Publication Cover
Levant
The Journal of the Council for British Research in the Levant
Volume 55, 2023 - Issue 2
187
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

The EB II ‘metallic ware’ from Tell el-Far‘ah North (West Bank): typology, technology and petrography of a ceramic industry of the central hill country

ORCID Icon
 

Abstract

The present work reports the results of the typological, technological and archaeometric study undertaken on Early Bronze Age ceramic fragments from the site of Tell el-Far‘ah North (West Bank), which macroscopic analysis has recognized as representative of ‘metallic ware’. The fragments belong to a distinctive class of medium-sized carinated bowls dating to the south Levantine EB II/ESL 4. Petrographic (OM), mineralogical (XRPD) and chemical (SEM-EDS) analyses have yielded the identification of a ‘metallic ware’ industry, which used a low calcareous clay where quartz is dominant, along with feldspars, fragments of sedimentary and siliceous rocks, nodules of iron oxides, and was fired at a temperature in a range between 800–900 °C. Petrographic and mineralogical data have made it possible to discuss the nature of raw materials and to investigate aspects of the production technology. Finally, through a comparison with other ceramics from the site, the fragments have been examined against the background of the local pottery tradition. The metallic ware bowls from Tell el-Far‘ah North have proved to be representative of a distinctive specialized ceramic industry of the central hill country, linked to the so-called ‘Aphek family’ bowls.

Acknowledgements

Heartfelt thanks are addressed to J.-B. Humbert and to the École biblique et archéologique française de Jérusalem for the access to the EBAF Museum, where ceramic materials are stored, and for the support given to the in-progress study on these materials. I deeply thank L. Medeghini for our collaboration in the ongoing archaeometric study of ceramics from Tell el-Far‘ah N. I also thank M. Botticelli, C. De Vito and S. Mignardi for the contribution given to the discussion on the petrographic results presented in this study. A special thank you is addressed to Itzik Paz for sharing observations on the ‘Aphek family’ bowls with me. Finally, I thank the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on this paper.

Notes

1 Carinated bowls with flaring concave upper wall have proved to be a distinctive category of ‘metallic ware’ in the central hill country. The type, however, was produced in both metallic and non-metallic (red-slipped) wares (already Esse Citation1984: 324). Beck integrates metallic and non-metallic items into her study. Macroscopic observation and microscopic analysis have now confirmed that most of the Tell el-Far‘ah N specimens belong to common local ware (see below).

2 The pottery from the EB I–II settlements of Tell el-Far‘ah N, object of an ongoing study, was collected during nine excavation seasons carried out at the site by Roland de Vaux between 1946 and 1960, on behalf of the École Biblique et Archéologique Française de Jérusalem (EBAF). These excavations extensively exposed the Early Bronze Age remains in four areas (for a summary, see de Miroschedji Citation1993).

3 For Tell es-Sultan/Jericho, see: Garstang (Citation1932: :9); Garstang et al. (Citation1935: pl. XXX:20); Garstang et al. (Citation1936: pls XXXVII:6, 10, XXXVIII:2); Kenyon and Holland (Citation1982: fig. 51:7–11; Citation1983: figs 87:2, 92:12, 93:3, 99:4, 101:2–3, 102:1, 137:34, 141:3, 144:25); and Sala (Citation2010: pl. XCII:1–5). Hennessy recognized the non-local character of the fabric employed and the similarity with the fabric used for the same type at Tell el-Far‘ah N (Hennessy Citation1967: 73 and note 77).

4 At least five items — registered in the inventories kept in the EBAF archives — come from the EB II settlement at Tell el-Far‘ah N: two made of basalt (F.3825 and an uninventoried item quoted in de Vaux and Steve Citation1947: 405), one made of limestone (F.4030), two made of clay (F.3243 and F.4048). The use of tournette — attested in finishing operations, as well as in the fashioning of some vessel parts — involved the acquisition of complex skills and hints at the presence of specialist potters (Roux Citation2009: 197–98, 208–09).

5 The plan is erroneously published as ‘période 4': it corresponds to de Vaux’s period 5.

6 The plan is erroneously published as ‘période 5': it corresponds to de Vaux’s period 4.

7 At some sites of the central district, the shape initially made in non-metallic ware is documented since the late EB IB/transitional EB IB–EB II phase: at Tel Aphek (Beck Citation2000: 94), the Shoham North caves (Gophna and van den Brink Citation2005: fig. 7.2:5), the burial cave at Ḥorbat Ḥani (Lass Citation2003: fig. 20:2–3), Khirbat Abu Ḥamid (Paz et al. Citation2018: 129, figs 22:1; 25:3), Lod (Golani Citation2022: 188, 191, figs 33:4, 6) and Tel Dalit (Gophna Citation1996: 82, fig. 39:6, 14; but the attestation of three ‘metallic’ specimens from Stratum V/EB I (Gophna Citation1996: fig. 43:1–3) is debated, e.g. Charloux Citation2006: 70). The same shape is documented in the final EB IB/transitional EB IB–EB II phase at Beth Shan (according to the revised stratigraphy of the site, see below note 8; Fitzgerald Citation1935: pls V: 15, 18, VIII:16; Rotem Citation2012: 132–33, pl. 18:3–4, 6–11); and it appears sporadically at Tel Yaqush (Rotem et al. Citation2019: fig. 9:21), Tel Bet Yerah (Paz Citation2006: 281, fig. 7.21:5) and ‘Afula (Sukenik Citation1948: pl. VI:53). According to Rotem, the presence of these carinated bowls in late EB IB contexts at Beth Shan ‘may allude a connection between Tell el-Far‘ah N, Tel Aphek and Beth-Shean at the time when these bowls were first manufactured’ (Rotem Citation2012: 133). Metallic specimens of this type, the so-called ‘Aphek family’ bowls, belong to the EB II horizon (lastly de Miroschedji Citation2022: 239–40).

8 As for Beth Shan, the updated stratigraphy has questioned a substantial occupation of the site during the EB II: Level XIII, corresponding to Stratum M-2 of the Hebrew University excavations, is now dated to late EB IB or to a transitional EB IB–EB II phase (Mazar Citation2012: 1–24; Mazar and Rotem Citation2009: 131–33, 137–44, 150–51).

9 De Vaux and Steve (Citation1947: figs 2:25, 4:1, 3–4, 6–7, 9–15, 6:2, 7:35–36; Citation1948: figs 5:20–21, 27, 6:10, 8:4–6; Citation1949: fig. 6:23–25 [Tomb 2]); de Vaux (Citation1955: figs 1:13 (Tomb 16), 13:31, 14:5, 8, 22; Citation1961: figs 3:36–38, 4:6, 8).

10 Unfortunately, the kiln was excavated in the 1950s (de Vaux Citation1955: 558–63) and no particular attention was paid to registration of the pottery coming from the kiln area; moreover, no processing waste is recorded and now available for analyses.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.