its
north.
No distinct habitation levels were identified in the building: these
were probably eroded away because of their proximity to the surface
L3
W8
L22
-130.00
-130.30
-130.50 L2
L12
L19 -130.54
L4
L14
W
W21
6
16
W
-130.70
L18 L1
-130.52
-130.64
W
17
L15 W20 W5
-130.36 -130.57
-130.58 -130.67
0 2
m
Figure 12.21. Plan of Area F.

368 chapter twelve
Figure 12.22. General view of Area F, looking north-west.
level (the depth of the excavation inside the structure to the base of the
stone course of the walls did not exceed 12 cm).
This structure is different from the rest of the structures at the site,
and it apparently does not belong to the EB I settlement; instead it
should be ascribed to another short episode apparently later than the
main settlement phase at the site.
General Architectural Conclusions

The construction of irregularly-shaped residential complexes is one of
features that are characteristic of the site. These consist of large ellip-
tical courtyards that contain one or more covered rooms and a large
open area (Fig. 12.4). To date, seven complexes of this kind have been
identified, and it seems that there are probably a total of 10 to 12. Thus
approximately 12 nuclear families resided there; that is to say, between
80 and 100 inhabitants. The complexes occur in different shapes and
sizes; the smallest being about 150 m2, and the largest about 500 m2 (its
full extent has still not been uncovered).
Alleys between 1 and 2 m wide separate the residential complexes
from one another. This width was sufficient for two people or animals
(e.g., a donkey carrying baskets, or a file of sheep or goats) to move
easily between the residential units. A main alley, from which second-
ary alleys branch off between the courtyards, runs through the centre
of the spur. The floor of the alley is the natural chalk bedrock, which is
pervious to water, and very effective in draining rainwater and sewage.
A similar phenomenon of erecting complexes with squares and alleys
between them dating to the EB Ib was found in the salvage excavations
conducted by the Israel Antiquities Authority in Stratum III at Ash-
kelon Barnea (Golani 2008).
It is difficult to know at this point in the research whether the settle-
ment was planned in advance, or whether the complexes were built one
after the other, and the alleys and squares were a result of the few vacant
areas that remained between them.
One of the interesting aspects of the site is that the occupation levels
were for the most part situated on the chalk bedrock that makes up the
spur. Some vessels were found in situ on that level, and it seems that
it was customary for the inhabitants of the site to clear the earlier oc-
cupation levels down to the bedrock. The artifacts found are therefore
mostly attributed to the latest habitation phase at the site – EB Ib.
The basic residential complex at Sheikh Diab 2 includes some typi-
cal principal elements: a roofed room or rooms: square rooms with
rounded corners, which are characteristic of EB Ib in the north of Israel
and earlier phases in the EB I of the Jordan Valley (e.g., at Tell Um
Hammad in EB Ia, Helms et al. 1992: figs. 38–39). In an earlier phase
at the site, one unit was elliptical, similar to units found at sites such
as Yiftah'el (Braun 1997) which typify northern Israel during the EB
Ia. The rooms have an average width of about 4 m and are 5–6 m long.
No internal partitions were identified inside the rooms. The room was
probably reserved for sleeping and storage, and occasionally for food
preparation, while most of the other household activities were con-
ducted outside in the courtyard.
The courtyards range in size between 115 m2 and 350 m2, and are
a very important component of the residential complex. In Area G,
the ratio between the areas of the roofed unit and the courtyard is 1:9,
which underscores the centrality of the courtyard in household activity.
Although only a small group of vessels were found in situ on the
rocky surface of the courtyards, the large size of the courtyards leads
us to conclude that they were host to many activities, including animal
shelter. The courtyards were floored with the natural chalk bedrock.
They contained silos, as well as large ceramic containers (pithoi, kraters
and jars) that were probably used by the household for storage. The dif-
ferent sizes of the courtyards at the site and their storage space indicate
370 chapter twelve
a society in which different people utilized different areas. This may

imply that some people had more property than others, or at least a
position or way of life that required the use of a larger area.
The openings of the residential complexes and the inner entrances
to the habitation units were not well preserved. However, in Complex
1 there is an external opening, together with its stone socket, that sepa-
rated the courtyard of the complex from the alley outside.
The walls at Sheikh Diab 2 are built of two rows of medium-sized
fieldstones with a fill of smaller stones and mud between them (the
walls are 70–90 cm thick). Most of the walls are curved rather than
straight (especially the outer walls of the courtyards of the residential
complexes), but there is at least one 90° corner in each complex. No
structural reason was found for leaving a right-angled corner like this,
nor does it stem from topographical considerations. The walls were
preserved to a height of up to six courses on the inner face of the resi-
dential complexes (more than 1 m; e.g., Fig. 12.10), and it seems that
in light of the large amount of stone collapse encountered during the
excavation they were built of stone to their entire height. The thickness
of the walls indicates that the buildings were only a single storey high.
Some of the wall foundation trenches were hewn into the chalk bed-
rock (Fig. 12.15). It seems that on the outside the walls did not stand
to a great height (on the outside, in the direction of the alleys, the walls
survived to a height of 50 cm). They were probably just a raised base
on which organic roofing material (brambles or a wooden hedge) was
placed, as has been observed by the author in many instances in mod-
ern Bedouin camps in the Jordan Valley (Bar 2008: fig. 13.4.7).
times together with crushed limestone, while certain parts that were
apparently used as storage areas or for cooking/work were paved with
stone. No artificial pavement was identified in the courtyard, and it
seems that the natural bedrock served as the floor there.
There is no doubt that the habitation units in the complexes that
were excavated were covered; however, neither remains of organic ma-
terial used as roofing, nor architectural remains for supporting a roof
were found. The fact that the width of the residential rooms is almost
uniform (slightly less than 4 m) seems to suggest a form of roofing that
utilized beams made of organic material, probably wood.
Only a handful of EB I sites in the lower Jordan Valley have been
sufficiently excavated to allow for a comparison of their architectural
features and settlement patterns with those of Sheikh Diab 2. These
include Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992), Jericho (Kenyon and

Holland 1982), Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux 1949, 1951; de Vaux
and Steve 1948), Tel Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006; Greenberg et al. 2006),
Bab edh-Dhra' (Rast and Schaub 2003), Beth Shean (Mazar and Rotem
2009), Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996) and Tel Kitan (Eisenberg 1993).
Some of these include public structures (e.g., the Beth Shean public
building and the walls excavated at Tel Shalem), while others feature
domestic rural dwelling units (e.g., the Tel Kitan rural settlement and
the dwelling units of Beth Yerah). None, however, reveal the full layout
of a complete village such as at Sheikh Diab 2. While the architectural
features of the domestic structures during EB Ib share common traits,
such as average unit size, unit width, and the externally rounded cor-
ners of the rooms, none of the other EB sites display the unique traits
found at Sheikh Diab: very large courtyards in every complex, and their
unique spatial distribution throughout the entire site. It is possible that
other EB sites in the Jordan Valley exhibit similar traits, but the low
level of exposure (minimal strata excavation) at these sites precludes
their discovery. The similarities between Sheikh Diab 2 and Ashkelon
Barnea (Golani 2008) on the southern coast of Israel certainly reinforce
this possibility.

During the excavation, 7,190 pottery sherds 4 cm2 or larger were col-
lected and counted (Table 12.1). Only the diagnostic items were ex-
amined, primarily the rims. Of these, 360 items were identified. The
predominant kind of vessel is the holemouth jar (152 fragments, 42.2%
of the finds), followed by the jar (91 fragments, 25.3% of the finds), and
bowls (75 fragments, 20.8% of the finds). Also found were 18 pithoi
(5% of the finds), 17 amphoriskoi (4.7% of the finds), and 7 kraters (2%
of the finds).
From the standpoint of the surface treatment of the 7,190 sherds
that were counted, only 136 fragments, 1.9% of the finds, were slipped
(band slip on jars and amphoriskoi and red slip on bowls are quite pre-
dominant).
One hundred and forty-nine fragments (2.1% of the finds) had some
sort of plastic ornamentation. Noteworthy among these are the diago-
nal incising in the vicinity of the rim – 73 fragments (49% of the deco-
rated sherds), a thickened peripheral band on the body – 40 fragments
372 chapter twelve
(26.9%), and rope ornamentation (plastic) – 30 fragments (20%). A few

‘piecrust’ type decorations appear on the rims of jars and pithoi (3.4%),
and there are also round perforations made with a sharp instrument
(0.7%).
An examination of the types of handles suggests that the ledge han-
dle is the most common – 132 fragments (77.6% of the finds), followed
by the loop handle – 17 fragments (10%), knob handle – 9 fragments
(5.3%), lug handle – 7 fragments (4.1%), and high loop handle – 5 frag-
ments (3%).
Plas-
Hol- Other
Amph- Pit- Ledge tic
Area No. emouth Jar Bowl Krater han- Slip
oriskos hos handle deco-
jar dles
ration
G 4777 103 56 7 12 51 4 79 16
I 1490 35 23 3 3 17 3 40 14
H 923 14 12 7 3 7 13 8
Total 7190 152 91 17 18 75 7 132 38 136 149
Table 12.1. Ceramic statistics according to areas (numbers).
Typology
Bowls (Fig. 12.23)

The flat bowl with a curved side and inverted rim is the prevailing type
at the site (Fig. 12.23: 1–6). The rim diameters are quite uniform at
about 17 cm. These bowls are widespread in EB I in the Jordan Val-
ley (see accompanying table for Fig. 12.23).4 The deep hemispherical
bowl with an upright or slightly inverted rim is also common (Fig.
12.23: 7–9). The rim diameter varies between 14 and 27 cm. These too
are widespread throughout the EB I. Bowls of this sort with irregular
combing on their bases and sides were noted (Fig. 12.23: 1, 7). In addi-
tion, bowls appear that have gently curved sides and somewhat everted
rims (Fig. 12.23: 10), and an average diameter of 14 cm. These are not
widespread at the site, but they do occur in the EB I at other sites in the
Jordan Valley.
Types of bowls that exist in the assemblage, but rare at the site, are:
4
Parallels for each type appear in the accompanying tables for all of the plates. In
selecting the parallels priority was given to those that were discovered at excavated sites
with known stratigraphy throughout the Jordan Valley – Tell Um Hammad, Jericho,
Tell el-Far'ah (North), Tel Beth Yerah and Bab edh-Dhra'.
1. A large deep bowl with a thickened inverted rim (Fig. 12.23:

11–12), characteristic of the EB Ib.
2. A large deep bowl with a folded-rim with a channel: one such item
was found (Fig. 12.23: 13). A similar type appears in EB Ia at Tell
Um Hammad (Fig. 12.23).
3. A shallow flat bowl with a cut rim (Fig. 12.23: 14) and a rim diam-
eter of 30 cm.
4. A deep bowl with a thickened and cut rim (Fig. 12.23: 12, 15), and
a rim diameter of 37 cm. This type of bowl is common in EB Ia at
Tell Um Hammad.
5. A bowl with straight sides (Fig. 12.23: 16), characteristic of the
Chalcolithic period and continuing less frequently in the EB I.
6. A bowl with an everted rim and a decorative element consisting
of a tiny ledge handle which is inclined diagonally upward (Fig.
12.23: 17). This item was extremely well fired (similar to the me-
tallic items characteristic of the EB II).
The surfaces of the bowls are mainly red-slipped inside and outside.
There is no plastic decoration, and a very few of the bowls are deco-
rated with diagonal incisions made with a pointed instrument (the
most common decoration at the site, which appears mostly on hole-
mouth jars).
No. Locus Description Parallels

Light coloured clay, pale grey
core, grey and white inclusions,
1 142
red slip inside and outside, well
fired.
Red clay, pale grey core, white
2 142 inclusions, red slip inside and Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.6: 9–10),
outside, well fired. Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
fig. 211: 6–7); Jericho (Kenyon and
Light brown clay, pale grey Holland 1982: fig. 34: 17–18); Tell
core, white inclusions, red slip el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux 1949: fig.
3 142
inside and outside, well fired 1: 1; de Vaux and Steve 1948: fig. 5:
(metallic). 28); Beth Yerah (Greenberg et al.
Brown clay, grey core, white 2006: fig. 3.39: 1); 'En Esur (Yannai et
4 126
inclusions, well fired (metallic). al. 2006: fig. 4.52: 22)
Dark clay, pale grey core,
5 145
numerous white inclusions.
Reddish clay and core, white
6 139
and brown inclusions.
374 chapter twelve

Light brown clay, pale grey Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.6: 11),
core, a few white inclusions, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
7 35
red slip inside and outside, fig. 211: 9–12); Jericho (Kenyon and
very well fired (metallic). Holland 1982: fig. 34: 9–13); Tell el-
Brown clay, pale grey core, Far'ah (North) (de Vaux 1949: fig. 1:
8 104 4); Bab edh-Dhra' (Rast and Schaub
white inclusions.
2003: fig. 7.3: 5–6); Beth Yerah
Brown clay, pale grey core, (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.12: 2, 25–26);
9 139 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.33:
white and grey inclusions.
11–15)
Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
figs. 211: 24–26; 214: 3–4); Jericho
(Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 35:
Brown clay, pale grey core,
8); Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux
10 34 white inclusions, remains of
1949: fig. 1: 2); Bab edh-Dhra' (Rast
soot outside and inside.
and Schaub 2003: fig. 7.3: 4); 'En
Esur (Yannai et al. 2006, fig: 4.33: 16,
20–23)
Brown clay, pale grey core, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
11 156
white inclusions. fig. 232: 7); Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 35: 22); Khirbet
Light brown clay, black core, et-Tuwal (Eisenberg 1998: fig. 3:
12 323 white and grey inclusions 1–2); 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
(calcite). 4.54: 3)
Reddish clay, grey core, white Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
13 35 inclusions (quartz), remains 1992: fig. 223: 12) - not in the Um
of soot. Hammad style
Brown clay, light grey core, fig. 212: 24); Jericho (Kenyon and
14 144
white inclusions. Holland 1982: fig. 35: 2); 'En Esur
(Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.33: 25)
figs. 212: 18–19; 232: 2); Jericho
Reddish brown clay, pale grey
15 103 (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 35:
core, white inclusions.
16); 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
4.32: 29–30)
Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.6: 1–2,
Light green clay, pale grey core, 4), Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
16 33
poorly fired. 1992: fig. 231: 2); 'En Esur (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4.75: 2)
Reddish brown clay, reddish
brown core, white and red
17 139 inclusions, dark red slip inside
and outside, very well fired
(metallic).

Figure 12.23. Bowls.

376 chapter twelve

The holemouth jar is the most common type of vessel at the site. The
incised diagonal decoration on the rim is prevalent, and appears on
more than half of the holemouth jars. Nine main types were found:
1. Holemouth jar with a flat base, a barrel-shaped body and an
inverted horizontal rim. Two complete holemouth jars were
discovered in Area I (Fig. 12.24: 1–2), 20 and 30 cm in diameter
respectively. No parallels were found in the Jordan Valley.
2. Holemouth jar with a flat base, barrel-shaped body and a round
folded rim with a ridge below it. A complete holemouth jar was
discovered in Area G (Fig. 12.24: 3). It is 20 cm in diameter, and
its morphology is characteristic of EB Ib. The jar is decorated in
the ‘splash and drip paint’ style, which is considered more typical
of the Chalcolithic and the EB Ia in the region. The jar was found
in situ (L104), and is probably one of the latest appearances of this
style in the EB I in the Jordan Valley.
3. Holemouth jar with a ridge (Fig. 12.24: 4–5) and a diameter be-
tween 14 and 33 cm. It occurs in all phases of the EB I.
4. Large holemouth jar with an inverted rim with a horizontal chan-
nel (Fig. 12.24: 6–8) and an average diameter of 35 cm. It appears
in the EB I in the Jordan Valley. Most of these vessels are deco-
rated with diagonal incisions on the rim.
5. Large holemouth jar with a plain, slightly inverted rim (Fig. 12.24:
9–10) and an average diameter of 30 cm. Most are decorated with
diagonal incisions on the rim. This type of vessel occurs in the EB
Ia at Tell Um Hammad.
6. Holemouth jar with a thickened and inverted rim (Fig. 12.24: 11,
15), with diameter between 14 and 35 cm. The vessel is sometimes
decorated with diagonal incisions on the rim. It is common in the
EB I within the Jordan Valley.
7. Holemouth jar with a plain or round rim (Fig. 12.24: 16) and an
average diameter of 20 cm. Only small fragments of this type of
vessel were found, and it is probably a smaller sub-type of Type 5.
8. Small narrow holemouth jar with a thickened and inverted rim
(Fig. 12.24: 17) and an average diameter of 14 cm. It is red-slipped
outside and inside. The vessel is not common at the site; however,
it does occur in the Jordan Valley sites throughout the EB I.
9. Large coarse holemouth jar with a narrow body and a thickened
rim turned slightly outward (Fig. 12.24: 18). It is 22 cm in diam-
eter and decorated with diagonal incisions. The vessel is common
in the Jordan Valley in the EB I.

Brown clay and core, Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.8: 2, 13),
numerous white and grey Beth Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006: fig.
1 325
inclusions, poorly fired, 8.46: 3); Khirbet et-Tuwal (Eisenberg
remains of soot on outside. 1998: fig. 3: 13) – on these items the
Brown clay and core, white rim is not as deep as the examples
2 325 and grey inclusions, remains from Sheikh Diab 2; 'En Esur (Yannai
of soot. et al. 2006: fig. 4.46: 5)
Light-coloured (cream) clay,
pale grey core, numerous
black white and grey Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
3 104 inclusions, poorly fired, dark fig. 161: 1–3); Jericho (Kenyon and
red slip on outside of upper Holland 1982; fig. 40: 25)
part of vessel (including paint
runs on sides).
Light-coloured clay, pale red
4 162 core, grey inclusions, red slip Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
on outside. figs. 147: 3–4; 154: 3; 159: 1); Jericho
Reddish brown clay, (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 39:
brown core, black and grey 25); 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
5 34 4.65: 10)
inclusions, well fired, remains
of soot.
Reddish brown clay, black
core, white inclusions, well
6 302
fired, remains of soot on Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.8: 8–9),
outside. Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
Light brown clay, pale grey figs. 148: 10–11; 149); Jericho (Kenyon
7 119 core, white inclusions, well and Holland 1982: fig. 40: 8–10); Beth
fired. Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006: fig. 5.75:
Light brown clay, pale 5)
8 119 grey core, white and grey
inclusions, well fired.
Brown clay and core, white
9 35 and grey inclusions, remains Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.8: 11), Tell
of soot. Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: fig.
Brown clay and core, white 146: 3); Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig.
10 35 and grey inclusions, remains 2.13: 1)
of soot.
378 chapter twelve

Brown clay, pale grey core,
white and grey inclusions,
11 35
remains of soot on the
outside.
Light-coloured clay, reddish Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.8: 3), Tell
12 104 brown core, white and grey Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: figs.
inclusions, well fired. 147: 6; 167: 6); Jericho (Kenyon and
Light-coloured (cream) clay, Holland 1982: fig. 33: 23); Beth Yerah
grey core, white, grey and (Greenberg et al. 2006: fig. 5.26: 5);
13 139 glittering inclusions, poorly Tell el-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig.
fired, remains of slip on 11: 3–4); Khirbet et-Tuwal (Eisenberg
outside. 1998: fig. 4: 5); 'En Esur (Yannai et al.
Light-coloured clay and core, 2006: fig. 4.56: 3–4, 10–11)
14 304 grey inclusions, poorly fired,
remains of soot on outside.
Brown clay and core, grey and
15 35
black inclusions.
Light brown clay, light-
figs. 145: 11; 168: 6; 172: 8); Jericho
coloured core, white, grey and
16 140 (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 39: 4,
glittering inclusions, poorly
15); Beth Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006:
fired.
fig. 3.39: 4)
Light-coloured (cream) clay, figs. 146: 6; 168: 3); Jericho (Kenyon
grey core, white, grey and and Holland 1982: fig. 39: 18); Beth
17 139
glittering inclusions, remains Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006: figs. 5.75:
of red slip on outside. 1; 7.26: 1); 'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006:
fig. 4.56: 8)
figs. 147: 8; 169: 7); Jericho (Kenyon
and Holland 1982: fig. 40: 6); Beth
Reddish clay, brown core, Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006: fig. 3.35:
18 149 white, grey and glittering 10; Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 23); Tell
inclusions, well fired. el-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig. 11: 1);
Beth Shean (Braun 2004: fig. 3.11: 8);
'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.47:
4)


380 chapter twelve
Figure 12.24. (continued) Holemouth jars.
Jars, amphoriskoi and pithoi (Figs 12.25–12.26)

The jar is the second most common type of vessel at the site. In most
instances they are undecorated: however, occasionally there are those
that are red-slipped and band slipped or treated with diagonal inci-
sions. The two most frequent types are the jar with an acutely flared rim
(Fig. 12.25: 1–6) and the jar with an inverted rim (Fig. 12.25: 11–12). In
both cases these are medium-sized jars with a rim diameter of 12 to 18
cm. Most are undecorated; however, some have a red slip on the outside
(and even more rarely on the inside, e.g., Fig. 12.25: 6). Other less com-
mon decorations include diagonal incisions and a wavy stripe below
the rim. These types are widespread in the Jordan Valley throughout
the EB I (see table accompanying Fig. 12.25) and also continue into the
EB II.
Less common is the jar/jug with high loop handles which rise above
the rim. This is different from and larger than the types that are charac-
teristic of burials in Jericho and Tell el-Far'ah (North). It has an average
diameter of 10 cm, and the handles are not much higher than the rim.
Another type (Fig. 12.26: 5) found whole in Area G, is barrel-shaped,
with a long neck tapering toward the rim. Most of the rims were found
broken, but it seems that it belongs to the type that is bent outward
(presumed diameter 12 cm). The jar is decorated with a delicate plastic
ornamentation and diagonal incisions resembling rope. There are di-
agonal incisions on the inside of the rim, and there are also two handles
located close together. They are of a type that is unknown in the EB,
and even though they were found broken, it is clear that they were bent
upward similarly to the basket handles of later periods. The vessel’s
uniqueness is also evidenced in the quality of its firing and the excellent
levigation of the clay, unlike the relatively coarse vessels of the site. No
whole parallels of this jar were found, except for a rim with a similar
profile that was discovered at Tell Um Hammad.
Amphoriskoi (Fig. 12.25: 7–8) are not particularly common at the
site. The types that were found are characterized by a red slip on the
outside and an S-shaped profile. They range in size from 5 to 8 cm.
Two kinds of pithoi were found. The most common one has a thick-
ened rim that resembles a circumferential ring (Fig. 12.26: 1–4), and
an average diameter of 25 cm. A complete pithos was found in Area
G (Fig. 12.26: 1) whose dimensions are: rim and base diameter 26 cm,
height 70 cm and maximum body diameter 55 cm. Most of the pithoi
are undecorated, with the exception of one item (Fig. 12.26: 2), red-
slipped on the outside (at least on the upper part which was preserved).
No whole parallels were found for this type in the Jordan Valley, and a
few similar rims were found at Tel Beth Yerah in the EB Ia.
Another pithos (Fig. 12.25: 13) with a long slightly everted neck and
an everted rim was also discovered at the site. It has an average rim
diameter of 25 cm, and on one of the items there is a plastic rope-like
decoration in the vicinity of the neck where it connects to the body
of the vessel. This type of pithos is common in the Jordan Valley sites
throughout the EB I.
A round ceramic object 22 cm in diameter was also found, probably
used as a stopper for a jar (Fig. 12.27: 12). This object was in second-
ary use, and it seems that it was originally the base of a pithos, and its
edges were rounded and smoothed when it was adapted as a stopper.
No other stoppers were found, and it can reasonably be assumed that
vessels were sealed using other kinds of stoppers made of organic mate-
rial (e.g. wood).
382 chapter twelve

Brown clay, light brown core,
1 140
grey and white inclusions.
Brown clay, light grey core,
2 139
red and brown inclusions.
Reddish brown clay, light-
3 304 coloured core, grey inclusions, Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.7: 3,
red slip on outside. 5–6), Tell Um Hammad (Helms et
al. 1992: figs. 183: 4; 184: 1; 194:
Very light grey clay, pale 2; 198; 199); Jericho (Kenyon and
grey core, white and grey Holland 1982: fig. 38: 23); Beth Yerah
4 162
inclusions (quartz and calcite), (Greenberg et al. 2006: figs. 4.3: 9;
remains of soot on outside. 20: 12; Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 8); Tell
Coarse light-coloured clay, el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux 1949: fig.
5 162 light-coloured core, numerous 13: 19; de Vaux 1951: fig. 4: 4); Tell
white and grey inclusions. el-Shuna (Contenson 1960: fig. 9: 9)
Reddish brown clay, black
core, grey and white
6 35 inclusions, red slip on outside,
red slip on inside of rim,
Light brown clay and core, Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
7 104 white and grey inclusions, red fig. 193: 12–14, 17); Jericho (Kenyon
slip on outside. and Holland 1982: fig. 38: 27); Tell el-
Red clay and core, white and Far'ah (North) (de Vaux 1949: fig. 1:
8 126 black inclusions, red slip on 23); Bab edh-Dhra' (Rast and Schaub
outside. 2003: fig. 5.1: 12)
Light brown clay and Jericho – particularly in the tombs
9 35 core, white black and red (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig. 47:
inclusions, red slip on outside. 10); Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de Vaux
1949: fig. 1: 22); Beth Shean (Braun
Light brown clay and core, 2004: fig. 3.14: 2); 'En Esur (Yannai et
10 139
white and black inclusions. al. 2006: fig. 4.41: 2)
Light brown clay, pale grey Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.7: 2), Tell
11 132
core, red and white inclusions. Um Hammad (Helms et al. 1992: figs.
174: 8; 176: 1; 182: 1); Jericho (Kenyon
and Holland 1982: fig. 37: 4, 10, 17);
Beth Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006:
Reddish brown clay, figs. 5.76: 5–6; 7.22: 6–7; Getzov 2006:
12 33 light-coloured core, white fig. 2.15: 1); Tell el-Far'ah (North) (de
inclusions. Vaux 1949: fig. 13: 20; de Vaux 1951:
fig. 4: 6); Khirbet et-Tuwal (Eisenberg
1998: fig. 3: 11); 'En Esur (Yannai et al.
2006: fig. 4.37: 18–20)
Reddish brown clay, pale grey figs. 181: 2; 196: 1,5); Jericho (Kenyon
13 162 core, white inclusions, well and Holland 1982: figs. 37: 27; 38: 3);
fired. Beth Yerah (Greenberg et al. 2006:
figs. 4.3: 11; 8.48: 3)

Figure 12.25. Jars.

384 chapter twelve

Reddish brown clay, light grey core,
1 142
white and grey inclusions, poorly fired.
Light brown clay, black core, white, Fazael 4 (Chapter 13: Fig. 13.7:
2 142 red and grey inclusions, red slip on 10–12). Certain similarity
outside. also to items from Beth Yerah
Reddish light brown clay, light grey (Greenberg et al. 2006: figs.
3 39 core, white and grey inclusions, well 3.39: 7; 7.24: 11; Getzov 2006:
fired. fig. 2.16: 7–8)
Light brown clay, black core, white and
4 31
grey inclusions, poorly fired.
Similar to items from Tel Um
Hammad (Helms et al. 1992:
Light-coloured clay, light grey core,
fig. 178: 6); Tell el-Shuna
5 142 white inclusions, well fired, remains of
(Contenson 1960: fig. 12: 6);
soot on outside.
'En Esur (Yannai et al. 2006:
fig. 4.39: 8, 16)
Light-coloured clay in core, white and
6 312
grey inclusions, band slip on outside.
Pale yellowish clay, light brown core,
7 142 white and grey inclusions, well fired,
Handles (Fig. 12.27)

Smooth and wavy ledge handles are common at the site, and can be
divided into a number of secondary types:
1. Ledge handle with thumb impressions (Fig. 12.27: 1–2, 8) – the
most common decorated handle at the site. Most have thumb or
indented marks across the entire width of the handle, or there are
thumb impressions on part of the handle. Both straight and wavy
handles of this sort occur in the assemblage.
2. Smooth ledge handle (Fig. 12.27: 3, 7) – plain and undecorated.
They occur very frequently in different sizes. In one instance (a
small handle, probably part of a red-slipped amphoriskos) the
handle is red-slipped.
3. Handle with a shell-like decoration (Fig. 12.27: 4) – a wavy ledge
handle decorated in the form of an open shell. It is uncommon at
the site and in the southern Levant during the EB. It attests to a
high level of design on the part of the potter.
Figure 12.26. Jars and pithoi.

386 chapter twelve
The ledge handles are common mainly on the amphoriskoi and

holemouth jars of the EB I.
Other types of handles found in the assemblage (Figs. 12.25: 9–10;
12.27: 5–6) include a few loop handles (mostly on jars), knob handles
(mostly on bowls), lug handles (mostly on amphoriskoi) and high loop
handles (on amphoriskoi).
Decoration (Fig. 12.27)

The most common decoration in the assemblage consists of diagonal
incised bands that occur mostly on holemouth jars (Fig. 12.24: 6–7,
9–12, 14–15), but also on jars (Figs. 12.25: 3;12.26: 5), and deep bowls
(Fig. 12.23: 15).
Also quite widespread is a thickened plastic band on the body of the
vessel. It is most common primarily on large storage vessels, particu-
larly the pithoi (Fig. 12.26: 1), and rarely appears on jars and holemouth
vessels. The plastic rope ornamentation also occurs on the body (Figs.
12.26: 5; 12.27: 9–10), or below the rim or the neck (Figs. 12.24: 5; 12.25:
11) on large storage vessels. Uncommon decorations include perfora-
tions (Fig. 12.27: 11) and irregular combing on the sides of bowls (Fig.
12.23: 1, 7).
Although the nether stone of a tournette was found in Area G, all
of the pottery found in the excavation was apparently handmade. An
important characteristic of a small portion of the assemblage is its
metallic-like quality.
The ceramic assemblage contains types that are characteristic of
both EB Ia and EB Ib in other sites in the lower Jordan Valley region
mentioned in the text. The appearance of band slip, unknown in the EB
Ia in the southern Levant, and the metallic-like quality of the firing on
a small number of the bowls (a technique which usually characterizes
EB II assemblages), reinforce the dating of the site to the EB Ib. The
absence of types which are characteristic of the end of this period, par-
ticularly the prominent types of the Um Hammad family (Chapter 8;
Bar 2010) and the carinated bowls (a possible prototype of the platter),
suggests an early date within the EB Ib. Such a date might also explain
the appearance of EB Ia types in the assemblage.
From the standpoint of form there are many similarities between
the site’s assemblage and the assemblage excavated at Fazael 4, on the
northern bank of Wadi Fazael (Chapter 12). At that site too, the use of
large storage jars is remarkable, as is the paucity of small vessels and
slipped vessels. To this we should add the extensive use of incised diag-
onal lines that decorated the holemouth jars in both of the assemblages.
The multitude of large storage vessels, the smaller number of small
vessels and the absence of special finds, may possibly indicate that the
site was abandoned in an orderly manner.
No. Locus Description

1 35 Reddish brown clay, light grey core, white inclusions, well fired.
2 303 Reddish brown clay, light-coloured core, brown and grey inclusions.
3 31 Light brown clay and core, white and grey inclusions, red slip on outside.
4 34 Light brown clay, pale grey core, white, grey and glittering inclusions.
5 139 Brown clay, light brown core, white and glittering inclusions, red slip on
outside.
6 139 Brown clay, black core, white and grey inclusions, red slip on outside.
7 112 Reddish brown clay, grey core, white and grey inclusions, well fired.
8 126 Light brown clay, pale grey core, grey and glittering inclusions, remains
of soot.
9 139 Light brown clay and core, grey (calcite), black and glittering inclusions.
10 139 Reddish brown clay, grey core, red and grey inclusions, red slip on
outside.
11 302 Reddish brown clay, light-coloured core, white and grey inclusions.
12 304 Light brown clay, great core, white, grey and glittering inclusions.
Figure 12.27. Handles and decoration.

388 chapter twelve
Figure 12.27. (continued) Handles and decoration.

Background
Only a portion of the site has been excavated so far, and the overall
number of flint artifacts, 982, is very small. This analysis is based on
combined figures of Areas G, H, and I, including Complex 1 in Area
G which was excavated completely. At this stage possible conclusions
should be considered as preliminary. Future excavations, analyses and
experiments could change proportions, perhaps leading to different
understandings.
The method introduced by the authors is not conventional, thus
challenging the reader to some extent, but it aims to shed new light on
important aspects of the community, such as mobility and economy.
Remarks on the Method

This study, preliminary as yet, is an initial attempt to introduce a new
attitude to the research of early tool assemblages. It aims to present the
relations between the tool kit and the way of life of the community ac-
cording to the relative share of various working activities carried out by
the population.
These relative shares are indicated by the percentages of tool groups
in the assemblage designated for specific working activities. These
groups include all tool categories present in the assemblage. As experi-
ments, use-wear analyses and a detailed discussion of the function of
tools were beyond the scope of this study, we had to rely on the mor-
phological similarity of flint tools to modern tools and the activities
designated to these, on the function of some tool types which had been
studied in detail, e.g. sickles (Rosen 1997: 44–60) and to some extent,
on personal experience and ethnographic observations of the Bedouin
herder-farmers of the Negev highlands. Even so, is it possible that some
other activities and procedures, still not fully understood, utilized flint
tools. Furthermore, certain tools could be used for a variety of tasks,
thus complicating the definition of activities. The methodology and the
definitions used in this study are identical to those used for the Chalco-
lithic site of 'Ein Hilu (Bar et al. 2008: 192–193).
5
390 chapter twelve
Remarks on Raw Materials and Sources

The sources of raw flint have not been studied in detail. Most artifacts
in all areas were of brown, good quality flint. The same type of flint was
used both for specialized sickle production and simple ad hoc tools.
Grey, beige, black and coarse–or fine-grained materials were relatively
scarce.
The Assemblage (Table 12.2, Figs. 12.28–30)

The assemblage from Area G contained cores, primary elements and all
other waste products of Group A (waste), all components of Group B
(debitage), and most of the tools of Group C (Table 12.2). In Group C,
handicraft tools were dominant (37.1%), most being notches and den-
ticulates. Sickles were abundant (29.0%), while scrapers (11.3%) and
cutting implements (11.3%) were rather scarce. Most tools of Group C,
except sickles, were of rather poor fabric, apparently prepared ad hoc
from prefabricated blanks of Group B whenever needed. In this area
Complex 1 was excavated completely; thus the number of flint artifacts
was considerably higher than in the other, only partly excavated areas.
The small assemblage from Area H originates from an excavation
limited in size, but it contained cores, primary elements and other
waste products of Group A, all components of Group B, and some of
the tools of Group C. Similarly to Area G, apart from the Canaanean
sickles (42.9% of Group C), the few tools found were of poor fabric.
No scrapers, and only a single cutting tool, were found. The extremely
low number of retouched tools does not allow drawing any conclusions
about the activities carried out in this area.
The rather small assemblage from Area I contained cores, primary
elements and other waste products of Group A, components of Group
B, and some of the tools of Group C. Again, most tools of this group
were of poor fabric. Special attention should be paid to the fact that no
cutting tools and only a single scraper were present, while sickles were
abundant (42.6%). The single bifacial core tool fragment found in Area
I was produced from black, high-quality flint with fine retouch and a
biconvex cross-section, and should be attributed to the Neolithic Age.
The assemblage of Area G contributes the main data to the analysis.
The summary presented in Table 12.2 demonstrates a common pattern
in all three areas, and allows a preliminary evaluation of the figures.
Handicraft (mean 34.9%) and reaping tools (mean 32.5%) are domi-
nant, while scrapers (mean 9.6%) and cutting implements (mean 9.6%)
are relatively scarce. The common pattern provides important indica-

tions on the economy and way of life at the site.
Sickle elements (Table 12.3)

With the beginning of the intensive exploitation of wild cereals in the
Natufian, and later during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods, of
cultivated varieties, sickles are a most important indicator for the econ-
omy of the society. Furthermore, changes in the technology of sickle
production and the morphology of the segments were inevitable, as
over time the variety of plants changed and cultivated areas grew, thus
requiring the development of more efficient tools. These changes are
important chronological indicators (Winter 2006).
All sickle elements present were of fine-grained, brown flint, pro-
duced by the Canaanean technology (Table 12.3). Some 18.5% of the
elements were fragments, and three pieces were backed; 37.0% of the
segments were reversed in the haft and had sheen on both cutting
edges, The retouch of the cutting edge was in most cases just a fine
serration, 44.4% on one cutting edge, 11.1% on both edges, and the rest
without retouch. No deeper denticulation was found, and 63.0% had
one truncation.
Total all
The flint Area G Area H Area I
areas Functional Group
assemblage
n % n % n % Total %
Group A – Waste
Core 14 2 7 23
Primary flake 43 6 20 69
C.t.e. 1 1 Waste to be discarded
Chunk 99 14 41 154 68.3%
Chip 374 9 41 424
Total group A 531 72.4 31 45.6 109 60.2 671 68.3
Group B – Debitage
Flake 104 18 53 175
Blade 29 8 5 42 Potential blanks for
modified tools
Bladelet 7 4 11 23.2%
Total group B 140 19.1 30 44.1 58 32.0 228 23.1
Group C – Tools
392 chapter twelve
Total all
The flint Area G Area H Area I
areas Functional Group
assemblage
n % n % n % Total %
Axe 1 1 Heavy woodwork:
Subtotal heavy felling, tilling
1 7.1 1 1.2 1.2%
woodwork
Burin 1 1 2
Notch 12 1 3 16 Handicrafts:
Denticulate 8 8 Preparation of artifacts
of perishable materials
Borer 1 1 such as wood, bone,
Awl 1 1 2 hides, and stone.
34.9%
Subtotal
23 37.1 2 28.6 4 28.6 29 34.9
handicraft
End scraper 2 2
Scraping:
Side scraper 4 1 5 Cleaning of hides, food
Fan scraper 1 1 preparation, cutting
9.6%
Subtotal scraping 7 11.3 1 7.1 8 9.6
Sickle segment 17 3 6 26
Reaping
Reaping knife 1 1
32.5%
Subtotal reaping 18 29.0 3 42.9 6 42.6 27 32.5
Retouched (or
2 2
backed) blade
Retouched (or
2 2
backed) flake
Retouched
3 3
fragment Cutting.
Backed knife 1 1 butchering,
dismembering, food
Subtotal cutting 7 11.3 1 14.3 8 9.6 preparation, carving
Truncation 2 1 3 9.6%
Undefined,
multiple, 5 1 1 7
trimmed
Subtotal general
7 11.3 1 14.3 2 14.3 10 12.0
purpose
Total group C 62 8.4 7 10.3 14 7.7 83 8.5 Total of tools
Total 733 100 68 100 181 99.9 982 100 8.5%
Table 12.2. Summary table of the flint assemblage.

SD 2 – Canaanean sickles and Area G Area H Area I Total

reaping knives n n n n %
Complete 15 3 4 22 81.5
Fragment 3 2 5 18.5
Total 18 3 6 27 100
Backing 3 3 11.1
Double truncation 1 1 3.7
Truncation + snap 12 2 3 17 63.0
Proximal end + snap 3 1 4 14.8
Distal end + snap 1 1 3.7
Retouched edge single 9 3 12 44.4
Retouched edge double 3 3 11.1
No sheen 1 1 3.7
Sheen single 10 2 4 16 59.3
Sheen double 7 1 2 10 37.0
Table 12.3. Sickle blades and Canaanean reaping knives.
Discussion
Table 12.2 presents the characteristics of the assemblage and provides
important indications for the economy of the society. Some important
points are listed below:
1. Cores and waste from the production of flakes, blades and tools
(except sickles) were present in all areas. The cores are poor, and
core-trimming elements are almost completely missing.
2. Most tools, except sickles, were prepared rather carelessly, indi-
cating the decline of flint technology with the onset of the Metal
Ages. Besides the decline in flint technology for general purposes,
the presence of the advanced Canaanean technology for sickle
and blade production is well attested.
3. Hunting implements and other tool types attributed to the Stone
Age, and celt tools such as axes (one exception, see Area I above)
abundant during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods, were not
found.
4. All sickle elements were on Canaanean blades, but to date no
cores for the production of these blades have been found on the
site.
394 chapter twelve
5. There were few scrapers (especially fan scrapers) and cutting

tools.
6. Handicraft tools and sickles were dominant. It should be men-
tioned that most tools in the handicraft functional group were
notches and denticulates. These tools are simple, easily prepared
whenever needed, and effective for wood and bone processing.
They point to a production of tools or other artifacts from perish-
able materials.
The presence of all three groups of flint artifacts and in reasonable rela-
tive percentages (Table 12.2 – A, B, C), provides evidence of a local in
situ flint industry, as opposed to sporadic exploitation of flint.
Canaanean technology needs specialization of the artisans and high
quality raw flint. It reached its peak during the EB, and was widely used
until the IB. Later, finds become rarer, and gradually disappear. Finally,
in the MB, it was replaced by the geometric sickle technology. As no
cores for Canaanean blades were present, it may be assumed that these
were produced at a still unknown location, maybe not at the site. Actu-
ally, the tools seem to originate from two different industries, a local,
ad hoc technology for tools intended for everyday use, and a specialized
Canaanean blade industry.
The share of the main activity groups in the assemblage (Table 12.2)
demonstrates the dominance of handicraft tools (34.9%) and reaping
tools (32.5%). Cutting tools (9.6%) and scraping tools (9.6%) indicate a
lesser scope of the activities carried out with these tools.
Despite the small sample, the importance of handicraft tools ap-
parently points to an established permanent settlement, and the high
proportion of sickles points to an economy based mainly on grain
farming. It also seems that tools serving for meat and hide processing
(cutting and scraping implements) played a lesser role, thus indicating
that herding was not the major contributor to the economy and the diet
of the population.
Figure 12.28. Sickle elements: Area G: 4 – Bilateral retouch and sheen,

truncated; 5 – Reaping knife, unilateral sheen; 6 – Unused; 7, 10 – Backed,
unilateral sheen; 8, 9 – Unilateral sheen; 11, 14 - Unilateral retouch, bilateral
sheen, truncated; 12, 13, 15 – Unilateral sheen, truncated; 16 – Bilateral sheen.
Area H: 2 – Unilateral sheen, truncated; 3 – Unilateral sheen, retouched,
truncated. Area I: 1 – Bilateral sheen, truncated.
396 chapter twelve
Figure 12.29. Various flint tools. Area G: 1, 2 – Cores; 4 – Retouched Canaanean

blade; 5, 6 - Canaanean blades; 8 – Borer. Area H: 3 – Naturally backed knife;
7 – Burin.
Figure 12.30. Area G: 1, 2 – Notch; 3, 5 – Denticulates; 4 – End-scraper on

flake; 6 – Coarse end-scraper; 7, 8 – Side-scrapers.
398 chapter twelve

A total of 34 stone objects used were discovered during the excavation
(breakdown presented in Table 12.4). The stones were recovered from
the fills, walls and floors in different areas: Area G – 20 items; Area I – 7
items (including 2 surface finds within the excavation area) and Area H
– 6 items. One item was found on the surface near the excavation area.
The items were produced from three kinds of stone: limestone (25
items; 74%), basalt (7 items; 21%), and Nubian sandstone (2 items, 5%).
The stone artifacts are discussed below according to their type, and
contemporary parallels are presented.
Grinding Tools
The vast majority of the tools found at the site were grinding tools
(26.5% of the assemblage). These were divided according to their gen-
eral morphology:
Grinding slabs
Six broken items were found, made of hard limestone (Fig. 12.31: 1–
2). It is apparent that all sides of the slabs were worked, and it seems
that they were discarded after they broke. Three of the objects have a
slightly concave working surface, and the three others have a slightly
convex working surface. These dissimilarities are apparently related to
the differences in the kinds and directions of grinding. Parallels were
found at Arad (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 79: 1, 2), Beth Yerah (Getzov
2006: fig. 3.59: 5) and Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.1: 3–4).
Upper grinding stones

Two complete loaf-shaped items made of limestone were found. One
has a flat working surface, while the other has a convex working sur-
face. Parallels were found at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 3.59: 1) and
Arad (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 80: 8).
Pestle/upper grinding stone

One finely crafted item was found in Area G. It is made of basalt, is
conical, and there are signs of use at both ends (Fig. 12.31: 3). There are
also signs of wear along one side, and it seems that it was also utilized
in secondary use as an upper grindstone for delicate grinding. Parallels
6
This section was written by D. Ben-Yosef, University of Haifa.
were found at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 3.58: 14) and at Qiryat Ata
(Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 5).
Basins
Eight basins were found at the site (23.5% of the assemblage). These
were divided according to their depth.
Deep basins
Three limestone basins were found. A very large one with a depres-
sion 30–35 cm in diameter and 16 cm deep was found in Area H (Fig.
12.20). This was a stationary vessel used for crushing and grinding. The
second basin is portable, and has a depression 16 cm in diameter and 13
cm deep. This was used for crushing together with a pestle. A parallel
was found at Arad (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 78: 7, 10), dated to EB II. The
third basin, of similar size, was well-worked on all of its sides. A close
parallel was found at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig. 3.58: 7).
Shallow basins
Five basins of this kind were found in the excavation, all made of lime-
stone. Two are medium-sized (Fig. 12.31: 4–5), with the basin 7–8 cm
in diameter and 3–4 cm deep. It is possible that they were used as small
mortars. Parallels were discovered at Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: fig.
3.58: 12), Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 11) and Arad (Amiran et al.
1978: pl. 78: 5–6). The other three stones are shallower basins 4–5 cm
in diameter and 1.0–1.5 cm deep. These may be very small stone bowls.
Parallels were found at Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 4).
Pounders
Three limestone and two sandstone artifacts used for crushing and
pounding, probably in the preparation of food, were found. One of the
limestone tools is spherical, and the two others are elliptical. Parallels
were found at Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 1–3) and Ashkelon-
Afridar (Khalaily 2004: 152). The sandstone hand tools were found
broken. One is rectangular and made of light brown coloured sand-
stone; the other is elliptical and made of reddish sandstone.
Stone rings
Four items were found, three of basalt and one of limestone. The rings
are relatively uniform in size, and it is apparent that they were perfo-
400 chapter twelve
rated through their centre by means of a drill. It is difficult to determine

what they were used for, but it is possible that they were loom weights.
Parallels were found at Qiryat Ata (Shamir 2003: fig. 7.5: 5–12) and 'En
Shadud (Braun 1985: pl. XI: A).
Figure 12.31. Ground stone tools.

Elliptical stones with bi-conical perforations

Two limestone objects of this kind were found in the excavation in Area
G (Fig. 12.31: 8). One item is relatively small, and seems to be ellipti-
cal. The other is larger and round. Parallels were found at Beth Yerah
(Getzov 2006: fig. 3.58: 3) and at Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.2: 7).
Basalt bowls with a flared rim

Two objects of well-worked dense basalt. One is a fragment of a pointed
and flared rim about 2 cm thick, and the other is a fragment of a side
of a bowl about 3.5 cm thick. Parallels were found at Ashkelon-Afridar
(Khalaily 2004: fig. 23: 1–2), 'Ain Assawir (Rowan 2006: fig. 6.1: 3–4)
and Qiryat Ata (Rowan 2003: fig. 6.4: 3–4).
Various items
One limestone nether stone of a tournette (Fig. 12.31: 6) was found in
Area G. The object consists of two well-worked basins; one opposite
the other. The upper basin is deep, and the lower one is shallow. The
rim of the upper basin was made extremely smooth so as to allow the
upper stone of a tournette to spin in it. A parallel was found at 'En Esur
(Rowan 2006: fig. 6.5: 8), where the item is dated to the Chalcolithic
period, and is defined as a pivot or socket. Contemporary tournettes for
ceramic production were found at Arad: however, these have a single
depression.
A worked elliptical stone with a notch along its length was made
of limestone (Fig. 12.31: 7), and has a long slightly curved artificial
groove on one side. It may have been used as a female fertility figurine
(in the Neolithic period style), for straightening reeds, or some other
unknown function. A contemporary parallel was found at 'En Shadud
(Braun 1985: pl. XI: C. fig. 37: 7).
Conclusions
The following generalizations can be drawn from the 34 stone tools
found in the excavation:
The principal raw material from which the items were produced is
limestone (25 objects, 73%), followed by basalt (7 objects, 21%,) and
Nubian sandstone (2 objects, 6%). The limestone and basalt are obtain-
able from sources close to the site (the Wadi Far'ah region). The closest
source of Nubian sandstone, on the other hand, is across the Jordan, in
402 chapter twelve
the vicinity of the city of Salt and east of the Dead Sea. The presence of
this kind of stone at the site might be indicative of relations that existed
between the two banks of the Jordan during the EB I.
The stone artifacts that were identified were mainly used for crush-
ing and grinding, probably of cereal, which was one of the principal
types of work conducted at the site.
With the exception of four items, most of the artifacts are simple and
do not reflect a high level of stone craftsmanship. Finding a tournette
indicates that ceramic production was probably part of the activities at
the site.
Type/Row material Basalt Limestone Sandstone Total %

Grinding Stones 1 8 9 26.5
Basins 8 8 23.5
Pounders 3 2 5 14.6
Stone rings 3 1 4 11.8
Perforated items 2 2 5.9
Vessels 2 2 5.9
Various items 1 3 4 11.8
Total 7 25 2 34
% 20.6 73.5 5.9 100
Table 12.4. Breakdown of the stone tool assemblage.
The Faunal Remains7

Animal bones were collected by hand-picking, while dry and wet sifting
through 6 mm mesh was done in selected loci. Zooarchaeological and
taphonomic analysis procedures followed Raban-Gerstel et al. (2008).
Identified specimens were examined and scanned for preliminary ta-
phonomic observations, and coded anatomically and taxonomically in
an electronic database. Morphological markers aided differentiation
between closely related species. Separation of sheep (Ovis aries) from
goat (Capra hircus) was based on morphological criteria of selected
bones following Boessneck (1969). Skeletal elements of sheep and
goat that could not be identified to species were combined in a sheep/
goat category. Separation of aurochs from domestic cattle was based
7
This section was written by G. Bar-Oz and N. Raban-Gerstel, University of Haifa.
on morphometric analyses. Measurements of fully ossified bones were

taken following von den Driesch (1976).
The faunal remains of Sheikh Diab 2 encompass predominantly do-
mesticated livestock, with some presence of wild game. The distribu-
tion of identified animal bones is shown in Table 12.5.
A total of 55 complete and fragmentary identified bones were col-
lected from the different areas of excavation of Sheikh Diab 2. Most of
the bones are from Area G, the main area of excavation (NISP = 47).
Area I, which is adjacent to Area G, contained an additional 8 identified
bones. Of the excavated loci, L140 was found to contain the most abun-
dant bone assemblage (22 of the identified bones, 40% of total NISP).
The remaining loci included only single animal bones. Aside from the
abundance of bones in L140, the spatial patterning of animal bones
does not appear to differentiate between the residential and courtyard
structures of the areas of excavation. Furthermore, the abundance of
the different species of livestock also does not show a distinctive pat-
tern. It seems most likely that the butchered livestock were consumed
fresh, and thus their bones were discarded near and inside the hamlet,
rather than in the open area.
Analysis of species abundance from additional sites in the region
demonstrates that the relative importance of the various livestock ani-
mals changed very little over time from the Chalcolithic to EB Ib. As
in the nearby Chalcolithic sites of 'Ein-Hilu (Chapter 9; Bar et al. 2008)
and Fazael 2 (Bar-Oz and Raban-Gerstel, Chapter 10) the subsistence of
'Ein-Hilu was based predominantly on four livestock ungulates: cattle,
sheep, goat and pigs. However, according to these data the importance
of pigs increased in the EB Ib. However, sheep and goats continued to
dominate subsistence at all the sites. At the same time cattle contri-
bution remained a minor factor in the economy, and did not change
significantly throughout the periods discussed.
Pig remains also appear to be evenly distributed, and there is no
major difference in their spatial abundance. The overall small size of the
bones attests that they derive from domestic pig (Sus scrofa domesticus)
rather than wild boar (Sus scrofa). In addition, the bone assemblage
contains three post-cranial elements (scapula glenoid-fossa, proximal
metacarpus, and proximal metatarsus) of an equid. These bones could
not be identified as to species, and it remains uncertain whether the
assemblage represents the remains of ass (Equus asinus), horse (E. ca-
ballus), or onager (E. hemionus). Given the context of the finds, in a
rural EB I village, and the absence of additional game animals, it seems
404 chapter twelve
most likely that the remains are of an ass, the most common animal in
the southern Levant during the EBA. Only two bones (proximal radius
and distal metacarpus) of the sheep and goat category were definitely
identified as a sheep (Ovis aries). Other species found in Sheikh Diab 2
include a single bone fragment of a Mesopotamian fallow deer (Dama
mesopotamica). A single example of a freshwater mollusc (Unio sp.) was
found.
Bone surface modifications appear only on three specimens. These
are two specimens with butchering marks (a filleting mark on the prox-
imal radius of fallow deer and an unidentified mark on a femur shaft
of a sheep/goat), and a single sheep/goat metacarpal shaft which bore
the remains of carnivore tooth-marks. The shape and structure of the
tooth-marks suggest that they were made by a dog/wolf-sized animal.
This indicates that some of the remains were discarded soon after their
abandonment. The rare occurrence of bone surface modifications does
not allow further analysis on the meat consumption behaviour of the
site’s occupants. In addition, none of the bones was found to have been
burnt.
The bone assemblage is too small to allow detailed analysis of
anatomical representation or age structure. However, given their im-
portance, the elements were combined into meat refuse (long bones,
scapula and pelvis) and butchery waste (hooves/toes, lower limbs,
heads and neck). It appears that the occurrence of skeletal elements
of sheep, goats and pigs represents a mixture of both types of refuse,
and there is no distinction between gourmet portions (upper limbs and
axial skeleton) or less meaty elements (skull, lower limbs and hoof).
The anatomical representation at EB I Sheikh Diab 2 is therefore inter-
preted as reflecting the disposal of butchered carcasses.
The sparse faunal assemblages did not allow the reconstruction of
a mortality profile. However, bone epiphysis fusion reveals that most
long bones of sheep and goat and cattle derived from adult individu-
als. These patterns suggest that these animals were raised and exploited
primarily for their secondary products. A different trend appears for
the pig remains. Of the five identified long bones, one belonged to a
young individual under the age of 12 months. It seems reasonable to
assume that pigs were culled differently from sheep and goats, and were
slaughtered young. Thus, it appears that pig-raising was oriented to-
ward meat, while sheep and goats seem to be more related to a second-
ary product-based economy (Grigson 1995a).
To conclude, the faunal sample from Sheikh Diab 2 is small but sig-
Bos Capra/ Ovis Sus

Equus sp.
taurus Ovis aries scrofa
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
MNE
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
NISP
Head
Mandible teeth 1 1
Body
Ver: Lumbar 1 1
Rib 5 3
Forelimb
Scapula Glenoid fossa 1 1 1 1 1 1
Radius proximal 1 1 1 1
Radius distal 1 1
Metacarpus proximal
Metacarpus distal 3 2 2 2
Hindlimb 2 1
Pelvic acetabulum 2 2
Tibia proximal 1 1
Metatarsus proximal 1 1 1 1
Metatarsus distal 1 1
Toes 1 1
Phalanx 1 1 1
Phalanx 2
NISP 3 17 1 2 11 34
NISP – % 9 50 3 6 32 100.0
MNI 1 2 1 1 1 6
Table 12.5. Number of identified specimens (NISP), minimum number of

elements (MNE), and minimum number of individuals (MNI) of each taxon
represented at Sheikh Diab 2.
406 chapter twelve
nificant. The assemblage adds new faunal data to the limited database
of EBA subsistence strategies in the Jordan Valley. The results of the
zooarchaeological study enable the drawing of several broad conclu-
sions regarding the subsistence economy and butchery practices that
were carried out at the site:
1. The economy was based primarily on sheep and goats, and in-
cluded certain exploitation of pigs. The dominance of sheep and
goats indicates their economic importance. It shows that mixed
groups of sheep and goats were herded in the vicinity of the site.
2. The presence of pigs suggests that it was a permanent settlement.
It also attests to the lush environment that existed in the vicinity
of the site.
3. Presence of freshwater molluscs shows that the ecological land-
scape of the site included freshwater sources in the vicinity. This
provided the inhabitants with the optimal conditions for raising
cattle and pigs nearby.
4. The diversity of the surrounding landscape is further attested to
by the presence of fallow deer, and the nearby existence of a some-
what wet environment with a forest or woodland habitat.
5. Age profiles and the representation of bone refuse debris indicate
that meat was consumed on the site. The high occurrence of adult
sheep and goat individuals indicates that secondary products
such as milk and wool were exploited, as well as meat (Grigson
1995a: 257).
6. Tooth-marks on one bone suggest that scavenging carnivores
(most probably dogs) had some access to refuse.
7. Hunting was practiced by the site’s inhabitants, but not on an in-
tensive scale.
General Conclusions
Sheikh Diab 2 is an example of a well-preserved single-period site that
dates to the middle of EB I, probably early in the EB Ib. The small vil-
lage or hamlet includes residential complexes densely spread across a
spur next to a perennial stream.
The excavations have disclosed the following characteristics of the
site:
1. The hamlet is built of irregular elliptical residential complexes,
separated by alleys and squares. Even though it is still not possible
to determine if the complexes were constructed at the same time,
or if they were added as the site developed, their architectural
outline has been preserved, as were the spaces used by people and
animals to move between the different units. This is one of the
best preserved EB I rural settlements in the southern Levant, and
a unique example of such a settlement type in the Jordan Valley.
2. There were ten to twelve residential complexes in the site, in each
of which may have lived a nuclear family. Therefore it can be sug-
gested that the settlement numbered about 100 people.
3. The plan of the residential complexes is in the style of a courtyard
house, architectural units and different functions, for living and
storage, inside a courtyard surrounded by a wall. The outlines
of the courtyards are irregular, with a tendency to be elliptical.
Closing off the unit by means of walls and doors may attest to a
desire for maintaining privacy. The varying sizes of the different
complexes may possibly reflect the family size, status or assets.
4. Based on the architecture and ceramics, it seems that the site dates
to the first part of EB Ib.
5. The economy was mainly based on growing grain, as well as the
grazing of animals.
6. The site was built on the natural chalk bedrock of the spur. Such
construction made it possible to exploit the natural drainage of
the slope, freeing many areas near the wadi for growing grain. The
construction was also located on the spur probably to distance
the residential complexes from the floods and the damp flatlands
along the banks of the wadi.
7. The ceramic and ground stone assemblages attest to some kind
of connection between the two banks of the River Jordan in the
period under discussion.
8. The multitude of large storage vessels, the paucity of small vessels,
408 chapter twelve
the absence of special finds, and the absence of any signs of de-
struction, may possibly bear witness to an orderly abandonment
of the site during the EB Ib. This is consistent with a significant
decrease in the scope of settlement which was identified in the
Jordan Valley during the transition from EB Ib to EB II, together
with intensified settlement along the slopes of the central hill
country (Bar 2008).
Further research at the site and its surroundings will provide a clearer
picture of the rural life in the EB I within the Jordan Valley.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
FAZAEL 4: THE EXCAVATIONS AT THE

EARLY BRONZE AGE I SITE
Introduction
During May 2010 an excavation was conducted at Fazael 4 (map ref.
Old Israel Grid 1907/1618; Site 89 in the Catalogue)1, an EB I site lo-
cated in the Jordan Valley, about 20 km north of Jericho (Fig. 13.1).2
The EB I settlement in Wadi Fazael is situated along the fringes of
the wadi, in an area where the stream emerges from the narrow gorge
into the flood plain. The first site excavated was Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar
2008; Bar et al. 2011; Chapter 12), on a narrow spur above the southern
bank of the wadi. The second site, Fazael 4, which covers an area of 3
ha, is located on level ground on the wadi’s northern bank, opposite
Sheikh Diab 2.
The first research at the site was done by Goring-Morris (1980)
who excavated Kebaran and Geometric Kebaran remains to the east
of the excavated area described here. The site was later surveyed by the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey, when it was dated to the EB I.
The Fazael Valley project began in 2007, and the researchers in-
tend to work there for many more seasons. It was therefore decided to
pursue a strategy of slow and continuing research. At Fazael 4 it was
decided to excavate just a limited area in a spot where the ancient re-
mains were beginning to be swept into the wadi. The key questions of
this season focused on examining the round buildings observed on the
surface level by the Manasseh Hill Country Survey, and determining
the chronology of the site based on a comparison of the finds with the
adjacent EB I site of Sheikh Diab 2. For this reason it was decided to
excavate about 100 m2 in the area of the round buildings in the location
of the probable collapse of archaeological material into the wadi floor.
1
This chapter is based on a paper published in the Journal of the Israel Prehistoric
Society (Bar et al. 2012).
2
The excavation was directed by Shay Bar, with assistance from Haim Winter
(flint), Sapir Haad (drawing of figures: plans, sections and finds), Ronny Zuckerman
(fauna), Michael Eisenberg and the Zinman Institute of Archaeology (scientific sup-
port), and the Manasseh Hill Country Survey (scientific and logistical support).
410 chapter thirteen
Stratigraphy and Architecture (Figs. 13.2–5)

The 2010 excavation focused on the group of round buildings in the
south-western part of the site. A single stratum dating to the EB I, with
a number of secondary phases, was identified in all the excavation
squares. An earlier stratum that has not yet been dated, where a flint
knapper’s work area was found in situ, was identified beneath a round
180 190 200

170 170
Sartaba
Ma'ale
Ephraim
Wa d
Yafit
i A
hm
ar
a el
Wa d i F a z
Fazael 4
160 Fazael 160
R
i v
e r
J o r a n
'Aujjeh
d
150 150
W a d i ' Au j j e
h
0 50
km
0 5
km Jericho
140 140
180 190 200
Figure 13.1. Fazael 4: general location map.

fazael 4: the excavations at the early bronze age i site 411
building (W20). We will not deal with this special find, which will be
published later, after it has been restored.
The habitation levels of the EB I settlement were located very close
to the surface level, at a depth of 20–70 cm. Hence, organic material was
not preserved at the site.
The remains of a number of different dwelling complexes were vis-
ible at this initial stage of the research. These complexes are part of
courtyard houses that have curved outlines whose characteristics are
similar to those discovered at the neighbouring site of Sheikh Diab 2.
The main difference between the sites is that so far no alleys have been
positively identified between the different complexes at Fazael 4.
The Western Structures (Figures 13.2–13.4)

Approximately 90 m2 of these structures were excavated, including sev-
eral key elements that suggest a gradual development and change and
possible sub-phasing in the units excavated in this part of the site.
Peripheral wall
The wall (thickness 80 cm) was built of two rows of medium-sized
fieldstones and a core of small stones between them. It was preserved
in several noncontiguous segments. A western section of the wall (W1)
was exposed for a distance of 9 m. The southern part of Wall 1 had
eroded away along the slope of the wadi, and its north-eastern part had
collapsed to the south, possibly also because of the slope. A northern
segment (W30) of this wall was exposed for a distance of 2.5 m. In the
west it abutted the region where Wall 1 had collapsed, and in the north-
east it adjoined W29, which forms part of another unexcavated unit
to the north. Wall 30 post-dates the initial construction phase of the
structure, and it is possible that it was intended to repair the collapse
of Wall 1. At least 2 m of the north-eastern section of Wall 29 seems to
have been a common wall shared by the two adjacent units.
North-western building
Wall 28, which abuts Walls 1 and 29 and forms an irregularly shaped
room, seems to be another latter construction. The wall of the room was
constructed in the same manner as the peripheral wall, but was not as
well preserved. There may be an opening (width 70 cm, Square C11) in
the middle of the wall. The excavation inside the room reached a depth
of about 80 cm, and the habitation level has still not been exposed.
10 11
L38
L33

L23
W29

18 L21 L21
D W L41 D

L19
0 L27
W2

L22 1 0
W W3
W28
W24

L26
L32
L25
L39

L26
L26 L31
C C
W28

U n e x c a v a t e d
W1
L16
W36
W2
L4
L10 W35
W

14
L5 L11
L11
L40
L9 L15

B
B

L7 L13

L8
W3 L37

L17
W12

L34
A A

P
10 11
Figure 13.2. Plan.

Two adjacent circular buildings

Two adjacent circular structures with an inner diameter of about 1.5 m
were found in the southern part of the excavated area. Each was built
of a wall made of small and medium stones that survived to a height
of three courses, with an average thickness of 55 cm. While excavat-
ing the two buildings, tamped lime material that had been poured to
make a horizontal surface was found inside each of the structures. This
was most likely the base of the building. The two round buildings were
connected by Wall 35. In addition, a badly preserved wall (W3) was ex-
cavated south of the western circular building. Another wall (W36), the
function of which has not yet been determined, was located north-west
of this building. Both the buildings had openings that were constructed
in a same manner. These faced north, and were about 60 cm wide. Al-
though no organic material was found on the base of the buildings it
seems that they were used as silos. This supposition is primarily based
on their resemblance to the built silos that were discovered at other EB
I sites in the southern Levant, e.g. nearby Sheikh Diab 2; Abu Thawwab
(Kafafi 2001: fig. 24), and Amaziya (Milevski et al. 2012), the very nar-
row dimensions of which restrict human activity inside them, and the
almost complete absence of finds of any kind.
Figure 13.3. Circular structures (silos?) in the western complex.

Figure 13.4. Dwelling structure in the western complex and round buildings
(silos?) in the north-western complex.
Figure 13.5. Habitation level and the bases of the round buildings in the
north-western complex.
The Courtyard Between the Units

An open area, which was an inner courtyard, was located between the
aforementioned units. Most of the stone and ceramic artifacts, and a
number of vessels, were discovered in the courtyard, crushed on the
ancient habitation level that consisted solely of tamped earth with no
other unique features.
The North-western Circular Structures (Figures 13.2, 13.4–13.5)

Two other circular buildings, probably silos, were discovered in the area
between Walls 29, 30, 1, and 24. The larger of the two structures (L21)
was delimited by Wall 20 (thickness 80 cm), which was built of small
and medium fieldstones, and survived to a height of three courses. This
structure had an opening (width 80 cm) that faced north-north-east. A
tamped lime base, which may have served as an inner pavement simi-
lar to the buildings to the south, was also identified in this structure.
The inside diameter is about 2.5 m, and unlike the other three circular
buildings that were discovered in the excavation, one can move around
inside it relatively comfortably.
West of the large circular building was another smaller round struc-
ture. Its inside diameter was 1.2 m, and it was delimited by Wall 18
(thickness about 50 cm), built of small and medium fieldstones. The
base of this building, which also appears to have been used as a silo,
consisted of the lime level that is present in all four of the circular build-
ings at the site. An entrance that may have faced north-north-east was
identified. Whether this was actually an opening is uncertain, and it
could be that a stone was just missing from the wall of the building.
A habitation level very close to the surface, at a depth of not more
than 20 cm, was identified between the circular units. A number of
crushed pottery vessels were found in situ on this ancient surface.
The Ceramic Assemblage3

A total of 1,916 pottery sherds, each with a surface area larger than 4
cm2, were collected and sorted during the course of the excavation and
afterwards. The following is a preliminary report.
Analysis of the diagnostic items (rims – 73 items) shows that the
most common type of vessel is the holemouth (28 items, 38.4% of the
finds), followed by bowls (21 items, 28.8% of the finds), jars (17 items,
3
This section was written by O. Cohen, University of Haifa.
23.2% of the finds), and other kinds (7 items, 9.6% of the finds).
The prevalent type of handle in the assemblage is the ledge handle
(16 items, 72.7% of the finds). In addition, 3 lug handles, 2 loop handles,
and one knob handle were found.
As for the treatment of the vessel surfaces, 34 items (1.8% of the
finds) are decorated. The most common decorations are grooved,
particularly on the holemouth jar rims (11 items, 32.4% of the finds),
plastic strips around the body of jars (9 items, 26.5% of the finds), a
plastic rope ornamentation around the body of closed vessels (8 items,
23.5% of the finds), and red slip, often burnished, on bowls (6 items,
17.6% of the finds).
Bowls
Open bowls
The bowl in Fig. 13.6: 1 is very wide, and has a plain rounded rim.
The soot-marks on the outside of the vessel indicate that it was used
for cooking. Parallels dated to the beginning of the EB I were found at
Ashqelon-Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 22: 8, 13; Bowl Types I–II).
Bowls with straight sides (‘V-shaped’) and a plain rim (Fig. 13.6: 3),
or a flattened rim rounded on top (Fig. 13.6: 2). have a flat base, and
are frequently red-slipped. The soot-marks on them indicate that some
were used as lamps. Parallels dated to the EB I were found at Ashqelon-
Afridar (Baumgarten 2004: fig. 10: 1–2; Golani 2004: fig. 22: 3).
Bowl 6: 4 is hand-made from especially coarse clay, with a plain
rounded rim. This is another straight-sided (‘V-shaped’) bowl. A paral-
lel was found at Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12, Fig. 12.23: 16).
Bowl 6: 6 belongs to a group of bowls/open kraters that have a thick-
ened folded rim, the outer part of which has a rope decoration (thumb-
indented or incised), and are red-slipped and not burnished. Parallels
were found at 'En Esur III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.36: 2–3) dating
from the beginning of EB I.
Round Bowls
Bowl 6: 5 is a hemispherical bowl with a plain rounded rim with in-
dented rope decoration. Similar red burnished bowls were found at
Ashqelon-Afridar (Golani 2004: fig. 23: 8, 11; Bowl Type VI). An un-
burnished parallel was found at Azor (Golani and van den Brink 1999:
fig. 4: 12). The parallels date to the EB Ia.
The hemispherical bowls with tapered rims (Fig. 13.6: 10–11) are the
most prevalent type of bowl at the site. They are shallow or deep, and
have a rounded base and a hemispherical body. Hemispherical bowls
are common in the EB I of the Jordan Valley (chapter 8). They are usu-
ally red-slipped inside and out, and are often fired at such a high tem-
perature as to render them a metallic-like texture. The soot-marks on
their rims suggest that some were used as lamps (Getzov 2006: 14; Go-
lani 2003: 121). However, the bowls from Fazael 4 are not red-slipped,
and in most instances they were fired at a low temperature. The soot
marks on some of them indicate they were used for lighting.
It is interesting to note that the bowls of this type found at Sheikh
Diab 2, south of the site, were red-slipped and extremely well fired.
Hemispherical bowls appeared throughout the EBA, and parallels
abound. Parallels dated to the EB I were found at Beth Yerah V (Getzov
2006, fig. 2.12: 25–29), 'En Esur III-II (Yannai et al. 2006: figs. 4.43: 2–5;
4.52: 3–4, 10–12), Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: fig. 34.3.7: 1, 3, 7–8, 10;
Chapter 12: fig. 12.23: 4, 11) and the cemetery at Jericho (Kenyon and
Holland 1982: fig. 43: 1–3, 5).
Shallow round bowls with straight or slightly in-curved sides and
a plain upright (Fig. 13.6: 7, 9) or tapered rim (Fig. 13.6: 8). Their fir-
ing ranges from mediocre to good. The bowls are red-slipped and even
burnished (No. 9) and exhibit traces of soot (No. 8), evidence of their
use as lamps. Similar example dated to the EB Ia was found at Bab edh-
Dhra', Tomb C2 (Schaub and Rast 1989: fig. 118: 12).
Bowl 6: 12 has a thickened rim that is acutely inverted. It is painted
red inside and outside. Parallels dating to the EB Ib were found at Arad
IV (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 7: 4, 8).
Bowl 6: 13 is a deep bowl with an inverted rim. Parallels dated to the
EB Ib were found at Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.12: 7, 9).
Bowl 6: 14 belongs to a group of deep bowls that have an upright or
slightly in-curved side and a flat base. They are sometimes hand-made
and finished on a slow wheel or tournette. Some are painted red on the
outside. Parallels dating to the EB I were found at Bab edh-Dhra', Tomb
A43 (Schaub and Rast 1989: fig. 137: 4–7) and at Tell Abu al-Kharaz
(Jordan), Phases B-IA (Fischer 2008: fig. 170: 4).
Pithoi
The pithos with a thickened rim that resembles a circumferential band
(Figs. 13.7: 10–12; 13.8: 12) is the most prevalent kind at the site. This
is also the case at Sheikh Diab 2, on the southern bank of Wadi Fazael.
A complete pithos found there (Bar 2008: fig. 37.3.7: 1) is 26 cm in

diameter and stands 70 cm high. The pithos has a flat base, a swollen
upper body, sides that curve in, a thickened rim, and plastic ridges on
the body. Most of the fragments of this type found at Sheikh Diab 2
are not decorated (Bar 2008: 439–440). A red-painted pithos rim was
found at Fazael 4 (Fig. 13.7: 12), and a body fragment of a red-painted
ridged pithos was discovered that can also be ascribed to this type of
vessel (Fig. 13.9: 1). The following parallels also show that in many in-
stances the pithoi or parts of them are painted red, or also have incised
decorations. Traces of soot were found on the sherds from Fazael 4
(Figs. 13.8: 12; 13.9: 1) and on the complete pithos from Sheikh Diab 2.
The parallels of this type date to the EB Ib: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006:
figs. 2.15: 6; 2.16: 6), Qiryat Ata III-II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.13: 1; Storage
Jar SJ Va), 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 21: 7) and Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar
2008: fig. 37.3.7: 1–4).
Another kind of pithos is shown in Fig. 13.7: 1. There are plastic
rope decorations on the body and on the everted rim. There is a certain
resemblance between this type of pithos and the large pithoi from the
beginning of the EB I, such as those that were found at Mezer, Yiftah'el
II and 'En Esur III. A complete pithos from Mezer has a flat base, cylin-
drical body and everted rim. The characteristic element of this type is
the plastic rope decoration at the connection of the body and the neck
(Braun 1997: 61–62, figs. 9.15–9.18; Type 52; Dothan 1959: fig. 8: 13;
Yannai et al. 2006: 81–82). Several parallels are red-slipped (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4.39: 15–16): however, none of them have a rope decora-
tion on the rim. Another body sherd with a plastic decoration from
Fazael 4 can be ascribed to this type of pithos.
Jars
The most prominent type of jar found at the site has a tapered and
flared rim (Fig. 13.7: 6). Both painted and unpainted examples of this
type were found. Of the painted jars, most are painted on the outside,
and occasionally on the inside of the rim. One of the characteristics of
this kind of jar at the site is the decoration incised on the inside of the
rim. This type is also common at Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: 439, fig.
36.3.7: 1, 3, 6; Chapter 12; Fig. 12.25: 3, 6). The jar is identical with the
group of jars designated Genre 22–23 at Tell Um Hammad (Helms et al.
1992: 62–63, figs. 86: a, d; 87–88; 198–200). Genre 22 comprises three
kinds of jars: spherical with a broad shoulder, elongated with a ridged
shoulder, and narrow at the base with a broad shoulder. It seems that
most had flat bases; however, the jars with the broad shoulder probably
also had rounded bases. The jars do not have handles, are red-slipped
and burnished, and sometimes have a patterned burnish. The jars be-
longing to Genre 23 are similar in form to those of Genre 22, but are
characterized by an incised decoration located on the inside of the rim
(similar to the jar in Fig. 13.7: 6). Helms ascribes Genre 22 to EB Ia
(Helms et al. 1992: fig. 262 [Repertoire R2], table 14 [pp. 118, 119]) and
Genre 23 to the EB Ia-b (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 263 [Repertoire R3],
table 14 [pp. 118–119]). The tapered and flared rim is prevalent in the
Jordan Valley throughout the EB I, and also continues into the EB II
(Bar 2008: 439).
Parallels date to the EB I: 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 20: 9, 11),
Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: fig. 36.3.7: 1, 3, 6) and Ashqelon-Afridar (Kh-
alaily 2004: fig. 9: 7).
A single parallel of the jar with a thickened and everted rim (Fig.
13.7: 4) was found in Strata III-II at Abu edh-Dhahab in the Western
Galilee (Getzov 2004: fig. 13.8: 6), dated to EB Ib.
We can learn about the shape of Jar 7: 7 from a complete example
that was found at Qiryat Ata III-II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.12: 6; storage jar
type SJ IIIb), which has a flat base, globular body, short upright neck
and a tapered rim. A pair of handles is affixed to its body, which is
decorated on the outside with band slip painting. The rim is painted
dark-brown on the inside and outside. Most of the parallels date to EB
Ib: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 3), 'En Shadud (Braun 1985:
fig. 20: 10), 'En Esur III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.37: 14) and Arad III
(Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 15: 10).
Cooking Jars
These jars were defined as such due to the large amount of calcite in
the clay used to make them and the traces of soot that appear on most
of them.
Parallel of Jar 7: 2 dated to the EB I was found at Kabri 9 (Scheftelow-
itz 2002: fig. 5.5: 7).
Parallels of Jar 7: 3 dated to EB Ib: Abu edh-Dhahab III–II (Getzov
2004: fig. 8: 1), Qiryat Ata III–II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.12: 5; Storage Jar
Type SJ IIIa). The parallels of this vessel are painted red on the outside,
and occasionally also on the inside of the rim.
No exact parallels were found for Jar 7: 5.
Holemouth jars
At Fazael 4 two types of holemouth jars stand out prominently: those
that have a thickened rim (Fig. 13.8: 3, 11), and those with a gutter rim
(Fig. 13.8: 5, 7–9).
The group of holemouth jars with a thickened rim is characterized
by an incised rope decoration on the outside of the neck. On most of
the holemouth jars the rim edge is actually a thickening of the side
(Fig. 13.8: 3): however, there are those where the thickening resembles
a band round the mouth of the vessel (Fig. 13.8: 11).
At Tell Um Hammad the holemouth jars with a thickened rim be-
long mainly to Genre 2 (Helms et al. 1992: 47, 48, figs. 56–57; 143–146).
This group includes tall and short holemouth jars, with a flat base and
an ovoid body. They are sometimes equipped with a number of perpen-
dicular lug handles that are situated below the rim. The bottom of the
rim is sometimes also decorated with perforated, incised or indented
rope decoration, an element which is also found on the edges of the
handles. Traces of soot indicate that the holemouth jars were used for
cooking. Helms ascribes this group of vessels to the EB Ia (Helms et
al. 1992: fig. 262 [Repertoire R2], table 14 [pp. 118–119]). The hole-
mouth jars with a thickened rim are sometimes also decorated with red
or reddish-brown paint on the outside of the vessel and the inside of the
rim (see parallels).
The following parallels date to EB Ib: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006:
fig. 2.13: 1–4), Qashish XVB (Zuckerman 2003: fig. 19: 3; Type H IIa),
'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 21: 10), 'En Esur II (Yannai et al. 2006: fig.
4.56: 1–8, 17–18), Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig. 12.24: 10–11) and
Arad IV (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 8: 14).
The holemouth jar in Fig. 13.8: 13 should probably also be added
to this type, even though its rim is more horizontal. A similar rim was
found at Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig. 12.24: 11).
The group of holemouth jars with the gutter rim is characterized
by a rim that has a prominent (Fig. 13.8: 8–9) or vestigial (Fig. 13.8: 5,
7) depression cut along it. The rim is sometimes wavy (Fig. 13.8: 9) or
incised (Fig. 13.8: 7–8). There is some similarity between its shape and
that of the holemouth jar rims in Genres 4, 10, 14 at Tell Um Hammad.
The holemouth jars in Genre 4 (Helms et al. 1992: 48–49, figs. 58: b;
60; 148–150) are slightly squat on top and have a flat base. Incised rope
decorations appear mainly on the outside, below the rim. The rim is
sometimes wavy. The holemouth jars in Genre 10 (Helms et al. 1992:
50–51, figs. 62: e, f; 68; 155–157) appear as variants that are low and
open (e) or tall and somewhat more closed (f). The base is flat, and the
upper part of the body is enlarged. The jars from this group usually do
not have handles and are undecorated. They are common in the EB
Ib sites on both sides of the Jordan. The holemouth jars of Genre 14
(Helms et al. 1992: 53–54, figs. 72: b, c; 74; 164–166) are similar to those
of Genre 10, but their upper part is not as large. They too are usually
not decorated, but incised lines that may be potter’s marks were found
below the rim on some of them. Helms ascribes Genre 10 and 14 to
EB Ib–II (Helms et al. 1992: fig. 267 [Repertoire R9], table 14 [pp. 118,
119]). It should be mentioned that on many of the parallels that were
found (below) the holemouth jars were painted at least on their outside.
EB I parallels that have a prominent gutter (Fig. 13.8: 8–9) were found
at Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 15, 21), Tel Te'o V (Eisenberg
2001: fig. 7.5: 3), Kabri 9 (Scheftelowitz 2002: fig. 5.5: 7), Qiryat Ata III-
II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.7: 12; Holemouth type H V), 'En Esur III (Yannai
et al. 2006: fig. 4.43: 13–14, 18–19), et-Tell ('Ai) Phase III (Callaway
1972: fig. 30: 6–9; 1980, fig. 65: 13), Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig.
12.24: 6–8) and Arad IV (Amiran et al. 1978: pl. 8: 12).
The parallels of Jar 8: 7 date mostly to the EB I: Tel Te'o V (Eisenberg
2001: fig. 7.5: 11), Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996: fig. 14: 11) and Jawa
(Helms 1991: fig. 117: 88).
No exact parallel for Jar 8: 5 was found.
EB I parallels of the holemouth jar with the wavy cut rim (Fig. 13.7:
8) were found at Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.13: 16), Moza IX
(Greenhut and de Groot 2009: fig. 3.1: 6) and Tell Um Hammad (Helms
et al. 1992: fig. 161: 10; Genre 11[EB I-II]).
Parallels of the holemouth jar with a high wavy rim (Fig. 13.7: 9)
were from the EB I: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006: fig. 2.15: 9), 'En Esur
III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.48: 5) and et-Tell ('Ai) Phase III (Callaway
1980: fig. 65: 19). The vessel from Beth Yerah is red-slipped, and the
rim of the vessel from 'En Esur is painted red on the inside.
The holemouth jar in Fig. 13.8: 1 has a tapered rim with grooves on
its inner and outer parts. Parallels dating to EB Ib were found at Qiryat
Ata III-II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.6: 5; Holemouth jar type H IIb), et-Tell
('Ai) Phase II (Callaway 1972: fig. 20: 2). The example from Qiryat Ata
is painted red on the outside of the vessel and on the inside of the rim.
The rim of Holemouth jar 8: 2 has a triangular cross-section and an
incised rope decoration on its upper part. Most of the parallels date to
EB Ib: Qiryat Ata III-I (Golani 2003: figs. 4.5: 1, Holemouth jar type H
Ia; 4.28: 16), 'En Shadud (Braun 1985: fig. 22: 8), 'En Esur II (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4.56: 10–11) and Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: Fig. 12.24: 2).
The rim of Holemouth jar 8: 6 is folded and has a ‘thumb-impressed’
rope decoration. The parallels date to the EB I: 'En Esur III (Yannai et
al. 2006: fig. 4.44: 21, 24) and Jericho (Kenyon and Holland 1982: fig.
40: 6).
The holemouth jars in Fig. 13.8: 4, 10 have a tapered and folded
rim. The rim of the holemouth is folded outward and its end has a
‘thumb-impressed’ rope decoration. This shape of rim is common on
holemouth jars at Ashqelon-Afridar from the beginning of the EB I
(Baumgarten 2004: figs. 9: 14; 11: 16–17, 19). A complete holemouth
jar found at the site has a flat base and a slightly squat upper body.
Other parallels were found at 'En Esur III (Yannai et al. 2006: fig. 4.44:
7, 13) dating to the same period.
Miscellaneous
Four kinds of handles were found at Fazael 4: ledge, lug (Fig. 13.9: 8),
knob and loop (Fig. 13.9: 3, 6). The prevalent type at the site is the wavy
ledge handle (Fig. 13.9: 5, 6). The potter decorated them with thumb
strokes that run their whole length, which give the handles their undu-
lating form. Traces of soot on the handles and the calcite clay indicate
they belonged to cooking vessels. It seems that the thumb marks were
on the lower part of the handle and the gable-like part was the top. This
at least is how the type is defined at Tell Um Hammad, where it is classi-
fied as Genre 70 (Helms et al. 1992: 89–90, fig. 239: 5–8). Parallels date
to the EB I: Shoham (North) (Gophna and van den Brink 2005: fig.7.5:
5), Sheikh Diab 2 (Bar 2008: fig. 38.3.7: 2) and Tell Umm Hamad Esh-
Sherqi (Leonard 1992: pls. 25: 5, 11; 26: 13).
The short knob handle (Fig. 13.9: 7) appears mostly on hemispheri-
cal bowls; it is also found on a holemouth vessel at Beth Yerah (below).
The following parallels date to the EB I: Beth Yerah V (Getzov 2006:
figs. 2.12: 10; 2.13: 10), Qiryat Ata III–II (Golani 2003: fig. 4.1: 11),
Ashqelon-Afridar (Khalaily 2004: fig. 17: 10) and Tell Umm Hamad
Esh-Sherqi (Leonard 1992: pl. 23: 21–23, 25).
The high loop handle (Fig. 13.9: 6) apparently belongs to the red-
slipped burnished juglets, a type prevalent in the EB I (Getzov 2006: fig.
2.14: 3; Golani 2003: fig. 4.8: 1, 3).
The spout in Fig. 13.9: 9 probably belongs to a holemouth or hole-
mouth krater. The following parallels date mostly to the EB Ib: Tel
Qashish “Post-Stratum XIII” (Zuckerman 2003: fig. 15: 4), 'En Shadud
(Braun 1985: figs. 14: 6; 26: 3–4) and Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996: fig.
13: 11–13).
The vessel bases found at the site (Fig. 13.9: 2) are flat, and several
are painted or red-slipped. The paint runs that appear on the base
presented here indicate that at least the upper part of the vessel was
painted. The ascription of the bases is unclear; some belonged to jars,
large bowls or kraters.
The ceramic disc that is perforated at its centre (Fig. 13.9: 10) was
apparently used as a spinning weight. It was not made from a pottery
sherd that was worked round (as is usually the case with loom weights
and ceramic lids), rather it was produced at its inception in the shape
of a perforated disc. It is probably an imitation of similar stone loom
weights (see for example Eisenberg 1996: fig. 18: 8).
Two body sherds with incised decoration were found at the site: one
is decorated with four vertical lines and a horizontal line crossing them
(Fig. 13.9: 11); the other is a perforated body sherd decorated on one
side with short incised strokes (Fig. 13.9: 12).
Summary
The pottery assemblage from Fazael 4 is composed mostly of bowls
and jars (including holemouth jars). The absence of kraters, jugs and
juglets is striking. In contrast, the small bowls that were used for light-
ing stand out prominently. In most instances the vessels were fired at
a low or medium temperature, and the red slip is not prevalent in the
assemblage. Most parallels found at Beth Yerah V, Qiryat Ata III-II, 'En
Esur III, Ashqelon-Afridar and 'En Shadud, date the assemblage to the
entire time span of the EB I.
From the standpoint of form there are many similarities between the
Fazael 4 assemblage and that from at Sheikh Diab 2, on the southern
bank of Wadi Fazael. The latter dates to the middle of EB I (Chapter 12;
Bar et al. 2011). At that site too, the use of large storage jars is remark-
able, as is the paucity of small vessels and slipped vessels. To this we
should add the extensive use of incised diagonal lines that decorated
the holemouth jars in both of the assemblages. We must add to the
similarity in the vessel forms the architectural similarity: at both sites
similar circular structures were found and interpreted as silos. It seems
that the main activity at Fazael 4 was connected to storing (as testified
by the pithoi and the jars), most likely grain from the nearby cultivated
fields. The bowls were mainly used as oil lamps (or cooking), and the
holemouth jars were used both for storing and cooking.
Based on the proximity of the site to Sheikh Diab 2, the similarity of
form between the two assemblages, and the similarity in architecture,
it is conceivable that the sites existed simultaneously, at least during the
later phases of Fazael 4, and constituted a single settlement.
2 3
4 5
7 8
9
10
12
11
13
14
0 10 cm
Figure 13.6. Bowls.

No. Type Locus Description

Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits, soot
1 Bowl 17
traces outside, low firing.
2 Bowl 22 Light-brown clay and core, white and grey grits, good firing.
3 Bowl 8 Reddish clay and core, white grits, good firing.
Course, light yellow clay, light-yellow core, white, grey and
4 Bowl 13
black grits, low firing, handmade.
Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits, soot
5 Bowl 13 traces outside, impressed rope decoration on outside rim, low
firing.
Light-brown clay, light-grey core, big white, black and grey
6 Bowl 17
grits, impressed rope decoration on outside rim, low firing.
Orange-brown clay, light-yellow core, black and grey grits, low
7 Bowl 40
firing.
Light-brown clay, light-grey core, white, grey and black grits,
8 Bowl 17
soot trace (?) outside, good firing.
Light-brown clay, light-grey core, grey grits, red burnish outside
9 Bowl 40
and red painting inside, medium firing.
10 Bowl 141 Levigated (?) orange-brown clay, light-grey core, good firing.
Light-brown clay and core, white and grey grits, straw
11 Bowl 13
impressions, low firing.
Light-brown clay, grey core, a few grey grits, reddish-brown
12 Bowl 7
painting inside and outside, medium firing.
13 Bowl 34 Light-brown clay, grey core, white and grey grits, good firing.
Light clay and core, red and grey grits, soot traces inside, good
14 Bowl 22
firing, handmade.

3
0 10 cm
4 5
10
11
12
0 10 cm
Figure 13.7. Pithoi, jars and holemouth jars.


Light clay, grey core, white and grey grits, soot traces
1 Pithos 13
outside, plastic rope decoration outside, low firing.
Grey clay, reddish-brown core, white, grey and shiny
2 Jar 8
grits, low firing.
Light-brown clay, grey core, white and grey grits, straw
3 Jar 22
impressions, soot traces inside and outside, good firing.
Light clay, grey core, white and grey grits, red painting
4 Jar 17
outside, medium firing.
Brown clay, grey core, light, grey and shiny grits, soot
5 Jar 38
traces inside and outside, medium firing.
Reddish clay, light-yellow core, white grits, reddish
brown to black panting outside, red painting on rim
6 Jar 10
inside, incised decoration on rim inside, low to medium
firing.
Reddish-brown clay, grey core, white and grey grits,
7 Jar 13
straw impressions, soot traces outside, low firing.
Light-brown clay, grey core, white, black and red grits,
Holemouth
8 13 soot traces inside and outside, thumb-impressed rope
jar
decoration on rim, low firing.
Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits,
Holemouth
9 13 soot traces inside and outside, thumb-impressed rope
jar
decoration on rim, low firing.
Light-brown clay, greyish-brown core, white and grey
10 Pithos 38
grits, soot traces inside, medium to good firing.
Light-brown clay and core, grey, red and shiny grits, good
11 Pithos 32
firing.
Light-brown clay, greyish-brown core, black, red and
12 Pithos 22
white grits, red painting outside, good firing.

10
11
12
13
0 10 cm


Holemouth Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, black and grey grits,
1 17
jar soot traces outside, low firing.
Holemouth Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits,
2 10
jar incised rope decoration outside, low firing.
Reddish clay, light-grey core, white, grey and red grits,
Holemouth
3 22 soot traces outside, incised rope decoration under the rim
jar
outside, low firing.
Light clay, light-grey core, grey, white and shiny grits,
Holemouth
4 7 soot traces (?) outside, thumbed rope decoration on rim
jar
Holemouth Over-firing clay, white and grey grits, soot traces outside
5 7
jar and inside, low firing.
Light-yellow clay, reddish-brown core, grey (light and
Holemouth
6 17 dark) and shiny grits, thumb-impressed rope decoration
jar
on rim outside, low firing.
Holemouth Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits,
7 10
jar incised decoration on rim outside, low firing.
Holemouth Reddish clay, light-grey core, white grits, incised rope
8 9
jar decoration on rim outside, good firing.
Holemouth Light-brown clay, grey core, white and shiny grits, soot
9 8
jar traces on rim outside, medium firing.
Light-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits,
Holemouth
10 13 soot traces outside, plastic rope decoration on rim
jar
Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey
Holemouth
11 10 grits, soot traces outside, incised rope decoration on rim
jar
Holemouth Reddish clay, light-grey core, white and grey grits, soot
12 7
pithos traces outside and inside, low firing.
Holemouth Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white, grey and
13 8
jar shiny grits, soot traces outside, low firing.

0 20 cm 2
1
5
3
4
6 7 8 9
11
12
10
0 10 cm
Figure 13.9. Miscellaneous.


Light-brown clay and core, white and grey grits, soot
1 Jar (body sherd) 10
traces inside, low firing.
Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, white and grey
2 Base 10 grits, dark-brown drops of painting outside, good
firing.
Reddish clay, light-grey core, many large white and
3 Jar (body sherd) 10
grey grits, soot traces outside and inside, low firing.
Light-brown clay and core, white and grey grits, soot
4 Ledge handle 10 traces outside and inside, thumb-impressed rope
decoration on upper part of handle, low firing.
Light-orange clay, light-yellow core, white and grey
5 Ledge handle 21 grits, thumb impressions on upper part of handle,
low firing.
Light-brown clay and core, grey grits, red painting,
6 Ear handle 10
low firing.
Light clay, light-yellow core, white and red grits, low
7 Lug handle 8
firing.
Reddish-brown clay, light-brown core, grey and
8 Knob handle 38
shiny grits, low firing.
Reddish-brown clay and core, white and grey grits,
9 Spout 38
red painting (?) outside, low to medium firing.
Light-brown clay, grey core, white and grey grits,
10 Loom weight 17
low firing.
Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, red and grey
11 Body sherd 17 grits, pre-firing linear incisions outside, medium
firing.
Reddish-brown clay, light-grey core, red and grey
12 Body sherd 21 grits, soot traces outside, pre-firing linear incisions
outside, good firing.


The excavation at the site was limited, and therefore the small flint as-
semblage is not yet large enough to provide a complete picture of the
industry and the activities the flint tools were used for. We hope that fu-
ture excavation seasons will produce more extensive assemblages and a
broader picture which will allow determining the connection between
the various groups of tools and the way of life.
The sources of the raw material have not yet been studied, but the
items were mostly made of mediocre brown flint or poor quality grey
and beige flint. A few artifacts were made of grey flint with dark zebra-
like stripes. Fine-grained, high quality flint was rare.
The Assemblage (Table 13.2)
Group A - Waste and cores (43.8%)

The cores in the assemblage were unsuitable for the production of large
flint items, thus most of the industry was composed of fairly small
artifacts. The four bladelet cores present indicate that bladelets were
produced on a regular basis. The cores used for the production of Ca-
naanean blades were not found. The ratio between the various kinds
of waste seems reasonable for a proto-historic site where not all the
excavated soil was sifted. The scant quantity of core trimming elements
is usually characteristic of similar proto-historic sites (Rosen 1997:
31–32), a period when the art of flint knapping was in decline and in its
final stages (Rosen 1997: 151–160).
Group B - Flakes and blades (defined by us as ‘semi-finished’ prod-

ucts) – (49.6%)
This group contained mostly flakes (74.4% of Group B), but other
categories in the group are also reasonably well-represented. This in-
cludes bladelets (9.3%), produced on a regular basis and Canaanean
blades (5.2%; including a long Canaanean blade). Some of the blades
and bladelets were broken, and they were identified according to their
presumed shape.
Group C - Tools (6.6%)

The percentage of tools in the assemblage was reasonable: however,
4
excluding the sickle blades (17.6% of Group C) and the single fragment
of a fan scraper, there were no diagnostic tools. Most of the tools were
small, and only a minimum of work was invested in their preparation.
Notches and denticulates comprised 25.5% of the group; whereas 17.6%
were retouched flakes and blades. Apparently these ad hoc tools were
improvised for the purpose of performing an immediate task.
Sickle Blades (Table 13.1)

The assemblage of sickle blades is definitely small. However, despite
finding two sickle blades with a retouched back and truncations attrib-
uted mainly to the Chalcolithic period, the characteristics (the cross-
section of the tools and use-wear on both sides of the blade) clearly
indicate a predominance of Canaanean technology.
Discussion
The total quantity of flint items (N = 781) is indeed small; however,
the presence of flint items belonging to the three groups (A – waste,
B – semi-finished products, C – retouched tools) proves the existence
of a flint industry at the site. Flint was utilized as a raw material in the
production of items for everyday use. However, based on the nature of
the finds, most of the industry was not particularly sophisticated, both
from the standpoint of production-technology and the selection of
raw material. Despite the presence of the three groups of flint products
which indicate the existence of a local flint industry, no hammer stones,
which are essential for the knapping process, were found.
The quantity of semi-finished products at the site (flakes, blades, bl-
adelets and Canaanean blades) which were not shaped by a secondary
treatment or retouched is considerable (N = 378, 49.6%). Retouched
tools were relatively scarce, and it can therefore be assumed that at least
some of the flakes or blades were the end-product used for various
purposes. The Canaanean blades (5.2%) were probably blanks for the
preparation of sickle blades.
Most tools of group C (N = 6.6%) should be classified as ad hoc tools
(Rosen 1997: 34, 158–159). A minimum of work was invested in the
secondary treatment (retouching) of most of these. They were prepared
from brown and grey flint of poor and mediocre quality. The cores were
not suitable for the production of large artifacts, similar to the situation
in other sites in the region (e.g. Fazael 7, Chapter 11). Exceptions to
this rule are the Canaanean sickle blade, which were skillfully knapped
from fine quality light-brown raw material, which was apparently also
the case with the fan scraper. The cores used to produce these were
not found, and they probably came from specialized workshops whose
location has not yet been found.
Based on the ceramic finds the site is ascribed to EB I, which is cor-
Figure 13.10. Flint artifacts.

roborated by the flint artifacts. This period is characterized by local

industries which produced ad hoc tools with little secondary shaping
treatment, by Canaanean blades from specialized workshops, and by
the complete absence of core tools for felling or digging (celt tools)
which usually characterized the Chalcolithic period. The fan scrapers,
which are probably also the result of a specialized production, are typi-
cal for both periods (Rosen 1997: 75).
The relatively large number of sickle blades is indicative of an agrar-
ian society engaged in growing grain, but the meagre amount of other
tools does not make it possible to define other activities at the site more
specifically. The relatively large quantity of notches and denticulates
apparently indicates the production of artifacts made of perishable
materials, such as wood or bone. At this early stage of the research and
with such a small quantity of diagnostic items, it would be incorrect to
draw any conclusions regarding the lifestyle of the population, and we
should wait for the results of future excavations at the site.
Lustre on both
Fine serration
Retouched or
Double snap
natural back
Canaanean
Truncation
Truncation
Reaping
Double
Lustre
Locus
knife
sides
Snap
8 + + + +
+
8 + + +
natural
16 + + +
22 + + + +
25 + + + + +
25 + + + +
31 + +
31 + Short fragments
+
31 + +
Table 13.1. Sickle blade characteristics.

Category / Locus 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 15 16 17 19 21 22 25 27 31 32 33 37 38 39 40 41 N %
Group A - Waste
Core 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 10 2.9
Primary element 3 3 2 24 1 6 3 18 1 10 3 5 2 7 6 94 27.5
Chunk 2 6 6 18 2 2 2 9 2 8 3 1 5 6 72 21.1
Chip 4 22 29 1 2 4 6 17 5 7 8 12 6 2 7 34 166 48.5
Group A - sub-total 9 31 9 73 1 3 2 13 12 46 2 5 19 12 25 11 2 2 19 46 342 43.8
Group B - Debitage - (Semi-finished products)
Flake 14 8 9 35 1 2 9 9 36 1 8 54 28 26 2 12 2 4 1 12 14 1 288 74.4
Blade 1 1 4 1 2 6 4 8 7 2 1 1 5 43 11.1
Table 13.2. The flint assemblage.

Cananean blade 2 1 4 2 3 1 4 1 1 1 20 5.2
Bladelet 2 2 5 1 1 1 7 11 3 1 1 1 36 9.3
Group B - sub-total 15 10 12 46 1 5 10 16 7 53 3 12 68 35 27 3 18 4 4 2 2 19 14 1 387 49.6
Group C - Tools
Scraper 1 1 2 3.8
Fanscraper 1 1 1.9
Burin 1 1 1.9
Awl 1 1 1.9
Borer 2 1 1 4 7.7
Retouched flake 1 2 1 3 7 13.5
Retouched blade 1 1 2 3.8
Sickle element 2 1 1 2 3 9 17.3
Notch 1 3 2 3 1 10 19.2
Denticulate 1 1 1 3 5.8
Retouched microlith 1 1 1.9
Truncation 1 1 1.9
Multiple function 1 1 1.9
Varia 3 2 4 9 17.3
Group C - sub-total 1 1 2 11 1 1 3 11 6 2 5 1 4 1 2 52 6.6
Total 25 42 23 130 3 8 12 30 22 110 5 17 93 49 57 4 33 6 6 2 2 39 62 1 781 100
The Stone tool Assemblage

Eleven stone objects, all dating to the EB I, were found in the excava-
tion. They were produced from hard stone: indigenous limestone (10
items) and basalt (1 item). The assemblage includes six grinding stones,
four small bowls and a stone with a biconical perforation.
Grind Stones
Six items were found. A large whole basin (maximum width 35 cm,
length 60 cm) made of limestone was discovered near the round build-
ings (silos) in the southern part of the excavation region (Figs. 13.3;
13.11: 1). The inside of the basin (width 35 cm, length 48 cm, depth 10
cm) is elliptical. The other stone objects include a fragment of a lower
grind stone made of limestone; two complete upper grinding stones
made of limestone (maximum width 15 cm, length 24 cm and 29 cm;
Fig. 13.11: 3–4) and two small grind stones, one round (diameter 6.5
cm) made of limestone, and the other square (width 3.5 cm, length 4.5
cm, height 2.5 cm), made of basalt. It seems that at least two of the sides
of the square stone were used. The number of items attests to the inten-
sity of food preparation activities involving grain at the site. Parallels of
these items were found at nearby Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12) and other
EBA sites in the region.
Small Bowls/Shallow Stone Mortars

Four items were found, all hewn from limestone. Three are small com-
plete bowls (Fig. 13.11: 5–7) with a shallow depression about 30 mm
in diameter and an average depth of 80 mm. There are parallels for
these items from nearby Sheikh Diab 2 (Chapter 12: fig 12.31: 4–5).
The function of these small bowls is not known: they were probably
used for very fine crushing. Another broken bowl was discovered. It
is elliptical, 9 cm wide and more than 10 cm long. The depression is
deeper (15 mm) than the other small stone bowls described above, and
it was most likely used for another purpose – possibly for grinding or
crushing food.
Stone with a Biconical Perforation

A limestone fragment with a biconical perforation was found in Locus
22 (Fig. 13.11: 9). Stones with similar perforations were found at Sheikh
Diab 2 (Chapter 12; fig 12.31: 8), and were probably used as weights.
Figure 13.11. Stone objects.

Conclusions
The 11 stone items that were found in the excavation reveal interesting
characteristics. The principal raw material was indigenous limestone
that was readily available to the residents of the site. The basalt was
also available to the residents of the site from the Lower Cretaceous
outcrops in Wadi Far'ah. No stones were found that came from a source
farther away. The amount of food preparation tools attests that food
preparation was a significant activity at the site.
The spatial distribution of the stone artifacts is also worth noting.
The stone mortar was found together with two small stone bowls and
the two small grind stones in the vicinity of the two adjacent circu-
lar buildings in the southern part of the excavation. Two upper grind
stones, a small stone bowl and the stone with the biconical perforation
were found between the two circular buildings and Wall 1, in the north-
ern part of the excavation. An upper grind stone and a small stone bowl
were found in the area where there was probably a building (between
Walls 1 and 28). The main conclusion we can draw from the distribu-
tion is that all of the stone items were found outside the circular build-
ings (in an area that was apparently used as two inner courtyards and a
room): hence these structures were not used for work, but most likely
for storage. Most of the items were discovered in a courtyard, and only
two were found inside the room.
The Faunal Remains5

The Fazael 4 faunal assemblage is small, and consists of only 17 identi-
fied bones.
Methods
To examine surface modifications and carnivore and cut-marks, the
bones were cleaned in water and when necessary, a 5% acetic acid solu-
tion was used. Bones not identified at a taxonomic level were docu-
mented according to body size. Differentiating between domestic sheep
and goat was not possible; therefore, these remains were pooled and
referred to as sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis). The total number of identified
bones (NISP) is given as counts and as percentage of the assemblage as
a whole. The minimum number of elements (MNE) is given for each
species and group size.
5
This section was written by R. Zuckerman, University of Haifa.
Description of finds
Seventeen bones and bone fragments were identified and recorded
(Table 13.3). Mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella) and the undifferenti-
ated caprine category of sheep/goat (Capra/Ovis) were present in equal
proportions (29% of the assemblage); whereas pig (Sus sp.) and cattle
(Bos sp.) appear less often (18% and 6%, respectively). At the present
stage of research it is not possible to determine whether the cattle and
pig bones at the site represent domesticated animals. Bones and bone
fragments not identified at a taxonomic level and attributed to the
group of medium sized animals (e.g. mountain gazelle, goat, sheep, pig
or dog) constitute 18% of the assemblage.
Only a few bones were complete enough to assess age, therefore, reli-
able mortality data could not be obtained. On the basis of bone fusion
stages (Silver 1969), all caprine, mountain gazelle and pig remains were
identified as those of young animals. Slaughter of animals at a young
age suggests that animals were raised and exploited for meat. Break-
age and fracture patterns suggest that the bones were broken close to
the time of the animal’s death. Due to the small size of the assemblage
statistical analysis was not possible.
Evidence of butchery was found on one bone – cattle first phalange.
Carnivore damage, in the form of dog-gnawing, was observed on the
same phalange. Both carnivore and cut marks suggest that after the
bones were used by man, some were discarded at the site and exploited
by predators or domestic dogs.
In summary, the preliminary conclusions presented here suggest
a mixed economy of domestic animal husbandry (sheep/goat, cattle,
and probably pigs) and wild animal hunting (mountain gazelle and
perhaps pigs). The gnawing marks suggest the presence of predators,
or alternatively, the presence of
domestic dogs in the vicinity Species NISP (%NISP) MNE
of the residential area. Further Capra/Ovis 5 (29) 4
excavations at the site, leading Bos sp. 1 (6) 1
to a larger faunal assemblage Sus sp. 3 (18) 3
will make it possible to conduct Gazella gazella 5 (29) 4
a representative and in-depth Medium size 3 (18) 3
analysis. Total 17 (100)
Table 13.3. Total number of identified

bones (NISP) and minimum number
of elements (MNE) from Fazael 4.
General Conclusions
Fazael 4 is an example of an EB I rural settlement in the southern Jor-
dan Valley in the second half of the 4th millennium BCE. The dating of
the site is based primarily on the ceramic typology that is characteristic
of this region in the EB I. Its proximity to the Sheikh Diab 2 site located
just to the south, the close similarity of the various architectural units
at the two sites, and the typological kinship of the ceramic, lithic and
stone finds, shows the two settlements are chronologically very close,
and might even be contemporary. There is also the possibility that the
two sites were part of one large settlement that extended across the
western portion of the Fazael Valley.
The area of the site is about 3 ha, and the survey on the surface of
the site discovered distinct architectural remains that indicate the pos-
sible existence of dwelling complexes, including courtyards, rooms and
round structures. From our experience at Sheikh Diab 2 we assume
that we are dealing with about 10 family units, that together with data
collected from Sheikh Diab 2, suggests a large village of more than 20
family units that existed in the western part of the Fazael Valley during
EB I.
One of the most intriguing phenomena at the site is the round build-
ings, which we presume functioned as storage installations and silos,
although no evidence was found of the contents of these structures
(possibly because of their proximity to the surface, which resulted in
the disintegration of organic matter). Such buildings have been discov-
ered nearby at Sheikh Diab 2 and a few other sites in the EB I in the
southern Levant. All the openings of the buildings face in a general
north-north-west to north-north-east direction. The silo opening at
Sheikh Diab 2 also faced in this direction.
In light of the preliminary data collected at the excavation, which
is similar to other sites in the Fazael Valley in the Chalcolithic period
and EB I, it seems that the site’s economy was based on a combination
of grazing and agriculture, with a limited amount of hunting. This is
indicated by the sickle blades, animal bones and stone objects that were
discovered in the excavation.
The data collected in the 2010 season only provide a preliminary
picture of the activity in the Fazael Valley during the EB I. Further re-
search at Fazael 4 and other sites nearby should aid in formulating a
broader picture of the fabric of life in the region.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
This study presents an analysis of the settlement patterns in the Chal-
colithic and EB I periods in the southern Jordan Valley and the desert
fringes of Samaria. The data from 102 survey sites were reviewed, and
those of 30 new sites were analyzed. Five sites were excavated in order
to answer specific questions concerning this subject.
This chapter summarizes the surveys and excavation data to give a
general picture of the settlement pattern, according to trends and key
processes.
Trends in Population Fluctuation in

the Chalcolithic and EB I Periods
The Chalcolithic and EB I were periods of peak settlement in this re-
gion. Similar peaks were only recorded in later periods, particularly in
the Iron I–II and the Roman-Byzantine periods (Zertal 2005; 2008).
A sequence of several sites (Sites 45, 67, 86–87, 108–109, 113) from
earlier periods (Pottery Neolithic B/Early Chalcolithic) was identified
for the first time in this study. In addition, there are three known sites
that border on the region: Tel Tsaf, the Bezeq Channel (Site 6) and Tell
Far'ah (North), which can also be ascribed to the Early Chalcolithic,
based on ceramics (Miroschedji 1993).
Of the 10 early sites, seven also existed in the Chalcolithic, when
more than 45 new sites were established. It is clear from this that a sig-
nificant increase in settlement occurred in the Chalcolithic, the reasons
for which we can only assume. Fifty-three sites from the Chalcolithic
were discovered (40 of which have medium or higher levels of prob-
ability). However, a decrease occurred again at the end of the period:
in only seven of the sites with a medium or higher level of probability
were there EB I finds (which does not meant there was stratigraphic
continuity).
Fifty-six sites were discovered from the EB I (46 of which have a
general conclusions 443
medium or higher level of probability). Using survey data alone it is

difficult to associate the sites with the different phases of the period: it
appears that a substantial portion of the sites existed mostly in the EB
Ib. This seems to be the period when numerous settlements flourished
and new ones were founded (80% of the sites were new), the majority of
them at the base of tells, or at sites that would be fortified at the end of
the period (nearly two-thirds of the tells in the Jordan Valley and desert
fringes were founded during this period; See similar results in northern
Israel in Esse 1991, and in the entire southern Levant in Joffe 1993: 50).
Only a third (31.5%) of the EB I sites, with a medium or higher level
of probability, also existed in the EB II. The rest (68.5%), in contrast,
were abandoned by the end of the period. A significant decrease in
the scope of settlement occurred in the EB II (from 82 sites in the EB
I to 24 sites in the next period, a trend that has already been identi-
fied throughout the country, e.g. Esse 1991; Joffe 1993; Portugali and
Gophna 1993).
A destruction layer at the end of the EB I was found at some of the
sites close to this region (Tel Kitan – Eisenberg 1993; Bab edh-Dhra'
– Rast and Schaub 2003; and Tel Yaqush – Esse 1993). The fortified
settlement at Tel Shalem was deserted, Tell Um Hammad shrank, etc. It
therefore seems that the region underwent changes in the end of the EB
Ib, when almost all the major settlements in the western Jordan Valley
were abandoned or violently destroyed, and others shrank significantly.
This phenomenon was not as drastic in the eastern Jordan Valley,
where many settlements continued to exist (e.g. Tell es-Sa'idiyeh and
Tell Abu el-Kharaz). The settlements in the Samarian foothills actually
continued to exist, and the sites at Tell Far'ah (North), Tel Za'anuni,
Juraish and Khirbet Rahiyeh reached the height of their power during
this period.
The Settlement Model – Types of Sites, Area Estimates,

Topography, and Relevant Geographical Data
Four types of sites were discovered in the Chalcolithic period: the most
common was the settlement site (and its variants) – 27 sites (79.5% of
all the sites). Open sites (four sites – 11.5%), work sites (two sites – 6%)
and enclosures (one site – 3%) were uncommon. Cave sites (common
in the Judean Desert, south of the study region), and burial sites (much
more common in the EB I) were absent from the sites with a medium
444 chapter fourteen
or higher level of probability in the Chalcolithic.

The large settlements, about 10 ha in area, were characterized by ex-
tensive area and scattered architecture (large dwelling units separated
by large tracts of open land), near sources of water and large areas for
agriculture. Most were located where the slope met the level ground of
the wadi. These sites were discovered in the flood plains of the major
wadis (Far'ah and Fazael) and in the southern Beth Shean Valley. They
were evidently permanent settlements. The Fazael cluster of sites is an
example of this kind of site. Smaller sites with an average area of about
2 ha, whose architecture was more densely distributed, were also preva-
lent. Their spatial distribution is similar to the large sites, and they are
located in all the wadis in the region. 'Ein Hilu is an example.
The main conclusions drawn from the geographical data are:
There is no obvious hierarchy between the different sites. This con-
clusion is inconsistent with attempts to develop complex socio-settle-
ment models, but it does support a tribal model (see below).
– The sources of water and potential agricultural land were very
important factors in the size and location of the sites – the large
sites are concentrated in the wadi flood plains and the southern
Beth Shean Valley, and the medium sites in the flood plains or
near the major springs.
– More than 90% of the population of the Chalcolithic period re-
sided in large and medium sites in the Jordan Valley, with no sig-
nificant penetration into the desert fringes and higher regions of
Samaria. Hence these were probably permanent settlement sites.
– A few small sites are scattered in the area without regard to sources
of water, and with no uniform topographical characteristics. This
supports the supposition that these were encampment sites.
– The topography was taken into account in establishing the sites:
the settlers preferred plateau sites in the open valleys, usually
close to sources of water; and in the wadi flood plains and along
the wadis they favoured the edges of the valley. The latter choice
possibly stemmed from the need to keep space available for ag-
riculture and to be well above the wadi channel, which had a
tendency to flood. Also taken into account was the proximity to
the slopes of the wadi where there was available building mate-
rial, and building on a gentle slope to ensure proper drainage and
natural cleaning of the area.
– The vast majority of the sites were established with an eastern or
southern orientation. A logical ecological reason for this is the
direction of the sun’s movement in the sky and its effect on the
vegetation in a period that was more humid than the present. The
southern orientation in this region is warmer than the northern
orientation, it receives more direct and uninterrupted sunshine,
and the plant life is sparser. Hence the founders of the sites pre-
ferred to leave the northern orientation available for agricultural
purposes (grazing or field crops).
Six types of sites were discovered in the EB I: the most common being
the unfortified site, of which 37 were discovered (44.5% of all of the
sites of the period). This type is divided into four categories according
to area. There are also 27 open sites (33%), seven burial sites (8.5%), six
enclosure sites (7%), two fortified sites, two caves, and one cultic site.
Of the sites with a medium or higher level of probability the unforti-
fied site is also the most prevalent, with 31 sites of this kind (69% of
all the sites). Of the sites with a medium or higher level of probability,
seven burial sites (15.5%), four open sites (9%), two fortified sites, and
one cultic site (2%) were also discovered. The cave sites and enclosures
that were found in the surveys have a lower than medium level of prob-
ability.
Here too, as in the case of the Chalcolithic sites, the unfortified sites
stand out. These are divided into four area-related categories: large vil-
lages about 10 ha in area with numerous houses; medium-sized villages
between 1 and 3 ha; small villages up to 1 ha in area; and single build-
ings – a farmhouse or a house of a nuclear family (usually in an area of
less than 3,000 m2).
The characteristics of the large unfortified sites were identical to the
Chalcolithic (see above). Four sites of this kind were discovered (Shu-
net el-Masna'ah, Kaziyet el-Ratrut, Mantaket Wadi Zeit and Far'at ej-
Jiftlik – Sites 55–57, 62) – all in Wadi Far'ah. In the medium-sized sites,
which were more prevalent than the large sites, there was relatively
dense construction, and they were typically located on a shoulder or
spur above the source of water. They were distributed in all of the major
wadis, except Wadi Malih and Bezeq, but were mainly concentrated
in the western part of Wadi Far'ah and near the springs of the desert
fringes of Samaria. Sheikh Diab 2 and Fazael 4 are examples of such
settlements. The small unfortified settlements, characterized by their
limited area (2,000–3,000 m2), were located near a source of water, and
usually near arable land.
Of particular importance were the fortified sites from this period
concentrated in the Jordan Valley between the Kinneret and the Dead
Sea. In this region two sites were discovered for which there is a high
and a medium level of probability that they were probably already forti-
fied in the EB Ib (Tel Shalem and er-Rjjum). Three other sites, all in
the desert fringes, might already have been fortified in the EB Ib: Tel
Za'anuni (Site 42; Zertal 2008), Khirbet Juraish (Site 64; Porath 1968;
Finkelstein et al. 1997) and Khirbet Rahiyeh (Site 96; Finkelstein et al.
1997). All of these also existed in the EB II, and without excavating it is
not possible to determine the dates of their fortification. The five sites,
together with the major sites at Beth Yerah, Tell Far'ah (North), and
Jericho, form a sequence of fortified settlements between the Kinneret
and the Dead Sea on the western side of the Jordan. A similar phenom-
enon was also noted on the eastern side of the Jordan, particularly at
Tell Abu al-Kharaz and Tell es-Sa'idiyeh. In both regions, west and east
of the Jordan River, the sequence is dated to the EB Ib and EB II.
The distribution of the fortified sites suggests ‘independent’ centres
with unfortified settlements around them, that constituted an eco-
nomic, and possibly also a cultural, periphery. In the southern Beth
Shean Valley this was the fortified settlement of Tel Shalem; in the east
and middle of Wadi Far'ah er-Rjjum was the key site. The proximity of
er-Rjjum to Tell Far'ah (North), if they were both fortified at the same
time, is difficult to understand, and the data at this stage are insufficient
to determine which of the two was more important (they are similar in
area: er-Rjjum was not excavated, and the information from Tell Far'ah
[North] has not been consolidated).
The absence of Um Hammad ware and the paucity of sites south
of Wadi Far'ah suggest that this wadi was the southernmost bound-
ary of the area affected by these settlements, and south of it is Jericho’s
settlement region. An environmental analysis of the desert fringe sites
suggests that they did not have an economic/cultural periphery. Their
location there is possibly related to economic activity, such as the grow-
ing of olives and vines that required centres where the activity could be
organized and the produce processed.
From this analysis we learn that the fortified sites were not real
‘cities’, and were certainly not ‘city-states’. The author agrees with Paz
(2002) who proposed the existence of limited socio-political units with
the beginnings of a bureaucratic mechanism, and not more than two
settlement hierarchies.
These sites have other important characteristics: an area of 2–5 ha in-
side the fortification; a location on slopes or precipitous hilltops above
wadis (except Tel Shalem which is on level ground); and between seven
and 15 unfortified sites (settlements in a secondary hierarchy) around
each of them. In each settlement cluster, which was in the centre of one
or two fortified sites, was a large regional cemetery; and an unfortified
settlement existed near some of the fortified settlements (Tel Shalem,
'Ain Juraish – next to Khirbet Juraish; 'Ain Duma – next to Khirbet
Rahiyeh).
Seven burial sites were also identified in the EB I (16% of the sites
with a medium or higher level of probability), and one site that was
evidently used for cultic purposes – el-Khellaiyel (Site 24). Burial sites
are also known in the southern Beth Shean Valley – Qa'un (Site 4),
on the slopes of the Samarian hills – Tana Cave (Site 59), and in Wadi
Far'ah – Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh, el-Maqbarah, el-Maqaber, Aqraban-
iyeh and Jelamet el-Ahmar (A) (Sites 26–29, 38). The northern bank
of Wadi Far'ah (for a distance of more than 5 km between 'Ain Shibli
and Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh) was one of the largest cemeteries in the
southern Levant in the EBA.
The main features of the burial sites are: multi-chamber shaft tombs
with a vertical entrance, usually located on a gentle slope, and contain-
ing special finds that are absent from settlement sites (e.g. grey bur-
nished bowls that were found in most of the funerary assemblages and
at only one settlement site, red burnished or trefoil amphoriskoi with
a tall handle rising above the rim, etc). The absence of Um Hammad
ware from the funerary assemblages is surprising, because it was a very
common type of pottery in the settlement sites.
The el-Khellaiyel site is an example of a cultic site, and possibly
also a burial site in the EB I. It is located on a high peak in the centre
of the Jebel Tammun ridge, and looks out over the Wadi Far'ah val-
ley and its settlements. There are two key elements in it that stand out
prominently: a tall pyramid-shaped hill on which remains of ashes and
burnt bones were identified, and a broad house 25 m long by 5 m wide.
The desolate location, remote from sources of water and agricultural
land, on the one hand, and the breathtaking view and cultic/funerary
features on the other, suggests that this was no ordinary site, and was
apparently a unit with special ritualistic importance, or a magnificent
burial structure.
The following are the main conclusions drawn from the geographi-
cal data of the EB I:
– The sources of water and potential farmland were a key element
in the location of the sites. Unlike in the Chalcolithic, even the
smallest sites were located near water.

– A settlement centre developed in Wadi Far'ah, particularly its
western part. More than half the EB I sites were discovered here.
The northern wadis, Bezeq and Malih, together with Wadi 'Aujjeh
in the south, were very sparsely inhabited.
– There was significant development along the hill slopes in Sa-
maria, where large settlements were founded near springs. The
reasons for this were possibly economic, due to the establishment
of the olive and vine as the main branches of agriculture in the
hills.
– Topographical considerations were taken into account in estab-
lishing the sites: on the wadi flood plains and along the wadis the
settlers preferred locating their sites on the slope and along the
edge of the valley. During this period the sites on the plateau (the
most prevalent kind of site in the Chalcolithic) were abandoned,
and instead the settlers relocated to the higher regions that con-
trolled the wadis, or to the first tell sites.
– Most of the sites were established with an eastern or southern ori-
entation, possibly for reasons similar to those of the Chalcolithic
settlers.
The Settlement Pattern – Spatial Distribution

and Socio-settlement Model
The main conclusions drawn from the new data and the spatial analysis
of the Chalcolithic sites suggest a social model with a single hierarchy:
– The Chalcolithic sites were grouped together in settlement clus-
ters (probably permanent) with distinct boundaries. These were
dictated by, among other things, the topography and natural re-
sources (water and land).
– Three main settlement clusters were identified – the southern
Beth Shean Valley, Wadi Far'ah, and Wadi Fazael, and possibly a
smaller cluster in Wadi 'Aujjeh. In each of them (except Wadi 'Au-
jjeh) was a site or central block of sites that was the focal point of
the settlement. Around it were usually smaller settlements located
not more than 5 km away. The distance between the settlement
clusters ranged between 15 and 40 km. This settlement model
seems reflecting a family or multi-family entity that was concen-
trated in each cluster of sites. It is very probable, although there
is no existing evidence to prove it, that these were linked to each

other by various relationships (family, trade, alliances, etc.).
– The water and land resources in extensive areas of the region were
not exploited. Certain sections in the southern Beth Shean Val-
ley and along Nahal Bezeq, Wadi Malih, the central and western
parts of Wadi Far'ah, and the eastern parts of Wadi 'Aujjeh were
not inhabited. This suggests that the population was not large,
and did not exhaust its potential for expansion until the end of
the Chalcolithic. It also shows that there was no centralized body
that controlled the movement of people and distribution of settle-
ments in the region.
The settlement pattern and spatial analysis of the next period (EB I)
suggest a social model, similar to the Chalcolithic, in the first part of
the period. Afterwards a more complex model with two hierarchies
appears in the second part of the period with the beginning of fortifica-
tion. The following are its characteristics:
– The EB I sites were grouped together in settlement clusters, with
water and land as key factors in determining the location of the
settlement sites.
– In the three main settlement clusters (southern Beth Shean Valley,
Wadi Far'ah, and Wadi Fazael) there was one site or a block of
sites that was the focus of settlement of the cluster. In the south-
ern Beth Shean Valley this was Tel Shalem; in Wadi Far'ah – er-
Rjjum and possibly Tell Far'ah (North), 'Ain Farr, and the sites of
the eastern flood plain; and in Wadi Fazael – Khirbet Rahiyeh.
Usually there were several smaller settlements around them. The
distance between clusters ranged between 20 and 40 km.
– The settlement on the slopes of the Samarian hills was more
crowded than in previous periods, and large sites were established
near springs ('Ain Mta'a, Khirbet Juraish, 'Ain Juraish, Sheikh
Mazar, Khirbet Rahiyeh, 'Ain Duma, and 'Ain Rashash). Some
were fortified at the end of the period, or at the start of the next
period (Khirbet Juraish, Khirbet Rahiyeh), and others were aban-
doned during the transition, or at beginning of the EB II ('Ain
Mta'a, 'Ain Juraish, 'Ain Duma and 'Ain Rashash). It is unclear
whether these sites were independent units, or if there was a con-
nection between them and the settlement clusters in Wadi Far'ah
(presumably) or in Wadi Fazael.
– The regions where the water and land resources were not exploited
(e.g. Wadi Malih and Wadi 'Aujjeh) suggest that the population of
the Jordan Valley did not exhaust the potential for its expansion
until the end of the period.
The Intra-settlement Pattern – Residential Building

Units in the Chalcolithic
The basic dwelling unit in the Chalcolithic was a square or trapezoidal
complex composed of two main parts: the first was a covered room
or number of rooms – rectangular broad rooms with smaller cells
alongside them, 4 to 5 m wide, and 5 to 15 m long (average 8 m). The
adjacent cells, the number of which varied, were smaller, rectangular,
and usually did not exceed 10 m2 in area. Sometimes the broad room
was divided into two units of similar size. The roofed room was used
primarily for sleeping and cooking. The nearby cells, some of which
were paved, were used mainly for storage. The second part was a large
square or rectangular courtyard/s 180 to 700 m2 in area, where most
of the household activities were performed, and where it seems the
animals were also kept. Pavements and hearths, as well as large storage
vessels and vessels used in preparing food, were discovered in some of
the courtyards.
The entrances were usually in the centre of the large broad room
of the dwelling unit or in the middle of the courtyard. Socket stones
located to the right and left on the inside of the door indicate that the
doors opened inwards. The average width of the openings was 80 cm,
and they were paved with stone. At some of the sites a step descended
from the opening to the lower level of the room/courtyard because of
differences in elevation of the area outside the structure.
The walls were of fairly standard construction: two rows of medium
fieldstones with a fill of smaller stones and mud between them. Their
thickness, between 65 and 85 cm, indicates that the building was single-
storey. Thinner walls were usually used as internal partitions. The walls
were usually built to a maximum height of three to four courses (with
the exception of the stone masonry at Fazael 7), and the construction
above them was continued using mud bricks.
The floors, which were made of tamped earth, sometimes combined
with crushed chalk, were always below the level of the mud brick con-
struction (usually at the elevation of the upper part of the first stone
course). It is important to note that stone construction was character-
istic of those parts of the Jordan Valley close to the slopes of the hills.
In regions near the Jordan River and far from sources of stone, the con-
struction utilized mud bricks (e.g. at Tel Tsaf, located near the Jordan
River – Garfinkel et al. 2007). In some areas stone pavements were used
for storage or as a working/cooking surface.
At least some of the dwelling units were covered, but with the excep-
tion of one stone base ('Ein Hilu, Area E) and the unique crossed wall
pattern from the large unit in Fazael 7, no other roof supports were
found. The fact that the width of the living rooms was practically uni-
form (4.0–4.5 m) suggests that the roofing usually used organic ele-
ments (probably wood) of this length.
The Basic Dwelling Unit and Settlement Plan

of the Permanent Village in the EB I
The excavation at the Sheikh Diab 2 and Fazael 4 sites revealed the
layout of two villages from the EB I. The residential complexes, which
included courtyards and buildings inside them, were of a scale and lay-
out uncommon in this period. The sites were located on both banks of
the channel in Wadi Fazael.
In Sheikh Diab 2 residential complexes separated by alleys and
squares were excavated. The construction of the site consisted of ir-
regular enclosures containing family units, each of which had a covered
room/s and a wide courtyard varying in shape, with areas from 150 to
500 m2. The alleys which separated the dwelling complexes were be-
tween 1 and 2 m wide. A main alley, with secondary alleys branching
off of it between the complexes, ran through the middle of the spur. The
floor of the alley was the natural chalk, which is permeable and highly
efficient at draining rainfall and sewage.
The basic living unit was an irregular enclosure with two main parts:
a living room and courtyard. The former was a covered room or rooms,
about 4 m wide and 5 m long. It was square with rounded corners; a
characteristic of the EB Ib in the north, and also in earlier phases of
the EB in the Jordan Valley (e.g. at Tell Um Hammad in the EB Ia –
Helms et al. 1992: figs. 38–39). Unlike in the Chalcolithic, no rooms
were located adjacent to the main room, and no internal division was
identified inside the rooms. The room was probably mainly used for
sleeping, and sometimes also for storage, and most of the household
activities were conducted in the courtyard. The courtyard was enclosed
within a wall, and had an average area of 165 m2. The ratio between the
areas of dwelling unit and the courtyard was 1:9; hence its centrality
in the household activity (animals were probably also kept in it). The
courtyards were based on the natural chalk bedrock, and silos and the
household’s large storage vessels were located in it.
The walls were built similarly to those in the Chalcolithic sites: two
rows of medium-sized fieldstones with a fill of smaller stones and mud
between them. The walls were up to 85 cm thick. The main difference
between the two periods was that the EB I settlers had a tendency to
build curved rather than straight walls (particularly the outer wall of
the courtyard). The walls were preserved to a maximum height of seven
stone courses, and it seems they were stone-built to most of their height.
The thickness of the walls shows that the buildings were probably only
of one storey. Some of the wall foundation trenches were rock-hewn.
times combined with crushed chalk. Some parts were paved with stone
that might have been used as storage surfaces or as working/cooking
surfaces. No pavements were laid in the courtyards, where the natural
bedrock served as the floor.
The dwelling units were roofed, but no organic remains used for
covering or as a means of supporting a roof were found. The width of
the living rooms was standard (4 m), probably because of the organic
roof covering, which was most probably wood.
The area of the dwelling units indicates that the typical complex was
intended for a nuclear family. The variation in area of the courtyards
seems to indicate that the owners of the larger courtyards had more
property than the others (or at least a social or economic function that
necessitated the use of a larger area).
A comparison between the Chalcolithic sites at Fazael and Sheikh
Diab 2 is important because they are very close to one another geo-
graphically. The comparison shows that the dwelling unit at the Fazael
sites was significantly (approximately four times) larger than that
at Sheikh Diab 2; the average area of the courtyards at the two sites
was similar; and the total area of the dwelling complexes at Fazael was
greater than its counterpart at Sheikh Diab 2.
In conclusion: the difference in the area of the dwelling units might
be indicative of a transfer of some of the household activities from the
covered units to the open areas. Ilan (2001) contended that some of
the small rooms at the EB II sites were intended for the maintenance
and feeding of animals. If this is true, then the lack of adjacent rooms
at Sheikh Diab 2 indicates some change in the subsistence economy (a

transition toward more agriculture), or a change in the maintenance
and feeding of animals in the EB I. If there is a correlation between the
area of the courtyards and economic wealth, then the nuclear family’s
assets were similar in both periods. The storage volume of the silos at
Sheikh Diab 2 was considerably greater than that at the Fazael sites, and
therefore is further evidence of a transition to an economy with more
field crops (but which still included elements of grazing).
The Economy in the Chalcolithic and EB I Periods
The Economy in the Chalcolithic Period

According to the flint, stone, and faunal artifacts from the excavated
sites, the Chalcolithic economy was mainly based on a combination of
agriculture and grazing, with marginal evidence of hunting.
Grazing was very important: 68% of the faunal assemblage consisted
of sheep and goats (Chapter 5). The flint finds were relatively rich,
with tools for processing animal products (mainly scrapers and cutting
tools). To this day grazing is a key element in the subsistence economy
of the area’s inhabitants. A preliminary analysis of the ages of the ani-
mals at 'Ein Hilu shows that they were used as a source of milk and
wool, and not meat (as is also indicated by the large numbers of churns,
spindle whorls, and loom weights). Pigs were raised for meat (4% of the
assemblage), and possibly also cattle (6%), together with mature ewes
that no longer produced milk. No equine pack animals were found,
and it seems that such animals were not used in moving between settle-
ment regions. Although the excavations have proven the importance
of grazing in the subsistence economy, no proof of nomadic shepherds
was found (bearing in mind the difficulty of identifying such evidence
among the archaeological finds), and it seems that the inhabitants of the
sites were engaged in daily foraging. The nature of the grazing (which is
still practiced to this day) consists of leaving from and returning to the
facility where the animals are housed in the dwelling complex.
The sickle blades from the excavated and surveyed sites attest to the
growing of crops, together with tools used to process food by crushing
and grinding. Cattle were probably used as beasts of burden. The most
common field crops included the different kinds of wheat, legumes
(lentils), peas, beans, chickpeas, vetch, flax, onion, garlic, and barley.
The olive tree was the only fruit tree identified. Dates, almonds and pis-
tachio were also found, but it is unclear if they were intentionally grown
or randomly gathered. It is also unknown if irrigated farming was used
in the region: however, the presence of perennial streams would seem
to suggest that it was. The most common wild tree was the tamarisk,
which was used as fuel for heating and cooking (it was mainly found
in hearths at Fazael 2). The small number of bifacial tools from the ex-
cavated sites is surprising, and the adzes increased in number towards
the north and west. This indicates that wood was mostly processed in
the higher regions in the foothills of Samaria and in the southern Beth
Shean Valley, where the climate was more favorable to the growth of
trees.
Trade
Little evidence was found of inter-regional trade (some metal tools, a
haematite mace head, and a pendant in Fazael 2, and a Mediterranean
seashell in 'Ein Hilu). The basalt tools from both sites were evidence of
regional trade. These finds indicate there was some transfer of goods
from more distant regions to this region. The meagre evidence would
seem to indicate the weakness of regional and inter-regional trade in
the Chalcolithic, but this is probably due to the lack of archaeological
research in the region. In Jordan, for example, much more evidence of
trade was found (bowls from the Negev, mace heads and shells from
Egypt, metal from the Caucasus, etc. –Bourke 2001).
The Economy in the EB I

In general, the economy of the period was based on agriculture, com-
bined with certain elements of grazing. This conclusion is mainly based
on the finds of flint and stone artifacts, and a comparative analysis of
the architecture of the dwelling complexes at Sheikh Diab 2 with those
of Fazael 2 in the Chalcolithic period (see above).
Raising livestock by grazing was an important element in the lives
of the inhabitants – 60% of the faunal assemblage was sheep and goats.
The most prominent finds amongst the flint tools were those used in
processing animals and their products (mainly scrapers and cutting
tools). This activity is a key factor in the economy of the local residents
even now.
There was a trend toward an increase in the percentage of cattle, and
a decrease in the percentage of pigs during the EB I (Philip 2001: table
5.4). This change suggests an increase in the importance of cattle as
work animals in the second half of the period. The significant decrease
in the amount of hunted wildlife relative to previous periods indicates
a transition to raising more animals for meat (the most suitable being
pig). No evidence was found to indicate a population of nomadic shep-
herds (again bearing in mind the difficulty of identifying such evidence
among the archaeological finds), and it seems that the sedentary set-
tlers were also engaged in grazing as part of their subsistence economy
(a model similar to the daily foraging that characterizes the grazing
model of the Chalcolithic sites).
The comparison of the Fazael 2 and Sheikh Diab 2 sites is interest-
ing: the primary animal at both sites was goat/sheep, but their number
at Fazael 2 was significantly greater. Cattle were raised at both sites. At
Fazael 2 there were wild animals (fox, wild cat) which were absent from
Sheikh Diab 2. Pigs, which were absent from Fazael 2, were dominant at
Sheikh Diab 2. Members of the equine family (probably donkeys) have
only been found at Sheikh Diab 2.
The main evidence of field crops is sickle blades and silos, many of
which were discovered at the excavated and surveyed sites. This indi-
cates a change in the EB I economy, and an increase in the importance
of cereal farming as opposed to grazing. There is further evidence of
this in the crushing and grinding tools used to process food, discovered
at excavated and surveyed sites alike. Presumably cattle were also used
as work animals in farming. The prevalent field crops were wheat, bar-
ley, legumes, and vetch. The common orchard crops were the European
olive and grapes. Natural plant life in use included the tamarisk, as well
as Tabor oak, Jerusalem pine, willow, mustard, hackberry, jujube, al-
mond, and spiny burnet. Not surprisingly, the varieties of vegetation in
the Chalcolithic and the EB I were similar. The difference is apparent in
the presumed introduction or intensified use of agricultural technolo-
gies that altered the economy of the period (Philip 2001; Rowan 1998):
flood agriculture, cultivation of fields using work animals, a growth
in processing olives and grapes, and the use of donkeys as work/pack
animals. In addition, agricultural productivity was increased through
the use of metal implements (at the expense of flint tools), and the in-
troduction of the plough.
Also important was the penetration of settlements into the hilly re-
gions of Samaria, which was sparsely inhabited in the Chalcolithic pe-
riod. This change was possibly due to the increased growing of orchard
crops, especially olives and grapes in the Samarian hills and along their
slopes.
Trade
No imported traded items were found at Sheikh Diab 2 or Fazael 4,
save a few sandstone grinding stones that probably originated in Jor-
dan. However, trade is known to have been lively during the period
(Chapter 6), and the Jordan Valley has been described as “the backbone
of exchange between northern and southern Canaan” (Milevski 2011).
According to Milevski the commercial ties of the Jordan Valley with the
north of the country were stronger than those with the southern region,
and Jericho was the regional centre of control.
These hypotheses have not been corroborated in this study.
The Transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I

This subject is one of the open questions in the later phases of prehis-
tory of the southern Levant. This study’s contributions to solving the
question are:
– An analysis of the ceramic finds from the two periods identified a
number of types that continued from the Chalcolithic into the EB
I (EB I Types H1a, H2, B1, J2a, J4a, J4b): however, there are also
many new types. Hence there was only partial continuity between
the two periods.
– An analysis of the building model from the excavated sites shows
that the architectural complexes changed at some time between
the two periods.
– The Fazael 2 site, which we excavated, is one of the latest Chalco-
lithic sites in the Jordan Valley (radiometric dates place it in the
first quarter of the 4th millennium BCE). The flint artifacts sug-
gest that the first use of Canaanean blades in the southern Levant
should be brought forward to the Chalcolithic period.
These few contributions are only the beginning of understanding the
transition from the Chalcolithic to the EB I in this region.
General Conclusions
The survey and excavation data of the two periods draw a picture of
an array of agricultural settlements (probably permanent sites) based
on cereal farming and grazing. They were distributed near the sources
of water and arable land on the banks of the wadis in the southern Jor-
dan Valley. The social structure was apparently tribal, and united the
different villages into defined settlement clusters. At the beginning of
the Chalcolithic there was a significant increase in the number of sites
and the population in the valley. This growth was probably due to the
introduction of certain agricultural technologies. After the boom of
the Chalcolithic period a change occurred, during which most of the
Chalcolithic sites were abandoned. After an unknown time, at the be-
ginning of the next period, new sites were established, often close to the
previous sites. The difference in the architectural style, and also (but to
a lesser extent) the material finds, suggests a penetration from outside,
and integration, the scope of which is still unclear, with the inhabit-
ants who remained after the settlements collapsed in the Chalcolithic.
In the later phases of the EB I, another change took place: an increase
in the number of inhabitants, a penetration into new regions (western
Wadi Far'ah and the slopes of Samaria), an economic change, transi-
tion to more intensive cereal farming at the expense of raising livestock,
and the appearance of the first fortified sites. The tribal social system
underwent change, and toward the end of the period two settlement
hierarchies appeared – fortified settlements, surrounded by an array of
unfortified settlements (a hinterland?). At the end of the period there
was a crisis, and a fundamental change resulted in the almost com-
plete abandonment of the Jordan Valley and relocation to the hills. This
impacted the sites in the valley whose subsistence was based on cereal
farming, and moved the settlement hub to the sites on the Samarian
slopes, which were apparently based on growing fruit trees, particularly
olive and vines.
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
SITE CATALOGUE
This Site Catalogue presents the entire array of Chalcolithic and EB I

sites on which the research is based. It includes the information on all
surveys and excavations in the region, including unpublished sites that
were found while this research was in progress. Almost all sites were
revisited, and the information given here is the most accurate avail-
able for the researcher. The low probability scored sites are not fully
presented here but appear in Table 15.1 at the end of the Catalogue.
The map in Figure 15.1 shows all the site locations described here. For
a brief explanation of the nature of each term used in the Catalogue
see Chapter 4. All the Chalcolithic and EB I pottery references given in
each site description apply to the pottery figures in Chapter 8.
site catalogue 459
180 185 190 195 200 205 210

205
Road 205
Wadi
2 1 Na h
a l Bez
eq
ash)
9 43
(Wa
di Shu b
5 67 W
ad i Y
ab i s
200
8 10 200
Zebabdeh 13 11 12
117 14
15
River J
123 Mehula 16
195
17 195
Wadi Malih
122 18
o rdan
Tubas 20 19
190 21 190
23
22
in
ufr j
2627 24 Wadi K
i
185 185
29 28 25
30 32 31 34 35
41 33 40 36
3839 37 43
180
42 44 45 180
47 46 120
48
50
54 49 51 53 52
55
175
58 56 175
r qa
57
59
Ze
61 62 63
W
64 60
ad
e
di
65
iF
118
Wa
ar
ah
66
'
170
67 68 170
Majdal 69
Beni 70 71
Fadil 121 73 72
75
165 77 76 79 165
7478
82 85 83 80
96 azael 84 87 818891
Wa d i F 86 89 90 Wadi A
97 9495 92 93
River J
160 98 100 99
h ma
r 160
119
101
102
or
103
dan
155
104 155
105
108 109 107 106 'Aujjeh
110 114 115
150 111 112 150
116 Aujje h 113

i '
W ad
i Nim r in
145 W ad 145
0 5
km Jericho
180 185 190 195 200 205 210
Figure 15.1. Map of all Chalcolithic and EB I sites

in the Site Catalogue.
460 chapter fifteen
Site 1: Khirbet Qa'un (1)

Israel grid: 1941/2016 Periods of occupation: EB I,
Elevation: -60 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. Byzantine
Site type: settlement Visibility of other sites: 3
Area: 6,500 m2 Number of visits: 3
Topography: hilltop on valley Number of sherds: 65
fringes Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Qa'un 2005: site 2
springs, 200 m distant
Description: A low tell on the northern bank of Wadi Qa'un, 200 m dis-
tant from Qa'un springs. Traces of ancient building activity are visible
on the ground. A few Byzantine graves are located in the middle of the
site. Adjacent are 20 rectangular hewn installations, including a few cup
marks. There is an abundant sherd scatter from the EB I.
Pottery finds: 65 sherds from the EB I, including: 4 holemouth rims
(Types: H1b, H2a, H4), 1 jar rim (Type J1a), 1 krater rim (Type K2), 2
Um Hammad body sherds, 1 ledge handle, and many flat bases.
Flint finds: 177 flint artifacts, including non-diagnostic tools, such as 5
burins, 3 awls and a scraper.
Other finds: 13 frag-
ments of basalt stone
tools including 2 lower
grinding stones and a
rectangular basin.
Summary: The ceramic
assemblage attests to
a medium-high prob-
ability presence during
the EB I. The presence
of Um-Hammad sherds
suggests an occupa-
tion during EB Ib. The
flint and stone tools are
not diagnostic, and the
absence of Canaanean
blades is noteworthy. Figure 15.2. Plan of Khirbet Qa'un (1)
(Zertal 2005: 112).
site catalogue 461
Site 2: Khirbet Qa'un (2)

Israel grid: 1942/ 2014 Nearest water source: Qa'un
Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. springs, 300 m distant
Site type: sherd scatter Periods of occupation: EB I, IB
Area: 6 ha (the area of occupa- Visibility of other sites: 3
tion during the Chalcolithic is Number of visits: 2
not known) Number of sherds: 35
Topography: plateau Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 5
Description: A large site in a field south-west of Tell Qa'un, 2 km west of

the Jordan Valley road. Large concentrations of building material were
found. Most of the finds are from the IBA.
Pottery finds: 35 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including: 2 hole-
mouth rims (Type H1), a bowl with red slip on the rim (Type B1a), and
a flat base.
Flint finds: 7 flint artifacts, including diagnostic tools, such as an adze
and an axe.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium
probability presence during the Chalcolithic period. This site probably
belonged to the Chalcolithic period cluster of the southern Beth Shean
valley.
•
Site 3: Qa'un Cemetery
Israel grid: 1942/2013 Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic? EB, IB, MB II, Iron I–II,
Site type: cemetery Persian
Area: 1 ha (the area of the site Visibility of other sites: 3
during the Chalcolithic and Number of visits: 4
EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 15
Topography: slope Previous publications: Zertal
462 chapter fifteen
Description: A large multi-period cemetery on the southern slope of

Wadi Qa'un, east of Tell Qa'un. The cemetery was continuously robbed
in the last century. In an area 300 m long, about 200 cave openings were
noted. Most of the caves are vertical shaft tombs. Some of the caves
have horizontal shafts with a hewn cave at the end. Most of the finds
date to the EB II, IB, and MB II. This was probably a regional cemetery
for the southern Beth Shean Valley population for a long period.
Pottery finds: 15 sherds from the EB I, including 6 holemouth rims,
some in the Um Hammad style (Types: H4, H5), a krater rim, and flat
bases.
Flint finds: 45 flint artifacts, including tools, such as 4 burins, 2 notches,
and a Chalcolithic backed sickle blade.
Summary: The lithic assemblage attests to a low probability presence
during the Chalcolithic period. The complete absence of indicative
pottery from this period attests to a temporal presence at the site that
might be connected to the vast fields in the vicinity. The ceramic as-
semblage attests to a medium-high probability presence during the EB
I. The presence of the Um Hammad style suggests an occupation dur-
ing the EB Ib. No correlation can be made between the different types
of caves and the assemblages associated with the site.
Figure 15.3. Aerial view of Qa'un Cemetery (Zertal 2005: 117).

site catalogue 463
Figure 15.4. Plan of Qa'un Cemetery (Zertal 2005: 121).

464 chapter fifteen
Site 4: Tell Qa'un

Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB, IB, MB II, LB II,
Site type: tell Iron I–II, Persian, Hellenistic
Area: 7000 m2 (the area of the site Visibility of other sites: 3
during the Chalcolithic and Number of visits: 4
Topography: hilltop Previous publications: Zertal
Description: A low, multi-period tell, situated at the end of a ridge de-

scending to Wadi Qa'un, 2.5 km north-west of the village of Bardale.
There is an enclosure wall with building remains at the top of the tell.
A chain of rocks with caves and installations is visible in the moderate
slopes. It seems that all the visible remains are later than the periods of
this study.
Pottery finds: 77 sherds from the Chalcolithic and EB I periods, includ-
ing 9 holemouth rims (Chalcolithic Types: H1, H3b; EB I Types: H1b,
H1c, H2b, H4, H7, H8), 8 lug handles, 2 EB Ib Um Hammad style krat-
ers (Types K1a, K1c), a few EB Ib band slip style body sherds, 3 EB I
bowls (Type B1b), 12 EB ledge handles, and 5 flat bases.
Other finds: many fragments of stone tools, including a Chalcolithic
straight-sided basalt bowl.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period, and a high probability pres-
ence throughout the EB I. The presence of both EB Ib band slip and Um
Hammad styles attest that the site was populated in this period.
site catalogue 465
Site 5: Tell Mukehaz

Israel grid: 1966/2011 Periods of occupation: Neolithic,
Elevation: -125 m.a.s.l.; 5 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic, EB II, MB II, LB,
Site type: tell Iron I–II, Persian, Byzantine,
Area: 3,000 m2 (the area of the site Early Muslim
during the Chalcolithic and EB Visibility of other sites: 4
I is not known) Number of visits: 3
Topography: valley Number of sherds: 12
Nearest water source: 'Ain Mal- Previous publications: Tzori 1962:
qoah springs, 50 m distant site 95; Zertal 2005: site 11
Description: A small tell in the southern Beth Shean valley near 'Ain
Malqoah springs and the modern Beth Shean–Jericho road. Most of
the sherds were collected in the fields bordering the tell and the spring.
Pottery finds: 12 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including a krater
rim, a flat base, and 3 body sherds with rope ornamentation.
Flint finds: 12 flint artifacts, including a Chalcolithic backed sickle
blade.
Other finds: 5 fragments of basalt objects, including 2 hemispherical
bowls, a lower grinding stone, and a pestle.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages, together with the
descriptions of finds by Tzori (1962), attest to a medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period. This was probably a small
settlement by the spring, belonging to the cluster of the southern Beth
Shean valley. The finds are not abundant, due to the dense occupation
remains dating to later periods.
466 chapter fifteen
Site 6: Bezeq Canal

Israel grid: 1993/2002 Number of visits: only in the
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. 1960’s by Sadeh and Gophna:
Site type: settlement the site was not found by later
Area: unknown surveys, and was probably
Topography: plateau destroyed during extensive
Nearest water source: 'Ain Bulibil, agricultural works in the area
1 km distant Number of sherds: 110 (reported
Periods of occupation: Late by Sadeh and Gophna)
Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic, Previous publications: Sadeh and
Chalcolithic Gophna 1991
Visibility of other sites: 2
Description: a multi-strata Chalcolithic site in the Jordan Valley 1 km

north-east of Shemsiyeh village. In the 1960’s the site was discovered
in the construction of a water channel. Remains of mud brick walls of
dwellings and pits were observed 0.5 m below the alluvium.
Pottery finds: Sadeh and Gophna (1991: 140) report the following
Chalcolithic finds: bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B1c), a churn, jars (Types
J2, J3), holemouth jars (Types H2, H3a), lug and strip handles, and flat
bases.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a medium-high probabil-
ity presence during the Chalcolithic period, together with a high prob-
ability presence during earlier phases of the Chalcolithic period. This is
a typical site from the Chalcolithic period cluster of the southern Beth
Shean valley.
•
Site 7: Tel Shalem
Elevation: -210 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB Ib
Site type: settlement (fortified) Visibility of other sites: 1
Area: 12 ha (4 ha fortified) Number of visits: 1
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: not collected
Nearest water source: 'Ain Ibra- Previous publications: Tzori
him spring, 30 m distant 1962; Eisenberg 1996; Zertal
2005: site 18
site catalogue 467
Description: A very large site, 12 ha in size, adjacent to 'Ain Ibrahim

spring, 2 km south of modern kibbutz Tirat Tzvi. The site has two main
parts:
1. A fortified site of area estimated at 4 ha. A small area was exca-
vated by Eisenberg (1996), who describes two parallel mud brick
walls (Figs. 15.6–15.7). The first probably had a glacis-like wall
attached to it, and reached a maximum thickness of 5 m. The sec-
ond wall, only partly excavated, reached a thickness of 3 m. Ac-
cording to the excavator the thickness of the fortification system
at its peak was 17 m! Between the walls three habitation layers
dating to the EB Ib were observed. In the fills a few Chalcolithic
sherds were found, implying an earlier settlement from this pe-
riod nearby.
2. A very large non-fortified settlement estimated at 12 ha adjacent
to the south of the fortified site (estimate was made by Porath in
an unpublished survey carried out in 1986, and quoted by Eisen-
berg in the 1996 publication).
Pottery finds: The excavation yielded a large assemblage from the EB Ib
(Eisenberg 1996: 8–20), and a few finds from the Chalcolithic period.
The earlier finds include straight-sided bowls and large jars with big
inclusions (Eisenberg 1996: 13, 18–19). The main types published from
the EB Ib assemblage include deep hemispheric bowls (Types B2a, B4),
carinated ‘proto-platter’ bowls, inward-curved rim bowls (Types B2d,
B3), kraters (Types K2, K4, K5), holemouth jars (Types H1c, H2a, H2c,
H5, H8), and pithoi (Types J2a, J2b), some with band slip style decora-
tion. Noteworthy are a few metallic style finds, indicating that the site
was settled until very close to the beginning of the EB II period, or even
at the very beginning of this period.
Flint finds: the flint assemblage was blade-oriented: Canaanean sickle
blades and other blade types.
Other finds: two upper basalt grinding stones, and two limestone
weights (originally described as mace heads).
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium prob-
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period, and a high probability
presence during the EB Ib period. This is one of the first and largest for-
tified sites in the southern Levant (Chapter 6). This large site perhaps
served as a regional centre similar to the sites at Megiddo, Beth Yerah,
and Jericho. The site was abandoned for an unexplained reason, prob-
ably at the very beginning of the EB II period, and not inhabited since.
468 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.5. Aerial view of Tel Shalem

(Eisenberg 1996: fig. 2).
Figure 15.6. Mud brick walls at Tel Shalem

(Eisenberg 1996: fig. 7).
site catalogue 469
Figure 15.7. Plan of the fortification of Tel Shalem

(Eisenberg 1996: plan 1).
470 chapter fifteen
Site 8: Mrah es-Sbeh

Elevation: 196 m.a.s.l.; 60 m.a.s.a. lithic
Site type: settlement, sherd Visibility of other sites: 2
scatter Number of visits: 2
Area: 1 ha Number of sherds: 156
Topography: ridge Previous publications: Zertal
Springs, 4 km distant
Description: A small site on a high ridge north of Wadi Bezeq. It extends

across a flat field with three low terraces, bordered by a rock cliff and
a stony hilltop, and is isolated on the east and west by deep ravines.
The few wall remains built of small field stones discovered by Zertal
no longer exist (as of 2008). Many sherds and flint tools are scattered
on the surface. This site is near, and may be connected to, the site 'Iraq
el-Hamam (Lower) – Site 9.
Pottery finds: 156 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 6 hole-
mouth rims (Types H1, H3a, H4), 4 jar rims (Types J1b, J4), 4 krater
rims (Types K4, K5), and lug handles.
Flint finds: 165 flint artifacts, including diagnostic tools, such as 3
adzes, 2 axes, 2 chisels, and 2 backed sickle blades. Cores and debitage
together with non-diagnostic tools were also found.
Other finds: 5 fragments of basalt tools.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high prob-
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period. The closeness of the
site to 'Iraq el-Hamam (Lower) – Site 9, might attest to a connection
between the two sites.
site catalogue 471
Site 9: 'Iraq el-Hamam (Lower)

Elevation: 428 m.a.s.l.; 60 m.a.s.a. lithic, Byzantine
Site type: sherd scatter Visibility of other sites: 1
Topography: ridge Number of sherds: 62
Nearest water source: Qa'un Previous publications: Zertal
Springs, 4 km distant 2008: site 31
Description: A small site on a high ridge north of Wadi Bezeq. There

are several stone piles in the area, with two structure walls and terraces,
probably from the Byzantine period. Medium-sized amounts of sherds
and flint tools, especially adzes, are scattered around. Lamps of low
quality raw flint are found in the vicinity of the site.
Pottery finds: 62 body sherds, possibly from the Chalcolithic period,
including one typical rope decoration.
Flint finds: 415 flint artifacts, including diagnostic tools, such as 12
Figure 15.8. 'Iraq el-Hamam (Lower),

in the background – the ridge of Mrah es-Sbeh.
472 chapter fifteen
adzes, an axe, 4 chisels, and 2 backed sickle blades. Cores and debitage
together with non-diagnostic tools were also found.
Summary: The lithic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the Chalcolithic period. The sparse amount of pottery is
unique, and might indicate a work place rather than a dwelling. The
topographic location, situated on a narrow ridge high above the wadi,
and the high frequency of bifacial tools (mainly adzes) might indicate
a connection to tree-processing industry. The lesser probability of it
being a flint quarry cannot be ruled out.
Figure 15.9. Plan of 'Iraq el-Hamam (Lower)

(Zertal 2008: fig. 89).
site catalogue 473
Figure 15.10. Natural flint lamps from 'Iraq el-Hamam (Lower).
•
Site 10: 'Ain Buleibil
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Roman
Site type: sherd scatter (settle- Visibility of other sites: 3
ment?) Number of visits: 3
Nearest water source: 'Ain 2005: site 24
Buleibil spring, 30 m distant
Description: a large rich scatter of sherds situated in agricultural fields

near 'Ain Buleibil spring 2 km north-east of Shemsiyeh village. In the
fields are scatters of pottery, flint and stone tools. No remains of build-
ings were traced, but this might be because of the destruction caused by
agricultural activity in the last decade.
Pottery finds: 114 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 15
holemouth rims (Types H1, H2, H5), 8 krater rims (Types K1, K3, K5),
including 2 fragments of a huge krater/pithos in the style of the Jor-
474 chapter fifteen
dan Valley pithoi, 20 body sherds with rope ornamentation, and 12 flat
bases.
Flint finds: 107 flint artifacts, including diagnostic tools, such as 2 adzes,
a typical Chalcolithic backed and truncated sickle blade, a borer, 2 den-
ticulates, 4 notches, an end scraper. A few cores and many debitage
pieces were also found, indicating that flint was processed at the site.
Other finds: 7 fragments of basalt bowls and food processing tools, 3
limestone perforated weights, and a copper axe (Fig. 15.11).
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a high probabil-
ity presence during the Chalcolithic period. The copper axe resembles
the axes of the EB I period, but this is the only artifact in the assemblage
from this period. The relative wealth of finds might attest to a small
settlement situated by the spring. This is another site from the Chalco-
lithic period cluster of the southern Beth Shean valley.
Figure 15.12. General view of 'Ain Buleibil.

site catalogue 475
Site 11: 'Ain ed-Deir

Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I, MB II, LB, Iron
Site type: tell I–II, Hellenistic
Area: 7,000 m2 (the area of the Visibility of other sites: 3
site during the Chalcolithic Number of visits: 3
and EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 18
Nearest water source: 'Ain ed- 2005: site 23
Deir spring, 30 m distant
Description: a low tell north of 'Ain ed-Deir spring 1 km north-east of

Shemsiyeh village. The site has been almost completely destroyed by
modern agricultural activities. Most of the finds date to the Iron Age,
and only a limited number of finds date to earlier periods of occupa-
tion.
Pottery finds: 18 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including
an EB Ib Um Hammad style krater (Type K1c), a jar rim (Type J2), and
a flat base.
Flint finds: 6 flint artifacts, including diagnostic Chalcolithic celt tools
– 2 broken adzes and an axe.
Other finds: a broken fenestrated incense burner from the Chalcolithic
period.
Summary: The basalt incense burner and the lithic assemblage attest
to a medium probability presence during the Chalcolithic period. The
EB Ib krater attests to a low-medium probability presence during the
EB Ib. This was probably another small site in the cluster of settlements
in the southern Beth Shean valley. The probabilities are relatively low,
due to the modern destruction and the late period remains that cover
the Chalcolithic and EB I remains. The site might be connected to the
adjacent site Tell ed-Deir (Site 12).
476 chapter fifteen
Site 12: Tell ed-Deir

Elevation: -195 m.a.s.l.; 20 lithic, Persian, Roman–Byzan-
m.a.s.a. tine, Middle Ages.
Site type: tell and scatter of finds Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 1 ha (the area of the site Number of visits: 3
during the Chalcolithic is not Number of sherds: 12
known) Previous publications: Zertal
Topography: plateau 2005: sites 27–28
Nearest water source: 'Ain ed-
Deir spring, 80 m distant
Description: a low tell rising above flat agricultural areas in the southern
Beth Shean valley, 1.5 km north-east of Shemsiyeh village. On the tell’s
summit are a few building remains from the Middle Ages. Chalcolithic
finds were sherds from the tell, and flint tools from a field on the north
side.
Pottery finds: 12 small body sherds, possibly from the Chalcolithic pe-
riod, including a lug handle and rope ornamentation on body sherds.
Figure 15.13. General view of Tell ed-Deir, facing south. The field with the
flint remains is in the middle of the picture.
site catalogue 477
Flint finds: 26 flint artifacts, including diagnostic Chalcolithic celt tools

– 3 adzes and an axe, and 2 typical Chalcolithic backed sickle blades.
Other finds: a fragment of a basalt bowl.
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period. It is interesting to note
the difference in the location of finds: on the tell itself only pottery was
found, while in the adjacent field only flint tools were found. This might
imply that the settlement itself was on the tell (to be heavily covered by
later debris) and the field to the north was some kind of a working area.
Similar possible relations between a settlement and working areas were
also observed in the north-eastern Samaria hills (Sites 8 and 9). The site
might be connected to the adjacent site 'Ain ed-Deir (Site 11) and be
one of cluster of settlements in the southern Beth Shean valley.
•
Site 13: Tell el-Beidha-Shemsiyeh
Israel grid: 1978/1986 Period of occupation: EB
Elevation: -120 m.a.s.l.; 10 Visibility of other sites: 2
m.a.s.a. Number of visits: 1
Site type: tell Number of sherds: 35
Area: 1.2 ha Previous publications: Mittmann
Topography: plateau 1970: 263; Tzori 1977b: site 54;
Nearest water source: 'Ain Shem- Zertal 2005: site 26
siyeh spring, 30 m distant
Description: a low tell below the modern village of Shemsiyeh adjacent

to 'Ain Shemsiyeh spring. The modern village has destroyed large parts
of the ancient site. Tzori and Mittmann both report pottery from the
EB, including large body sherds decorated with the band slip style.
Pottery finds: 35 body sherds, possibly from the EB I, found by the au-
thor, including band slip style decoration.
Flint finds: 3 non-indicative items.
Summary: The ceramic assemblages reported in earlier publications at-
test to a medium probability presence during the EB I. The band slip
style supports an occupation during the EB Ib.
478 chapter fifteen
Site 14: Tell Abu Sus

Elevation: -244 m.a.s.l.; 50 lithic? EB I–II, MB II, LB,
m.a.s.a. Iron I–II, Persian, Hellenistic,
Site type: tell Byzantine, Middle Ages
Area: 3 ha (the area of the site Visibility of other sites: 1
during the EB I is not known) Number of visits: 2
Topography: summit Number of sherds: 65
Nearest water source: 'Ain Safafa Previous publications: Conder
spring, 50 m distant and Kitchener 1882; Tzori
1977b: site 56; Zertal 2005: site
33
Description: a large tell towering high above and to the west of the Jor-
dan. In its vicinity are two fords across the river. Most of the site is
completely destroyed, and large parts are covered with minefields. In
the middle of the site a section was made by earthmoving work. In the
lower parts of the section EB strata are visible.
Pottery finds: 65 sherds from the EB I, including: 7 holemouth rims
Figure 15.14. General view of Tell Abu Sus, facing east.

site catalogue 479
(Types H1a, H2a, H7, H8), a krater rim (Type K1d), 3 ledge handles,
and 5 body sherds decorated in the band slip style.
Flint finds: 36 flint items in a blade-oriented assemblage. 2 Canaanean
sickle blades and 5 Canaanean blades were found.
Other finds: 3 basalt tools were observed in the bottom strata of the
section: a hemispherical bowl and 2 lower grinding tools.
ability presence during the EB I. Contrary to previous surveys nothing
diagnostic to the Chalcolithic period was found, and it seems that the
site was established during the EB I. The massive destruction at the site
and later settlement activity prevent a discussion of its size during the
EB I.
•
Site 15: ej-Jobeh
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic
Area: 9 ha Number of visits: 4
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: 270
Nearest water source: 'Ain es- Previous publications: Zertal
Sakut spring, 1 km distant 2005: site 31
Description: a large site situated on a low hill rising above flat agricul-
tural areas in the southern Beth Shean Valley, 1.8 km south-east of
Shemsiyeh village. The site is located in the middle of large fields, and
in its presumed centre there is a modern channel 30 m wide allowing
a view of the two deep sections on both sides. In the eastern section,
at the depth of 80 cm, a paved living stratum is visible (Fig. 15.15).
The remains of a wall and a burial are also visible in this section. In
the western section, 3 pits, between 60 and 150 cm deep, are visible.
One of the pits has collapsed into the channel, and many Chalcolithic
sherds, including a churn, were observed. In the fields surrounding the
channel many pottery, flint and basalt tools were collected. The section
in the middle of the site gives two important indications: the pattern of
480 chapter fifteen
settlement seems to be of distinct dwelling units with large open areas

between them (this pattern also appears in the Fazael valley sites); and
there is no evidence of more than one stratum at the site.
fragments of a huge krater/pithos (Type K3), some in the style of the
Jordan Valley pithoi, 6 jars (Types J1a, J2), 4 holemouth jars (Types H1,
H2), 8 bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B1c, B2), 6 kraters (Types K1, K2, K3,
K5), and a churn. 7 body sherds with rope ornamentation, 5 flat bases,
and 3 lug handles were also found.
Flint finds: 170 flint items, including diagnostic Chalcolithic celt tools,
such as 2 adzes and 2 axes, amongst other non-diagnostic tools.
Other finds: 13 basalt and limestone tools were collected, including a
typical Chalcolithic straight-sided bowl, 2 basins, and a leg of a fenes-
trated incense burner pierced with triangular incisions.
ity presence during the Chalcolithic period. This site is the largest and
richest site from the Chalcolithic period in the southern Beth Shean
cluster, and it might have been the central settlement in the area.
Figure 15.15. View of the eastern section in ej-Jobeh.

site catalogue 481
Figure 15.16. Pottery, stone tools and flint items from ej-Jobeh.
•
Site 16: Khirbet es-Sakut
Elevation: -216 m.a.s.l.; 10 lithic? EB? MB II, LB, Iron
m.a.s.a. I–II, Persian, Hellenistic,
Site type: tell Roman–Byzantine, Early
Area: 4 ha (the area of the site Muslim, Middle Ages
during the Chalcolithic/EB I is Visibility of other sites: 2
not known) Number of visits: 3
Nearest water source: 'Ain es- Previous publications: Zertal
Sakut spring, 30 m distant 2005: site 32
Description: a large tell in the southern Beth Shean valley, 2.5 km east
of the modern village of Mehula, and adjacent to 'Ain es-Sakut spring.
Most of the early pottery was found on the outskirts of the tell in a pit
in a field near the spring. There is therefore no way to assess the size of
the site in the periods under study.
Pottery finds: 18 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including 2
482 chapter fifteen
small holemouth jar rims, and 2 flat bases.

Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a small-medium probabil-
ity presence during the Chalcolithic/EB I periods. The data at present
are scarce, and only future investigations at the site can reveal addi-
tional data to support a more accurate dating.
•
Site 17: Khirbet Wadi edh-Dhb'ah
Elevation: -120 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I, Iron III, Persian,
Site type: settlement Hellenistic, Roman
Area: 4,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 0
Topography: slope and valley Number of visits: 2
fringe Number of sherds: 55
Nearest water source: 'Ain esh- Previous publications: Zertal
Shaqq spring, 300 m distant 2008: site 76
Description: A small site on the western fringes of esh-Shaqq Valley, be-

tween the Wadis esh-Shaqq and edh-Dhb'ah, about 2.5 km southwest
of the modern village of Mehula. A wide anti-tank ditch crosses the site.
In the cross-section created by the ditch, a dark layer and remains of
floors and walls were discovered. On the slope and above the ditch are
a few walls and a large sherd scatter.
Pottery finds: 55 sherds from the Chalcolithic and EB I periods, includ-
ing 7 holemouth jar rims (Chalcolithic Types H1, H3b; EB I Types H2a,
H4, H5), 2 EB I bowls (Type B5), 11 body sherds with rope ornamenta-
tion (some typical Chalcolithic, and others in the EB Ib Um Hammad
style), and a flat base.
Flint finds: 17 flint items, including 2 borers and a Canaanean sickle
blade.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a low-medium
probability presence during the Chalcolithic period, and medium
probability presence during the EB I. This is the only EB I site in the
area of Wadi Malih.
site catalogue 483
Site 18: Fass ej-Jamal

Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 30 lithic/EB
m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 0
Site type: scatter of sherds Number of visits: 3
Area: 200 m2 Number of sherds: 15
Topography: slope and valley Previous publications: Zertal
fringe 2005: site 36
Nearest water source: Wadi
Malih, 2.5 km distant
Description: Remains of a building and a scatter of sherds on the slopes

of Fass ej-Jamal ridge, 1 km north-east of the modern village of Brosh.
lug handles and 3 flat bases.
Flint finds: 1 pick.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a low-medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period, and low probability presence
during the EB I.
•
Site 19: 'Ein Hilu
See a detailed description and excavation report in Chapter 9.
•
Site 20: Qta'at el-Khalifeh
Elevation: 210 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Roman
Topography: ravine Number of sherds: 41
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Previous publications: Zertal
Mayatteh spring, 3 km distant 2008: site 99
484 chapter fifteen
Description: A site in a small ravine, in the ridges east of Ras Jadir, and
about 700 m north of Kh. Yarzah (Zertal 2008: site 104). Next to it is a
well named Bir Abu Tayib. Concentrations of sherds were found on the
site surface, with no building remains.
Pottery finds: 41 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 3 pithos
rims with rope ornamentation (Type H3a), and 2 holemouth jars (Type
H1).
Flint finds: 4 flint items, including a diagnostic Chalcolithic backed and
truncated sickle blade.
Other finds: a leg of a basalt incense burner.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a medium probability presence
during the Chalcolithic period. The site is located far from any other
Chalcolithic site or any water source. The absence of building material
is worth noting. All these support the idea that this is an encampment
site on a possible route between the Jordan Valley to northern Samaria,
especially to the fertile Zebabdeh and Tubas Valleys where Zertal de-
scribed some Chalcolithic sites (Zertal 2008: sites 8, 16, 46, 145 and
151).
•
Site 21: Khirbet Hamamat
See a short description of this low probability EB I site in Table 15.1.
•
Site 22: Khirbet Yusef
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic/EB I site in
Table 15.1.
site catalogue 485
Site 23: Khalil el-Adseh

Elevation: 70 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Iron II, Byzantine
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Zertal
Far'ah, 3 km distant 2008: site 241
Description: a small scatter of sherds and two Byzantine enclosures in a

wide desolate ravine in the desert fringes of Samaria.
mouth jars (Types H2, H3b), and a jar.
Summary: The ceramic assemblages attest to a medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic period. This was probably another
encampment site connecting the Jordan Valley and the northern Sa-
maria valleys.
•
Site 24: el-Khellaiyel
Israel grid: 1893/1849 Periods of occupation: EB I, IB,
Elevation: 540 m.a.s.l.; 250 MB II, LB
Site type: ritual Number of visits: 4
Area: 5,000 m2 Number of sherds: 87
Topography: high summit Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: Wadi 2008: site 148
Far'ah, 3 km distant
Description: A site on a high summit of Jebel Tammun, to the east of a

narrow, rocky saddle. There is a very fine view from the east to Wadi
Far'ah.
The site consists of three parts:
486 chapter fifteen
1. A pyramid-like hillock, 25 m in diameter and 6 m high (Fig.

15.18). It is basically composed of remains of ash and burnt bones,
together with earth and stones. Inside are structural remains, with
many sherds scattered nearby. This feature is unique, and no par-
allels have been found in the southern Levant.
2. About 120 m north-west of the pyramid-like hillock is an elon-
gated broad room structure of large boulders, 5×25 m in size. It is
divided into three halls of unequal length. It is possible that this
structure is connected with the nearby hillock.
3. 50 m north of the pyramid-like hillock is a large, empty cave. In
the area of the long structure two dismantled circles of stones and
a tumulus were found. Long walls extend to the north-west of the
complex, but their connection with it is unclear. To the north of
the site there is also a hewn basin.
The site is exceptional in its location, view and structure, suggesting a
cultic centre or a unique burial site, possibly with sacrificial fire activi-
ties.
Pottery finds: 87 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature
is the large quantity of the Um Hammad style, almost half of the as-
semblage. These include 6 basins, kraters and bowls, and more than 30
body fragments with rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1b, K1c, B5).
Other diagnostic sherds include 2 kraters, a jar rim (Type J1b), and
ledge handles.
Flint finds: 9 non-diagnostic items. Worth noting is a large denticulate
from the slope of the hillock.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a high probability pres-
ence during the EB I. The large portion of the Um Hammad style pot-
tery indicates an EB Ib presence. This site is unique, and because of its
cultural features we can assume a ritual function. Most of the collected
items belong to the EB I, and thus we can presume that the site was
erected and was in use mostly during this period. It is possible that it
continued to serve as a ritual or burial site until the LBA.
site catalogue 487
Figure 15.17. Plan of el-Khellaiyel. Note the hillock (no. 1) and the
elongated broad room (no. 2) (Zertal 2008: fig. 326).
488 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.18. View of el-Khellaiyel. Note the unique location towering high
above Wadi Far'ah (Zertal 2008: fig. 325).
Figure 15.19. View of the hillock at el-Khellaiyel (Zertal 2008, fig. 327).
site catalogue 489
Site 25: Roi 1

Elevation: 60 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I? Iron, Roman–Byz-
Site type: sherd scatter, settle- antine
ment? Visibility of other sites: 0
Description: A site on the southern slope of Twel edh-Dhyiab range, in

the northeastern Buqei'ah. It is built near a small wadi descending from
the summit into the Buqei'ah valley.
An oval, empty enclosure about 35 m in diameter, surrounded by a
wall of large stones. This enclosure probably dates to the Iron Age. To
the south and west, and adjacent to the enclosure, are various structures
built of walls 40–60 cm thick. These are earlier than the construction of
the enclosure, and probably date to the Chalcolithic period.
Pottery finds: 65 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, most of them
small body sherds. The finds include 3 bowls (Type B4), 3 holemouth
jars (Types H1, H2, H3b), 2 flat bases and 3 body sherds with rope
decoration. Also found: an EB I holemouth jar (Type H2b).
Flint finds: 221 items were collected. Worth noting is the small number
of tools (a Cannaanean blade and ad-hoc tools) and the large amount
of debris (although no cores were found). It is possible that some parts
of the flint production sequence were performed at the site. In this site
the method of collecting was different from the other sites, thus making
a comparison of collected items to other sites useless: we collected all
flint items from the surface of four 5×5 m squares. This was done in
order to help dating the site (although we did not succeed in dating by
this method).
presence during the Chalcolithic period. The ceramic and lithic as-
semblages attest to a low-medium probability presence during the EB
period. This site is distant from perennial water sources, but is close to
fertile land. Although Zertal dates the enclosure to the Chalcolithic pe-
riod, the author suggests that it dates to the Iron Age (like many other
490 chapter fifteen
enclosures discovered in the region by Zertal – Zertal 2005: 66) and the
Chalcolithic site (and possibly an EB site) is buried beneath the Iron
Age structure.
Figure 15.20. Plan of Roi 1 (Zertal 2008: fig. 301).
•
Site 26: Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh
Israel grid: 1870/1843 Periods of occupation: EB I, MB
Elevation: 100 m.a.s.l.; 15 m.a.s.a. II, LB
Site type: cemetery Visibility of other sites: 4
Topography: slope and valley Number of sherds: 25
fringe Previous publications: Zertal
Far'ah, 1.5 km distant
Description: A cemetery in the southern foothills of Jebel Tammun. In

the slope are more than 60 shaft and tunnel cave openings, all looted
site catalogue 491
in modern times. Because of danger of collapse the caves were not en-
tered, and the pottery was collected from the surface where the looters
left the incomplete vessels.
Pottery finds: 25 sherds from the EB I, including 2 fragments of grey
burnished carinated bowls (‘PUC’ in Kenyon’s terminology, Type B6),
6 red burnished juglets (Types J6a, J6b), 2 incense burner red-slipped
and burnished bases, red-slipped bowl (Type B1b), 2 holemouth jars,
and a ledge handle.
Other finds: rim of a basalt bowl.
ence during the EB I period. This cemetery is part of the large cemetery
on the southern slopes of Jebel Tammun that served the large commu-
nity that inhabited Wadi Far'ah during the EB I. The morphology of the
carinated bowls and the absence of Um Hammad style pottery attest to
the use of this cemetery also during the EB Ia.
Figure 15.21. View of the looted cemetery of Maqbarat en-Nuseriyyeh (Zertal

2008: fig. 350).
492 chapter fifteen
Site 27: el-Maqbarah

Elevation: 100 m.a.s.l.; 15 m.a.s.a. II, LB, Iron I–II
Description: A burial area on the northern edge of the Wadi Far'ah val-
ley in the low, southern edge of Jebel Tammun. The cemetery, exten-
sively looted, extends over the lower ridges of southern Jebel Tammun.
There are more than 100 holes of shaft and tunnel caves, in various
stages of illegal excavation. Many sherds, including large fragments of
vessels, are scattered outside the graves. Because of danger of collapse
no entry to the caves was made, and the pottery was collected from the
surface where the looters left the incomplete vessels. Similar cemeteries
extend eastwards, along the foothills of Jebel Tammun.
Pottery finds: 29 sherds from the EB I, including 2 fragments of grey
burnished carinated bowls (PUC, Type B6), 2 incense burner red-
slipped and burnished bases, 8 red and black slipped bowls (Types B1b,
B4), 2 jar rims (Types J2a, J5), and a ledge handle.
ence during the EB I. This cemetery is another occurrence of the large
cemetery on the southern slopes of Jebel Tammun serving the large
community that inhabited Wadi Far'ah during the EB I. The morphol-
ogy of the carinated bowls and the absence of Um Hammad style pot-
tery attest to the use of this cemetery during the EB Ia as well.
site catalogue 493
Site 28: el-Maqaber

Israel grid: 1885/1841 Periods of occupation: EB I, LB,
Elevation: 100 m.a.s.l.; 15 m.a.s.a. Iron I
Description: Another burial area on the northern edge of the Wadi

Far'ah valley in the low, southern edge of Jebel Tammun. The cemetery,
like the other cemeteries that were discovered in the region, is in an ad-
vanced stage of looting. More than 100 holes of shaft and tunnel caves,
in various stages of illegal excavation, were noted on the site. Many
sherds, including large fragments of vessels, are scattered outside the
graves. Because of danger of collapse no entry to the caves was made,
and the pottery was collected from the surface where the looters left the
incomplete vessels.
Pottery finds: 16 sherds from the EB I, including a fragments of a grey
burnished carinated bowl (PUC, Type B6), 3 red burnished juglets
(Types J6a, J6b, J4b), a jar rim (Type J2a), and a flat base.
ence during the EB I. Like the two previous discussed cemeteries, this
cemetery is another example of the large cemetery on the southern
slopes of Jebel Tammun serving the large community that inhabited
Wadi Far'ah during the EB I. Here too, the morphology of the carinated
bowls and the absence of Um Hammad style pottery attest to the use of
this cemetery also during the EB Ia.
494 chapter fifteen
Site 29: Aqrabaniyeh

A multi-period cemetery near the village of Aqrabaniyeh in Wadi
Far'ah. A. Eitan made a salvage excavation at this site during 1981,
which has not yet been published. Remains of looted caves dating from
EB I to the Iron Age were found. This cemetery is another example of
the large cemetery on the southern slopes of Jebel Tammun serving
the large community that inhabited Wadi Far'ah during the EB I. Once
published, this assemblage will enrich our data on the burial customs
in the region.
•
Site 30: Khirbet 'Ain Farr
Elevation: 90 m.a.s.l.; 70 m.a.s.a. Iron I
Area: 1.8 ha Number of visits: 2
Topography: valley fringe and Number of sherds: 95
slope Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: 'Ain Farr 2008: site 169
spring, 800 m distant
Description: A large site on a low, broad ridge south of the Wadi Far'ah
valley. North-east of the site is a spring, 'Ain Farr, with a road (Aqra-
baniyeh to Bet Farr) to the west. East of it is a small, deep ravine, and to
its south is a low cliff.
The site extends along the axis of the ridge, in a north-east–south-
west direction. On the ridge are a number of low terraces with consid-
erable sherd scatter. On the top of the ridge there is a low acropolis,
3,000 m2 in area; no structural remains were found.
Pottery finds: 95 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature is
the large quantity of the Um Hammad style, almost half of the retrieved
assemblage. These include 7 large kraters (Types K1a, K1b, K1c), 4 jars
(Type J1c), 5 holemouth jars with rope ornamentation (Type H4), and
2 bowls with rope ornamentation (Type B5). Other diagnostic types in-
clude 6 holemouth jars (Types H1c, H2a, H2b, H5, H8), 4 bowls (Types
site catalogue 495
B2a, B2c, B4), a krater, 2 jar rim (Type J2a), and 10 ledge handles.
Flint finds: 29 items, including 5 Canaanean sickle blades and 2 Canaa-
nean blades.
Other finds: a basalt bowl rim.
ability presence during the EB I. Most of the assemblage belongs to the
Um Hammad style, and therefore dates to the EB Ib. This is one of the
largest sites from the EB I in the Wadi Far'ah region.
Figure 15.22. View of Khirbet 'Ain Farr (Zertal 2008: fig. 360).
496 chapter fifteen
Site 31: Khirbet Bet Hassan

•
Site 32: Tel Miski
Elevation: -30 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. lithic? EB I, LB, Iron I–II,
Site type: tell Persian, Roman–Byzantine
Area: 1.5 ha (the area of occupa- Visibility of other sites: 9
tion during the Chalcolithic/ Number of visits: 2
Topography: valley Previous publications: Glueck
Nearest water source: 'Ain Miski 1951: 422; Kappus 1966:
spring, 30 m distant 81–82; Porath 1968: site 76;
Kallai 1972: site 3; Zertal 2008:
site 171
Description: a small tell in the centre of the valley of Wadi Far'ah near
a spring bearing the same name. This is a multi-period site, and the
Chalcolithic presence was noted by Glueck and Zertal, while EB I pres-
ence was noted in all the surveys.
Pottery finds: 19 sherds from the EB I with the most prominent feature
of the Um Hammad style, more than half of the retrieved sherds. These
include 3 large kraters (Types K1a, K1c), a holemouth jar with rope
ornamentation (Type H4), and 8 body fragments bearing rope orna-
mentation.
ity presence during the EB Ib. There is no evidence of a Chalcolithic
presence at the site. The site was one of the villages that flourished in
the western Wadi Far'ah region during the EB Ib.
site catalogue 497
Site 33: Khirbet Murassas

Israel grid: 1873/1821 Period of occupation: EB I
Elevation: 0 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 7
Site type: settlement Number of visits: 2
Topography: slope and valley Previous publications: Zertal
Far'ah, 800 m distant
Description: A site on a cultivated hill, on a low step south of Wadi

Far'ah, about 400 m south of Tel Miski. Structural remains: building
stones and walls in situ, were found in a ploughed field, with sherds
nearby. The site is situated along one of the ancient paths leading from
Wadi Far'ah to the mountains to the south, where another group of EB
I sites is found (the Tell Za'anuni area). In Kh. Murassas marked on
the map, there are new houses (from the time of the Jordanian rule)
without ancient remains.
Pottery finds: 19 sherds from the EB I, including 2 large Um Hammad
style indicative kraters (Type K1a) a bowl (Type B5), 4 body fragments
bearing rope ornamentation, and 4 flat bases.
ity presence during the EB Ib period. The site was one of the small
villages that flourished in the western Wadi Far'ah region during the
EB Ib.
498 chapter fifteen
Site 34: Tell Shibli

Israel grid: 1901/1819 Periods of occupation: EB, IB,
Elevation: -57 m.a.s.l.; 15 m.a.s.a. Iron II, Roman–Byzantine,
Site type: tell Early Muslim
Area: 6,000 m2 (the area of oc- Visibility of other sites: 4
cupation during the EB I is not Number of visits: 2
known) Number of sherds: 39
Topography: hilltop at end of Previous publications: Porath
ridge 1968: site 85; Gophna and
Nearest water source: 'Ain Shibli Porath 1972: site 159; Zertal
spring, 30 m distant 2008: site 180
Description: a small multi-period tell on a ridge descending from the

north to Wadi Far'ah. It is situated on the northern bank of the wadi
close to 'Ain Shibli spring. Today the tell is almost completely destroyed,
due to the construction of a water tank on its summit.
Pottery finds: 39 sherds from the EB I, including 13 holemouth jar rims
(Types H1a, H1b, H2a, H2c, H3, H5, H7, H8), 3 jars (Types J2b, J4a),
a krater (Type K5), 5 Um Hammad style body fragments bearing rope
ornamentation, 4 body fragments bearing band slip decoration, and 4
ledge handles.
Flint finds: 2 Canaanean blades.
ence during the EB I. The presence of band slip and Um Hammad style
decoration suggests an occupation mainly during the EB Ib. This site
was also one of the small villages that flourished in the western Wadi
Far'ah region during the EB Ib. Unlike most of these sites it continued
into the EB II.
site catalogue 499
Site 35: 'Ain Shibli

Israel grid: 1904/1817 Nearest water source: 'Ain Shibli
Elevation: -55 m.a.s.l.; 5 m.a.s.a. spring, 80 m distant
Site type: sherd scatter, settle- Periods of occupation: EB I, MB
ment? II, Hellenistic, Byzantine
Area: 2 ha (the area of occupation Visibility of other sites: 4
2008: site 181
Description: A site on a slope descending to Wadi Far'ah, next to the

Jordan Valley road. A new Bedouin settlement, built on the ancient site,
has completely destroyed all the remains. Zertal states that the sherds
were found on the slopes, some concentrated in groups, and various
wall remains did not create clear structures. Nothing of these survived
the extension of the village. This site was possibly an extension of the
nearby Tell Shibli.
Pottery finds: 11 sherds from the EB I, including a holemouth jar rim
(Type H7), an Um Hammad krater rim (Type K1c), 4 Um Hammad
style body fragments bearing rope ornamentation and a ledge handle.
presence during the EB I. The presence of Um Hammad style decora-
tion suggests an occupation during the EB Ib. The site was probably
connected to the nearby Tell Shibli site, and both were connected to
'Ain Shibli spring. This site was also one of the small villages that flour-
ished in the western Wadi Far'ah region during the EB Ib.
•
Site 36: Ras Bilam ez-Zef (A)
500 chapter fifteen
Site 37: Ras Bilam ez-Zef (B)

•
Site 38: Jelamet el-Ahmar (A)
Israel grid: 1898/1814 Periods of occupation: Neolithic?
Elevation: -30 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. EB I–II, IB
Site type: sherd scatter and Visibility of other sites: 12
cemetery Number of visits: 3
Topography: ridge Previous publications: Zertal
Description: A site and a large cemetery on a ridge of a rocky hill on the

southern bank of Wadi Far'ah. The site is located opposite the pass of
Bab en-Naqb and Tell Shibli, both north of the wadi: there is a sharp
bend in the wadi at the foot of the site.
About two-thirds of the hilltop is surrounded by a built ‘road’, which
encircles the site on the east, south and west, with no remains on the
northern side, where the cliff falls to the deep wadi. This ‘road’ is built
of two parallel rows of very large stones 4 m apart; some of the stones
are upright. The overall length of this ‘road’ is 480 m, with connecting
walls in eight places along the whole length. On the top of the hill, on
the south-west of the site, a large structure was found. It contains two
rectangular structures, each about 10×15 m in size, with an opening
between them. Zertal suggests that this arrangement, located in the
centre and ‘tip’ of the ‘road’, may have been used as an entrance to the
complex. There are dozens of looted burial caves over the entire area.
These date to the EB I and IB periods. The tombs contained hewn shafts
and openings, with grave niches and burial halls. Sherds and parts of
vessels are scattered all over the looted areas. On the hill and the slopes
hewn basins were also found, with an average diameter of 30–50 cm
and depth of 40 cm.
The site is an especially large burial complex, which apparently con-
tained hundreds of burial caves. Zertal suggests that the built road (he
site catalogue 501
calls a ‘procession road’) was probably used for burial ceremonies dur-
ing the EBA, although, without excavations, one cannot link the differ-
ent features of the site necessarily to the EB I, and not to the IB period.
the large quantity of Um Hammad style items, almost half of the indica-
tive items from the assemblage. The assemblage includes 15 holemouth
jars (Types H1a, H1b, H2a, H4, H7, H9), 6 jars (Types J1b, J1d, J2a, J2b,
J4a, J4b), 5 bowls (Types B2b, B2c, B5), 2 large kraters (Type K1a), 12
Um Hammad body fragments with rope ornamentation, 2 body frag-
ments bearing band slip decoration, 6 ledge handles, and 18 flat bases.
Flint finds: 39 items, including 3 Canaanean sickle blades, 2 Canaanean
blades, and a backed sickle blade.
ence during the EB I. The presence of Um Hammad style decorations
suggests burial during the EB Ib. The burial site continued to the EB II,
and was also used during the IBA. The presence of EB II pottery in a
burial context is rare in the Wadi Far'ah area, and might be connected
to the nearby er-Rjjum site.
Figure 15.23. Aerial view of Jelamet el-Ahmar (A)

(Zertal 2008: fig. 379).
502 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.24. Plan of Jelamet el-Ahmar (A) (Zertal 2008: fig. 377).
site catalogue 503
Site 39: Jelamet el-Ahmar (B)

Elevation: -55 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic, EB I–II, MB II
Far'ah, 300 m distant 2008: site 178
Description: A small site on a narrow ridge in a ravine descending south

to Wadi Far'ah, some 500 m west of Jelamet el-Ahmar (A). Remains
of a structure, built of small pebbles, are in the centre of the ridge, but
the date of its construction is not known. No other structural remains
are visible, but there are many stone items, flint of various types, and
sherds. This is one of the only sites in the Jordan Valley that was inhab-
ited from the Neolithic period until EB Ib.
Pottery finds: 12 sherds from the Chalcolithic period and 116 sherds
from the EB I. The most prominent feature is the large quantity of the
Um Hammad EB Ib style pottery, more than half of the indicative items
from the assemblage. These include 7 large kraters with Um Hammad
style rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1b, K1c, K1d), 4 holemouth
jars with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type H4), 8 bowls
with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type B5), 2 jars with Um
Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type J1b), and 30 body fragments
with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation. Other indicative sherds
include 5 holemouth jars (Types H1c, H4, H5), 5 jars (Types J1a, J2a,
J2b, J3, J4b, J6b), 9 bowls (Types B2b, B4, B5), a large krater, and 13
ledge handles. Chalcolithic pottery includes a churn, and a flat base
with a mat impression.
Flint finds: 89 items, including 3 Canaanean blades.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a low-medium prob-
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period. The ceramic and lithic
assemblages attest to a high probability presence during the EB I. The
plentiful Um Hammad style decoration suggests significant occupation
during the EB Ib. This site was also one of the small villages that flour-
ished in the western Wadi Far'ah region during the EB Ib.
504 chapter fifteen
Site 40: ed-Dweir

Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic? EB I
Topography: slope Number of sherds: 80
Far'ah, 300 m distant 2008: site 177
Description: A small site on a slope descending into Wadi Far'ah, about

1 km south of Kh. Bet Hasan. The foundations of eight to ten structures,
built of medium-sized, unhewn field stones with right-angled corners
were found. The structures stand on an artificial rampart, about 30 cm
higher than the surface of the slope. Many building stones have been
preserved.
the large quantity of the Um Hammad EB Ib style, more than half of
the indicative items from the assemblage. These include 3 holemouth
jars with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type H4), 2 large
kraters with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types K1c, K1d),
and 36 body fragments with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation.
Other indicative sherds include 5 holemouth jars (Types H3, H7, H10),
2 kraters, a bowl (Type B2b), and 5 ledge handles.
ence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style decoration
suggest significant occupation during the EB Ib. This site was also one
of the small villages that flourished in the western Wadi Far'ah region
during the EB Ib. No remains from earlier periods reported by Zertal
were traced in the assemblage.
site catalogue 505
Site 41: Mughur 'Id

Elevation: 350 m.a.s.l.; 200 Iron II
Topography: slope Previous publications: Zertal
Nearest water source: 'Ain Mu- 2008: site 182
ghur 'Id spring, 40 m distant
Description: A site on a low hilltop, on the middle step south and above
the valley of Wadi Far'ah. South of the site rise the cliffs of Tell el-
Fukhar. From the cliff to the site there is a well-built pass (naqb) with
hewn steps. There is a fine view of the river valley. Remains of walls
and building remains are scattered on the slope. In the ravine to the
northeast is 'Ain Mughur 'Id spring, the water source of the site.
the large quantity of Um Hammad EB Ib style items. These include a
krater with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type K1c), and 18
body fragments with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation. Other
indicative sherds include 2 holemouth jars (Type H2c), 2 jars (Types
J1b, J2b), 3 bowls (Type B2b), and a lug handle.
Flint finds: 20 items, including 2 Canaanean sickle blades, and a backed
Canaanean sickle blade.
ability presence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style deco-
ration suggests significant occupation during the EB Ib. Here stood a
small settlement that might have been connected to the large nearby
site of Tell Za'anuni. It is also possible that here was one of the ascents
from Wadi Far'ah to the mountains to the south.
506 chapter fifteen
Site 42: Tell Za'anuni

Elevation: 442 m.a.s.l.; 300 Chalcolithic? EB I–II, MB II,
m.a.s.a. Iron II, Byzantine
Site type: fortified tell Visibility of other sites: 14
Area: 2.6 ha (the area of occupa- Number of visits: 3
tion during the EB I is not Number of sherds: 65
known) Previous publications: Zertal
Topography: slope 2008: site 183
Nearest water source: 'Ain
Za'anuni spring, 200 m distant
Description: A fortified tell on the eastern edge of a small plain, on

the upper step above the Wadi Far'ah valley, north of Jebel Kebir. 'Ain
Za'anuni, the water source, is 200 m to the north-west. There is a fine
view of the environs of Wadi Far'ah.
The site consists of four parts:
1. The lower city is in the south of the site. This is an irregular long
triangle, 1.5 ha in area, situated on a small plateau demarcated
by cliffs in the south, east and north. To its west rises the upper
city (tell or ‘acropolis’). Along the southern edge of the slope is a
wall 2–3 m thick, built of medium-sized stones. Midway the wall
forms a kind of bay, presumably the location of the gate. The wall
is missing on the east and north. On the surface there is a rich
scatter of sherds, but only few walls in situ.
2. The upper city is the hilltop tell, about 1.5 ha in area, located north
and above the lower city. It comprises three main built terraces
descending eastward. On the summit there are remains of struc-
tures and a possible fortification wall, while the wall of the lower
city reaches the eastern part of the tell.
3. The industrial area north of the tell. Here there are many instal-
lations, including two oil presses and several basins. It seems that
in this area there was extensive agricultural product processing,
mainly during the Byzantine period, judging by the pottery and
type of installations.
4. The cemetery is located on the hilltop and the slopes west of the
tell. Several dozen burial systems are here (noted in 1993), most
having been heavily looted. Each system consists of one central
site catalogue 507
hall with caves, mostly with an entrance-shaft and sometimes

with steps. The dump outside the tombs contains a rich pottery
collection, which represents the settlement periods of the site.
the Um Hammad EB Ib style. These include 4 kraters with Um Ham-
mad style rope ornamentation (Type K1a), and 21 body fragments
with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation. Other indicative sherds
include 12 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H1c, H3, H4, H5), 2 jars
(Types J2a, J2b), a bowl (Type B2a), 5 body sherds bearing band slip
decoration, and a lug handle.
ity presence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style decora-
tion suggests significant occupation during the EB Ib. This is a fortified
EB II settlement that was erected during the EB I (no remains from
earlier periods reported by Zertal were traced in the assemblage). This
is one of the most important sites from the Early Bronze Age in the
Wadi Far'ah area. In addition to its natural elevated location, it is forti-
fied by a wall. It is one of a group of fortified EB Ib–II sites in the valley,
together with Tell el-Far'ah (North), er-Rjjum, and el-Makhruq.
Figure 15.25. View of the lower city of Tell Za'anuni. In the background the
view to the Wadi Far'ah valley (Zertal 2008: fig. 392).
508 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.26. Plan of Tell Za'anuni (Zertal 2008: fig. 394).

site catalogue 509
Site 43: Er-Rjjum

Israel grid: 1915/1802 Periods of occupation: EB I–II
Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 50 m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 3
Site type: fortified settlement Number of visits: 2
Area: 3.4 ha Number of sherds: 79
Topography: ridge Previous publications: Porath
Nearest water source: Wadi 1968: site 88; Zertal 2008: site
Far'ah, 500 m distant 187
Description: This is a large fortified site north of Wadi Far'ah on an iso-

lated spur separated from its surroundings by deep river channels. The
place is surrounded by a wall about 3 m thick. A trench or deep fosse
was excavated in the northeastern part of the site, in the only easily
accessible area. An entrance complex consisting of a gate and two tow-
ers was discovered nearby. Around the wall are adjacent architectural
remains. There are heaps of building stones in the centre of the site that
apparently cover other buildings.
Pottery finds: 79 sherds from the EB I, including 15 holemouth jars
(Types H1a, H1b, H2a, H4, H5, H8), 7 jars (Types J2a, J2b), 3 ‘proto-
Figure 15.27. Aerial view of er-Rjjum (Zertal 2008: fig. 400).

510 chapter fifteen
platter’ carinated bowls, 7 flat bases, and 4 ledge handles. Other indica-
tive finds include a large group of Um Hammad style vessels bearing
rope ornamentation. These include a holemouth jar (Type H4), a bowl
(Type B5), and 5 body fragments with rope ornamentation.
Figure 15.28. Plan of er-Rjjum (Zertal 2008: fig. 402).

site catalogue 511

ity presence during the EB I. A few sherds were also found from the EB
II, which indicate that the site continued to exist, and raise reservations
regarding the certainty with which the fortifications are dated to the EB
Ib (however, in view of the small amount of pottery from the EB II, the
likelihood that the fortification is from this period is not high). The size
and characteristics of the site at er-Rjjum are similar to those of other
fortified sites in the area discussed here: el-Makhruq (EB II – Damati
1993), Khirbet Juraish, Tell Za'anuni, and Khirbet Rahiyeh.
•
Site 44: 'Iraq el-Hamrah
Elevation: 25 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB, MB II, Iron I,
Site type: sherd scatter Byzantine
tion during the Chalcolithic/ Number of visits: 3
Topography: hilltop on valley Previous publications: Zertal
Description: Structures scattered over a broad hilltop west of Wadi

Far'ah and north of Wadi Khalleter-Radwan, 1 km north-west of Ham-
rah.
The 24 structures at the site are divided into three types: tumuli,
round structures and a large square courtyard. Most of the round struc-
tures are concentrated on the southern hilltop (four structures) and on
the northern side (11 structures). The structures are 10–25 m apart on
the average. The three tumuli are 4–5 m in diameter, whereas the round
constructions are about 5 m in diameter, built of Cyclopean boulders at
the bottom, with large, stone doorposts standing on either side of the
entrance. Most of the entrances face north-east. The interior of the con-
structions is empty, except for a long monolith, possibly to support a
roof. Several structures are divided internally into cells. Small finds are
few, and the connection between them and the structures is not clear.
512 chapter fifteen
The plan of the round structures resembles burial structures found in

Admia (Stekelis 1935), Bab edh-Dhra' (Harrison 2001), and Mezad Aluf
(Levy and Alon 1982). The size of the structures here is similar to the
structures at Bab edh-Dhra', and larger than those at Admia and Mezad
Aluf. After a careful inspection of the round structures in a return visit
to the site, the assumption that they served for burial proposes was
ruled out. It seems more likely that these were either rural dwellings, or
agricultural storage installations.
mouth jars (Type H1), and a flat base (the rest or body sherds).
Flint finds: 48 items, including 4 Chalcolithic backed and truncated
sickle blades, 4 Canaanean sickle blades, an adze, a fan scraper, and
other ad-hoc tools.
Summary: The lithic assemblage attests to a medium probability pres-
ence during the Chalcolithic period, and a low-medium probability
presence during the EB I. It seems that during the Chalcolithic period
there was some kind of poorly understood lithic-oriented activity at the
site. During the EBA similar activity occurred, possibly in connection
with the nearby site at er-Rjjum.
•
Site 45: Khirbet edh-Dhra'
Israel grid: 2018/1793 Period of occupation: Chalco-
Nearest water source: 'Ain Salah Previous publications: Zertal
spring, 1 km distant 2005: site 42
Description: a small site on the Jordan Valley plateau, 3.5 km north of

the modern village of Argaman. The plateau is intersected by small ra-
vines, and the site is situated between two of these deep ravines. Wall
remains are visible on the northern part of the site, and many sherds are
scattered on the surface. The site is situated far away from other sites
from the Chalcolithic period.
site catalogue 513
Pottery finds: 87 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 6 jars

(Types J1a, J1b), 3 holemouth jars (Type H1), 2 bowls, 2 kraters. Seven
body sherds with rope ornamentation, 11 flat bases, and 5 lug handles
were also found.
Flint finds: 89 flint items, including diagnostic celt tools, such as 2 adzes,
amongst other non-diagnostic tools.
Other finds: a basalt straight-sided bowl, and a basalt mortar.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium-high
probability presence during the Chalcolithic period. The topography
and building remains suggest that this was a small hamlet of not more
than two dwelling units.
•
Site 46: Wadi 'Abd el-'Al
Elevation: 60 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. lithic, Iron I, Hellenistic,
Site type: sherd scatter Roman–Byzantine, Middle
Area: 1,000 m2 Ages
Topography: valley fringe Visibility of other sites: 0
Nearest water source: Wadi Number of visits: 1
Far'ah, 3 km distant Number of sherds: 3
Previous publications: Zertal
2008: site 211
Description: A site on a step on the eastern edge of Ras Humsah, next to

the path to Kh. Umm Hajar. From the site is a fine view of Mutaqallabat
Valley. The site comprises the remains of an elliptical enclosure, 20×12
m in size (from later periods).
Pottery finds: 3 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 2 body
sherds with rope ornamentation.
Flint finds: a scraper.
probability presence during the Chalcolithic period.
514 chapter fifteen
Site 47: Khirbet Basaliyyeh

Israel grid: 1936/1779 Periods of occupation: EB, Iron
Elevation: -140 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. II, Roman–Byzantine, Early
Site type: settlement Muslim
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Porath
Far'ah, 300 m distant 1968: site 101; Zertal 2008: site
194
Description: A large ruin in a broad ravine where two wadis exit to

Wadi Far'ah from the north. On a flat hilltop, in the eastern part of the
ravine, remains of several structures were found in situ. Here a sherd
scatter from the EBA was observed. Remains from later periods were
found in a field west of the structures.
Pottery finds: 12 sherds from the EB I, including an Um Hammad style
bowl, 3 flat bases, and a ledge handle.
presence during the EB I, and a medium probability presence during
the EB (without periodization). The presence of Um Hammad style
decoration suggests an occupation during the EB Ib. This site was also
one of the small villages that flourished in the Wadi Far'ah region dur-
ing the EB Ib. This is the only EB I site to be found in central Wadi
Far'ah that connects the two heavily settled settlement areas: eastern
and western Wadi Far'ah.
site catalogue 515
Site 48: Khirbet Wadi el-Joffe

Elevation: -165 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. Byzantine
Area: not known Number of visits: only during
Topography: ridge Porath’s survey
Nearest water source: Wadi Number of sherds: 11
Far'ah, 200 m distant Previous publications: Porath
1968: site 109
Description: Porath describes a small ruin on a ridge above and to the

north of Wadi Far'ah. It seems that the site was completely destroyed by
modern agricultural activities.
(Types H2a, H2c), an Um Hammad style krater (Type K1c), 4 Um
Hammad style body sherds bearing rope ornamentation, 2 flat bases,
and 2 ledge handles.
presence during the EB I. Due to the destruction of the site no addi-
tional data can be given.
•
Site 49: Bab ed-Dayyq
Israel grid: 1936/1759 Periods of occupation: EB, Iron
Elevation: -170 m.a.s.l.; 50 I–III
Site type: sherd scatter Number of visits: 2
Topography: hilltop Previous publications: Porath
Description: a ruin on a high prominent hilltop, above and south of the

deep gorge of Wadi Far'ah. From this place the wadi delta opens to the
east towards the River Jordan. Porath describes remains of an Iron Age
516 chapter fifteen
fortress, but army entrenchments ruined the site completely. The EB

sherds were collected at the slopes of the site.
Pottery finds: 14 sherds from the EB I, including a jar (Type J3), a krater,
8 flat bases, and a ledge handle.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a low-medium probabil-
ity presence during the EB I, and a medium probability presence during
the EB (without periodization). Due to the destruction of the site no
additional data can be given.
•
Site 50: el-'Alam
Elevation: -50 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. Iron II
Far'ah, 1.5 km distant 2008: site 225
Description: a small ruin on the slopes of Wadi umm-Wated. The re-

mains of at least two structures built of large field stones were discerned.
Pottery finds: 22 sherds from the EB I, including 5 body sherds bearing
rope ornamentation.
Flint finds: 24 items, including diagnostic tools, such as a Canaanean
blade, a backed Canaanean blade, and a few ad-hoc tools. A Chalco-
lithic backed sickle segment was also found, indicating a possible pres-
ence in this period.
probability presence during the EB I. A possible presence during the
Chalcolithic period awaits additional research at the site. It is possible
that this site was connected to the nearby EB I site Khirbet Wadi umm-
Wated.
site catalogue 517
Site 51: Khirbet Wadi umm-Wated

Elevation: -170 m.a.s.l.; 30 lithic? EB I–II
Topography: valley fringe Previous publications: Porath
Description: a large ruin at the northern end of the delta of Wadi Far'ah
on the fringe of the Ras Kharube ridge. The upper part of the site is
situated on a narrow spur descending south from the Ras Kharube
ridge to Wadi Far'ah above Wadi umm-Wated. Here Zertal reports that
most of the sherds were found along a few traces of walls. These were
not found in a return visit to the site. The lower part of the site is situ-
ated in a small valley to the south of the spur. Here a small scatter of
sherds was found between the houses of modern farmers.
Pottery finds: 96 sherds from the EB I, including a grey burnished cari-
nated bowl (this is the only example of grey burnished pottery found in
the region not in a burial context), 4 Um Hammad style holemouth jars
(Type H4), 4 Um Hammad style kraters (Type K1c), 3 jars, 2 of them
in the Um Hammad style (Types J1a, J1d, J2b), a holemouth jar (Type
H2c), 2 bowls, one of them in the Um Hammad style (Types B2c, B5),
24 body sherds bearing Um Hammad style rope ornamentation, 18 flat
bases, and 15 ledge handles.
ence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style decorations
suggest significant occupation during the EB Ib. This site was also one
of the villages that flourished in the Wadi Far'ah delta region during
the EB Ib. No remains from the Chalcolithic period reported by earlier
surveys were traced in the assemblage.
518 chapter fifteen
Site 52: Zbeidat

Elevation: -130 m.a.s.l.; 60 Chalcolithic, EB, MB II, Iron
m.a.s.a. I–II, Hellenistic, Roman–Byz-
Site type: cave and enclosures antine, Middle Ages
Area: 1.2 ha Visibility of other sites: 0
Topography: slope Number of visits: 3
Nearest water source: River Number of sherds: 28
Jordan, 3 km distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 60
Description: The site is a 25-m-long cave (called Abu Zineh) near a ter-
raced slope and rock shelter. The site is situated below a rocky mountain
slope, south-west of the village of Zbeidat. It is located approximately 3
km from the nearest perennial water source (River Jordan). Scattered
pottery collected from the terrace below the cave indicates human pres-
ence during several periods. Noteworthy is a sherd bearing the typical
Yarmukian herringbone incision.
small bowl rims, 2 lug handles, a pierced knob handle, and a flat base.
presence during the Chalcolithic period. This is the only site in the re-
gion where traces of the Pottery Neolithic Yarmukian culture have been
found (Bar and Rosenberg 2011).
•
Site 53: Ras el-Kharubeh 5
site catalogue 519
Site 54: 'Ain Mta'a

Israel grid: 1870/1749 Periods of occupation: EB I–II,
Elevation: 410 m.a.s.l.; 50 m.a.s.a. Byzantine
Nearest water source: 'Ain Mta'a Previous publications: none
Description: a large site on the Rujum el-Osher ridge, high above Wadi
el-Qrud. The site is situated on a moderate slope built in two terraces
guarding Wadi el-Qrud from the east. Terrace walls divide the ancient
settlement into sub-areas. In the south there are two large piles of
stones, up to 6 m high, possibly covering ancient structures. Walls of
structures are scattered over the entire area, as well as hewn installa-
tions and a water cistern. The remains of a dry spring, 'Ain Mta'a, were
found 500 m to the south-east. According to local Bedouin it was used
as a water source for shepherds until 30 years ago, when it dried up. In
a return visit to the site we observed the almost complete destruction of
the site due to modern agricultural activity sponsored by the U.N. This
is another example of good intentions without proper inspection that
causes destruction of antiquities in this region.
Pottery finds: 210 sherds from the EB I. The most prominent feature
is the Um Hammad EB Ib style. The finds include 18 holemouth jars
(Types H1a, H1c, H2a, H2b, H4, H5, H7, H10), 16 kraters, some with
Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1b, K1c, K4, K5),
12 jars (Types J1c, J2a, J2b, J4a), 10 bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B2b, B2c,
B4), 34 body fragments with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation,
32 flat bases, 4 body sherds with band slip decoration, and 50 ledge
handles.
Flint finds: 124 items including diagnostic tools, such as 14 Canaanean
sickle blades.
Other finds: many limestone and basalt stone tools, including 3 bowl
rims, a lug handle, and the base of an incense burner.
ity presence during the EB I. The plentiful Um Hammad style decora-
tions suggest significant occupation during the EB Ib, that continued
520 chapter fifteen
to some extent to the EB II. This seems to be one of the largest and
most heavily settled sites from the EB I in the region, and it might have
served as a regional centre. No signs of fortifications were found. Most
of the site has been completely destroyed by modern agricultural activ-
ity.
Figure 15.29. Plan of 'Ain Mta'a.

site catalogue 521
Site 55: Shunet el-Masna'ah

Israel grid: 1955/1748 (centre) Periods of occupation: Chalco-
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I, IB
Area: 10 ha (estimate based on Number of visits: 3
earlier surveys) Number of sherds: 158
Description: a large site in the western edge of the Wadi Far'ah delta,
between Wadi Zeit and Wadi Far'ah. The site is spread along a narrow
terrace 400 m long, rising about 2 m above the wadi floor. This ter-
race is intersected by small gullies descending south to Wadi Zeit. In
these gullies the remains of walls and floors were found. It seems that
considerable post-depositional activity occurred here, and the site was
covered by the alluvial fan of the wadi.
Pottery finds: 42 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, and 116 sherds
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 6 jars (Types J1a, J2),
5 holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H3a), 5 kraters (Types K2, K3, K5), 12
bowls (Types B1b, B1c, B3), 17 body sherds with rope ornamentation, 8
red burnished body sherds, and a lug handle. The EB I pottery includes
8 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H1c, H2a, H4, H5, H6, H8), 3 krat-
ers with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1c), 3
jars with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Types J1a, J1b), 3
bowls (Type B1a, B5), and 4 ledge handles.
ence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. No EB II pottery was
recognized. It seems that a large unfortified settlement stood here in
both periods. It is one of a small group of sites that was inhabited in
both periods of this study. The site is completely covered with modern
dwellings, and it is difficult to trace its boundaries. This site forms part
of the large group of sites dating to both periods in the eastern section
of Wadi Far'ah, together with sites such as Kaziyet el-Ratrut and Man-
taket Wadi Zeit.
522 chapter fifteen
Site 56: Kaziyet el-Ratrut

Elevation: -230 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I
Area: 30 ha (estimation based on Number of visits: 2
Topography: valley fringe Previous publications: Bar-Adon
Description: a very large site in the northern part of the delta of Wadi
adi Far'ah along the southern cliffs of the Ras el-Kharube ridge. It
seems that the site spread from the border of the cliff area in the north
to the Wadi Far'ah channel itself. The exact size of the site is not known
because it is almost totally covered by a modern village and its fields.
Thus we have to rely on the data given by the Emergency Survey (Bar-
Adon 1972) that reported that the site stretched along the cliffs and the
wadi for 1800 m. Building remains described by Bar-Adon have been
destroyed.
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 2 jars, 2 kraters (Types
K2, K5), 2 bowls (Type B3), and 7 body sherds with rope ornamenta-
tion. The EB I pottery includes 5 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H4, H6),
presence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. No EB II pottery was
recognized. In a photo taken by Bar-Adon (1972) at least two examples
of Um Hammad style sherds are visible (mistaken for Chalcolithic pot-
tery), indicating a presence at the site during the EB Ib. It seems that
a large unfortified settlement stood here in both periods. It is one of
a small group of sites that was inhabited in both periods of this study.
The site is completely covered with modern dwellings, and it is difficult
to trace its boundaries. This site forms part of the large group of sites
dating to both periods in the eastern section of Wadi Far'ah, together
with sites such as Shunet el-Masna'ah and Mantaket Wadi Zeit.
site catalogue 523
Site 57: Mantaket Wadi Zeit

Elevation: -220 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I, IB
Nearest water source: Wadi 1968: sites 108, 119–120;
Far'ah, 200 m distant Zertal 2005: site 80
Description: a large site on the northern section of the Wadi Zeit delta.
The modern village of Mantaket abu-Zeit is built atop the ancient site,
making size estimation problematic, and necessitating reliance on
earlier surveys. In the southern part of the village, in gullies cutting
through the alluvial fan, traces of building remains and pottery are
found. Porath suggested that 3 different sites stood here, while Zertal
suggested that they are part of one large site. The modern coverage of
the site prevents a new study, and the finds are presented here as one
large site.
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 2 jars (Types J1a, J1b),
3 kraters (Types K2, K3), a holemouth jar (Type H2), 2 bowls (Type
B1a), a leg of a fenestrated incense burner, 20 body sherds with rope
ornamentation and a lug handle. The EB I pottery includes 5 hole-
mouth jars (Types H1a, H1c, H2b), a holemouth jar with Um Hammad
style rope ornamentation (Type H4), 3 kraters with Um Hammad style
rope ornamentation (Types K1a, K1b, K1c), 2 bowls with Um Ham-
mad style rope ornamentation (Type B5), 2 bowls (Types B2b, B2c), 13
body sherds with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation, and 7 ledge
handles.
Other finds: 6 fragments of basalt tools, including a bowl rim.
ence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. No EB II pottery was
recognized. The examples of Um Hammad style sherds indicate a
presence at the site during the EB Ib. It seems that a large unfortified
settlement stood here in both periods. It is one of a small group of sites
that was inhabited in both periods of this study. The site is completely
524 chapter fifteen
covered with modern dwellings, and it is difficult to trace its boundar-

ies. This site forms part of the large group of sites dating to both periods
in the eastern section of Wadi Far'ah, together with sites such as Shunet
el-Masna'ah and Kaziyet el-Ratrut.
•
Site 58: el 'Ain et-Tahta
Elevation: 250 m.a.s.l.; -30 II, Iron I–II, Roman–Byzan-
m.a.s.a. tine, Middle Ages
Nearest water source: 'Ain et- Previous publications: Finkelstein
Tahta spring, 10 m distant et al. 1997: 849
Description: a small site by the built pool of 'Ain et-Tahta spring. Sherds
were found scattered on the moderate slope by the spring. No traces
of architecture were visible, and it seems that it was an open site con-
nected to the nearby spring.
(Types H1b, H2b, H5, H10), 4 jars (Types J2a, J2b, J4b), an Um Ham-
mad style krater (Type K1c), 4 Um Hammad style body sherds bearing
rope ornamentation, 6 flat bases, and 5 ledge handles.
Flint finds: 2 indicative items: a Canaanean sickle blade, and a fan
scraper on tabular flint.
probability presence during the EB I. It seems that a small site con-
nected to the spring stood here.
site catalogue 525
Site 59: Tana Cave

Israel grid: 1876/1736 Visibility of other sites: 1
Elevation: 280 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. Number of visits: not found in
Site type: burial cave the new survey. Data based on
Area: 100 m2 the description by Finkelstein
Topography: slope et al. 1997
Nearest water source: 'Ain et- Number of sherds: 44
Tahta spring, 100 m distant Previous publications: Finkelstein
Period of occupation: EB I et al. 1997: 848
Description: a looted burial cave in the wadi descending from 'Ain et-
Tahta spring to Wadi el-Qabi. The pottery was collected from looted
remains at the openings of the cave.
Pottery finds: 45 sherds from the EB I, including material presented in
the publication (Finkelstein et al. 1997: 848): 2 jars (Types J1d, J2a),
a holemouth jar (Type H1a), a bowl (Type B4), and a ledge handle.
A thorough inspection of the original survey additional unpublished
indicative pottery revealed 13 holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H2a,
H5, H7, H8), a jar (Type J2b), a krater (Type K5), and a PUB-style bowl.
ence during the EB I. This might have been a burial cave connected to
the large EB I site of 'Ain Mta'a, 1.7 km distant.
•
Site 60: 'Iraq ez-Zah
Elevation: 230 m.a.s.l.; 40 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? MB II, Iron,
Site type: sherd scatter Roman
during the Chalcolithic/EB I is Number of visits: 2
not known) Number of sherds: 8
Topography: saddle and slope Previous publications: none
Nearest water source: 'Ain et-
Tahta spring, 1 km distant
526 chapter fifteen
Description: a scatter of sherds on a long saddle and slopes descending

south from EP 363, 2.3 km south-west of the modern village of Me-
chura. Structures at the site date to the MB IIb. Earlier scattered pottery
was found.
Pottery finds: 8 sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, including a
krater with rope ornamentation, and a flat base with mat impression.
presence during the Chalcolithic/EB I periods. The sparse finds and the
distance from any other Chalcolithic site in the region indicate a pos-
sible encampment site. The site might be connected to the nearby EB I
sites 'Ain et-Tahta or 'Ain Mta'a.
•
Site 61: 'Iraq er-Resifeh 3
Elevation: 110 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Iron II, Roman–Byzan-
Site type: sherd scatter tine
Topography: high plateau Number of visits: 1
Far'ah, 2 km distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 128
Description: a small site on the north-eastern fringes of the 'Iraq er-

Resifeh high plateau, 3.5 km south-east of the modern village of Me-
chura. A Roman structure stood here, and the early sherds are scattered
around it.
Pottery finds: 13 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including a body
sherd with rope ornamentation.
Other finds: Zertal reports 2 Chalcolithic basalt bowls.
Summary: The ceramic and stone assemblages attest to a low-medium
probability presence during the Chalcolithic period. This might have
been an encampment site serving the Wadi Far'ah site cluster.
site catalogue 527
Site 62: Far'at ej-Jiftlik

Elevation: -250 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB I–II, Iron I?
Topography: valley fringe Previous publications: Bar-Adon
Nearest water source: Wadi 1972: site 2; Melaart 1953 (in
Far'ah, 200 m distant Leonard 1992: 5–8); Zertal
2008: site 79
Description: a large site on the north-eastern valley of Wadi Far'ah, a

possible continuation of the site Kaziyet el-Ratrut. Melaart describes
a typical unfortified Chalcolithic settlement (Leonard 1992: 5). In the
Emergency Survey the report is as follows (translation by the author):
“the length of the site is about 1850 m and its boundaries are between
1978/1713 to 1967/1728. Its width is not known because of the refugee
camp, Far'at ej-Jiftlik, built on top of it. The camp dwellers excavated
trenches for brick material and in these trenches fire remains, walls
made of mud brick and stone, and large ovens are visible. Some of the
stone walls survived to the height of 2.5 m. ….in the mountain cliffs, in
the location where the site reached to [the] hill, are openings of many
caves. In the southern part of the site, 1978/1713, are rectangular and
circular enclosures stretching for 150 m. These are built of large field
stones and they survived to the height of 2–3 courses…the pottery is
from the Chalcolithic (most of the finds), EB and Iron I.”
Today the site is completely covered with modern structures, and the
remains described in the Emergency Survey no longer exist.
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 3 jars (Types J1b, J2),
6 kraters (Types K2, K3), 5 straight sided bowls (Type B1c), 11 body
sherds with rope ornamentation, and 2 lug handles. The EB I pottery
includes 24 holemouth jars (Types H1b, H1c, H2a, H2b, H2c, H5, H8,
H9), a jar with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type J1a), a
krater with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation (Type K1c), a jar
(Type J4a), a krater (Type K5), 17 body sherds with Um Hammad style
rope ornamentation, 3 body sherds with band slip decoration, 21 flat
bases, and 17 ledge handles. The assemblage also contains much EB II
528 chapter fifteen
pottery, including platters and ‘Abydos’ jugs.

Flint finds: 90 items, including Chalcolithic diagnostic tools, such as 2
adzes, an axe, 2 fan scrapers, and a backed and truncated sickle blade.
ity presence during both the Chalcolithic and the EB I periods. It seems
that a large unfortified settlement stood here in both periods. The site
continued to flourish in the EB II. It is one of a small group of sites that
was inhabited in both periods of this study. The data gathered in the
different surveys suggests that not all the area of the site was inhabited
in both periods, and that the Chalcolithic settlement was much smaller
than the EB village. The site is completely covered with modern dwell-
ings, and it is difficult to trace its boundaries. This site forms part of
the large group of sites dating to both periods in the eastern section of
Wadi Far'ah, together with sites such as Shunet el-Masna'ah and Ka-
ziyet el-Ratrut.
•
Site 63: el-Makhruq
Israel grid: 1984/1710 Nearest water source: Wadi
Elevation: -200 m.a.s.l.; 40 Far'ah, 500 m distant
m.a.s.a. Periods of occupation: EB, Iron,
Site type: sherd scatter (site from Byzantine, Middle Ages
the EB II) Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 3 ha (the area of occupation Number of visits: 3
during the EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 6
Topography: ridge Previous publications: Eisenberg
1992: 926; Zertal 2005: site 72
Description: a fortified EB II and Iron II site on the Ras Khrube ridge

in the north-eastern part of the valley of Wadi Far'ah. The site also
stretches along the northern slope of the ridge, where a few caves and
enclosures were noted. Eisenberg describes EB I pottery in the fills
below the EB II fortified site. A very small scatter of EB I sherds was
found at the site.
Pottery finds: 6 sherds from the EB I, including a body sherd with Um
Hammad style rope ornamentation, and a lug handle. Many flat bases
site catalogue 529
and ledge handles found at the site were attributed to the EB II, al-
though some might be EB I.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage and the description by Eisenberg
attest to a medium probability presence during the EB I, before the
erection of the fortified site in the EB II.
•
Site 64: Khirbet Juraish
Israel grid: 1854/1711 Periods of occupation: EB, Iron II
Elevation: 420 m.a.s.l.; 100 Visibility of other sites: 1
m.a.s.a. Number of visits: 2
Site type: fortified tell Number of sherds: 80
Area: 2 ha (the area of occupation Previous publications: Porath
during the EB I is not known) 1968: site 142; Finkelstein et al.
Topography: hilltop and ridge 1997: 832
Nearest water source: 'Ain Juheir
Description: This is a fortified site on a high knoll along the slope of a

spur surrounded by precipitous wadis. Wadi el-Mashkara, where there
is a spring, runs east of the tell, which is surrounded on the west and
south by Wadi Juheir, where there is also a spring – 'Ain Juheir. At the
top of the knoll is a large building from which a wall descends along a
steep slope and encloses the entire eastern part of the site. The wall is
about 4 m thick, and is built of extremely large stones. Zertal (personal
communication) believes the wall was constructed in the EB, because
of its resemblance to city walls from this period at Khirbet Rahiyeh and
el-Makhruq.
(Types H1a, H1b, H2a, H7, H10), 6 jars (Types J2a, J2b, J4), a krater
(Type K1c), a bowl (Type B2c), 5 body sherds with rope ornamentation,
Flint finds: 3 indicative items: a Canaanean sickle blade, and 2 Canaa-
nean blades.
530 chapter fifteen
ability presence during the EB I. Earlier surveys did not recognize the
EB I pottery, and attributed all the early finds to the EB II. It is possible
that the site here is contemporary with the adjacent site 'Ain Juraish,
and they might even be one large site. During the EB II the site became
an important fortified centre, probably connected to the cultivation of
vineyards and olive groves. The site is topographically very similar to
other fortified settlements in the fringes of Samaria, such as Khirbet
Rahiyeh and Tell Za'anuni (see Discussion in Chapter 6).
Figure 15.30. General view to the north of Khirbet Juraish,

'Ain Juraish, and Juraish (lower).
site catalogue 531
Site 65: 'Ain Juraish

Elevation: 300 m.a.s.l.; -30 lithic, EB I
Topography: ravine Previous publications: none
Nearest water source: 'Ain Juraish
Description: a large site in the Wadi Mashqara ravine, to the east of Kh-
irbet Juraish (Fig. 15.30). The site is situated on a natural terrace 250 m
long and 70 m wide. Remains of walls are visible on the surface, as well
as a large sherd and flint scatter.
from the EB I. The Chalcolithic pottery includes 4 large kraters (Types
K1, K3, K4), 3 jars (Types J1b, J2), 2 bowls (Type B1c), 21 body sherds
with rope ornamentation, and a lug handle. The EB I pottery includes 7
holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b, H5), 2 kraters (Types K2, K5), a bowl
(Type B2a), 20 ledge handles, and 25 flat bases.
Flint finds: 45 items, including an axe and 3 Chalcolithic backed sickle
blades, and 10 Canaanean blades from the EB I.
Other finds: 18 fragments of basalt tools, including a lug handle, 4 bowl
rims, and 2 legs of fenestrated incense burners. All these fit well with
basalt tools of the Chalcolithic period.
ability presence during the Chalcolithic and EB I periods. This is one
of the few sites in the fringes of Samaria where a possible continuum
between the periods is shown. In the Chalcolithic period the fringes of
Samaria were almost empty of sites, and the presence of sites from this
period in the Wadi Ahmar area has some significance. Perhaps this was
the main path between the Jordan Valley clusters of sites and the scat-
tered sites situated high in the Samaria hills. Another possibility is that
the Chalcolithic sites in the upper part of the fringes of Samaria were
connected to olive- and possibly grape-growing. At the end of the EB I
the site was abandoned, and the settlement shifted to the nearby site of
Khirbet Juraish.
532 chapter fifteen
Site 66: Juraish (Lower)

Elevation: 260 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. lithic
Topography: slope and plateau Number of sherds: 30
Nearest water source: 'Ain Juheir Previous publications: none
Description: a small site on a flat terrace on the moderate slope de-

scending to the south-east from Khirbet Juraish to Wadi Ahmar (Fig.
15.30). The place is a ploughed field, and no architecture is visible on
the surface.
mouth jars (Types H1, H2), a body sherd with rope ornamentation, 3
lug handles, and 6 flat bases.
Flint finds: 7 items, including an axe.
Other finds: 3 basalt items from the Chalcolithic period: a bowl with
rectangular incisions, a straight sided bowl, and a fragment of an in-
cense burner.
Summary: The ceramic, stone tool and lithic assemblages attest to a
medium-high probability presence during the Chalcolithic period. It
is possible that this site was connected to the nearby site of 'Ain Ju-
raish, and formed part of the small cluster of settlements in upper Wadi
Ahmar.
site catalogue 533
Site 67: Wadi Ahmar Terrace

Israel grid: 1863/1704 Visibility of other sites: 0
Elevation: 200 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. Number of visits: not found in
Site type: sherd scatter the new survey. Data based on
Area: 2,000 m2 the description by Finkelstein
Topography: slope et al. 1997
Nearest water source: 'Ain Juheir Number of sherds: 40
spring, 1.2 km distant Previous publications: Finkelstein
Period of occupation: Chalco- et al. 1997: 842
lithic
Description: a small site located on a terrace above Wadi Ahmar. The

nearest known water source is found at 'Ain Juhair, 1.2 km north-west
of the site.
mouth jars (Type H1), 2 jars (a bow rim jar and Type J2), a pithos (Type
J1a), 3 kraters (Types K1, K2, K4), 7 bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B1c, B2,
B3), 2 lug handles, 10 body sherds with rope ornamentation, and 4 flat
bases.
ence during the Chalcloithic period. The presence of bow rim jars
attests to an early date in the Neolithic/Chalcolithic continuum (the
Wadi Raba stage), but the rest of the finds are also indicative of the later
Chalcolithic period. The site is situated in the narrow gorge of the wadi,
indicating a possible encampment site along Wadi Ahmar on the route
to the cluster of sites in the Khirbet Juraish area.
534 chapter fifteen
Site 68: EP 173

Elevation: 173 m.a.s.l.; 120 lithic/EB I? Iron, Roman–Byz-
m.a.s.a. antine, Middle Ages
Topography: hilltop Number of sherds: 8
Nearest water source: 'Ain Abu Previous publications: Zertal
Darajh spring, 1 km distant 2005: site 150
Description: a small scatter of sherds on the hilltop of EP 173, 2 km

north-east of the modern village of Gitit. The area of the site was de-
stroyed when a large water tank was built here. No architectural re-
mains are visible.
body sherd with rope ornamentation, and 2 flat bases.
presence during the Chalcolithic/EB I periods. The meagre finds and
the geographical location might attest to an encampment site.
•
Site 69: Masu'a 1
Elevation: -300 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I?
Site type: enclosure Visibility of other sites: 0
Far'ah, 2.5 km distant 2005: site 89
Description: an enclosure in a small ravine 400 m from the modern

village of Masu'a. The enclosure is built of massive stones, and a sherd
and flint scatter is found inside and nearby.
Pottery finds: 45 body sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, with
no diagnostic items.
site catalogue 535
Flint finds: 93 items, including diagnostic tools, such as an axe and a

fan scraper.
Summary: The lithic assemblage attests to a low-medium probability
presence during the Chalcolithic and/or the EB I periods. The use of
enclosures in these periods has been observed in other areas in the
southern Levant (e.g. Wadi Hasa in Jordan – Papalas et al. 1997: 434),
as well as in this area of research (e.g. Wadi Sadi 3; Wadi Ahmar 3). The
problem of enclosure sites is the lack of enough diagnostic datable finds
(see Chapter 5).
•
Site 70: Masu'a 2
Table 15.1.
•
Site 71: Masu'a 8
Site type: enclosure Visibility of other sites: 1
Far'ah, 3 km distant
Description: an enclosure on the southern slope of EP -189, 1.5 km

south of the modern village of Masu'a. The enclosure is built of large
field stones with no internal partitions. A small rectangular cell is at-
tached to the eastern part of the enclosure. The sherds and flint items
were collected from the nearby surroundings.
bowl and a body sherd with rope ornamentation.
536 chapter fifteen
Flint finds: 96 items, including a chisel and a large amount of debitage.

probability presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. The
use of enclosures in these periods has been observed in other areas in
the southern Levant (e.g. Wadi Hasa in Jordan – Papalas et al. 1997:
434), as well as in this area of research (e.g. Wadi Sadi 3; Wadi Ahmar
3).
Fig. 15.31. The enclosure of Masu'a 8

(the man is standing in the middle of the structure).
site catalogue 537
Site 72: Masu'a 9

Elevation: -180 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron I–II, Byzan-
Site type: sherd scatter tine
Area: 1.2 ha Visibility of other sites: 2
Topography: ravine and valley Number of visits: 2
fringe Number of sherds: 15
Description: enclosures and a settlement, probably dating to the Iron

Age, in a ravine 2 km east of the Sartaba hill. The sherds and flints from
the early periods were found scattered throughout the site.
Pottery finds: 15 body sherds from the Chalcolithic/EB I periods, in-
cluding a flat base.
Flint finds: 19 items, including a Canaanean blade, 2 denticulates, and
a scraper.
probability presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods.
•
Site 73: Wadi Ahmar 3
Elevation: -60 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron II, Late
Site type: enclosures Roman, Middle Ages
Topography: valley fringe Number of visits: 2
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Number of sherds: 18
Mana spring, 700 m distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 183
Description: two enclosures in the northern section of the Wadi Ahmar

valley, 3 km north of the modern village of Fazael. The enclosures are
situated on a slightly elevated ridge between two small ravines that flow
into Wadi Ahmar. Both enclosures are rectangular and built of large
538 chapter fifteen
field stones. The diameter of the north-western enclosure is 20 m, while

the other enclosure has a diameter of 7 m. The sherds were found scat-
tered inside and between the enclosures.
bowl and a body sherd with crude rope ornamentation.
Summary: The assemblage attests to a low-medium probability pres-
ence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. The use of enclosures
in these periods has been observed in other areas in the southern Le-
vant (e.g. Wadi Hasa in Jordan – Papalas et al. 1997: 434), as well as in
our area of research (e.g. Wadi Sadi 3; Masu'a 8).
•
Table 15.1.
•
Site 75: Naqb Harabah 2
Elevation: -105 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron, Roman,
Site type: sherd scatter Ottoman
Area:.6,000 m2 Visibility of other sites: 3
Topography: valley fringe Number of visits: 3
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Number of sherds: 22
Mana spring, 600 m distant Previous publications: Zertal
2005: site 180
Description: a site on the western bank of Wadi Naqb Harabah, 4 km

north of the modern village of Fazael. Visible structures at the site,
mainly square units and rectangular courtyards/enclosures, possibly
date to later periods than those researched here. A sherd and flint scat-
ter dating to the Chalcolithic/EB I was found between the structures.
a bowl.
site catalogue 539
Flint finds: 8 items, including a fan scraper.

probability presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. This
site is a fine example of one of the cluster of sites discovered by the
Manasseh Hill Country Survey in Wadi Ahmar, which share common
traits: impressive architectural remains on one hand, and meagre finds
that make their dating very difficult, on the other.
•
Site 76: Wadi Sadi 3
Elevation: -140 m.a.s.l.; 10 lithic, Roman
Site type: sherd scatter, enclo- Number of visits: 2
sures? Number of sherds: 20
Area: 1,000 m2 Previous publications: Zertal
Topography: ravine 2005: site 188
Nearest water source: 'Ain el-
Mana spring, 1.2 km distant
Description: a small site on a flat area near the exit of narrow Wadi Sadi
in the valley of Wadi Ahmar. Zertal describes the meagre remains of
two enclosures, but these were not found in a return visit to the site, and
were probably dismantled by local Bedouin who live in this location
today.
Pottery finds: 20 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including a hole-
mouth jar (Type H3b), and 4 flat bases.
Flint finds: 9 items, including diagnostic Chalcolithic tools: an adze and
a fan scraper.
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period. It is possible that this
was another enclosure site typical of the Wadi Ahmar-Masu'a area.
540 chapter fifteen
Site 77: Sheikh Mazar

Israel grid: 1845/1648 Periods of occupation: EB,
Elevation: 610 m.a.s.l.; 60 m.a.s.a. Iron I–II, Persian, Hellenistic,
Site type: settlement Middle Ages
tion during the EB I is not Number of visits: 1
known) Number of sherds: 49
Topography: hilltop and slope Previous publications: Porath
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- 1968: site 187; Finkelstein et al.
Juhir spring, 1 km distant 1997: 794
Description: a large ruin on top of a high hilltop 500 m south of the

village of Majdal Bani-Fadil. The site is on the summit and the western
slope. There is a Sheikh’s tomb, and from it there are fine views to the
east. The whole area is an agricultural field, and no traces of structures
are visible on the surface.
Pottery finds: 49 sherds from the EB I period, including 6 holemouth
jars (Types H1a, H1b, H2c, H5), a krater (variant of Type K5), 2 bowls
(a ‘proto-platter’ bowl and Type B2c), 4 ledge handles, a flat base, and a
body sherd with rope ornamentation.
presence during the EB I. Although no traces of fortification were vis-
ible, it seems that this site belongs to the EB ‘cities’ that developed dur-
ing the EB Ib–EB II on the fringes of Samaria (e.g., Khirbet Juraish,
Khirbet Rahia). This is because of the geographical and topographical
location and the rich assemblage collected (especially from the EB II).
The absence of Um Hammad style items has chronological or geo-
graphical significance.
site catalogue 541

Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Previous publications: Zertal
Mana spring, 500 m distant 2005: site 193
Description: a small site in the Wadi Ahmar valley adjacent to the dirt
road that climbs to the Sartaba ridge from the south-west, and 200
m east of the Wadi Ahmar channel. At the western section of the site
are the remains of a large pile of stones covering a structure, 15 m in
diameter. There is an elliptical enclosure measuring 15 by 25 m at the
northern part of the site. Inside this structure the remains of a square
cell are visible. Remains of additional smaller structures and walls are
visible on the surface of the site.
a bowl.
Flint finds: 65 items, including 2 scrapers, a notch, and 2 borers.
probability presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. This
site is a fine example of the cluster of sites discovered in Wadi Ahmar,
which share common traits: visible architectural remains on one hand,
and meagre finds that make their dating very difficult, on the other.
•
Site 79: EP-167
Table 15.1.
542 chapter fifteen
Site 80: EP-145

Table 15.1.
•
Site 81: 'Urqan er-Rub
Israel grid: 1917/1635 Periods of occupation: Epipaleo-
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, Chalcolithic, EB I?, IB,
Site type: caves and enclosures Roman–Byzantine, Middle
Area: 1.5 ha Ages
Nearest water source: 'Ain el- Number of visits: 3
Mana spring, 1.5 km distant Number of sherds: 45
Previous publications: Hovers
1993; Zertal 2005: site 195
Description: a large site in the southern section of 'Urqan er-Rub ridge,

300 m south of the Wadi Ahmar channel, and 2 km north of the mod-
Figure 15.32. Aerial view of 'Urqan er-Rub (Zertal 2005: 536).

site catalogue 543
ern village of Fazael. The site has three main parts:

Four openings of caves in the cliffs of the 'Urqan er-Rub ridge, 4–8
m wide and 10–15 m deep. Two enclosures built of large field stones in
front of these caves. A rich sherd and flint scatter was found.
The remains of six enclosures the eastern section of the site. Signs of
construction modifications and the pottery retrieved from this section
imply that these structures were used at different periods.
Figure 15.33. Plan of 'Urqan er-Rub (Zertal 2005: 535).

544 chapter fifteen
A group of nine elliptical enclosures in the western part of the site. This
area is poor in finds.
fragments of a fenestrated incense burner, a holemouth jar (Type H5),
2 lug handles, and 2 flat bases.
Flint finds: Excavation by Hovers exposed an Epipalaeolithic Kebaran
site.
presence during the Chalcolithic period and a low probability presence
during the EB I. The meagre finds make the dating of architectural ele-
ments impossible.
•
Site 82: Mughur el-Hable
Israel grid: 1885/1627 Periods of occupation: EB I
Elevation: -40 m.a.s.l.; 30 m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 0
Site type: sherd scatter Number of visits: 2
Topography: slope Previous publications: none
Nearest water source: Fazael
springs, 1 km distant
Description: a small scatter of sherds 1 km north of Fazael springs.

Pottery finds: 40 sherds from the EB period, including 3 holemouth jars
(Type H2a), a krater, and a bowl.
Other finds: 6 unrecognized basalt items.
presence during the EB I.
site catalogue 545

Elevation: -180 m.a.s.l.; 20 lithic/EB I?
Topography: valley fringe and Previous publications: Zertal
slope 2005: site 201
Fazael, 1 km distant
Description: a large site in the south-western part of Wadi Ahmar, 500

m west of the wadi channel. The site is located on a steep slope covered
with very large boulders. The southern part of the site, 100 m long and
60 m wide, is located inside a massive rock collapse. The main struc-
tures in this section are a broad room 18 m long and 5 m wide, divided
into 3 smaller cells, and an adjacent courtyard, 18 m in diameter (no.
1 in Fig. 15.34). To the west of this massive structure additional build-
ings and courtyards are visible in the rock collapse (nos. 2–3). In the
centre of the site seven square units built of large boulders are visible
on the surface (no. 4). Some of these units, 9 m2 in area, have a built
opening made of standing monoliths. In the northern part of the site
(no. 5) there is another complex with additional square structures and
enclosures, built in the same masonry as the other structures. There is
another elliptical enclosure at the northern section of the site (no. 6).
Chalcolithic jars (Type J2), an EB I jar (Type J2a) and a holemouth jar.
Flint finds: 15 items, including non-diagnostic tools: 4 scrapers, and 2
notches.
presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. This site is a fine
example of the cluster of sites discovered in Wadi Ahmar, which share
common traits: visible architectural remains on one hand, and meagre
finds that make their dating very difficult, on the other.
546 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.34. Plan of Wadi Ahmar 8 (Zertal 2005: 546).

site catalogue 547
Site 84: Mugharet Sad Khariz

Israel grid: 1910/1625 Periods of occupation: Middle
Elevation: -100 m.a.s.l.; 40 Paleolithic, EB, Late Roman,
m.a.s.a. Middle Ages
Site type: cave Visibility of other sites: 2
Topography: slope in a ravine Number of sherds: 15
Fazael, 1 km distant 2005: site 202
Description: a large cave on the rocky slopes, 40 m above the channel

of Wadi Zamor, close to its entrance to Wadi Ahmar. The cave is 10 m
deep, 8 m wide and 2–3 m high. In front of the cave there is a bow-like
courtyard 40 m long and 15 m wide. The courtyard is based on a ter-
race of large boulders, 3–4 m high. It has a built entrance in the middle,
made of large monoliths. The construction date of the courtyard is not
known.
Pottery finds: 15 sherds from the EB I, including a holemouth jar (Type
H1a), and 3 flat bases.
Flint finds: 44 items, including 2 Canaanean blades, and a fan scraper.
ability presence during the EB. The use of caves in this region is not
well documented (as opposed to the Judean Desert to the east, where
caves were inhabited in both periods – Davidovich 2008 and references
therein), and this cave might have been connected to the nearby site
Wadi Ahmar 8.
•
Site 85: EP 55
Elevation: 50 m.a.s.l.; 50 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Late Roman,
Site type: sherd scatter Middle Ages
Topography: slope Number of visits: 2
Nearest water source: Fazael Number of sherds: 30
springs, 400 m distant Previous publications: none
548 chapter fifteen
Description: a small sherd scatter on a moderate slope descending from

the north to Wadi Fazael. No architectural remains were noted.
body sherd with rope ornamentation, and 9 flat bases.
Flint finds: an adze
ability presence during the Chalcolithic period, and low–medium pres-
ence during the EB I period.
Figure 15.35. View to the north to EP 55 and Fazael Springs.

site catalogue 549
Site 86: Fazael Springs

Israel grid: 1884/1621 Periods of occupation: Epipalaeo-
Elevation: -50 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. lithic, Neolithic, Chalcolithic,
Site type: sherd scatter and a Middle Ages
structure Visibility of other sites: 0
Topography: hilltop Number of sherds: 40
Nearest water source: Fazael Previous publications: The
springs, 50 m distant Epipalaeolithic site was
discovered by Goring-Morris
(1980: 7)
Description: a small site on a hillock above and to the north of Fazael

springs (Fig. 15.35). A few meagre wall remains are visible on the sur-
face. To the north are many openings of caves. On the slope between
the caves and the site is a large flint scatter. The finds from the Neolithic
and Chalcolithic derive from the hillock itself.
mouth jars, a krater, a bowl with a knob handle, 4 flat bases (one with a
mat impression), and 2 body sherds with rope ornamentation.
presence during the Chalcolithic period. It seems that most of the finds
belong to the Pottery Neolithic period. Without excavation it is difficult
to be more precise.
•
Site 87: Fazael 1
Area: 1.5 ha Number of visits: 3
Topography: valley fringe Number of sherds: 140
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Glueck
Fazael, 500 m distant 1951: 416
550 chapter fifteen
Description: a large site on the valley fringes of the Wadi Fazael fan, 200
m south-east of the water tank of the modern village of Fazael. The site
spreads over moderate slopes descending to the south to Wadi Fazael.
Most of the area of the site has been damaged by modern earth-moving
activities and by looters. A few wall remains are visible on the surface
at the eastern section of the site. Amongst the remains is a building 2.5
m wide and 10 m long. A large scatter of sherds and flints is found on
the surface. This might be part of the site that Glueck notes in this area
(although he also describes EB pottery and states the meagre amount
of finds).
holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H5), one with a red stripe around the
rim, a fragment of a chalice with rope ornamentation, 5 jars (Types J1b,
J2), 3 bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B1c), a krater (Type K1), 2 lug handles, 8
body sherds with rope ornamentation, 10 red-slipped body sherds, and
14 flat bases.
Flint finds: 64 items, including diagnostic tools, such as 3 adzes, an axe,
and a backed and truncated sickle blade.
Figure 15.36. A Chalcolithic dwelling unit in Fazael 1, 1ooking north-west.

site catalogue 551

ability presence during the Chalcolithic period. This is the eastern part
of the very large Chalcolithic settlement on the northern bank of Wadi
Fazael. The celt tools found during the survey and the absence of Ca-
naanean technology, an important indicator of the lateness of the other
Chalcolithic sites in the Wadi Fazael fan, implies that this is the earliest
site of this Chalcolithic cluster in the Fazael valley.
Figure 15.37. Plan of the eastern section of Fazael 1.

552 chapter fifteen
Site 88: Fazael 2

•
Site 89: Fazael 4
•
Site 90: Fazael (Porath’s Excavation)
Site type: building (part of settle- Visibility of other sites: 5
ment) Number of visits: The site was
Area: unknown destroyed in the 70’s
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: unknown
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: Porath
Fazael, 50 m distant 1985
Description: salvage excavation directed by S. Porath in the modern vil-

lage of Fazael (Porath 1985: 2–13). A broad room with two adjacent,
probably later, units, and a large square courtyard were excavated. An
opening was discovered in the centre of the broad room. In the court-
yard a small rectangular feature, possibly a silo, was exposed. The floors
were made of beaten earth mixed with small cobbles.
Pottery finds: a varied selection of Chalcolithic pottery was presented
by Porath in his publication. These include bowls (Types B1a, B1b, B1c,
B2, B3), kraters (Types K2, K3, K4), holemouth jars (Types H1, H4),
jars (Types J1a, J1b, J2, J3), a spoon, and lug and ledge handles.
Flint finds: 42 items, implying that the collecting methods were rather
opportunistic, and included mainly tools. Amongst the published tools
are 2 Canaanean blades, an adze, and a backed sickle blade.
Other finds: a varied selection of limestone and basalt tools was pre-
sented in the publication, including straight-sided bowls and food
site catalogue 553
preparation tools.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a high probability presence during
the Chalcolithic period. This building was part of the large Chalcolithic
cluster of sites situated on the northern bank of Wadi Fazael. The pres-
ence of the Canaanean technology at the site is not surprising, and is
typical of the Fazael cluster in the latest phases of the Chalcolithic pe-
riod (see also Chapter 2).
Figure 15.38. Plan of Fazael – Porath's excavation (Porath 1985: 3).

554 chapter fifteen
Site 91: Fazael (Peleg’s Excavation)

Site type: building (part of settle- Visibility of other sites: 5
ment) Number of visits: The site was
Area: unknown excavated and covered
Topography: plateau Number of sherds: unknown
Nearest water source: Wadi (only 2 published sherds)
Fazael, 500 m distant Previous publications: Peleg
2000: 67
Description: salvage excavation directed by Y. Peleg in the modern vil-

lage of Fazael (Peleg 2000: 67). The remains of a square building 25 m2
in area, built of medium field stones, were excavated. The floor was
made of packed earth mixed with small cobbles, and meagre remains
of patches of white plaster were also visible.
Pottery finds: the
very meagre Chalco-
lithic finds include
a jar with rope or-
namentation, and a
straight-sided bowl.
Summary: The ce-
ramic assemblage
attests to a medium
probability presence
during the Chalco-
lithic period. This
building was part
of the large Chal-
colithic cluster of
sites situated on the
northern bank of
Wadi Fazael. Figure 15.39. Plan of Fazael – Peleg’s excavation
(Peleg 2000: 68).
site catalogue 555
Site 92: Fazael 5

Elevation: -205 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic, EB? MB II? Roman
Nearest water source: Wadi Previous publications: none
Fazael, 50 m distant
Description: a large site on the northern bank of Wadi Fazael, 200 m

west of the modern village of Fazael. The site is located on an elevated
plateau above the channel of the wadi. Remains of several structures
were noted on the surface of the site:
A long wall (no. 1 in Fig. 15.40), possibly a terrace, 2.5 m thick, was
found in the eastern part of the site. The masonry is similar to paved
path constructions of later periods (mainly Iron I–II, although no finds
from this period were retrieved in the survey at the site), and includes
two bordering walls made of one line of large and medium boulders,
one on each side of the thick wall, and a fill of smaller stones in be-
tween. If this thick wall was indeed part of the Chalcolithic site, then it
might have served as a terrace wall to level and support the eastern part
of the elevated plateau on which the other structures stand.
Remains of a very large courtyard (no. 2) were found west of 1. It is
similar in its square shape to other courtyards discovered in the Fazael
valley in Chalcolithic sites (e.g. Fazael 2, Fazael 7, Fazael – Porath’s ex-
cavation). It has a small broad room at the north-eastern corner.
Remains of a large square structure (no. 3) in the centre of the site.
Here again a possible courtyard and a square room can be distin-
guished. The relation between this unit and courtyard no. 2 is unclear.
This structure is located back-to-back with Complex 4, and might be
related.
The meagre remains of what seems to be a very long broad room and
an adjacent large courtyard can be observed on the surface (no. 4). If
the visible remains are of one structure, then it would have measured
approximately 40 m wide and 38 m long (almost 1,600 m2). Without
excavation it is difficult to ascertain these measurements.
Remains of additional walls (ancient and modern alike) were found
556 chapter fifteen
in the northern part of the site.

Pottery finds: 120 sherds from the Chalcolithic and EB I periods, in-
cluding 6 Chalcolithic holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H3a), 3 Chal-
colithic kraters (Types K2, K3, K5), an EB I jar (Type J2a), and an EB I
holemouth jar (Type H5), 5 flat bases, and 3 ledge handles.
Flint finds: 45 items, including diagnostic tools such as an adze, a fan
scraper, and a Canaanean blade.
Other finds: 2 limestone bowls, and 2 basalt bowls with flaring rims.
the Chalcolithic period, and a small-medium probability presence dur-
ing the EB I. It is possible that the few finds dated to the EB I are actu-
Figure 15.40. Plan of Fazael 5.

site catalogue 557
ally part of a transitional phase between the two periods, and not an
EB I stratum at the site. This could be proven only by an excavation of
all the different units at the site. This site was part of the large Chalco-
lithic cluster of sites situated in the northern bank of Wadi Fazael. If
future research locates a clear EB I stratum here, it will be the only and
earliest EB complex in the middle of the plateau of the fan of Wadi
Fazael (other EB I sites are located at the western fringes of the valley).
•
Site 93: Fazael 7
•
Site 94: Sheikh Diab 2
•
Site 95: Tell Sheikh Diab
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 10 lithic/EB? MB II, LB, Iron I–II,
m.a.s.a. Persian, Hellenistic, Roman
Site type: sherd scatter, tell Visibility of other sites: 2
Area: 3,000 m2 (the area of the site Number of visits: 5
during the EB I is not known) Number of sherds: 14
Topography: valley fringe Previous publications: Glueck
Nearest water source: Wadi 1951: 415; Bar-Adon 1972: site
Fazael, 50 m distant 13
Description: a small Iron Age fortified tell on the southern fringes of

Wadi Fazael (see Zertal 2012 for additional data and excavation report).
The creation of the tell involved massive earth-moving operations to
create an artificial podium, possibly for an Iron Age fortress. Glueck
558 chapter fifteen
noted EB material, and Bar-Adon noted Chalcolithic and EB material

on the tell. Zertal probed the site in 2007, and did not find any Chalco-
lithic/EB material in the excavation (Zertal 2012), although some was
found in his survey.
EB holemouth jars (Types H1a, H1b), 2 flat bases, a cornet base, and 2
body sherds bearing rope ornamentation.
Summary: The ceramic assemblage attests to a low-medium probabil-
ity presence during the Chalcolithic period (based solely on the cornet
base), and medium probability presence during the EB I. It is possible
that the Chalcolithic and EB finds originate, not from a settlement on
the premises of the tell, but from the fills brought to the site during its
erection, probably in the Iron Age II, from the nearby sites of these
periods situated in the Wadi Fazael fan.
•
Site 96: Khirbet Rahiyeh
Elevation: 570 m.a.s.l.; 100 MB II, Iron I, Persian, Hel-
m.a.s.a. lenistic, Roman
Site type: fortified tell Visibility of other sites: 2
Nearest water source: 'Ain Duma Previous publications: Finkelstein
spring, 400 m distant et al. 1997: 791
Description: This is a large fortified site on a steep slope north of and

above Wadi Rashash. It is located about 1 km south of Duma, and 400
m east of 'Ain Duma, the site’s water source. On the upper part of the
site are the remains of a city wall that probably dates to the EB. It is
about 5 m thick, and is built of boulders. Most of the finds at the site are
ascribed to the EB II. However, it can be assumed that the settlement
was founded, and possibly also fortified, in the latter part of the EB I.
Pottery finds: 75 sherds from the EB I period, including 16 holemouth
jars (Types H1a, H1b, H2a, H2b, H7), 3 jars (Types J1a, J1b, J2a), a
krater, 8 ledge handles, 3 body sherds with Um Hammad style rope
site catalogue 559
ornamentation, and 15 flat bases.

Flint finds: 14 items, including 3 Canaanean sickle blades.
probability presence during the EB I period. A large EB fortified city
was found at the site, and the question of its possible erection during the
EB I is addressed in Chapter 6. The cluster of sites around 'Ain Rashash
and 'Ain Duma is of particular interest: the area was uninhabited dur-
ing the Chalcolithic period, and only settled during the EB Ib, possibly
in connection with the growth in agricultural activity in the fringes of
Samaria in this period. This shift of settlement from the Jordan Valley
proper to the fringes of Samaria occurred before the transition from EB
I to EB II almost throughout the entire region investigated (in the areas
of Wadi Far'ah and Wadi Ahmar).
Figure 15.41. View to the north-west of Khirbet Rahiyeh,

'Ain Duma and 'Ain Rashash.
560 chapter fifteen
Site 97: 'Ain Duma

Israel grid: 1848/1614 Periods of occupation: EB I–III
Elevation: 540 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. Visibility of other sites: 2
Topography: slope Previous publications: Finkelstein
Nearest water source: 'Ain Duma et al. 1997: 789
Description: a large sherd scatter on modern terraces sloping to Wadi

Rashash from the north, 1.5 km south-south-east of the modern village
of Duma. The site is located 400 m west of the fortified tell of Khirbet
Rahiyeh near 'Ain Duma spring (Fig. 15.41). In the northern part of
the site a few ancient walls survived the modern cultivation, and are
remnants of the non-fortified EB settlement.
(Types H2a, H2b, H5, H10), 6 jars (Types J2a, J2b, J3, J4a), 5 kraters
(Types K1c, K4, K5), 3 bowls, 5 ledge handles, and 18 body sherds with
Um Hammad style rope ornamentation.
ence during the EB I. This is another site in the cluster of sites around
'Ain Rashash and 'Ain Duma during the EB that were probably con-
nected to the fortified EB site at Khirbet Rahiyeh.
•
Site 98: 'Ain Rashash
Elevation: 570 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. MB II, Iron, Byzantine
Nearest water source: 'Ain Previous publications: Finkelstein
Rashash spring, 200 m distant et al. 1997: 789
site catalogue 561
Figure 15.42. Plan of 'Ain Rashash.

562 chapter fifteen
Description: a large site on a shoulder above the northern cliff of Wadi

Rashash, 200 m south of 'Ain Rashash spring, and opposite Khirbet
Rahiyeh across the wadi (Fig. 15.41). The site is bordered by cliffs on
all sides, and building remains and terraces are scattered all over it.
Remains of looting activities in some of the structures at the site prove
that these buildings date to the EB.
(Types H2b, H2c, H4, H5), 2 jars (Type J2a), 3 kraters (Type K1a), 3
bowls Types B1a, B1b, B2c), 12 ledge handles, 21 flat bases, and 20 body
sherds with Um Hammad style rope ornamentation.
Flint finds: 12 items, including 2 Canaanean blades.
Other finds: a limestone mace head.
ability presence during the EB I period. The site is connected to the 'Ain
Rashash spring, and is part of the cluster of sites around 'Ain Rashash
and 'Ain Duma during the EB that were probably connected to the for-
tified EB site at Khirbet Rahiyeh. EB II finds retrieved in earlier surveys
(Finkelstein et al. 1997: 789), suggest that the site continued to exist
during this period.
•
Site 99: Umm Sueid
Elevation: -190 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? Iron II, Byzantine
Fazael, 800 m distant
Description: a site on a plateau by the channel of Wadi ez-Zamrah, 1

km west of the modern village of Fazael. A scatter of sherds was found
inside and around a large square enclosure from the Iron or Byzantine
age.
site catalogue 563
holemouth jar with rope ornamentation, and a body sherd with rope
ornamentation.
presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. It is possible that
this site is connected to the nearby Chalcolithic site EP -30.
•
Site 100: EP -30
Elevation: -150 m.a.s.l.; 60 lithic, Iron I
Topography: ridge Previous publications: none
Fazael, 1 km distant
Description: a small site on a saddle on the EP -30 ridge, 1.2 km south-

west of the modern village of Fazael. Meagre remains of an enclosure
and at least one broad room are visible on the surface.
Pottery finds: 33 sherds from the Chalcolithic period, including 2 small
rims and a flat base.
Flint finds: 114 items, including a backed sickle blade.
Other finds: a straight-sided basalt bowl rim.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a medium probability presence
during the Chalcolithic period. This site was probably connected to the
cluster of sites from the Chalcolithic period in the Wadi Fazael fan.
•
Site 101: Wadi Butam 1
Table 15.1.
564 chapter fifteen
Site 102: Tomer 3

Table 15.1.
•
Site 103: The Well Site
Israel grid: 1893/1568 Periods of occupation: EB, MB II,
Elevation: -30 m.a.s.l.; -50 Iron I–II, Hellenistic, Roman–
m.a.s.a. Byzantine
Fazael, 4.5 km distant
Description: a small site on a ridge above Wadi Abu Mahmoud, 2.5 km

west of the modern village of Gilgal. A small scatter of sherds was found
in and around an Iron Age enclosure.
Pottery finds: 7 sherds from the EB I period, including a holemouth jar
(Type H5).
Flint finds: 2 items, including a Canaanean blade.
probability presence during the EB I. The meagre finds, the geographi-
cal solitude of the site, and its topographic setting in a narrow gorge, far
from any water source, indicate that it was probably an encampment
site during the EB.
site catalogue 565
Site 104: Wadi Baker 1

Elevation: 0 m.a.s.l.; -40 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? MB II, Iron,
Site type: sherd scatter Roman–Byzantine, Middle
Area: 2,000 m2 Ages
Topography: moderate slope Visibility of other sites: 0
'Aujjeh, 4 km distant Number of sherds: 7
Previous publications: none
Description: an enclosure on a high shoulder south of and above Wadi

Baker. The enclosure is not dated to the Chalcolithic or the EB I, and the
sherds from these periods were collected in its vicinity. West of the site,
a cave in the cliffs was inspected by Peleg (Peleg and Hameiri 2002: 3),
who found a broken figurine dated by him to the Chalcolithic period.
holemouth jars and a flat base.
Flint finds: 6 items, including a fan scraper.
Summary: The ceramic and lithic assemblages attest to a medium
probability presence during the Chalcolithic and/or EB I periods. The
meagre finds, the geographical solitude of the site, and its topographic
settings in a narrow gorge, far away from any water source, indicate that
it was probably an encampment site.
•
Site 105: Wadi Baker
Table 15.1.
•
Site 106: Wadi Khaiat 1
Table 15.1.
566 chapter fifteen
Site 107: EP -66

Elevation: -66 m.a.s.l.; 20 m.a.s.a. lithic/EB I? IB, Iron, Late
Site type: settlement Roman
Topography: hilltop Number of visits: 2
'Aujjeh, 500 m distant Previous publications: none
Description: a small site on a hilltop 800 m north-west of the modern

village of Yitav and 500 m north of perennial Wadi 'Aujjeh. Meagre
remains of walls and rounded installations or graves are visible on the
summit.
Pottery finds: 35 sherds from the EB I, including a jar (Type J4a), 2
bowls (Types B1a, B2a), and 4 flat bases.
presence during the EB I. One or two structures were probably erected
here during the EB I.
•
Site 108: 'Ain 'Aujjeh 1
Israel grid: 1871/1513 Periods of occupation: Early
Elevation: 0 m.a.s.l.; 10 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic,
Site type: settlement EB I, Iron, Roman–Byzantine,
Area: 1.5 ha Middle Ages
Topography: slope Visibility of other sites: 0
'Aujjeh, 50 m distant Number of sherds: 135
Description: The site is situated on a moderate slope which descends

from the north into perennial Wadi 'Aujjeh, 500 m east of 'Ain 'Aujjeh.
An undated enclosure, 70 m in diameter, is situated at the centre of
the site. A natural gully created by winter rains cut a section in the
sediments of the western part of the site. Within this section, two clear
occupational horizons were noted, from the EB I and Early Chalco-
site catalogue 567
lithic (Wadi Raba culture). The remains of a wall that survived to the
height of 80 cm were noted 35 cm below the surface. Meagre finds date
this stratum to the EB I. Another stratum, which contained most of the
Early Chalcolithic pottery, was noted approximately 1.2 m below the
surface. Here a clear living surface is visible in the section, including
mud brick material and ash. The surface finds comprised mostly EB I
pottery.
Pottery finds: 135 sherds from the Early Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic and
Figure 15.43. Plan of 'Ain 'Aujjeh 1.

568 chapter fifteen
EB I periods. The Early Chalcolithic and Chalcolithic items include 3

jars (Types J1a, J3), and an Early Chalcolithic bow rim jar, 2 holemouth
jars (Type H1), a krater (Type K2), 4 bowls (Types B1a, B1c, B2), a
flat base with a mat impression, a lug handle, 3 strap handles (Early
Chalcolithic), 3 flat bases, and 10 red-slipped body sherds. The EB I
items include 10 holemouth jars (Types H1c, H2a, H5, H7, H8, H9), 3
bowls (Types B1a, B6), 3 ledge handles, and 5 flat bases.
Flint finds: 13 non-indicative items, including 3 borers.
Other finds: 5 basalt bowls, a limestone bowl, and fragments of basalt
grinding tools.
Summary: The assemblages attest to a medium-high probability pres-
ence during both the Chalcolithic and EB I periods (it seems that most
of the earlier finds date to the Early Chalcolithic/Wadi Raba stage, al-
though the possibility of a later Chalcolithic presence at the site cannot
be ruled out according to the finds). It seems that a small settlement
taking advantage of the spring’s water stood here at both periods. This
is one of a group of Early Chalcolithic sites discovered by the author in
the Wadi 'Aujjeh cluster (Bar and Rosenberg 2011).
•
Site 109: 'Iraq el-Awarna
Elevation: -10 m.a.s.l.; 0 m.a.s.a. Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic, MB
Site type: sherd scatter II, Iron, Persian, Byzantine,
Area: 1.5 ha Middle Ages
'Aujjeh, 100 m distant Number of sherds: 23
Description: a large site, mainly a scattering of sherds, found on a slope

of Wadi 'Aujjeh, 3 km west of the modern village of Yitav. The site is
bounded by a deep gully to the east and a cliff to the west. Building
remains from various periods are scattered on the slope, but none could
be associated with the Chalcolithic period.
site catalogue 569

mouth jars (Types H1, H3b), an early Chalcolithic bow rim jar, a bowl, 2
flat bases, a flat base with a mat impression, and an incised body sherd.
presence during the Chalcolithic period (it seems that most of the finds
date to the Early Chalcolithic/Wadi Raba stage, although the possibility
of a later Chalcolithic presence at the site cannot be ruled out according
to the finds). It seems that a settlement taking advantage of the spring’s
water stood here. This is one of a group of Early Chalcolithic sites dis-
covered by the author in the Wadi 'Aujjeh cluster (Bar and Rosenberg
2011).
•
Site 110: Yitav (Hizmi’s Excavation)
Elevation: -110 m.a.s.l.; 20 lithic
Site type: building Number of visits: 3
Area: 1,500 m2 Number of sherds: not collected
Topography: slope (summary based on published
Nearest water source: Wadi finds)
'Aujjeh, 500 m distant Previous publications: Hizmi
2003
Description: salvage excavation directed by H. Hizmi (2003) in the mod-

ern village of Yitav. The remains of a living complex with two square
buildings built of medium field stones and a large adjacent courtyard
were excavated. The meagre finds date the structure to the Chalcolithic
period.
Pottery finds: The preliminary report Hizmi (2003) presented only a
straight-sided bowl with red slip around the rim (‘lipstick’ motif), and
a few flat bases.
presence during the Chalcolithic period. This is a fine example of the
small settlement sites from the Chalcolithic period that are character-
ized by the presence of no more than two structures at the site and
570 chapter fifteen
Figure 15.44. Plan of Yitav (Hizmi 2003: 54).
remoteness from other settlement sites of this period (e.g. EP -30). The
general architectural idea: large rooms and adjacent large courtyards,
is typical of the Fazael valley sites at the end of the Chalcolithic period.
The meagre finds here make the comparison with the rich Fazael sites
somewhat problematic.
•
Site 111: Khirbet 'Aujjeh et-Tahta
Table 15.1.
•
Site 112: 'Aujjeh 2
Table 15.1.
site catalogue 571
Site 113: 'Aujjeh South

Elevation: -245 m.a.s.l.; 15 Chalcolithic, Chalcolithic
Topography: plateau Previous publications: Glueck
Nearest water source: Wadi 1951: site 249 (under a differ-
'Aujjeh, 100 m distant ent name); Bar-Adon 1972:
site 27
Description: a small site situated on the northern bank of perennial

Wadi 'Aujjeh south of the village of 'Aujjeh, and east of the modern road
connecting Beth Shean and Jericho. The site, also named esh-Sheikh
Ibrahim, Kh. el-Ayash, or Kh. el 'Awja et-Tahta, was noted in the past
by various surveyors (Bar-Adon 1972; Glueck 1951), who uniformly
assigned it to the Chalcolithic period. The site is intersected by small
gullies flowing to Wadi 'Aujjeh. Most of the early finds were retrieved
from these gullies. Meagre remains of walls were found between the
gullies. To the north and east of the site, small scatters of sherds were
found, being probably part of the outskirts of the site.
Pottery finds: 130 sherds from the Early Chalcolithic and Chalcolithic
periods, including 2 Early Chalcolithic bow rim jars, 6 holemouth jars
(Types H1, H2, H3b), a krater (Type K2), 7 bowls (Types B1b, B1c),
16 flat bases, 2 flat bases with a mat impression, 4 lug handles, 4 strap
handles (Early Chalcolithic), a tiny ledge handle, and 22 red-slipped
body sherds.
Flint finds: 34 items, including 2 sickle blades and 2 perforators.
ability presence during the Early Chalcolithic/Wadi Raba stage, and a
medium probability presence during the later Chalcolithic period. This
is one of a group of Early Chalcolithic sites in the Wadi 'Aujjeh cluster
(Bar and Rosenberg 2011).
572 chapter fifteen
Site 114: EP -261

Elevation: -261 m.a.s.l.; 15 lithic
Topography: plateau Previous publications: none
'Aujjeh, 700 m distant
Description: a site on the plateau of the Wadi 'Aujjeh fan, 700 m north
of today’s wadi channel. A vast sherd scatter was noted on the bank of a
ravine flowing to Wadi 'Aujjeh, but no architectural remains were noted
on the surface.
churns, 30 holemouth jars (Types H1, H2, H3a, H3b, H5), 5 jars (Types
J1a, J1b, J2), 10 bowls (Types B1a, B1c, B2), 10 lug handles, 22 flat bases,
3 body sherds with rope ornamentation, and 16 slipped body sherds.
Flint finds: 65 items, including 3 backed sickle blades and a chisel.
Other finds: 3 basalt grinding stones and a limestone basin.
the Chalcolithic period. This is one of the richest sites from the Chalco-
lithic period in the region, and the absence of remains of structures is
an enigma. These were possibly covered by the alluvial fan of the wadis,
and only excavations can resolve this question (a similar situation oc-
curs in the rich site of ej-Jobeh (Site 15) where only a deep cut trench
through the alluvial cover resulted in the exposure of architectural ele-
ments at the site)
•
Site 115: Malkahat el-Wadian
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic site in Table
15.1.
site catalogue 573
Site 116: Emergency Survey, site 30

15.1.
•
Site 117: Tell el-Hama
See a short description of this low probability EB site in Table 15.1.
•
Site 118: El-Makhruq
15.1.
•
Site 119: El-Fazil
15.1.
•
Site 120: Ras umm-Khubeza
15.1.
•
Site 121: Es-Shlat
15.1.
574 chapter fifteen
Site 122: Tell el-Hilu

See a short description of this low probability EB site in Table 15.1.
•
Site 123: Khirbet Mhallal
See a short description of this low probability Chalcolithic and EB site
in Table 15.1.
site catalogue 575
Site
Name Publications Comments
No.
Khirbet Only one body sherd with rope orna-
21 Zertal 2008: site 115
Hamamat mentation found in survey
Only 9 body sherds were attributed to
22 Khirbet Yusef Zertal 2008: site 117
Chalcolithic or EB I – none diagnostic
Khirbet Porath 1968: site 79; Both surveys reported only body frag-
31
Bet Hassan Zertal 2008: site 173 ments
Only 9 sherds retrieved in survey.
Ras Bilam
36 Zertal 2008: site 201 These include EB II platters and
ez-Zef (A)
nothing diagnostic of EB I
Ras Bilam Only 2 sherds, possibly EB I, retrieved
ez-Zef (B) in survey, but are not diagnostic
Ras Zertal 2008: site Only 9 body sherds attributed to the
53
el-Kharubeh 5 267/5 Chalcolithic or EB I – none diagnostic
15 body sherds and 85 flint items
70 Masu'a 2 Zertal 2005: site 91 attributed to the Chalcolithic – none
diagnostic
Only body sherds attributed to the
74 Wadi Ahmar 2 Zertal 2005: site 194
Excavation at the site by the author
79 EP -167 Zertal 2005: site 192 (Bar 2008) dated the site to the IB,
with no traces of earlier occupation
Only 4 body sherds attributed to
80 EP -145 Zertal 2005: site 196
Unpublished site
discovered in the 25 body sherds attributed to Chalco-
101 Wadi Butam 1
Manasseh Hill lithic– none diagnostic
Country Survey
Unpublished site
excavated by the 10 body sherds attributed to Chalco-
102 Tomer 3
Samaria Staff Officer lithic– none diagnostic
of Archaeology
Unpublished site
discovered in the Only 4 body sherds attributed to EB
105 Wadi Baker
Manasseh Hill I – none diagnostic
Country Survey
Unpublished site
discovered in the Only 10 body sherds attributed to
106 Wadi Khaiat 1
Manasseh Hill Chalcolithic/EB I – none diagnostic
Country Survey
Khirbet 'Aujjeh Bar-Adon 1972: Only 5 body sherds attributed to
111
et-Tahta site 26 Chalcolithic/EB I – none diagnostic
576 chapter fifteen
Site
Name Publications Comments
No.
Unpublished site
discovered in the Only 8 body sherds attributed to
112 'Aujjeh 2
Manasseh Hill Chalcolithic – none diagnostic
Country Survey
Malkahat Bar-Adon 1972: Only 4 body sherds attributed to
115
el-Wadian site 34 Chalcolithic – none diagnostic
Emergency Bar-Adon 1972: The site or the pottery boxes were not
116
Survey, site 30 site 30 traced
Only Mittmann suggested the slight
Mittmann 1970,
possibility that the site might have
263; Bar-Adon 1972:
117 Tell el-Hama been settled during the EB I. All other
site 30; Zertal 2005:
surveys and excavations at the site
site 30
rejected this option
Only Bar-Adon suggested the slight
Bar-Adon 1972:
118 El-Makhruq been settled during the Chalcolithic.
site 4
All other surveys and excavations at
the site rejected this option
Only Bar-Adon suggested the slight
Bar-Adon 1972:
119 El-Fazil been settled during the Chalcolithic.
site 15
Other surveys and a new check of the
survey’s pottery rejected this option
Our new survey at the site and a new
check of the survey’s pottery rejected
the possibility that the site might have
Ras umm- been settled during the Chalcolithic.
Khubeza The few flint items (a polished axe
and a sickle blade) attributed to the
Chalcolithic period could also be at-
tributed to the Neolithic period
check of the survey’s pottery rejected
121 Es-Shlat Zertal 2005: site 176
been settled during the Chalcolithic
Only Mittmann suggested the slight
122 Tell el-Hilu Mittmann 1970: 263 been settled during the EB I. All other
surveys, including our new survey,
rejected this option
check of the surveys pottery rejected
123 Khirbet Mhallal Zertal 2008: site 78
been settled during the Chalcolithic
Table 15.1. Low probability sites.

REFERENCE LIST
List of Abbreviations
AASOR Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research.

ADAJ Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan.
BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.
RB Revue Biblique.
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal.
JIPS Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society.
NEAEHL New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 1–5.
Stern, E. (ed.). Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society.
PEQ Palestine Exploration Quarterly.
QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine.
SHAJ Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan.
Abeles, Z.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves along the Eastern Escarpment of Jebel Qurun-
tul. 'Atiqot 41: 109–116.
Adams, R. M.
1981 Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central
Floodplain of the Euphrates. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Aharoni, Y.
1993 The Nahal Hever Caves. Pp. 827–829 in NEAEHL 3.
Albright, W. F.
1926 The Jordan Valley in the Bronze Age. AASOR, Vols. VI (For 1924–1925). New
Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.
1932 The Chalcolithic Age in Palestine. BASOR 48: 10–13.
Alon, D. and Levy, T.
1996 Demographic and Climate Problems during the Chalcolithic Period in the
Northern Negev: Case Studies from Gilat and Shiqmim. Eretz Israel 25: 41–44.
Alon, D. and Yekutieli, Y.
1995 The Tel Halif Terrace: “Silo Site” and its Implications for the Early Bronze Age I.
'Atiqot 27: 149–191.
578 reference list
Amiran, R.
1969 Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. New Brunswick: Rutgerts University Press.
1970 The Beginning of Urbanization in Canaan. Pp. 83–100 in Near Eastern Archae-
ology in the Twentieth Century. Essays in Honor of Nelson Glueck. Sanders, J. A.
(ed.). New York: Garden City.
1974 An Egyptian Jar Fragment with the Name of Narmer from Arad. IEJ 24: 4–12.
1985 The Transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age. Pp. 108–112 in
Biblical Archaeology Today: Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical
Archaeology, Jerusalem, April 1984. Amitai, J. (ed.). Jerusalem: Israel Explora-
tion Society; Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
1993 Ma'ahaz, Tel. Pp. 919–920 in NEAEHL 3.
Amiran, R. and Porat, N.
1984 The Basalt Vessels of the Chalcolithic Period and Early Bronze Age I. Tel Aviv
11: 11–19.
Amiran, R. and van den Brink, E. C. M.
2001 A Comparative Study of the Egyptian Pottery from Tel Ma’ahaz, Stratum I. Pp.
29–58 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory
of Douglas L. Esse. Chicago and Atlanta (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civiliza-
tion No. 59 ASOR Books, No. 5).
Amiran, R., Paran, U., Shiloh, Y., Brown, R., Tsafrir, Y. and Ben-Tor, A.
1978 Early Arad: The Chalcolithic Settlement and Early Bronze Age City. First-Fifth
Seasons of Excavations, 1962–1966. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
Arz, H. W., Lamy, F., Pätzold, J., Müller, P. J. and Prins, M.
2003 Mediterranean Moisture Source for an Early-Holocene Humid Period in the
Northern Red Sea. Science 300: 118–121.
Avigad, N.
1993 The Nahal David Caves. Pp. 832–833 in NEAEHL 3.
Avni, G.
1992 Survey of Deserted Bedouin Campsites in the Negev Highlands and its Impli-
cation for Archaeological Research. Pp. 241–254 in Pastoralism in the Levant:
Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Kha-
zanov, A. (eds.). Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press (Monographs in World
Archaeology 10).
Baird, D. and Philip, G.
1994 Preliminary Report on the Third (1993) Season of Excavation at Tell Esh-Shuna
(North). Levant 26: 111–133.
Banning, E. B.
2002a Consensus and Debate on the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic of the Southern
Levant. Paléorient 28 (2): 143–156.
2002b Archaeological Survey. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
2007 Time and Tradition in the Transition from Late Neolithic to Chalcolithic: Sum-
mary and Conclusions. Paléorient 33: 137–142.
2011 Houses, Households, and Changing Society in the Late Neolithic and Chalco-
lithic of the Southern Levant. Paléorient 36 (1): 49-87.
reference list 579
Banning, E. B. and Köhler-Rollefson, I.

1992 Ethnographic Lessons for the Past: Camp Locations and Material Remains near
Beidha, Jordan. Pp. 181–204 in Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Ma-
terials in Anthropological Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.).
Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press (Monographs in World Archaeology 10).
Banning, E. B., Robin Dods, R., Field, J. J., Maltby, S. L., McCorriston, J., Monckton, S.,
Rubenstein, R. and Sheppard, P.
1989 Wadi Ziglab Project 1987: A Preliminary Report. ADAJ 33: 43–58.
Banning, E. B., Blackham, M. and Lasby, D.
1998 Excavations at WZ 121, a Chalcolithic Site at Tubna, in Wadi Ziqlab, Jordan.
ADAJ 42: 141–159.
Bar, S.
2008 The Pattern of Settlement in the Lower Jordan Valley and the Desert Fringes of
Samaria During the Late Chalcolithic Period and Early Bronze Age I. Unpub-
lished PhD dissertation, Haifa: University of Haifa. (Hebrew)
2010 Early Bronze Age I ‘Um Hammad Ware’ - A Study in Regionalism. PEQ 142 (2):
82–94.
In Press (a) A New Settlement Pattern of the Chalcolithic Village: The View from the
Fazael Valley, Israel. Judea and Samaria Research Studies Vol. 23.
In Press (b) Yogevim Ve Nokdim I: Reports on Archaelogical Excavations in the Jordan
Valley snd the Desert fringe of Samaria (2006-2011). Haifa: Seker.
Bar, S. and Winter, H.
2010 Canaanean Flint Blades in Chalcolithic Context and the Possible Onset of the
Transition to the Early Bronze Age: A Case Study from Fazael 2. Tel Aviv 37 (1):
33–47.
Bar, S. and Rosenberg, D.
2011 Newly Discovered Yarmukian and Wadi Rabah Sites in the Southern Jordan
Valley and the Desert Fringes of Samaria During the 7th and 6th Millennia BC:
Preliminary Report. Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 39 (3):
32–39.
Bar, S., Bar-Oz, G., Boaretto, E., Cohen, O., Dan, E., Raban-Gerstel, N., Rosenberg, D.
and Winter, H.
2008 Ein Hilu - A Chalcolithic Site on the Desert Fringes of Samaria. JIPS 38: 153–
228.
Bar, S., Bar-Oz, G., Ben-Yosef, D., Raban-Gerstel, N. and Winter, H.
2011 Sheikh Diab 2: An Early Bronze Age I Hamlet in the Jordan Valley. JIPS 41:
95–154.
Bar, S., Cohen, O., Zuckerman, R. and Winter, H.
2012 The Archaeological Excavations at the Early Bronze Age I Site Fazael 4, Jordan
Valley, Israel. JISP 42: 1-34.
Bar, S., Bar-Oz, G., Ben-Yosef, D., Boaretto, E., Raban-Gerstel, N. and Winter, H.
In press Fazael 2, One of the Latest Chalcolithic Sites in the Jordan Valley? Report of
the 2007-2008 Excavation Seasons. JISP 43.
580 reference list
Bar-Adon, P.
1962 Expedition C – “Cave of the Treasure”. Yediot 26: 159–173. (Hebrew)
1972 The Judean Desert and Plain of Jericho. Pp. 92–152 in Judea, Samaria and the
Golan, Archaeological Survey 1967–1968. Kochavi, M. (ed.). Jerusalem: Carta.
(Hebrew)
1980 The Cave of the Treasure: The Finds from the Caves in Nahal Mishmar. Judean
Desert Studies. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
1993 The Nahal Mishmar Caves. Pp. 822–827 in NEAEHL 3.
Bar-Matthews, M., Ayalon, A. and Kaufman, A.
1997 Late Quaternary Paleoclimate in the Eastern Mediterranean Region from Stable
Isotope Analysis of Speleothems at Soreq Cave, Israel. Quaternary Research 47:
155–168.
1998 Middle to Late Holocene (6500 years period) Paleoclimate in the Eastern Medi-
terranean Region from Stable Isotopic Composition of Speleothems from Soreq
Cave, Israel. Pp. 203–214 in Water, Environment and Society in Times of Climatic
Change. Issar, A. S. and Brown, N. (eds.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bar-Yosef Mayer, D. E.
1995 The Molluscs from Grar. Pp. 453–462 in Grar: Chalcolithic Site in the Northern
Negev. Gilead, I. (ed.). Beer Sheva: Ben Gurion University Press.
2002 The Shell Pendants. Pp. 49–52 in Kissufim Road: A Chalcolithic Mortuary Site
(IAA Reports 16). Goren, Y. and Fabian, P. (eds.). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities
Authority.
2006 Marine and Riverine Shells at Gilat. Pp. 320–326 in Archaeology, Anthropology
and Cult - The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel. Levy, T. E. (ed.). London: Equinox.
Barshad, D. and Shaked, I.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves in Lower Wadi el-Makkuk. 'Atiqot 41: 35–42.
Baumgarten, Y.
2004 An Excavation at Ashqelon, Afridar – Area J. 'Atiqot 45: 161–184.
Barkai, R.
2004 The Chalcolithic Lithic Assemblage. Pp. 87–109 in Giv'at HaOranim: A Chal-
colithic Site near Nahal Beit Arif. Scheftelowitz, N. and Oren, O. (eds.). Tel Aviv:
Emery and Claire Yass.
Behrensmeyer, A. K.
1978 Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology 4
(2): 150–162.
Ben-Arieh, Y.
1965 The Central Jordan Valley. Merhavia: Hakibbutz Hameuchad. (Hebrew)
Ben-Tor, A.
1985 At the Dawn of History: The Chalcolithic Period and the Early Bronze Age.
Pp. 17–23 in Recent Archaeology in the Land of Israel. Shanks, H. and Mazar, B.
(eds.). Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society; Israel Exploration Society.
1989 Byblos and Early Bronze I Palestine. Pp. 41–52 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine
à l’age du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du
colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR Inter-
national Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
reference list 581
Ben-Yosef, D.
2007 The Jordan Valley during Iron Age I, Aspects of its History and the Archaeo-
logical Evidence for its Settlement. PhD dissertation. Haifa: University of Haifa.
(Hebrew)
Ben-Yosef, S.
1979 The Judean Desert and the Jordan Valley. Israel Guide Volume 4. Jerusalem:
Keter and Ministry of Defense. (Hebrew)
Betts, A. V. G. (ed.)
1991 Excavations at Jawa 1972–1986. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Belitzky, S.
1999 Recent Faulting and Folding in the Jordan Valley. Pp. 439–450 in Judea and
Samaria Research Studies, Volume 9. Eshel, Y. (ed.). Ariel: College of Judea and
Samaria –Research Institute. (Hebrew)
Binford, L. R.
1981 Bones, Ancient Men and Modern Myths. New York: Academic Press.
Blackham, M.
2002 Modeling Time and Transition in Prehistory: The Jordan Valley Chalcolithic
(5500–3500 BC). BAR International Series 1027. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports.
Boessneck, J.
1969 Osteological Differences between Sheep (Ovis aries) and Goat (Capra hircus).
Pp. 331–358 in Science in Archaeology. Brothewell, D. R. and Higgs, E. (eds.).
London: Thames and Hudson.
Bottema, S. and van Zeist, W.
1981 Palynological Evidence for the Climatic History of the Near East. Pp. 111–113 in
Prehistoire du Levant. Sanlaville, P. and Cauvin, J. (eds.). Paris: Centre national
de la recherche scientifique.
Bourke, S.
1997 The “Pre-Ghassulian” Sequence at Teleilat Ghassul: Sydney University Excava-
tions 1975–1995. Pp. 395–415 in The Prehistory of Jordan 2. Prespectives from
1997. Gebel, H. G. K., Kafafi, Z. and Rollefson, G. O. (eds.). Berlin: Ex Oriente.
2001 Chapter 4: The Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 107–162 in The Archaeology of Jordan.
MacDonald, B., Adams, R. and Bienkowski, P. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield Aca-
demic Press.
2002 The Origins of Social Complexity in the Southern Levant: New Evidence from
Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. PEQ 134 (1): 2–27.
Bourke, S. and Lovell, J. L.
2004 Ghassul, Chronology and Cultural Sequencing. Paléorient 30 (1): 179–182.
Bourke, S., Sparks, R. and Sowada, K. N.
1998 Preliminary Report on the University of Sydney‘s Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Seasons of Excavations at Pella (Tabqat Fahl) in 1996/1997. ADAJ 42: 179–211.
Bourke, S., Lovell, J., Sparks, R., Seaton, P., Mairs, L. and Meadows, J.
2000 A Second and Third Season of Renewed Excavations by the University of Syd-
ney at Tulaylat Al-Ghassul (1995–1997). ADAJ 19: 37–87.
582 reference list
Bourke, S., Lawson, E., Lovell, J., Hua, Q., Zoppi, U. and Barbetti, M.
2001 The Chronology of the Ghassulian Chalcolithic Period in the Southern Levant:
New 14C Determinations from Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. Radiocarbon 43 (3):
1217–1222.
Brandl, B.
1992 Evidence for Egyptian Colonization of the Southern Israel Coastal Plain and
Lowlands during the Early Bronze I Period. Pp. 441–476 in The Nile Delta in
Transition: 4th–3rd Millennium B. C. van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.). Proceedings
of the Seminar Held in Cairo, 21–24, October, 1990, at the Netherlands Institute
of Archaeology and Arabic Studies. Tel Aviv: E. C. M. van den Brink.
Braun, E.
1985 En Shadud: Salvage Excavations at a Farming Community in the Jezreel Valley,
Israel. BAR International Series 249. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
1989 The Transition from the Chalcolithic to the Early Bronze Age I in Northern
Israel and Transjordan: Is There a Missing Link? Pp. 7–27 in L’urbanisation de
la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles,
Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR
International Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
1990 Basalt Bowls of the EB 1 Horizon in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 16: 87-96.
1996 Cultural Diversity and Change in the Early Bronze I of Israel and Jordan:
Towards an Understanding of the Chronological Progression and Patterns of
Regionalism in Early Bronze I Society. PhD dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv Uni-
versity.
1997 Yiftah'el: Salvage and Rescue Excavations at a Prehistoric Village in Lower Gali-
lee, Israel. (IAA Reports 2). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2000 Area G at Afridar, Palmahim Quarry 3 and the Earliest Pottery of Early Bronze
Age I: Part of the ‘Missing Link’. Pp. 113–128 in Ceramics and Change in the
Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Levan-
tine Archaeology, no. 2. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
2004 Early Beth Shan (strata XIX-XIII): G.M. Fitzgerald’s Deep Cut on the Tell. Phila-
delphia: University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropol-
ogy.
2005 Identifying Ethnicity from Prehistoric Pottery in Ancient Egypt and the South-
ern Levant. in Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Transforma-
tion of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean. Clarke, J. (ed.) (Levant Supplemen-
tary Series, Vol. 2). Oxford: Oxbow.
Braun, E. and Gophna, R.
2004 Excavations at Ashqelon, Afridar - Area G. 'Atiqot 45: 185–242.
Braun, E., van den Brink, E. C. M., Bar, S., Regev, J. and Boaretto, E.
2013 Aspects of Radiocarbon Determinations and the Dating of the Transition from
the Chalcolithic Period to Early Bronze Age I in the Southern Levant. Paléorient
39 (1).
Brink, E. C. M. van den
2011 Continuity and Change – Cultural Transition in the Late Chalcolithic – Early
Bronze Age I: A View from Early Modi'in, a Late Prehistoric Site in Central
Israel. Pp. 61–70 in Culture, Chronology and the Chalcolithic, Theory and Transi-
reference list 583
tion. Rowan, Y. M. and Lovell, J. L. (eds.). (Levant Supplementary Series volume

9). Oxford: Oxbow.
Brink, E. C. M. van den, and Braun, E.
2002 Wine Jars with Serekhs from Early Bronze Lod: Appellation Vallée du Nil
Contrôlée, but for Whom? Pp. 167–192 in In Quest of Ancient Settlements and
Landscapes: Archaeological Studies in Honor of Ram Gophna. van den Brink, E.
C. M. and Yannai, E. (eds.). Tel Aviv: Ramot.
Brink, E. C. M. van den, and Gophna, R.
2005 Shoham (North): Late Chalcolithic Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel. (IAA
Reports 27). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Bronk-Ramsey, C.
1995 Radiocarbon Calibration and Analysis of Stratigraphy: The OxCal Program.
Radiocarbon 37: 425–430.
2001 Development of the Radiocarbon Program OxCal. Radiocarbon 43: 355–363.
Bruins, H. J.
1994 Comparative Chronology of Climate and Human History in the Southern Le-
vant from the Late Chalcolithic to the Early Arab Period. Pp. 301–314 in Late
Quaternary Chronology and Paleoclimates of the Eastern Mediterranean. Bar-
Yosef, O. and Kra, R. S. (eds.). Tucson, Arizona: Radiocarbon.
Burton, M. and Levy, T. E.
2001 The Chalcolithic Radiocarbon Record and its Use in Southern Levantine Ar-
chaeology. Radiocarbon 43(3): 1223–1246. Near Eastern Chronology: Archaeol-
ogy and Environment, Vol. 43 (Proceedings of the 17th International Radio-
carbon Conference). Bruins, H. J., Carmi, I. and Boaretto, E. (eds.). Tucson,
Arizona: Radiocarbon.
Callaway, J. A.
1972 The Early Bronze Age Sanctuary at Ai (et-Tell),1. London: Quaritch.
1980 The Early Bronze Age Citadel and Lower City at Ai (et-Tell), 2. Cambridge, Mass:
American Schools of Oriental Research.
Carmi, I., Epstein, C. and Segal, D.
1995 Radiocarbon Dates From Chalcolithic Sites in the Golan. 'Atiqot 27: 207–209.
Charloux, G.
2009 Régionalismes Céramiques en Jordanie à L’âge du Bronze Ancien. RB 116 (2):
202–231.
Chesson, M.
1998 Preliminary Results of Excavations at Tell el-Handaquq South (1993–1996).
PEQ 130: 20–34.
2011 Daily Life, Materiality and Complexity in Early Urban Communities of the South-
ern Levant: Papers in Honor of Walter E. Rast and R. Thomas Schaub. Winona
Lake, In: Eisenbrauns.
Chesson, M. and Philip, G.
2003 Tales of a city? 'Urbanism' in the Early Bronze Age Levant from Mediterranean
and Levantine Perspectives. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 16 (1): 3-16.
Claassen, C.
1998 Shells. New York: Cambridge University Press.
584 reference list
Clutton-Brock, J.
1983 The Animal Remains: A Summary. Pp. 802–803 in Excavations at Jericho, Vol-
ume Five. Kenyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A. (eds.). Jerusalem: British School of
Archaeology in Jerusalem.
Commenge, C.
2005 The Late Chalcolithic Pottery. Pp. 51–98 in Shoham (North): Late Chalcolithic
Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel (IAA Reports 27). Van den Brink, E. C. M.
and Gophna, R. (eds.). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2006 Gilat’s Ceramics: Cognitive Dimensions of Pottery Production. Pp. 394–506
Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult, The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel. Levi, T. E.
(ed.). London: Equinox.
Conder, C. R. and Kitchener, H. H.
1882 The Survey of Western Palestine, Vol. 2 – Samaria. London: Palestine Explora-
tion Fund.
Connan, J., Nissenbaum, A. and Dessort, D.
1992 Molecular Archaeology: Export of Dead Sea Asphalt to Canaan and Egypt in
the Chalcolithic-Early Bronze Age (4th-3rd Millennium BC). Geochimica et Cos-
mochimica Acta 56 (7): 2743–2759.
Contenson, H. de.
1956 La céramique chalcolithique de Beersheba: étude typologique. IEJ 6: 163–238.
1960 Three soundings in the Jordan Valley. ADAJ 4–5: 12–98.
Cope, C. R.
2006 The Fauna: Preliminary Results. Pp. 169–174 in The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations
1994–1995. Getzov, N. (ed.). (IAA Reports 28). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities
Authority.
Corbeletto, A.
1989 Degagement, enlèvement et restauration d’une grande jar-silo. P. 3 in Abu
Hamid: Village 4e millénaire de la Vallee du Jourdain. Dollfus, G. et al. (eds.).
Amman: Centre Culturel Français.
Covello-Paran, K.
1995 Gesher-Karantina. Hadashot Archaeologiot 104: 49–51. (Hebrew)
Croft, P.
1994 Preliminary Report on the Third (1993) Season of Excavations at Tell esh-Shuna
(North): Some Preliminary Comments on the Animal Remains from the First
Three Seasons at Shuna. Levant 26: 130–131.
Dagan, Y.
2000 The Settlement in the Judean Shephela in the Second and First Millennium B.C.
A Test-Case of Settlement Processes in a Geographic Region. Unpublished PhD
dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.
Damati, E.
1993 Makhruq, Khirbet el-. Pp. 929–930 in NEAEHL 3.
Dan, J.
1988 The Soils of the Land of Israel. The Zoogeography of Israel. Yom-Tov, Y. and
Tchernov, E. (eds.). Dordrecht: W. Junk.
reference list 585
Dan, J. and Alperovitch, N.

1971 The Soils of the Middle and Lower Jordan Valley. Bet Dagan: Division of Scient-
ific Publications.
Davidovich, U.
2008 Chalcolithic Period in the Judean Desert: Identification, Settlement Pattern and
Material Culture as a Basis for Socio-Economic Reconstruction. Unpublished
MA. thesis. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
Dollfus, G. and Kafafi, Z.
1986 Tell Abu Hamid. Pp. 231–235 in SHAJ III.
1993 Recent Researches at Abu Hamid. ADAJ 37: 241–262.
2001 Jordan in the Fourth Millennium. Pp. 163–172 in SHAJ VII.
Dollfus, G., Kafafi, Z., Rewerski, J., Vaillant, N., Coqueugniot, E., Desse, J. and Neef, R.
1988 Abu Hamid, an Early Fourth Millennium Site in the Jordan Valley. Pp. 567–602
in The Prehistory of Jordan: The State of Research in 1986. BAR International
Series 396. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Dothan, M.
1959 Excavations at Meser, 1957: Preliminary Report on the Second Season. IEJ 9:
13–29.
Douglas, K. and Kafafi, Z.
2000 The Main Aspects of the Early Bronze Age I Pottery from Jebel Abu Thawwab,
North Jordan. Pp. 101–112 in Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of
the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.). (Levantine Archaeology, 2).
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Driesch, A. von den.
1976 A Guide to a Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. (Peabody
Museum Bulletin 1). Cambridge: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Eth-
nology.
Driesch, A. von den. and Wodtke, U.
1997 The Fauna of 'Ain Ghazal, a Major PPN and Early PN Settlement in Central
Jordan. Pp. 511–556 in The Prehistory of Jordan II. Gebel, H. G. K., Kafafi, Z. and
Rollefson, G. O. (eds.). Berlin: Ex Oriente.
Edelstein, G., Milevski, I. and Aurant, S.
1998 Villages, Terraces, and Stone Mounds :Excavations at Manahat, Jerusalem, 1987–
1989. (IAA Reports 3). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Eisenberg, E.
1989 The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze I Occupations at Tel Teo. Pp. 29–40 in
L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des
recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Mi-
roschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports.
1993 Kitan, Tel. Pp. 878–881 in NEAEHL 3.
1996 Tel Shalem - Soundings in a Fortified Site of the Early Bronze Age IB. 'Atiqot 30:
1–24.
1998 Khirbet Et-Tuwal: Salvage Excavations at an EB IB Settlement in the Bet Shean
Valley. 'Atiqot 35: 1–7.
586 reference list
2001 Pottery of Strata VII-VI, The Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 105–116 in Tel Te'o – A
Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley. Eisenberg,
E., Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R. (eds.). (IAA Reports 13). Jerusalem: Israel
Antiquities Authority.
2002 The Excavation at Cave V/49. 'Atiqot 41: 105–123. (Hebrew)
Eisenberg, E., Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R.
2001 Tel Te'o – A Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley
(IAA Reports 13). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Eldar, I., Nir, Y. and Nahlieli, D.
1992 Bedouins and their Campsites in the Dimona Region of the Negev: A Compara-
tive Model for the Study of Ancient Desert Settlements. Pp. 205–216 in Pasto-
ralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives.
Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.). (Monographs in World Archaeology 10).
Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
Engberg, R. M. and Shipton, G.
1934 Notes on the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pottery of Megiddo. Studies in
Ancient Oriental Civilization, no. 10. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the Univer-
sity of Chicago.
Enzel, Y., Amit, R., Dayan, U., Crouvi, O., Kahana, R., Ziv, B. and Sharon, D.
2008 The climatic and physiographic controls of the Eastern Mediterranean over the
Late Pleistocene in the Southern Levant and its neighboring deserts. Global and
Planetary Change 60: 165–192.
Epstein, C.
1993 Oil Production in the Golan Heights during the Chalcolithic Period. Tel Aviv 20:
133–146.
1998 The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Eshed, V. and Bar, S.
2012 An Innovative Analysis of Infant Burials from the Chalcolithic Site Fazael 2,
Israel. IEJ: 62: 129–140.
Eshel, H. and Zissu, B.
2002 The Excavation of Cave VIII/9. 'Atiqot 41: 151–165. (Hebrew)
Esse, D. L.
1989 Secondary State Formation and Collapse in Early Bronze Age Palestine. Pp.
81–96 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et pers-
pectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre
1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford: British
Archaeological Reports.
1991 Subsistence, Trade, and Social Change in Early Bronze Age Palestine. (Studies
in Ancient Oriental Civilization 50). Chicago. Illinois: Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago.
1993 Yaqush. NEAEHL 4: 1502–1504
Finkelstein, I.
1992 Pastoralism in the Highlands of Canaan in the Third and Second Millennia
B.C.E. Pp. 133–142 in Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in An-
reference list 587
thropological Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.). (Monographs

in World Archaeology 10). Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
1995 Two Notes on Early Bronze Age Urbanization and Urbanism. Tel Aviv 22: 47–69.
Finkelstein, I. and Gophna, R.
1993 Settlement, Demographic, and Economic Patterns in the Highlands of Palestine
in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Periods and the Beginning of Urbanism.
BASOR 289: 1–22.
Finkelstein, I., Lederman, Z. and Bunimovitz, S.
1997 Highlands of Many Cultures: the Southern Samaria Survey. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv
University, Institute of Archaeology.
Finkelstein, I., Ussiskin, D. and Halpern, B.
2000 Megiddo III: 1992–1996 Seasons. (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archae-
ology of Tel Aviv University No. 18). Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, Institute of
Archaeology
Fitzgerald, G. M.
1935 The Earliest Pottery of Beth-Shan. Museum Journal 24: 5–22.
Fischer, P. M.
1997 Tell Abu al-Kharaz: The Swedish Jordan Expedition 1995–1996 - Sixth and Sev-
enth Seasons Preliminary Excavation Report. ADAJ 51: 129–144.
2006 Tell Abu al-Kharaz in the Jordan Valley. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften.
2008 Tell Abu al-Kharaz in the Jordan Valley I: The Early Bronze Age (Denkschriften
der Gesamtakademie 48; Contributions to the Chronology of the Eastern
Mediterranean 16). Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissen-
schaften.
Fletcher, R.
2008 Some Spatial Analyses of Chalcolithic Settlement in Southern Israel. Journal of
Archaeological Science 20: 1–11.
Frumkin, A., Magaritz, I., Carmi, I. and Zak, I.
1991 The Holocene Climatic Record of the Salt Caves of Mount Sedom, Israel. Holo-
cene 1 (3): 190–200.
Frumkin, A., Carmi, I., Zak, I. and Magaritz, I.
1994 Middle Holocene Environmental Change Determined from the Salt Caves of
Mount Sedom, Israel. Pp. 315–332 in Late Quaternary Chronology and Paleocli-
mates of the Eastern Mediterranean. Bar-Yosef, O. and Kra, R. S. (eds.). Tucson,
Arizona: Radiocarbon.
Gal, Z. and Covello-Paran, K.
1996 Excavations at Afula, 1989. 'Atiqot 30: 25–68.
Gal, Z., Smithline, H. and Shalem, D.
1997 A Chalcolithic Burial Cave in Peqi'in, Upper Galilee. IEJ 47 (3–4): 145–154.
Gat, Z. and Karni, O.
1995 Climate and Agrometeorology of the Jordan Valley, Adjacent Samaria Slopes and
Dead Sea Regions. Bet Dagan: Israel Meteorological Service.
588 reference list
Garfinkel, Y.
1993a The Yarmukian Culture in Israel. Paléorient 19: 115–134.
1993b Tel 'Ali. Pp. 53–55 in NEAEHL 1.
1996 The Yarmukian Culture – A Reappraisal. Qadmoniot 112: 66–77. (Hebrew)
1998 The Platter: A New Ceramic Type of the Chalcolithic Period. Levant 30: 191–
194.
1999 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant. Qedem 39. Jerusa-
lem: Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Garfinkel, Y., Ben-Shlomo, D., Freikman, M. and Vered, A.
2007 Tel Tzaf: The 2004–2006 Excavation Seasons. IEJ 57 (1): 1–33.
Garfunkel, Z.
1981 Internal Structure of the Dead Sea Leaky Transform (Rift) in Relation to Plate
Kinematics. Tectonophysics 80: 81–108.
Genz, H.
2000 Grain Wash Decoration in Early Bronze Age III? The Evidence from Khirbet
ez-Zearqon. Pp. 279–286 in Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the
Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press.
Getzov, N.
2004 Notes on the Material Culture of Western Galilee in the Early Bronze Age IB in
Light of the Abu edh-Dhahab Excavations. 'Atiqot 48: 35–50.
2006 The Tel Bet Yerah Excavations 1994–1995. (IAA Reports 28). Jerusalem: Israel
2007 Protohistoric Settlement Remains at Hittin, on the Fringes of the Arbel Valley.
'Atiqot 56: 14–20. (Hebrew)
Getzov, N., Paz, I. and Gophna, R.
2001 Shifting Urban Landscapes during the Early Bronze Age in the Land of Israel. Tel
Aviv: Ramot.
Gilead, I.
1988 The Chalcolithic Period in the Levant. Journal of World Prehistory 2 (4): 397–
443.
1990 The Neolithic-Chalcolithic Transition and the Qatifian of the Northern Negev
and Sinai. Levant 22: 47–64.
1992 Farmers and Herders in Southern Israel during the Chalcolithic Period. Pp.
29–41 in Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropologi-
cal Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.). (Monographs in World
Archaeology 10). Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
1994 The History of the Chalcolithic Settlement in the Nahal Beer Sheva Area: The
Radiocarbon Aspect. BASOR 296: 1–13.
2007 The Besorian: A Pre-Ghassulian Cultural Entity. Paléorient 33: 33–49.
2009 The Neolithic-Chalcolithic Transition in the Southern Levant: Late Sixth-Fifth
Millennium Culture History. Pp. 335-355 in Transitions in Prehistory: Essays in
Honor of Ofer Bar-Yosef. Shea, J. J. and Lieberman, D. E. (eds.). Oxford: Oxbow
Books.
reference list 589
Gilead, I. and Goren, Y.

1986 Stations of the Chalcolithic Period in Nahal Sekher, Northern Negev. Paléorient
12 (1): 83–90.
1995 The Pottery Assemblages from Grar. Pp.137–222 in Grar – A Chalcolithic site in
the Northern Negev. Gilead, I. (ed.). (Beer-Sheva VII). Beer Sheva.
Gilead, I., Hershman, D. and Marder, O.
1995 The Flint Assemblages of Grar. Pp.223–280 in Grar – A Chalcolithic site in the
Northern Negev. Gilead, I. (ed.). (Beer-Sheva VII). Beer Sheva.
Glueck, N.
1951 Explorations in Eastern Palestine, IV, Part I: Text. AASOR, Vols. XXV-XXVIII
(For 1945–1949). New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Golani, A.
1999 New Perspectives on Domestic Architecture and the Initial Stages of Urbaniza-
tion in Canaan. Levant 31: 123–133.
2003 Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Site of Qiryat Ata. (IAA Reports 18).
Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2004 Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Site of Ashqelon, Afridar - Area E.
'Atiqot 45: 9–62.
2008 Ashqelon Barnea' B-C. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 120 (Internet Edition).
Golani, A. and Brink, E. C. M. van den
1999 Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age IA Settlement at Azor. Atiqot 38:
1–49.
Golden, J. M.
2012 Dawn of the Metal Age: Technology and Society during the Levantine Chalcolithic.
London: Equinox.
Gonen, R.
1989 The Chalcolithic Period. In The Archaeology of Ancient Israel in the Biblical Pe-
riod. Tel Aviv: The Open University. (Hebrew)
Goodfriend, G. A., Margaritz, M. and Carmi, I.
1986 A High Stand of the Dead Sea at the End of the Neolithic Period: Paleoclimatic
and Archeological Implications. Climatic Change 9: 349–356.
Gopher, A. and Tsuk, T.
1996 The Chalcolithic Assemblages. Pp. 91–138 in The Nahal Qanah Cave: Earliest
Gold in the Southern Levant. Gopher, A. (ed.). (Monograph series of the Institute
of Archaeology, no. 12). Tel Aviv: Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University.
Gopher, A. and Rosen, S. A.
2001 Lithics of Strata XIII-III, The Pre-Pottery Neolithic – Early Bronze Age. Pp.
49–84 in Tel Te'o – A Neolithic, Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Age Site in the
Hula Valley. Eisenberg, E., Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R. (eds.). (IAA Reports
13). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Gophna, R.
1990 The Early Bronze I Settlement at 'En Besor Oasis. IEJ 40: 1–11
1995a Early Bronze Age Canaan: Some Spatial and Demographic Observations. Pp.
269–280 in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. Levy, T. E. (ed.). Lon-
don: Leicester University Press.
590 reference list
1995b Excavations at 'En Besor. Tel Aviv: Ramot.

Gophna, R. and Porath, Y.
1972 The Land of Ephraim and Manasseh. Pp. 196–243 in Judea, Samaria and the
(Hebrew)
Gophna, R. and Sadeh, S.
1988–1989 Excavations at Tel Tsaf: An Early Chalcolithic Site in the Jordan Valley. Tel
Aviv 15–16: 3–37.
Gophna, R. and van den Brink, E. C. M.
2005 The Early Bronze Age I Pottery. Pp. 99–106 in Van den Brink, E. C. M. and
Gophna, R. (eds.). Shoham (North): Late Chalcolithic Burial Caves in the Lod
Valley, Israel. (IAA Reports 27). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Gophna, R. and Tsuk, T.
2005 Chalcolithic Settlements in the Western Samaria Foothills. Tel Aviv 32: 3–19.
Gordon, R. and Villiers, L.
1986 Telul edh Dhahab and its Environs Surveys of 1980 and 1982: A Preliminary
Report. ADAJ 30: 275–289.
Goren, Y.
1990 Pottery from Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age I Cemeteries in Israel: Some
New Aspects of the Development of Ceramic Technology. Eretz-Israel 21:
119–126. (Hebrew)
Goren, Y. and Gilead, I.
1987 Petrographic Analysis of Pottery from Shiqmim: A Preliminary Report.
Pp. 411–417 in Shiqmim I (Studies Concerning Chalcolithic Societies in the
Northern Negev Desert, Israel (1982–1984)). Levy, T. E. (ed.). BAR International
Goren, Y. and Fabian, P.
2002 Kissufim Road: A Chalcolithic Mortuary Site. (IAA Reports 16). Jerusalem: Israel
Goren, Y., Finkelstein, I. and Na’aman, N.
2004 Inscribed in Clay: Provenance Study of the Amarna Tablets and Other Ancient
Near Eastern Texts. Tel-Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeol-
ogy, Tel Aviv University.
Goring-Morris, A. N.
1980 Late Quaternary Sites in Wadi Fazael, Lower Jordan Valley. Unpublished MA
Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Grant, A.
1982 The use of tooth wear as a guide to the age of domestic ungulates. Pp. 91–108 in
Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Wilson, B., Grigson,
C. and Payne. S.(eds.). BAR International Series 109. Oxford: British Archaeo-
logical Reports.
Greenberg, R.
2003 Early Bronze Age Meggido and Bet Shean: Discontinuous settlement in socio-
political context. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 16: 17–32.
reference list 591
Greenberg, R., Eisenberg, E., Paz, S. and Paz, Y.

2006 Bet Yerah: The Early Bronze Age Mound - Volume I - Excavations Reports, 1933–
1986. (IAA Reports 30). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Greene, J.
1986 Ajlon-Kufrinji Archaeological Survey. Amman: Department of Antiquities.
Greenhut, Z. and De Groot, A.
2009 The Pottery. Pp. 61–114 in Salvage Excavations at Tel Moza: The Bronze and Iron
Age Settlements and Later Occupations. Greenhut, Z. and De Groot, A. (eds.).
(IAA Reports 39). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Grigson, C.
1995a Plough and pasture in the early economy of the southern Levant. Pp. 245–268 in
The Archaeology of Society in The Holy Land. Levy, T. E. (ed.). London: Leicester
University Press.
1995b Cattle Keepers of the Northern Negev: Animal Remains from the Chalcolithic
Site of Grar. Pp. 377–452 in Grar: A Chalcolithic site in the Northern Negev. Gil-
ead, I. (ed.). Beersheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press.
2007 Farming? Feasting? Herding? Large Mammals from the Chalcolithic of Gilat.
Pp. 215–319 in Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult – The Sanctuary at Gilat,
Israel. Levy, T. E. (ed.). London: Equinox.
Gustavson-Gaube, C.
1985 Tell Esh-Shuna (North): 1984, a Preliminary Report. ADAJ 29: 43–87.
1987 Tell Esh-Shuna (North): 1984 and 1985. Pp. 237–240 in SHAJ III.
Gvirtzman, G. and Wieder, M.
2001 Climate of the Last 53,000 Years in the Eastern Mediterranean, Based on Soil
Sequence Stratigraphy in the Coastal Plain of Israel. Quaternary Science Reviews
20: 1827–1849.
Haber, A.
2001 The Faunal Analysis of Hagoshrim: Biological and Economical Aspects of Pre-
historic Agricultural Societies and the Process of Domestication. MSc thesis, Tel
Aviv University. Tel Aviv.
Haiman, M.
1991 Map of Mizpe Ramon Southwest (200). Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities
and the Archaeological Survey of Israel. (Hebrew)
1992 Sedentarism and Pastoralism in the Negev Highlands in the Early Bronze Age:
Results of the Western Negev Highlands Emergency Survey. Pp. 93–105 in Pas-
toralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives.
Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.). (Monographs in World Archaeology 10).
Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press
Hanbury-Tenison, J. W.
1986 The Late Chalcolithic to Early Bronze I Transition in Palestine and Transjordan.
BAR International Series 311. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Harrison, T. P.
1997 Shifting Patterns of Settlement in the Highlands of Central Jordan during the
Early Bronze Age. BASOR 306: 1–38.
592 reference list
2001 Early Bronze Social Organization as Reflected in Burial Pattern from the South-
ern Levant. Pp. 215- 236 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring
Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse. Wolff, S. R. (ed.). (The Oriental Institute of
the University of Chicago Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization No. 59/ The
American Schools of Oriental Research ASOR Books No. 5). Chicago: Oriental
Institute and Atlanta: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Hartenberger, B., Rosen, S. and Matney, Y.
2000 The Early Bronze Age Blade Workshop at Titriş Höyük: Lithic Specialization in
an Urban Context. Near Eastern Archaeology 63: 51–58.
Helms, S. W.
1987 Jawa, Tell Um Hammad and the EBI/Late Chalcolithic Landscape. Le-
vant 19: 49–81.
1991 The Pottery. Pp. 55–109 in Excavations at Jawa, 1972–1986: Stratigraphy, pottery
and other finds. Betts, A. V. G. (ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
1992 The “Zarqa Triangle”: A Preliminary Appraisal of Protohistorical Settlement
Patterns and Demographic Episodes. Pp. 129–136 in SHAJ IV. Amr, K., Zaya-
dine, F., Zaghloul, M., Nabeel, R. and Tawfiq, N. R. (eds.). Amman: Department
of Antiquities.
Helms, S. W., Betts, A. and O‘Tool, N.
1992 Excavations at Tell Um Hammad 1982–1984: The Early Assemblages. Betts,
A. V. G. (ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Hennessy, J. B.
1969 Preliminary Report on a First Season of Excavation at Teleilat Ghassul. Levant
1: 1–25.
1982 Teleilat Ghassul: Its Place in the Archaeology of Jordan. Pp. 55–58 in SHAJ I.
Henry, D. O.
1992 Seasonal Movements of Fourth Millennium Pastoral Nomads in Wadi Hisma.
Pp. 137- 141 in SHAJ IV.
Hesse, B.
1990 Pig Lovers and Pig Haters: Patterns of Palestinian Pork Production. Journal of
Ethnobiology 10: 195–225.
Hirschfeld, Y.
1985 Map of Herodium (108/2) 17–11. Jerusalem: Department of Antiquities and
Archaeological Survey of Israel. (Hebrew)
Hirschfeld, Y. and Riklin, S.
2002 Survey and Excavations in the Upper Wadi el-Makkuk Caves. 'Atiqot 41: 5–20.
Hizmi, H.
2003 Yitav. Hadashot Arkheologiot 115: 41–42.
Hongo, H. and Meadow, R. H.
1998 Pig Exploitation at Neolithic Cayono-Tepesi (Southern Iran). MASCA Research
Papers in Science and Archaeology 15: 77–98.
Hopf, M.
1983 Jericho Plant Remains. Pp. 577–621 in Excavations at Jericho: Volume Five. Ke-
nyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A. (eds.). Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem.
reference list 593
Horwitz, A.
2001 The Jordan Rift Valley. Lisse, Abingdon, Exton, Tokyo: A. A. Balkema Publish-
ers.
Horwitz, L. K.
2003 Temporal and Spatial Variation in Neolithic Caprine Exploitation Strategies: A
Case Study of Fauna from the Site of Yiftah'el (Israel). Paléorient 29: 19–58.
Horwitz, L. K. and Tchernov, E.
1989 Animal Exploitation in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant: An Over-
view. Pp. 279–296, in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien:
Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24
Octobre 1986). de Miroschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford:
British Archaeological Reports.
Horwitz, L. K., Tchernov, E., Ducos, P., Becker, C., Driesch, A. v.d., Martin, L. and
Garrard, A.
1999 Animal Domestication in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 25: 63–80.
Hout, J. L.
1967 Typologie et Chronologie Relative de la Céramique du Bronze Ancien à Tell
El-Farah. RB 74: 516–554.
Hovers, E.
1993 Samaria (Region) The Prehistoric Periods. Pp. 1310–1311 in NEAEHL 4.
Ibrahim, M., Sauer, J. and Yassine, K.
1976 The East Jordan Valley Survey. BASOR 222: 41–66.
Ilan, O.
2001 Household Archaeology at Arad and Ai in the Early Bronze Age II. Pp. 317-
354 in Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of
Douglas L. Esse. Wolff, S. R. (ed.). (The Oriental Institute of the University of
Chicago Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization No. 59/ American Schools of
Oriental Research ASOR Books No. 5). Chicago: Oriental Institute and Atlanta:
American Schools of Oriental Research.
Ilan, O. and Sebbane, M.
1989 Copper Metallurgy, Trade and the Urbanization of Southern Canaan in the
Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. Pp. 139–162 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine
à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du
Ilan, Z.
1973 The Jordan Valley and the Desert of Samaria. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. (Hebrew)
Joffe, A. H.
1991 Early Bronze I and the Evolution of Social Complexity in the Southern Levant.
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 4 (1): 3–58.
1993 Settlement and Society in the Early Bronze Age I and II, Southern Levant. (Mono-
graphs in Mediterranean Archaeology 4). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Joffe, A. H. and Dessel, J.
1995 Redefining Chronology and Terminology for the Chalcolithic of the Southern
Levant. Current Anthropology 36 (3): 507–518.
594 reference list
Kafafi, Z. A.
2001 Jebel Abu Thawwab (Er-Rumman), Central Jordan. Berlin: Ex Oriente.
Kallai, Z.
1972 The Land of Benjamin and Mt. Ephraim. Pp. 153–195 in Judea, Samaria and the
(Hebrew)
Keller, D. R. and Rupp, D. W.
1983 Archaeological Survey: Definitions. Pp. 17–30 in Archaeological Survey in the
Mediterranean Area. Keller, D. R. and Rupp, D. W. (eds.). BAR International
Kempinski, A.
1978 The Rise of an Urban Culture: The Urbanization of Palestine in the Early Bronze
Age, 3000–2150 B.C. Jerusalem: Israel Ethnographic Society.
1992 Reflections on the Role of the Egyptians in the Shefelah of Palestine in the Light
of Recent Soundings at Tel Erani. Pp. 419–426 in The Nile Delta in Transition:
4th-3rd Millennium B.C. van den Brink, E. C. M. (ed.). Proceedings of the
Seminar Held in Cairo, 21–24, October, 1990, at the Netherlands Institute of
Archaeology and Arabic Studies. Tel Aviv: E. C. M. van den Brink.
Kempinski, A. and Gilead, I.
1991 New Excavations at Tel Erani: A Preliminary Report of the 1985–1988 Season.
Tel Aviv 18: 164–191.
Kenyon, K. M.
1957 Digging Up Jericho. London: Benn.
1979 Archaeology of the Holy Land. London: Benn.
1981 Excavations at Jericho, Volume Three. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem.
Kenyon, K. M. and Holland, T. A.
1982 Excavations at Jericho, Volume Four. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem.
1983 Excavations at Jericho, Volume Five. Jerusalem: British School of Archaeology in
Jerusalem.
Kerestes, T. M.
1977/78 An Archaeological Survey of the Three Reservoir Areas in Northern Jordan.
ADAJ 22: 108–135.
Kerner, S.
1997 Status, Perspectives and Future Goals in Jordanian Chalcolithic Research. Pp.
465–472 in The Prehistory of Jordan 2. Perspectives from 1997. Gebel, H. G. K.,
Kafafi, Z. and Rollefson, G. O. (eds.). Berlin: Ex Oriente.
2008 The Transition between the Late Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze Age in the
Southern Levant. Offprint from the Proceedings of the Fourth International
Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East: Social and Cultural
Transformation: The Archaeology of Transitional Periods and Dark Ages Excava-
tion Reports. Kuhne, H., Czichon, R. M. and Kreppner, F. J. (eds.). Weisbaden:
Harrassowitz Verlag.
2010 Craft Specialization and its Relations with Social Organization in the Late 6th to
the Early 4th Millennium BCE of the Southern Levant. Paléorient 36: 179-198.
reference list 595
Khalaily, H.
2002 Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Pottery and Other Finds from Caves VIII/9
and VIII/28. 'Atiqot XLI: 129–141.
2004 An Early Bronze Age Site at Ashqelon, Afridar - Area F. 'Atiqot 45: 121–160.
Khazanov, A. M.
1984 Nomads and the Outside World. Madison, Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press.
Kline, M.
1988 The Geomorphology of Israel. The Zoogeography of Israel. Yom-Tov, Y. and Tch-
ernov, E. (eds.). Dordrecht: W. Junk.
Kochavi, M.
1972 Judea, Samaria and the Golan, Archaeological Survey 1967–1968. Jerusalem:
Carta. (Hebrew)
1975 The First Two Seasons of Excavations at Aphek-Antipatris, Preliminary Report.
Tel Aviv 2: 17–44.
Koeppel, R.
1940 Teleilat Ghassul II: compte rendu des fouilles de l’Institut biblique pontifical,
1932-1936. Rome : Institut Biblique Pontifical.
Kolodny, Y., Stein, M. and Machlus, M.
2005 Sea–rain–lake relation in the Last Glacial East Mediterranean revealed by δ18O/
δ13C in Lake Lisan aragonites. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69: 4045–4060.
Kroeper, K.
1988 The Excavations of the Munich East-Delta Expedition in Minshat Abu Omar.
Pp. 11–48 in The Archaeology of the Nile Delta, Egypt: Problems and Priorities. E.
C. M. van den Brink (ed.). Amsterdam: Netherlands Foundation for Archaeo-
logical Research in Egypt.
1989 Palestinian Ceramic Imports in Pre- and Protohistoric Egypt. Pp. 407–422 in
L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des
recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24 Octobre 1986). de Mi-
roschedji, P. (ed.). BAR International Series 527. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports.
Lee, J. R.
1973 Chalcolithic Ghassul: New Aspects and Master Typology. Unpublished PhD
dissertation, Jerusalem: Hebrew University.
Leonard, A.
1989 A Chalcolithic “Fine Ware” from Kataret Es-Samra in the Jordan Valley. BASOR
276: 3–13.
1992 The Jordan Valley Survey, 1953: Some Unpublished Soundings Conducted by
James Mellaart. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
Lev-Tov, J.
2000 Late Prehistoric Faunal Remains from New Excavations at Tel Ali (Northern
Israel). Pp. 208–216 in Archaeozoology of the Near East IVa. Mashkour, M.,
Choyke, A., Buitenhuis, H. and Poplin, F. (eds.). Groningen: Groningen Insti-
tute of Archaeology.
Levy, T. E.
1986 The Chalcolithic Period. Biblical Archaeologist 49 (2): 82–108.
596 reference list
1995 Cult, Metallurgy and Rank Societies - Chalcolithic Period (ca. 4500–3500 BCE).
Pp. 226–243 in The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. Levy. T. E. (ed.).
London: Leicester University Press.
2006 Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel. London:
Equinox.
Levy, T. E. (ed.)
1987 Shiqmim I (Studies concerning Chalcolithic societies in the Northern Negev Des-
ert, Israel (1982–1984)). BAR International Series 256. Oxford: British Archaeo-
logical Reports.
Levy, T. E. and Alon, D.
1982 The Chalcolithic Mortuary Sites near Mezad Aluf, Northern Negev Desert: A
Preliminary Study. BASOR 248: 37–59.
Levy, T. E. and Rosen, S. A.
1987 The Chipped Stone Industry at Shiqmim: Typological Considerations. Pp.
289–294 in Shiqmim I (Studies Concerning Chalcolithic Societies in the Northern
Negev Desert, Israel (1982–1984)). Levy, T. E. (ed.). Oxford: BAR International
Series 256.
Levy, T. E., Smith, P. and Alon, D.
1997 Egyptian-Canaanite Interactions at Nahal Tillah, Israel (ca. 4500–3000 BCE).
An Interim Report on the 1994–1995 Excavations. BASOR 307: 1–49.
Liphschitz, N.
2008 Reconstruction of the Arboreal Vegetation of the Judean and Samarian Moun-
tains during Antiquity as Evident from Archaeological Wood Remains. Pp. 48*-
55* in In the Hill-Country, and in the Shephelah, and in the Arabah. Bar, S. (ed.).
Jerusalem: Ariel.
Louhivuori, M.
1988 Continuity and Change in Pottery in the Early Bronze I Period in Israel. PhD
dissertation, Hebrew University. Jerusalem.
Lovell, J. L.
2000 Pella in Jordan in the Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 59–71 in Ceramics and Change
in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.).
(Levantine Archaeology, no. 2). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
2001 The Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods in the Southern Levant: New Data
from the Site of Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan. BAR International Series 974. Oxford:
2002 Shifting Subsistence Patterns: Some Ideas about the End of the Chalcolithic in
the Southern Levant. Paléorient 28 (1): 89–102.
Lovell, J. L., Meadows, J., Adams, T. J., Thomas, D. C., Richter, T., Miller, H., Elias, C.,
McRae, I. K. and al Balwaneh, M.
2006 The Second Preliminary Report of the Wadi ar-Rayyan Archaeological Project:
The First Season of Excavations at al-Khawarij. ADAJ 50: 33–59.
Lovell, J. L., Dollfus, G. and Kafafi, Z.
2007 The Ceramics of the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic: Abu Hamid and the Bur-
nished Tradition. Paléorient 33: 51–76.
reference list 597
Lynch, W. F.
1855 Narrative of the Expedition to the River Jordan and the Dead Sea. London: James
Blackwood, Paternoster Row.
Mabry, J.
1989 Investigations at Tell El-Handaquq, Jordan (1987–1988). ADAJ 33: 59–86.
Mabry, J. and Palumbo, G.
1988 The 1987 Wadi el-Yabis Survey. ADAJ 32: 275–305.
Mabry, J. B., Donaldson, M. L., Gruspier, K., Mullen, G., Palumbo, G., Rawlings, M. N.
and Woodburn, M. A.
1996 Early Town Development and Water Management in the Jordan Valley: Investi-
gations at Tell El-Handaquq North. AASOR 53: 115–154.
MacDonald, B.
2001 Climatic Changes in Jordan through Time. Pp. 595–600 in The Archaeology of
Jordan. MacDonald, B., Adams, R. and Bienkowski, P. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
Mallon, A., Koeppel, R. and Neuville, R.
1934 Teleilat Ghassul. Rome: L‘Institut biblique pontifical.
Mazar, A. and Rotem, Y.
2009 Tel Beth Shean during the EB IB Period: Evidence for Social Complicity in the
Late 4th millennium BC. Levant 41 (2): 131–153.
McCreery, D. W.
1981 Flotation of the Bab edh-Dhra' and Numeira Plant Remains. Pp. 165–170 in The
Southern Dead Sea Plain Expedition: An Interim Report of the 1977 Season. Rast,
W. E. and Schaub, R. T. (eds.). (AASOR 46). Cambridge, MA: American Schools
of Oriental Research.
2003 The Paleoethnobotany of Bab edh-Dhra. Pp. 449–463 in Bab edh-Dhra: Excava-
tions at the Town Site (1975–1981). Rast, W. E. and Schaub, R. T. (eds.). Winona
Lake. Indiana: Eisenbrauns.
Meadows, J.
1998 Ghassul Archaeobotany Report; 1997 Season. Unpublished Manuscript.
Mellaart, J.
1962 Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Survey in the Yarmuk and Jordan Val-
ley. ADAJ 6–7: 126–132.
1966 The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Ages in the Near East and Anatolia. Beirut:
Khayats.
Merrill, S.
1883 East of the Jordan. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Mienis, H. K.
2005 Mollusc Remains. Pp.155–157 in Shoham (North) - Late Chalcolithic Burial
Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel. van den Brink, E. C. M. and Gophna, R. (eds.).
(IAA Reports No 27). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Milevski, I.
2005 Local Exchange in Early Bronze Age Canaan. PhD dissertation Tel Aviv: Tel
Aviv University.
598 reference list
2011 Early Bronze Age Goods Exchange in the Southern Levant: A Marxist Perspective.
London and Oakville: Equinox.
Milevski, I., Fabian, P. and Marder, O.
2011 Canaanean Blades in Chalcolithic Contexts of the Southern Levant? Pp. 149-
159 in Culture, Chronology and the Chalcolithic, Theory and Transition. Lovell, J.
L. and Rowen, Y. M. (eds.). Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow.
Milevski, I., Braun, E., Varga, D. and Israel, Y.
2012 A Newly-discovered Early Bronze Age Settlement and Silo Complex at Amaziya,
Israel. Antiquity 85 Issue 331: http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/milevski331/; Ac-
cessed 12/24/2012.
Miller, J. M.
1991 Archaeological Survey of the Kerak Plateau. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Mimran, Y. and Bilitzky, S.
1995 The Uplift of Zahrat el-Qurein and its Effect on the Jordan Valley in Fazael
Area. Pp. 257–268 in Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 9. Eshel, Y.
(ed.). Ariel: College of Judea and Samaria – Research Institute. (Hebrew)
Miroschedji, P. de.
1971 L‘époque Pre-Urbaine en Palestine. Paris: Gabalda.
1989 Le Processus dùrbanisation en Palestine au Bronze Ancien: Chronologie et
Rythmes. Pp. 63–80 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien:
Bilan et Perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24
1993 Faràh, Tell el- (North): Neolithic Period to the Middle Bronze Age. Pp. 433–438
in NEAEHL 2.
2001 Gaza et l’Égypte de l’époque prédynastique à l’ancien empire: premiers résultats
des fouilles de Tell es-Sakan. Bulletin del la Société Française d’Égyptologie 152:
28–52.
Mittmann, S.
1970 Beitraege zur Siedlungs- und Territorialgeschichte des Noerdlichen Ostjordan-
landes. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Moustafa, Y. A., Pätzold, J., Loya, Y. and Wefer, G.
2000 Mid-Holocene Stable Isotope Record of Corals from the Northern Red Sea.
International Journal of Earth Sciences 88: 742–751.
Neef, R.
1990 Introduction, Development and Environmental Implications of Olive Culture.
Pp. 295–306 in Man`s Role in the Shaping of the Middle Eastern Landscape. Bot-
tema, S., Entjes-Nieborg, G. and van Zeist, W. (eds.). Rotterdam: Balkema.
Netser, M. and Gvirtzman, G.
1996 Settlement Changes in Menashe Mountains (Shechem Syncline) in the Scope
of Climatic Changes in Eretz-Israel during the Last 6000 Years. Pp. 293–300 in
Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 9. Eshel, Y. (ed.). Ariel: College of
Judea and Samaria – Research Institute. (Hebrew)
reference list 599
Nicholson, E. and Flohn, H.

1980 African Environmental and Climatic Changes and the General Atmospheric
Circulation in Late Pleistocane and Holocene. Climatic Changes 2: 313–348.
Nir, D.
1989 Geomorphology of Israel. Jerusalem: Department of Geography, Hebrew Univer-
sity of Jerusalem.
Nir, D. and Ben Arieh, Y.
1993 The Remains of the Middle Terrace between the Ghor and the Zor in the Mid-
dle Jordan Valley between the Sea of Galilee to Kfar Rupin. Pp. 73–79 in Studies
in Physical Geography of Eretz-Israel and South Sinai. Nir, D. (ed.). Jerusalem:
Ariel. (Hebrew)
Nissim, D.
1992 Survey of Carnivores in the Jordan Valley and Eastern Samaria. Pp. 191–193
in The Jordan Valley and Eastern Samaria. Markus, M. (ed.). Israel Nature and
Parks Authority and Jordan Valley Regional Council. (Hebrew)
North, R. S. J.
1961 Ghassul 1960 Excavation Report. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.
Ofer, A.
1990 The Judean Hill Country – From Nomadism to a National Monarchy. Pp. 155–
214 in From Nomadism to Monarchy, Archaeological and Historical Aspects of
Early Israel. Na’aman, N. and Finkelstein, I. (eds.). Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi
and Israel Exploration Society.
1993 The Highland of Judea during the Biblical Period. Unpublished PhD disserta-
tion, Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv.
Oren, E. D. and Yekutieli, Y.
1992 Taur Ikhbeineh: Earliest Evidence for Egyptian Interconnections. Pp. 361–384
in The Nile Delta in Transition: 4th – 3rd Millennium B. C. van den Brink, E. C.
M. (ed.). Proceedings of the Seminar Held in Cairo, 21–24, October, 1990, at the
Netherlands Institute of Archaeology and Arabic Studies. Tel Aviv: E. C. M. van
den Brink.
Ovadia, E.
1992 The Domestication of the Ass and Pack Transport by Animals: A Case of
Technological Change. Pp. 19–28 in Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological
Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. Bar-Yosef, O. and Khazanov, A. (eds.).
(Monographs in World Archaeology 10). Madison Wisconsin: Prehistory Press.
Palumbo, G.
1994 JADIS: The Jordan Antiquities Database and Information System – A Summary of
the Data. Amman: The Department of Antiquities of Jordan and the American
Center of Oriental Research.
Papalas, C. A., Eighmey, J. D. and Clark, G. A.
1997 Rock Rings: A Preliminary Report on Chalcolithic and EB I Settlement in the
Wadi Hasa Drainage, West-Central Jordan. Pp 429–439 in The Prehistory of
Jordan 2. Prespectives from 1997. Gebel, H. G. K., Kafafi, Z., and Rollefson, G. O.
(eds.) Berlin: Ex Oriente.
600 reference list
Parr, P. J.
2000 Proto-Urban Jericho: The Need for Reappraisal. Pp. 389–398 in The Archae-
ology of Jordan and Beyond: Essays in Honor of James A. Sauer. Stager, L. E.,
Greene, J. A. and Coogan, M. D. (eds.). Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbraun.
Patrich, J.
1993 The Ketef Jericho Cave. P. 837 in NEAEHL 3.
Paz, Y.
2000 Early Bronze Age I Fortified Settlements in Palestine. Unpublished MA thesis,
Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv.
2002 Fortified Settlements of the EB IB and the Emergence of the First Urban System.
Tel Aviv 29 (2): 238–261.
Paz, S.
2010 Life in the City: The Birth of an Urban Habitus in the Early Bronze Age of Israel.
PhD dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University.
Peleg, Y.
2000 Fasa'el (north). Hadashot Archaeologiot 112: 67–68. (Hebrew)
Peleg, Y. and Hameiri, N.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves along Wadi el-Makkuk and Wadi ed-Daliya.
Atiqot 41: 1–5.
Perrot, J.
1955 The Excavations at Tell Abu Matar, near Beersheba. IEJ 5: 17–40, 73–84, 167–
189.
1992 Umm Qatafa and Umm Qala'a: Two “Ghassulian” Caves in the Judean Desert.
Eretz-Israel 23: 100–111.
Philip, G.
2001 Chapter 5: The Early Bronze I-III Ages. Pp 163–232 in The Archaeology of Jor-
dan. MacDonald, B., Adams, R. and Bienkowski, P. (eds.). Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
Philip, G. and Williams-Thorpe, O.
1993 A Provenance Study of Jordanian Basalt Vessels of the Chalcolithic and Early
Bronze Age I Periods. Paléorient 19 (2): 51–63.
Porath, Y.
1968 The Samaria Survey (b). Unpublished manuscript. (Hebrew)
1985 A Chalcolithic Building at Fasa‘el. 'Atiqot 17: 1–19.
1992 Domestic Architecture of the Chalcolithic Period. Pp. 40–48 in The Architecture
of Ancient Israel from the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Kempinski, A. and
Reich, R. (eds.). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.
Portugali, J. and Gophna, R.
1993 Crisis, Progress and Urbanization: The Transition from Early Bronze I to Early
Bronze II in Palestine. Tel Aviv 20: 164–185.
Prag, K.
2000 Tell Iktanu, South Jordan Valley: Early Bronze Age I Ceramics. Pp. 91–99 in
Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip,
G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Levantine Archaeology, no. 2. Sheffield: Sheffield Aca-
demic Press.
reference list 601
2001 The Third Millennium in Jordan: A Perspective, Past and Future. SHAJ VII:
179–190.
Pritchard, J. B.
1958 The Excavation at Herodian Jericho, 1951. AASOR, Vol. XXXII-XXXIII (For
1952–1954). New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Raban-Gerstel, N., Bar-Oz, G., Zohar, I., Sharon, I. and Gilboa, A.
2008 Early Iron Age Dor (Israel): A Faunal Perspective. BASOR 349: 25–59.
Rast, E. W. and Schaub, R. T.
2003 Bab edh-Dhra: Excavations at the Town Site (1975–1981). Winona Lake. Indi-
ana: Eisenbrauns.
Ravikovitch, S.
1981 The Soils of Israel, Formation, Nature and Properties. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz
Hameuchad. (Hebrew)
Reimer, P. J., Baillie, M. G. L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Bertrand, C., Blackwell,
P. G., Buck, C. E., Burr, G., Cutler, K. B., Damon, P. E., Edwards, R. L., Fairbanks,
R. G., Friedrich, M., Guilderson, T. P., Hughen, K. A., Kromer, B., McCormac,
F. G., Manning, S., Bronk-Ramsey, C., Reimer, R. W., Remmele, S., Southon,
J. R., Stuiver, M., Talamo, S., Taylor, F. W., van der Plicht, J. and Weyhenmeyer,
C. E.
2004 IntCal04: Calibration Issue. Radiocarbon 46: 1029–1058.
Reimer P. J., Baillie M. G. L., Bard E., Bayliss A., Beck J. W., Blackwell P. G., Bronk
Ramsey C. E., Buck C. E., Burr G., Edwards R. L., Friedrich M., Guilderson T. P.,
Hajdas I., Heaton T. J., Hogg A. G., Hughen K. A., Kaiser K. F., Kromer B., Mc-
Cormac F. G., Manning S., Reimer R. W., Richards D. A., Southon J. R., Talamo
S., Turney J., van der Plicht J. and Weyhenmeyer C. E.
2009 IntCal09 and Marine09 Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curves, 0-50,000 Years
Cal BP. Radiocarbon 51 (4): 1111–1150.
Regev, J., Miroschedji, P. de, Greenberg, R., Braun, E., Greenhut, Z. and Boaretto, E.
2012 Chronology of the Early bronze Age in the Southern Levant: New Analysis for a
High Chronology. Radiocarbon 54 (3-4): 525-566.
Rice, P.
1987 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rizkana, I. and Seeher, J.
1987 Maadi I: The Pottery of the Predynastic Settlement. Archäologische Veröffentli-
chungen, no. 64. Mainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern.
Rosen, A. M.
1986 Quaternary Stratigraphy and Paleoenvironments of the Shephela, Israel. Geologi-
cal Survey of Israel, Reports 25/86. Jerusalem: Geological Survey of Israel.
1995 The Social Response to Environmental Change in Early Bronze Age Canaan.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 14: 26–44.
Rosen, S. A.
1983 The Canaanean Blade and the Early Bronze Age. IEJ 33: 15–29.
1986 The Analysis of Trade and Craft Specialization in the Chalcolithic Period: Com-
parisons from Different Realms of Material Culture. Michmanim 3: 21–32.
602 reference list
1989 The Analysis of Early Bronze Age Chipped Stone Industries: A Summary State-
ment. Pp. 199–223 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du bronze ancien:
Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du colloque d’Emmaüs (20–24
1997 Lithics After the Stone Age. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.
2002 The Evolution of Pastoral Nomadic Systems in the Southern Levantine Periph-
ery. Pp. 23–44 in In Quest of Ancient Settlements and Landscapes : Archaeological
Studies in Honour of Ram Gophna. van den Brink, E. C. M. and Yannai, E. (eds.).
Tel Aviv: Ramot.
Rowan, Y. M.
1998 Ancient Distribution and Deposition of Prestige Objects: Basalt Vessels during
Late Prehistory in the Southern Levant. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Univer-
sity of Texas.
2003 The Groundstone Assemblage. Pp. 183–202 in Salvage Excavations at the Early
Bronze Age Site of Qiryat Ata. Golani, A. (ed.). (IAA Reports 18). Jerusalem:
Israel Antiquities Authority.
2005 The Groundstone Assemblages. Pp.113–140 in Shoham (North)- Late Chalco-
lithic Burial Caves in the Lod Valley, Israel. van den Brink, E.C.M. and Gophna,
R. (eds.). (IAA Reports No. 27). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
2006 The Groundstone Assemblage. Pp. 211–250 in 'En Esur ('Ein Asawir) I: Excava-
tions at a Protohistoric Site In the Coastal Plain of Israel. Yannai, E. (ed.). (IAA
Rowan, Y. M. and Golden, J.
2009 The Chalcolithic Period of the Southern Levant: A Synthetic Review. Journal of
World Prehistory 22 (1): 1-92.
Rubin, S., Israeli, A., Gat, Z., Klebaner, L., Mishaeli J. and Lev Ami, U. (eds.)
1992 Israel Geoclimatic Regions Map. Bet Dagan: Ministry of Transport and Israel
Meteorological Service.
Sabah, O.
1992 The Vegetation of the Jordan Valley and Eastern Samaria. Pp. 48–55 in The
Jordan Valley and Eastern Samaria. Markus, M. (ed.). Israel Nature and Parks
Authority and Jordan Valley Regional Council. (Hebrew)
Sadeh, S. and Gophna, R.
1991 Observation on the Chalcolithic Ceramic Sequence in the Middle Jordan Valley.
JISP 24: 135–148.
Sanlaville, P.
1996 Changements Climatiques dans la Region Levantine à la Fin du Pleistocene
Superieur et au Debut de l’Holocène. Leurs relations avec L’Évolution des Socié-
tés Humaines. Paléorient 22 (1): 7–30.
Schattner, I.
1959 The Load of the Lower Jordan. Yediot 23: 157–175. (Hebrew)
1962 The Lower Jordan Valley. Scripta Hierosolymitana 11: 1–120.
Schaub, R. T.
1982 The Origins of the Early Bronze Age Walled Town Culture of Jordan. Pp. 67–75
in SHAJ I.
reference list 603
Schaub, R. T. and Rast, E. W.

1989 Bab-edh-Dhra: Excavations in the Cemetery directed by Paul W. Lapp (1965–
1967). Winona Lake, In.: Eisenbrauns.
2000 The Early Bronze Age I Stratified Ceramic Sequences from Bab-edh-Dhra'. Pp.
73–90 in Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant.
Philip, G. and Baird, D. (eds.). Levantine Archaeology, no. 2. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press.
Scheftelowitz, N.
2002 Early Bronze Age. Pp. 96–108 in Tel Kabri: The 1986–1993 Excavation Seasons.
Kempinski, A. (ed.). (Tel-Aviv University, Institute of Archaeology, Monograph
Series 20). Tel Aviv: Emery and Claire Yass Publications in Archaeology.
2004 The Pottery Assemblage. Pp. 37–60 in Giv'at Ha-Oranim: A Chalcolithic Site.
Scheftelowitz, N. and Oren, R. (eds.). (Salvage Excavation Reports 1). Tel Aviv:
Tel Aviv University.
Scheftelowitz, N. and Oren, R.
2004 Giv'at Ha-Oranim: A Chalcolithic Site. (Salvage Excavation Reports 1). Tel Aviv:
Tel Aviv University.
Schick, T.
1998 The Cave of the Warrior: A Fourth Millennium Burial in the Judean Desert. (IAA
Schiffer, M. B., Sullivan, A. P. and Klinger, T. C.
1978/79 The Design of Archaeological Survey. World Archaeology 10: 1–28.
Schulman, A.
1976 Egyptian Seal Impressions from 'En Besor’. 'Atiqot XI: 16–26.
1980 More Egyptian Seal Impressions from En Besor. 'Atiqot XIV: 17–33.
1989 At the Fringe: The Historiography and Historicity of the Relations of Egypt and
Canaan in the Early Bronze Age I. Pp. 433–453 in L’urbanisation de la Palestine
à l’âge du bronze ancien: Bilan et perspectives des recherches actuelles, Actes du
Seaton, P.
2008 Chalcolithic Cult and Risk Management at Teleilat Ghassul: The Area E Sanctu-
ary. BAR International Series 1864. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Shachar, A. (ed.)
1995 The New Israeli Atlas. Tel Aviv: Survey of Israel and the Hebrew University.
Shalev, S.
1994 The Change in Metal Production from the Chalcolithic Period to the Early
Bronze Age in Israel and Jordan. Antiquity 68: 630–637.
Shamir, O.
2003 Spindle Whorls. Pp. 209–214 in Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age Site
of Qiryat Ata. Golani, A. (ed.). (IAA Reports 18). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities
Authority.
Shimelmitz, R., Barkai, R. and Gopher, A.
2000 A Canaanean Blade Workshop at Har Haruvim, Israel. Tel Aviv 27: 3–22.
604 reference list
Silver, I. A.
1969 The Ageing of Domestic Animals. Pp. 283–302 in Brothwell, D. and Higgs, E. S.
(eds.). Science in Archaeology. London: Thames and Hudson.
Sion, O.
2002 Survey and Excavations of Caves along the Jebel Abu Saraj Cliff. 'Atiqot 41:
43–70.
Spanier, Y.
1992 The Geographical and Archaeological Aspects of East Samaria. Pp. 122–136 in
Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 1. Erlich, Z. H. and Eshel, Y. (eds.).
Kedumim-Ariel: College of Judea and Samaria. (Hebrew)
1993 The Water Sources of East Samaria – Past and Present Use. Pp. 267–282 in Judea
and Samaria Research Studies, Volume 2. Erlich, Z. H. and Eshel, Y. (eds.). Kedu-
mim Ariel: College of Judea and Samaria. (Hebrew)
1994a The Relationship Between Nomads and Permanent Settlements in East Samaria
– Past and Present. Pp. 379–388 in Judea and Samaria Research Studies, Volume
2. Erlich, Z. H. and Eshel, Y. (eds.). Kedumim-Ariel: College of Judea and Sa-
maria. (Hebrew)
1994b Survey of el-Mughair Map. Hadashot Arkheologiot 102: 68–69. (Hebrew)
Steen, E. van der
2004 Tribes and Territories in Transition. Orientalia Lovaniesia Analecta 130. Leuven:
Peeters.
2007 Town and the Countryside of the Kerak Plateau. Pp. 93-98 in On the Fringe
of Society: Archaeological and Ethnoarchaeological Perspectives on Pastoral
and Agricultural Societies. Saidel, B. A. and van der Steen, E. (eds.). BAR Inter-
national Series 1657. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Stekelis, M.
1935 Les Monuments Megalithiques de la Palestine. Thèse pour le doctorat
dùniversité de Paris, Paris: Mousson.
Stiner, M. C., Kuhn, S. L., Weiner, S. and Bar-Yosef, O.
1995 Differential Burning, Recrystallization, and Fragmentation of Archaeological
Bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 22 (2): 223–237.
Stuiver, M. and Polach, H. A.
1977 Discussing Reporting 14C Data. Radiocarbon 19: 355–363.
Sussman, V.
1990 Sheikh Ali 1959 – The Section in Area C. JIPS 23: 113–141.
Szuchman, J. (ed.)
2009 Nomads, Tribes, and the State in the Ancient Near East. Chicago, Ill: Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago.
Tubb, J. N., Dorell, P. J. and Cobbing, F. J.
1997 Interim Report on the Ninth Season (1996) of Excavations at Tell es-Saidiyeh,
Jordan. PEQ 129: 54–77.
Tzori, N.
1958 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Sites in the Valley of Beth-Shan. PEQ 90: 44–51.
1962 An Archaeological Survey in the Bet-Shean Valley. Pp. 135–198 in The Bet-
Shean Valley - The 17th Archaeological Conférence, Jerusalem. (Hebrew)
reference list 605
1977a Bet Shean in the Chalcolithic Period. Eretz-Israel 13: 76–81. (Hebrew)
1977b The Land of Issachar Archaeological Survey. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Soci-
ety. (Hebrew)
Underwood, A. J.
1997 Experiments in Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ussishkin, D.
1980 The Ghassulian Shrine at En-Gedi. Tel Aviv 7: 1–44.
Vaillant, N.
1989 La vie domestique. Pp. 31–32 in Abu Hamid: Village du 4e millénaire de la vallée
du Jourdain. Dollfus, G. and Kafafi, Z. Amman: Centre Culturel Français.
Vaux, de. R.
1949 La Deuxieme Campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 56:
102–138.
1951 La troisième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 58: 393–
430, 566–590.
1955 La Cinquième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 62:
541–589.
1957 La Sixième campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 64: 552–580.
1962 Le fouilles de Tell el-Far'ah. RB 69: 212–253.
1993 Far'ah, Tell el- (North). p. 433 in NEAEHL 2.
Vaux, de. R. and Steve, A. M.
1947 La Première Campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 54: 394–
433, 573–589.
1948 La Seconde Campagne de fouilles a Tell el-Far'ah, près Naplouse. RB 55: 544–
580.
1969 Les fouilles de Tell el-Far'ah. Tel Aviv: Internal Print of the Ancient Middle East-
ern Department of Tel Aviv University.
Werker, E.
1998 Plant Identification of the Wooden Objects. Pp. 92–97 in The Cave of the War-
rior. Schick, T. (ed.). (IAA Reports 5). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Winter, H.
2006 Reaping with Flint Sickles: From Prehistory to Early Historic Ages. JIPS 36:
231–244.
2008 Appendix A – The Flint Finds. Pp. 659–738. in The Manasseh Hill Country Sur-
vey, vol. II – The Eastern Valleys and the Fringes of the Desert. A. Zertal (ed.).
Leiden and Boston: Brill.
Wood, B. G.
1990 The Sociology of Pottery in Ancient Palestine. (Journal of the Study of the Old
Testament Supplement Series 103). Sheffield: JSOT Press.
Wright, G. E.
1937 The Pottery of Palestine from the Earliest Times to the End of the Early Bronze
Age. New Haven, Conn: American Schools of Oriental Research.
1958 The Problem of the Transition between the Chalcolithic and the Bronze Ages.
Eretz Israel 5: 37–45.
606 reference list
Yadin, Y.
1993 Cave of the Letters. Pp. 829–832 in NEAEHL 3.
Yannai, E.
2006 'En Esur (Ein Asawir) I: Excavations at a Protohistoric Site in the Coastal Plain of
Israel. (IAA Reports 31). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Yannai, E. and Braun, E.
2001 Anatolian and Egyptian Imports from Late EB I at Ain Assawir, Israel. BASOR
321: 41–56.
Yannai, E., Lazar-Shorer, D. and Grosinger, Z.
2006 The Pottery Assemblages. Pp. 63–178 in 'En Esur ('Ein Asawir) I: Excavations
at a Protohistoric site in the coastal plain of Israel. Yannai, E. (ed.). (IAA Reports
31). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.
Yassine, K., Sauer, J. and Ibrahim, M.
1988 The East Jordan Valley Survey, 1976: Part 2. Pp. 189–207 in Archaeology of Jor-
dan: Essays and Reports. Yassine, K. (ed.). Amman: Department of Archaeology,
University of Jordan.
Yeivin, S.
1960 Early Contacts between Canaan and Egypt. IEJ 10: 193–203.
Yekutieli, Y.
1998 The Early Bronze Age I of North Sinai: Social, Economic and Spatial Aspects.
Unpublished PhD dissertation, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. (Hebrew)
2000 Early Bronze Age I Pottery in Southwestern Canaan. Pp. 129–152 in Ceramics
and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Philip, G. and Baird,
D. (eds.). (Levantine Archaeology, no. 2). Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
2001 The Early Bronze Age IA of Southwestern Canaan. Pp. 659–682 in Studies in
the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse.
Wolff, S. R. (ed.). (The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago Studies in
Ancient Oriental Civilization No. 59/ American Schools of Oriental Research
ASOR Books No. 5). Chicago: Oriental Institute and Atlanta: American Schools
of Oriental Research.
2007 The Relationship Between Egypt and Canaan during the Early Bronze Age I as
Viewed from South-West Canaan. Qadmoniot 134: 66–74. (Hebrew)
Yizhaq, M., Mintz, G. I. C., Khalaily, H., Weiner, S. and Boaretto, E.
2005 Quality Controlled Radiocarbon Dating of Bones and Charcoal from the Early
Pre Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) of Motza (Israel). Radiocarbon 47: 193–206.
Zeder, M. A. and H. A. Lapham
2010 Assessing the reliability of criteria used to identify postcranial bones in sheep,
Ovis, and goats, Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (11): 2887–2905.
Zertal, A.
1993 Fortified Enclosures of the Early Bronze Age in the Samaria Region and the
beginning of Urbanization. Levant 25: 113–124.
2004 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. I – The Shechem Syncline. Leiden and
Boston: Brill.
2005 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. IV – From Nahal Bezeq to the Sartaba.
Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense and University of Haifa. (Hebrew)
reference list 607
2008 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. II – The Eastern Valleys and the Fringes
of the Desert. Leiden and Boston: Brill.
2012 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. V, The Middle Jordan Valley (From Wadi
Ahmar to Wadi 'Aujeh (Nahal Yitav)). Haifa: Seker, University of Haifa. (He-
brew)
Zertal, A. and Mirkam, N.
2000 The Manasseh Hill Country Survey, vol. III – From Nahal 'Iron to Nahal Shechem.
Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense and University of Haifa. (Hebrew)
Zohary, M.
1959 Geobotany. Merhavia: Hakibbutz Ha’artzi. (Hebrew)
1962 Plant Life of Palestine Israel and Jordan. New York: Ronald.
1980 Vegetal Landscapes of Israel. Tel Aviv: Am Oved. (Hebrew)
Zuckerman, S.
2003 The Early Bronze Age I Pottery. Pp. 35–49 in Tel Qashish: A village in the Jezreel
Valley. Ben-Tor, A., Bonfil, R. and Zuckerman, S. (eds.). (Qedem 5). Jerusalem:
Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Philosophy

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Philosophy

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

The Dawn of the Bronze Age

Culture and History of the

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/chan

Copyright 2014 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Reference List ........................................................................................... 577

Professor Adam Zertal encouraged me to write this book. It was after a

processing, writing, translating, and finally editing this work. I whole-

ing sites were comprehensively surveyed, based on new environmental

to analyze the society and economy of each period separately, compare

Structure of the Book

GEOGRAPHICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA

Geographical Boundaries Of The Study

180 185 190 195 200 205 210

Ancient site To Beth Shean

Figure 2.1. The boundaries of the study.

Geology And Geomorphology

The River Jordan

grey limestone of the surrounding hills, and some by the weathering of

The Climate Today

The Presumed Climate in the Chalcolithic and EB I

Many researchers have dealt with the palaeoclimate in this re-

ter regions or alter their grazing practices. An example of this was in

The Vegetation Today

of its distribution in the World.

The Vegetation in the Chalcolithic and EB I

Wildlife And Domesticated Animals

Wildlife in the Present and Historical Periods

Wildlife in the Chalcolithic and EB I

Lepus capensis 1% Bos taurus 5.3%

Gazella gazella 27.1%

Figure 2.4. Distribution of animals at the Chalcolithic site of 'Ein Hilu.

Figure 2.5. Distribution of animals at the Chalcolithic site of Fazael 2.

and freshwater crab.7 According to the data published from excavations

Lepus capensis 3% Felis 1%

Gazella gazella 17%

Ovis 3% Capra/Ovis 61%

Figure 2.6. Average distribution of animals from the Chalcolithic sites

mesticated animals comprising the livestock in the Chalcolithic period.

Sus domesticus 32%

Figure 2.7. Distribution of animals in the EB I site of Sheikh

Figure 2.8. Comparison of animal remains between Chalcolithic and EB sites

that had already begun in the Chalcolithic period).

Nahal Bezeq – Zebabdeh Valley

Wadi Malih – Tubas Valley

Wadi Far'ah – the Nablus syncline

Fazael Valley – Wadi Ahmar

Fazael Valley – 'Ain Rashash

180 185 190 195 200 205 210

205 Beth Shean 205

Fazael 7 Modern village

180 185 190 195 200 205 210

Figure. 2.9. Map of possible routes in the study area during

HISTORY OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH OF THE

focusing on the Chalcolithic and EB I. Nor will we discuss the history

Chalcolithic and EB I Research in the Southern

Nine Chalcolithic and EB I sites were discovered, among them other

the framework of these studies an EB I site – Fatzael 3 – was excavated

the correct chronological segmentation of the sites, it was decided not

4. A regional pottery typology was constructed, based on the survey

Terminology and Chronology

Garfinkel Lovell Banning Blackham Joffe and

The Archaeological Survey –