The Canaanite Cultic Milieu: The zooarchaeological evidence from Tel Haror, Israel 9781841714073, 9781407324128

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF PLATES
LIST OF APPENDICES
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
PREFACE
CHAPTER 1. HISTORY, CULTURE, AND IDEOLOGY OF CANAAN DURING THE MIDDLE BRONZE II (2000-1550 B.C.)
CHAPTER 2. AREA K AND THE WELL AT TEL HAROR
CHAPTER 3. ANALYSIS OF THE FAUNA AT TEL HAROR
CHAPTER 4. THE BURIAL FAUNA IN AREA K
CHAPTER 5. THE PRACTICE OF CULT AT TEL HAROR
BIBLIOGRAPHY
FIGURES, TABLES, PLATES, AND APPENDICES

Citation preview

BAR S1029 2002  KLENCK  THE CANAANITE CULTIC MILIEU

The Canaanite Cultic Milieu The zooarchaeological evidence from Tel Haror, Israel

Joel D. Klenck

BAR International Series 1029 B A R

2002

The Canaanite Cultic Milieu The zooarchaeological evidence from Tel Haror, Israel

Joel D. Klenck

BAR International Series 1029 2002

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 1029 The Canaanite Cultic Milieu

© JD Klenck and the Publisher 2002 Typesetting &layout: Darko Jerko The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781841714073 paperback ISBN 9781407324128 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841714073 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd/ Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2002. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

EMAIL

PHONE FAX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Dedicated To my grandmothers Lucille Sheehan and Luella Klenck both of whom passed away when I was in the field. To the U.S. Army soldier who died during training at the end of Field Artillery Officer Basic Course 1-96.

TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................

i

LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................

iii

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................

iv

LIST OF PLATES ...................................................................................................................

vi

LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................................

vii

DEDICATION .......................................................................................................................

viii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................

ix

PREFACE ...............................................................................................................................

x

CHAPTER 1. HISTORY, CULTURE, AND IDEOLOGY OF CANAAN DURING THE MB II (2000-1550 B.C.) ..............................................................................................................

1

1.1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................

1

1.2. Chronology of the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1550 B.C.) .......................................... 1 1.3. Origins of Canaanite Culture: MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/ 1750 B.C.) ........................... 2

1 .4. Canaanite Religion and Ideology During the MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.) ........................................................................................

6

1.5. The Floruit of Canaanite Civilization: MB IIB/C (1800/1750-1500 B.C.) ................... 9 1.6. Canaanite Religion and Ideology During the MB IIB/C (1800/1750-1550 B.C.) ..... 13 1.7. Floral and Faunal Remains from MB IIB/C (1800/1750-1550 B.C.) Archaeological Sites ................................................................................................

21

1.8. The Implications of the Archaeology of Cult on the Study of Canaanite Religion ......................................................................... 24 CHAPTER 2. AREA KAND THE WELL AT TEL HAROR ......................................................................... 28 2.1. Environment ............................................................................................................

28

2.2. The Tel .....................................................................................................................

29

2.3. Area K .....................................................................................................................

30

2.4. Functional Analysis of MB Structures from the Enclosed Area in Area K ............... 34 CHAPTER 3. THE ANALYSIS OF THE FAUNA AT TEL HAROR .............................................................. 39 3.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................

39

3.2. Retrieval Methods ...................................................................................................

39

3.3. Analytical Methods ..................................................................................................

40

3.4. Excavated Contexts ................................................................................................

40

3.5. Identification of Taxa ...............................................................................................

44

3.6. Taxon Abundance ...................................................................................................

51

3.7. Taphonomic Processes ...........................................................................................

54

3.8. Demographic Data ..................................................................................................

59

3.9. Skeletal Part Representation ..................................................................................

64

CHAPTER 4. THE BURIAL FAUNA IN AREA K ........................................................................................ 67 4.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................

67

4.2. Retrieval and Analytical Methods ............................................................................ 67 4.3. Analysis of the Burial Fauna ................................................................................... 68 4.4. Dogs and Mesopotamian Healing Deities ............................................................... 72 4.5. Dogs from Isin and Tel Haror .................................................................................. 73 CHAPTER 5. THE PRACTICE OF CULT AT TEL HAROR ........................................................................ 74 5.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................

74

5.2. Zooarchaeological Evidence from Tel Haror ........................................................... 74 5.3. Economic Considerations ....................................................................................... 77 5.4. Ideological Considerations ...................................................................................... 81 5.5. Other Considerations .............................................................................................. 88 5.6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 89 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 91 FIGURES, TABLES, PLATES, AND APPENDICES .......................................................... 101

ii

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1.1: Map of Canaanite archaeological sites dating to the MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.) and MB IIB (1800/1750-1550 B.C.). 1.2a: Comparison of MB IIA Canaanite ceramic vessels (from Kempinski 1992: 162-163). 1.2b: Comparison of MB IIA Canaanite ceramic vessels (from Kempinski 1992: 162-163). 1.2c: Comparison of MB IIB Canaanite ceramic vessels (from Kempinski 1992: 180-181 ). 1.2d: Comparison of MB IIB Canaanite ceramic vessels (from Kempinski 1992: 180-181 ). 1.3a: Plan of the MB IIA open cult site at Megiddo in Stratum XIII B (from Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 173-Fig. 11). 1.3b: Plan of the MB IIA open cult site at Megiddo in Stratum XIII A (from Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 176-Fig. 12). 1.3c: Plan of the MB IIA open cult site at Megiddo in Stratum XII (from Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 176-Fig. 13). 1.4: Plan of the open cult site at Nahariyah showing the MB IIA phase, A, and the MB IIB phases, B and C (from Dothan 1977b: 909). 1.5: Plan of the MB IIA open cult site at Byblos (from Dunand 1950: Pl. XXIV). 1.6: A deposit at Byblos containing miniature ceramic vessels (from Dunand 1950: Pl. LXXX). 1.7: Open air cult site at Gezer dating to 1600 B.C. (from Dever 1971: 120- -Fig. 10). 1.8a: Plan of MB IIB temple in Stratum 1a at Shechem (from G.E. Wright 1965: Fig. 41 ). 1.8b: Plan of MB IIC temple in Stratum 1bat Shechem (from G.E. Wright 1965: Fig. 48). 1.9: Plan of MB IIC temple in Stratum X at Megiddo (from Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 179-Fig. 15). 1.10a: Plan of the MB IIC temple of Stratum 3 in Area Hat Hazor (from Yadin 1972: 76-Fig. 18). 1.10b: Plan of the MB II-LB I temple in Area A at Hazor (from Yadin 1972: 103-Fig. 26). 1.11a: Plan of the MB IIB temple of Stratum Vat Tel Kittan (from Eisenberg 1977: 80). 1.11b: Plan of the MB IIB temple of Stratum IV at Tel Kittan (from Eisenberg 1977: 80). 1.12: Plan of the MB IIB temple at Tell el-Hayyat (from Falconer & Magness-Gardiner 1989: 340Fig. 9). 1.13: Plan of MB IIB temple complex of Strata E3-2 at Tell ed Dab'a (from Bietak 1979: 248-Fig. 8). 1.14: Plan of Temples 1 and 2 ('Dagan and Baal') at Ras Shamra/ Ugarit (from Schaeffer 1935: Pl. XXXVI). 1.15: Plan of the Dagan Temple at Mari (from Parrot 1938: 22-Fig. 13; and Parrot 1939: Pl. I). 1.16a: Plan of Temple Nat Ebia or Tell Mardikh (from Matthiae 1981: 127-Fig. 27). 1.16b: Plan ofTemple B1 at Ebia or Tell Mardikh (from Matthiae 1981: 128-Fig. 28). 1.16c: Plan ofTemple D at Ebia or Tell Mardikh (from Matthiae 1981: 131-Fig. 30). 1.17: Plan of MB IIC temple in Level VII at Alalakh (from Woolley 1955: Fig. 35). 2.1: Map of the Northern Negev showing the location of Tel Haror. 2.2: Map of Tel Haror. 2.3: Phytogeographical map of Israel showing location of Tel Haror. 2.4: Site plan of Area Kat Tel Haror showing Middle Bronze Age strata (IVA, IV, and V). 2.5: Site plan of Structure 8624 in Area K at Tel Haror. 2.6: Geometric and zoomorphic designs on MB ceramic vessels from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2. 7: Anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines from the 'enclosed area' in Area K.

2.8: Serpentine iconography from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.9: Ceramic sherd inscribed with two symbols and the head of a gazelle from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.10: Broken hand and arm of statuette retrieved from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.11: Decorated ceramic stands from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.12: Miniature ceramic bowls from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.13: Dipper juglets retrieved from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.14: Ceramic lamps from the 'enclosed area' in Area K. 2.15: Comparison of Middle Bronze temple structures from Canaan, the Phoenician Coast, and Syria with Structure 8630 from Area K at Tel Haror. 3.1: Areas I, II, Ill, IV, and Vin the 'enclosed area' at Tel Haror. 3.2: Stratigraphy of Area I. 3.3: Stratigraphy of Area II. 3.4: Stratigraphy of Area Ill. 3.5: Stratigraphy of Area IV. 3.6: Proportions of sheep ( Ovis aries) and goat ( Capra hircus) remains from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.7: Unbaked clay cylinders of unknown function found in Structure 8094 (Area IV). 3.8: Proportions of large (mostly cattle) and medium (mostly caprovine) mammal remains from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.9: Caprovine tooth eruption and wear rates from Area I. 3.10: Caprovine tooth eruption and wear rates from Area 11. 3.11: Caprovine tooth eruption and wear rates from Areas 111 and V. 3.12: Caprovine tooth eruption and wear rates from Area IV. 3.13: Caprovine tooth eruption and wear rates for sheep and goat teeth from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.14: Tooth eruption and wear rates for young sheep and goat from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.15: Tooth wear rates for cattle mandibular teeth from the enclosed area and well. 3.16: Bone fusion ratios for donkey (Equus asinus) postcranial remains from the well and Structure 8624. 4.1: Site plan of the enclosed area in Area K showing the locations of the loci where corvid and canid remains were retrieved in Level I in Areas I, II, and IV. 4.2: Site plan of the enclosed area in Area K showing the locations of the loci where corvid and canid remains were retrieved in Level II in Areas I, II, Ill, and IV. 4.3: Site plan of the enclosed area in Area K showing the locations of the loci where corvid and canid remains were retrieved in Level Ill in Areas I, II, Ill, and IV. 4.4: Site plan of the enclosed area in Area K showing the locations of the loci where corvid and canid remains were retrieved in Level IV in Area I. 5.1: Iconographic representation of Resheph, with a gazelle-head on the front of his Upper Egyptian crown, dating to the Nineteenth Dynasty (1307-1196 B.C.-from Boreux 1939: 682).

LIST OF TABLES 2.1: Architectural characteristics of Middle Bronze Age temples compared to criteria provided by A. Mazar (1992). Also recorded are comparisons of alleged cultic features and artifacts from these temples. 3.1: The NISP or number of skeletal fragments identified to taxa, from Non-Burial assemblages in Areas I, II, and Ill in the enclosed area. 3.2: The NISP or number of skeletal fragments identified to taxa, from Non-Burial assemblages in Areas IV and V; also recorded are the NISP amounts for all fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.3: Sheep, goat, and caprovine fauna from Areas I, II, Ill, IV, and V, and from all deposits from the enclosed area, the well, and Structure 8624. iv

3.4: Medium and large mammal fragments from Areas I, II, Ill, IV, and V, and from all deposits in the enclosed area, the well, and Structure 8624. 3.5: The NISP or number of skeletal fragments identified to taxa, from Area V-Level II. This level is divided into four components: A, B, C, and D representing the altar (Locus 8705), steps leading to Structure 8630, floor in front of the entrance, and the slope to the east of the entrance. 3.6: The MNI or Minimum Number of Individuals identified to taxa from Non-Burial assemblages from Areas I, II, and Ill in the enclosed area. 3.7: The MNI or Minimum Number of Individuals identified to taxa from Non-Burial assemblages in Areas IV and V; also recorded are the MNI values for all fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.8: Proportion of burned faunal remains per taxon from Areas I, II, and Ill in the enclosed area. 3.9: Proportion of burned faunal remains per taxon from Areas IV and V; and for all fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.10: Amounts of burned fauna showing the extent to which bones were burned, from each taxon, in levels from Areas I and II. %=Proportions of carbonized bones for each taxon from the total burned remains. 3.11: Amounts of burned fauna showing the extent to which bones were burned, from each taxon, in levels from Areas Ill and IV. %=Proportions of carbonized bones for each taxon from the total burned remains. 3.12: Amounts of burned fauna showing the extent to which bones were burned, from each taxon, in levels from Areas V and for all fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. %=Proportions of carbonized bones for each taxon from the total burned remains. 3.13: Amounts of accreted faunal remains from Areas I, II, and Ill in the enclosed area. %!=Proportion of accreted bones per taxon. %=Proportion of accreted bones for each taxon from the total accreted remains. 3.14: Amounts of accreted faunal remains from Areas IV and Vin the enclosed area; and from all deposits in the enclosed area and well. %!=Proportion of accreted bones per taxon. %11=Proportion of accreted bones for each taxon from the total accreted remains. 3.15: Amounts of weathered faunal remains from Areas I, 11,IV, and V, and from all deposits in the enclosed area. %1= Proportion of weathered bones per taxon. %ll=Proportion of weathered bones for each taxon from the total weathered remains. 3.16: Amounts of faunal remains with gnawing marks from Areas I, II, and Ill in the enclosed area. %!=Proportion of gnawed bones per taxon. %II=Proportion of gnawed bones for each taxon from the total gnawed remains. 3.17: Amounts of faunal remains with gnawing marks from Areas IV and V in the enclosed area; and from all deposits in the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. %!=Proportion of gnawed bones per taxon. %II=Proportion of gnawed bones for each taxon from the total gnawed remains. 3.18: Amounts of faunal remains with butchery marks from Areas I, II, and Ill in the enclosed area. %!=Proportion of butchered bones per taxon. %II=Proportion of butchered bones for each taxon from the total butchered remains. 3.19: Amounts of faunal remains with butchery marks from Areas IV and V in the enclosed area; and from all deposits in the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. %!=Proportion of butchered bones per taxon. %II=Proportion of butchered bones for each taxon from the total butchered remains. 3.20: Tooth wear and eruption rates for caprovine from all levels in the enclosed area, and all teeth from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.21: (a) Caprovine bone fusion ratios from Areas I, II, and Ill. 3.21: (b) Caprovine bone fusion ratios from Areas IV and V, and from all postcranial remains in the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.22: Tooth eruption and wear rates for sheep and goat from the enclosed area. 3.23: Bone fusion ratios for sheep in the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.24: Bone fusion ratios for goat in the enclosed area and well. 3.25: Tooth wear rates for cattle mandibular dentition from the enclosed area and well. 3.26: Bone fusion ratios for cattle postcranial remains from the enclosed area and well. V

3.27: (a) Tooth wear rates for gazelle mandibular dentition from the enclosed area and well. 3.27: (b) Bone fusion ratios for gazelle postcranial remains from the enclosed area and well. 3.28: Tooth wear rates for pig mandibular teeth from the well. 3.29: Bone fusion ratios for pig postcranial remains from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.30: Bone fusion ratios for dog postcranial remains from the well. 3.31: Bone fusion ratios for donkey postcranial remains from the well and Structure 8624. 3.32: Skeletal part distributions for caprovine (Ovis aries and Capra hircus) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.33: Skeletal part distributions for gazelle (Gazella gaze/la) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.34: Skeletal part distributions for roe deer and Persian Fallow Deer (Capreo/us capreo/us and Dama species) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.35: Skeletal part distributions for pig (Sus scrota) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.36: Skeletal part distributions for dog ( Canis familiaris) fauna from the well. 3.37: Skeletal part distributions for cattle (Bos taurus) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.38: Skeletal part distributions for equid fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.39: Skeletal part distributions for medium mammal fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 3.40: Skeletal part distributions for large mammal fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. 4.1: Corvid and canid skeletal elements (burial fauna) from Levels 1-111 in Areas I, II, Ill, and IV. Recorded are the number of bones attributed to skeletal elements from each locus and basket number. 4.2: Total numbers of bones attributed to raven, crow, and dog, for each locus and basket number, from Levels 1-111 in Areas I, II, Ill, and IV. Also recorded are the approximate ages of the dogs based on tooth eruption and bone fusion data, remains which exhibit taphonomic processes, the minimum number of individuals that the corvid and canid remains from each locus represent. Furthermore, the skeletal element by which the MNI was calculated is recorded along with the completeness of skeleton or CSI amount for each taxa from every locus. 4.3: Corvid and canid skeletal elements (burial fauna) from Level IV in Area I. Recorded are the number of bones attributed to skeletal elements from each locus and basket number. 5.1: Matrix of faunal analysis data on the 'Non-Burial' fauna from the temenos, Structure 8624, and the well. 5.2: Cut and cleaved skeletal remains from Tel Haror, Tel Beit Shemesh (Klenck 1991) and contemporary Bedouin cult sites (Klenck 1995).

LIST OF PLATES 2.1: Locus 8691-Cranium and mandible fragments of a donkey associated with a metal bit. 2.2: Locus 8744-A probe exhibiting the articulated skeleton of a donkey. 2.3: Ceramic vessels from Stratum IVA (Locus 8194) which corresponds to the abandonment and collapse of structures within the enclosed area. 2.4: Locus 8683-The crushed articulated skeleton of a lamb(< 2 months of age) found on the kurkar floor beneath mudbrick debris. The skeletal assemblage from Locus 8683 was 2 cm in depth. 2.5: Locus 8206-comprising two dipper juglets (a), a plate (b), a stone chopper (c), and a bowl with faunal remain inside this vessel (d). 2.6: The faunal remains inside the ceramic bowl from Locus 8206-(a) caprovine thoracic vertebrae; (b) caprovine metacarpus; (c) scapula of a juvenile dog (puppy); and (d) two unidentified 'medium mammal' fragments. 3.1: Stork tarsometatarsals exhibiting cut marks (dorsal view).

3.2: Stork tarsometatarsals exhibiting cut marks (plantar view). 3.3: Bone tools and a possible gaming piece from the enclosed area. 3.4: Pathologies on caprovine bones from the enclosed area: scaphoid bones exhibiting osteoporosis and phalanges with arthritic growth. 3.5: Pathologies on caprovine bones from the enclosed area: broken and healed ribs from caprovines and dogs and a healed perforation on a thoracic vertebra of a caprovine. 4.1: Locus 8430/82091 exhibiting the articulated skeleton of a raven. Associated with this skeleton is the right mandible of a lamb. 4.2: Locus 8430/82167 exhibiting the semi-articulated skeleton of a raven. The left leg of the bird (x), from the pelvis to the phalanges, is articulated. Also shown are the disarticulated remains including the (a) carpometacarpus; (b) pollex; (c) cervical and thoracic vertebrae; (d) coracoid; (e) scapula; and (f) ulna. 4.3: Locus 8430/82443 exhibiting the articulated skeleton of a juvenile dog (puppy) and the locations of the (a) atlas; (b) cranium; (c) forelimbs; (d) pelvis; and (e) foot bones. 4.4: From left to right-the canid skeletons from Loci 8430/82225 and 8430/82443. Locus 8430/ 82225 contained the articulated but fragmented torso and cranium of a puppy. The lumbar vertebrae, pelvis, and hindlimbs of the animal were missing. 4.5: From right to left-Locus 8430/82623, the articulated skeleton of a juvenile dog, and Locus 8430/82674 (Basket 1), the disarticulated remains of a raven. Associated with these skeletal remains are (iii) mandibular fragments and a maxillary tooth (M1) from cattle; (ii) an anthropomorphic figurine; and (i) the articulated toe (i.e., the phalanges) of a puppy. Labeled are the canid's (a) right hindlimb; (b) torso; (c) cranium; and (d) atlas and axis. 4.6: The disarticulated remains of a raven from Locus 8430/8267 4 (Basket 1). Exhibited are the (a) humerus and distal radius; (b) distal tibiotarsus; (c) phalanges; (d) distal end and shaft fragments of an ulna; (e) sternum; and (f) two vertebrae. 4.7: From right to left-Loci 8430/82623 and Loci 8430/82674 (Basket 2). The later locus comprises the disarticulated remains of a puppy deposited in the center of a kurkar pit at the foundation of feature 8253. Exhibited are the disarticulated remains from 82674 including the (a) ventral sides of a complete mandible; (b) distal femur; (c) proximal radius; and (d) proximal tibia. 4.8: A ventral view of the cranium from Locus 8688/83061 showing (a) the ventral positioning of the cervical vertebrae in relation to the (b) cranium which is turned to the right. 4.9: A dorsal view of the cranium from Locus 8688/83061 showing the atlas (a) with a fracture on its dorsal side. 4.10: Raven bones with cut marks from the enclosed area: (A) distal ulna from L 8194/80717; (B) distal tibiotarsus from L 8655/82941; (C) distal femur from L 8672/82944; (D) proximal humerus from L 8672/82944; and (E) proximal scapula from L 8239/80929. 4.11: Raven bones with cut marks: (A) distal femur from L 8257/80989 and (B) proximal scapula from L 8672/82944. 4.12: Can id bones with cut marks: (A) cervical vertebrae from L 8253/81014; (B) femur shaft from L 8206/80905; (C) atlas from L 8655/82941; and (D) second metacarpus from L 8430/82356. 4.13: Ventral view of the ilium of a puppy exhibiting cut marks. This specimen is from L 8250/ 81035. 4.14: Lateral view of a puppy rib with cut marks from L 8586/82574. 4.15: Canid remains with cut marks: (A) distal radius from L 8206/80905 and (B) proximal metacarpus from 8430/82356 (see also Plate 4.12-D).

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A. RECORDING SCHEME USED FOR THE FAUNA FROM TEL HAROR APPENDIX B. ADDITIONAL MEASUREMENTS USED IN THIS STUDY APPENDIX C. LOCUS AND CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION APPENDIX D. MAMMAL MEASUREMENTS APPENDIX E. AVIAN MEASUREMENTS APPENDIX F. HISTORY AND DEVELOPING AIMS OF MY RESEARCH ON THE BONES FROM TEL HAROR vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My thanks extends to so many people who gave me the knowledge and support to complete this manuscript. I extend my gratitude to Dr. Richard H. Meadow, Prof. Carl Lamberg-Karlovsky, Prof. Ofer Bar-Yosef, and Prof. Eliezer Oren. As my primary advisor, Richard Meadow was tireless in exacting the best in me. I very much appreciated his profound insight in zoology and archaeology. Ever since I was in Junior High and read his survey of the Negev in Biblical Archaeological Review, I wanted to work for Professor Oren. It has been my distinct privilege to work with him and learn from him. I also thank him for the use of the plates and photographs from the Tel Haror excavation which greatly added to this thesis. I also sincerely appreciate Prof. Eitan Tchemov's advice and permission to use the fabulous 'treasure-like' comparative faunal collection in the Zoology Lab at Jerusalem's Givat Ram Campus. And this section is not complete without thanking those who gave me the zeal necessary to be an archaeologist during my undergraduate years at Northwestern-Prof. James A. Brown, Rochelle Lurie, and John Hart. In terms of funding, I want to thank Uzi Chalamish and the Colonel Joe Alon Museum for the funds given me for my ethnoarchaeological study of Bedouin animal sacrifice practices. I also want to thank the Mellon Foundation at Harvard for giving me the funds necessary to complete the research. I have befriended many wonderful people that made the research for this manuscript bearable and sometimes even fun. These dear friends could always be counted on in times of emergency which as an archaeologist tend to be common place. In America, I want to thank Mike Rust, Lisa Collins, and Rodney Taylor. In England, my thanks goes out to my friends from the University of Sheffield, especially Andre Haigh and Simon Langworthy, and the Olsen family: Doug, Nancy, and Anna. In Israel, my warmest heartfelt thanks are extended Shoshi and Avraham Barzilay, Merav and Ami Drori, Yuval and Orit Yekutielli, and Miko and Ronit Gabay. Furthermore, I want to thank Michael Ben- Yacov and Eran Barzilay for there camaraderie. This section could not possibly end without some mention of the love I have for my friends from 'the gang' at Kibbutz Lahav: Asaf, Maya, Avital, Dor, Nadav, Emir, Itai, Dror, Oren, Chen, and Shachar; and the Porat family, especially Chanina, Bracha, and Yahal. I would like to thank both my nuclear and extended family, especially my father, Dr. Gordon M. Klenck. Furthermore, I want to thank my surrogate Uncle, John Hood, for always being there when I needed him for the entirety of my Ph.D. education. Lastly, I could have no finer peers and friends in the archaeological community than Ajita Patel and Ben Saidel.

ix

PREFACE

The aim of this treatise is to present information on Canaanite animal husbandry practices, diet, butchery methods, and animal sacrificial rituals. This information comes primarily from faunal remains that were retrieved from Middle Bronze IIB/C ( 1800/1750-1550 B .C.) strata at the archaeological site of Tel Haror, located 20 km northwest of Beer Sheva. In the first chapter of this thesis, I discuss the origins of Canaanite civilization in the MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.) and focus on the data that archaeologists use to support the notion that the cultures of Canaan, the Phoenician coast, and Syria were ethnically, culturally, and ideologically related. In addition, the first chapter reviews continuing similarities during the MB IIB/C (1800/1750-1550 B.C.) between cultures of Canaan, the Phoenician coast, and Syria, with special emphasis on their cultic contexts, i.e., the artifacts and architecture from cemeteries and temple complexes. In the second chapter, I discuss the MB IIB/C temple complex, well, and equid burial excavated at Tel Haror, paying special attention to the proposed Canaanite temenos in Area K. The temple complex, donkey burial, and associated artifacts are compared to similar material from contemporary sites in Canaan, on the Phoenician coast, and in Syria. Similarities between the architecture and artifacts from the temenos at Tel Haror and other previously documented cultic sites support the conclusion that the structures in Area K were part of a temple complex. The third chapter presents the core data of my study on the animal bones from the temple complex, equid burial, and well. I recount the methods used to retrieve and analyze the fauna at Haror and describe the different contexts from which the bones from the temenos were found: the midden floors and ritual deposits. I then provide a description of the archaeofaunal data from all contexts; the taxa, skeletal parts, and age information. I also discuss patterns in the faunal data in relation to the quantity of bones that were butchered, burned, gnawed, weathered, accreted, smoothed by running water, and colored by metal corrosion. The fourth chapter provides an analysis of the corvid and canid remains in the temple complex. A discussion is provided as to how the corvids and canids were dispatched. Furthermore, I present evidence that suggests that the ways in which Haror's inhabitants treated these animals changed over time. In the final chapter, I make comparisons between the faunal data from Tel Haror and accounts from ancient texts and ethnographic studies. Using these sources, I first provide suggestions as to how the MB inhabitants of Tel Haror killed, butchered, prepared, and deposited animals in the temple complex, donkey burial, and well. I also provide suggestions as to why Haror's inhabitants sacrificed the taxa found in the temple deposits.

X

Tho

Cultic Milieu

Chapter 1. HISTORY, CULTURE, AND IDEOLOGY OF CANAAN DURING THE MIDDLE BRONZE II (2000-1550 B.C.) 1.1. INTRODUCTION The term "Canaan" refers to a geographical area of the ancient world and the term "Canaanite" to the populations who lived in this area. The conquest and occupation of Canaan by the Israelites is a major theme of the Old Testament and it is from here that the clearest delineations of Canaanite territory are found. Canaan's southern border extended from the southern end of the Dead Sea, to the ascent of Akrabbim, to the wilderness of Zin, South of Kadesh-Bamea, along the 'Brook of Egypt' (most likely Wadi el-Arish), to the Mediterranean Sea. The western limit of Canaan was the Mediterranean, and its eastern limit extended from the entrance of Hamath (probably modern Lebwah), Sea of Kinnereth, along the Jordan River to the Dead Sea. Canaan's southern, eastern, and western boundaries continued to mark the extent oflsraelite territory after Canaanite control of the land diminished (Schmitz 1992: 830). Canaan's northern territory, however, was not maintained during Israelite occupation and remains enigmatic. Canaan's northern border ran along an axis that included (from West to East) the Mediterranean Sea, Mount Hor, Hamath, Zedad, Ziphron, Hazarenan, Shepham, Riblah, and Ain. From Ain, the boundary extended southward to the Sea of Kinnereth (Numbers 34: 7-11). That Canaan's border incorporated parts of the Phoenician coast is related in other ancient texts. The ethnicon "Canaanite" is first found in a cuneiform text from Mari, which dates to the eighteenth century B.C. (Dossin 1973). From Alalakh, the fifteenth century B.C. text of Idrimi refers to "Ammia in the Land of Canaan" (Schmitz 1992: 829). Ammia is located where the modem city of Ammiun, Lebanon, is located today. Furthermore, the fourteenth century B.C. Armama texts from Egypt state that the Egyptian province of Canaan included Tyre, Byblos, and Hinnatuni in the Galilee (Schmitz 1992: 830).

Canaanite civilization emerged at the beginning of the second millennium B.C. and declined at the millennium's end. It was shaped by exogenous factors-primarily immigration, foreign conquests, and international trade-and endogenous factorsagricultural intensification, invention, craft specialization, and population growth. Textual evidence indicates that the Canaanites employed two written languages. Akkadian was the language common to most administrative, legal, and commercial correspondence, while the indigenous "Canaanite" script was used for more personal settings such as the etchings on a dagger or graffiti (Ilan 1995: 311). During the emergence of Canaanite civilization, there were many similarities between Canaan's material culture and the architecture, pottery styles, and other artifacts found at contemporary sites in Syria and along the Phoenician coast.

1.2. CHRONOLOGY OF THE MIDDLE BRONZE AGE (2000-1550 B.C.) The Middle Bronze Age in the Southern Levant lasted from ca. 2000 to ca. 1550 B.C. This period witnessed the restoration of urban life after a phase of deurbanization and included the rise and fall of Canaanite civilization. Although most scholars agree with a division of the Middle Bronze Age into three temporal units, there is some disagreement as to the nomenclature for these periods. The disagreement began with the period immediately prior to the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. W. G. Albright named this period the 'Middle Bronze I' while K.M. Kenyon, W. G. Dever, E. D. Oren, and P. Lapp called it the 'Early Bronze IV.' This era was characterized by the collapse of urban culture and the growth of pastoral and village communities (Kempinski 1992: 167). These conflicting terms have affected the terminology for the following period which was called either the MB I or MB IIA (A. Mazar 1990: 175). In 1966, Dever provided another solution by using 'EB IV/MB I' to denote the period preceding

Jool D. Klonck

the advent of Middle Bronze Age urbanism (A. Mazar 1990: 152). This serves the continued use ofW. F. Albright's original temporal divisions of the Middle Bronze Age-the MB IIA, MB IIB, and MB IIC (Albright 1933, 1938). The first period, the MB IIA (2000-1800/1750 B.C.), differs greatly from the EB IV/MB I and corresponds with the restoration of urban life and the genesis of Canaanite culture. The second period, the Middle Bronze IIB or MB IIB (1800/1750-1650 B.C.), encompasses the establishment of Canaanite culture. The final period, the Middle Bronze IIC or MB IIC (1650-1550 B.C.), witnessed the zenith and ultimate decline of Canaanite civilization (Ilan 1995: 298; A. Mazar 1990: 189-197). These temporal divisions are used in this thesis. Another chronological problem is present in the periodization of the MB IIB (1800/1750-1650 B.C.) and MB II C (16501550 B.C.). Most ceramic types from the MB IIB continue in the MB IIC. Furthermore, some archaeologists consider the division between MB IIB and IIC as one of convenience and not substance and proceed to group the two periods when analyzing Canaanite material culture (Ilan 1995: 298, 302; A. Mazar 1990: 193). Although, this thesis will discuss international developments during the MB IIB and MB IIC separately, I combine both periods when evaluating the data for this dissertation.

1.3. ORIGINS OF CANAANITE CULTURE: MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.) It is difficult to determine with any precision the primary factors that led to the development of a new culture. This difficulty is apparent as scholars try to establish the prime movers behind the genesis of Canaanite culture, a civilization that disappeared three thousand years ago having lasted for eight centuries from the beginning of the second millennium B.C. Since the early 1900s the discipline of archaeology has brought this extinct culture back to life. Much archaeological data have been collected and many theories put forward to account for the origins of Canaanite civilization. There follows a discussion of the international events during the MB IIA (2000-1800/1750 B.C.) that were contemporary with the emergence of Canaanite civilization. An overview is provided of the various theories and data that researchers have used to explain the emergence of Canaanite culture. The features and artifacts that comprise Canaanite material culture are presented in summary fashion together with a sketch of the archaeological sites where excavations retrieved these features and artifacts.

1.3.1. International Events During the MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.) The MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.) correlates with other major political developments in the ancient Near East. In Mesopotamia, the last Sumerian revival under the Third Dynasty of Ur (Ur Ill-ca. 2060-1950 B.C.) collapsed due to

the expansion of the city-state oflsin. The ruler oflsin, Ishbiirra, was a former Amorite military officer from Mari. The Amorites originated in northwestern Mesopotamia and Northern Syria. Their name is derived from cuneiform texts where they are called 'Amurru' or Westerners (Posener 1985: 559-564). From the third millennium B.C., Amorite populations first migrated into and then conquered most areas of the Fertile Crescent. By the eighteenth century B.C., Amorite dynasties and populations had been established at Isin, Larsa, Babylon, Mari, Eshnunna, and Assyria in Mesopotamia; Elam in Persia; Qatna and Yamhad in Syria; and Razor and Megiddo in Northern Canaan (Gadd 1985: 597, 602, 625-631, Liverani 1973; Haldar 1971). Although alliances and kinship relations may have promoted a degree of political and economic stability throughout the Near East, the kingdoms often fought between themselves and vied for control of trade routes across the Fertile Crescent (Bottero, Cassin, & Vercoutter 1967). In Egypt, the MB IIA corresponds roughly with the Twelfth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.) of the Middle Kingdom (Hayes 1985: 996). At the beginning of the Twelfth Dynasty, the vizier Amenemhet took power and began a dynasty marked by stability. The six pharaohs of the Twelfth Dynasty ruled an average of 30 years each and, at the end of each reign, practiced coregency where a pharaoh's successor ruled with him before his death. This system of coregency facilitated a smooth transition of power and the perpetuation of the dynasty (Hayes 1985: 497). The pharaohs of the Twelfth Dynasty, especiallySesostrisI (1971-1928B.C.), initiatedmany ambitious ventures. The Dynasty reclaimed much land from the Nile Delta by building canals that took water from the Nile into the Fayum Lake. In addition, Pharaohs from this Dynasty built fortifications and initiated many military campaigns which promoted commercial interests (Hayes 1985: 499-505). Egyptians occupied the banks of the Nile to the second cataract in the South as Egypt campaigned against and traded with the Nubians. In the North, Egypt built forts across the Suez to defend against roving nomads; exploited copper mines in the Sinai; and according to the Execration Texts, dated to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries B.C., dominated a sphere of influence that at times comprised Canaan, the Phoenician coast, and southern Syria (Hayes 1985: 501). That Egypt made military forays into Canaan during the Twelfth Dynasty is attested by a text from the burial of the Egyptian official HuSebech who lived during the reign ofSenusert III ( 1878-1842 B.C.). This text mentions that Egypt invaded Canaan and attacked Shechem (Pritchard 1950: 230). Anatolia was a local power during the MB IIA but was to have much impact during the MB IIB ( 1800/1750-1650 B. C.) and MB IIC (1650-1550 B.C.). In Western and Central Anatolia, an increase in urbanization occurred around 2100 B.C. (Mellaart 1985: 682). Cultures in Central Anatolia were influenced by two populations. The first population comprised the Hatti, or the original inhabitants of Anatolia. The second group of peoples were nomads who migrated to the region in the third millennium B.C. and who spoke related IndoEuropean languages (Mellaart 1985: 681, 686). During the nineteenth century B.C., large cities emerged in Central

Tho

Anatolia; chief among these were Kasara, Polatli, Zalpa, and Kultepe (Mellaart 1985: 692; Hoffner 1973; Gurney 1952).

Cultic Milieu

states that long distance exchange systems emerged as sociopolitical complexity and craft specialization increased in Canaan. Knapp (1989: 145) states that hierarchies of trade centers or 'gateways' emerged which promoted the development of manufacturing centers and facilitated the diffusion of goods from Syria, Mesopotamia, and Egypt throughout Canaan.

In summary, the MB IIA corresponds to a period of warfare between Mesopotamian city-states, the migration of Amorite populations throughout the Fertile Crescent, the establishment of Amorite kingdoms in Northern Canaan, Syria, and Mesopotamia, and more infighting between the new Amorite Dynasties. During this time, urbanization increased in Central Anatolia while in Egypt rulers consolidated their control over the Nile and made military raids into Canaan.

Along with exogenous factors were endogenous agents that facilitated the growth of Canaanite polities. Marfoe (1979) states that EB IV/MB I populations moved to the lowlands and abandoned their pastoral focus because lowland karstic springs and high ground water tables facilitated agricultural production of a kind that was not possible in the Canaanite highlands. Another possibility is that Canaanites established cities in the lowlands in order to control overland and maritime trade networks (Gerstenblith 1983: 110-125; Gophna 1984: 31). Finally, Gophna and Portugali (1988) employ Malthusian ideas and suggest that population growth during the MB IIA outpaced subsistence production and encouraged the establishment of new settlements throughout Canaan.

1.3.2. Origins of Canaanite Culture

The emergence of Canaanite culture was encouraged by endogenous and exogenous factors. The primary exogenous factor given for the emergence of Canaanite culture is the migration of Amorite peoples from Syria and Mesopotamia into Canaan during the MB IIA (Albright 1933; Kenyon 1966; B. Mazar 1968; and Dever 1976). The expansion of the Amorites is well supported by philological sources (Posener 1985; Haldar 1971; Liverani 1973). During the latter part of the third millennium B.C., texts indicate that Amorite incursions from northern Syria into Mesopotamia were becoming problematic. Three Sumerian kings: Shulgi (2095-2045 B.C.), Amar-Sin (2046-2039 B.C.), and Shu-Shin (2038-2030 B.C.) are mentioned in texts as taking Amorite prisoners of war (Posener 1985: 562). Eventually, kings with Amorite names took control of Mesopotamian, Syrian, and Canaanite city states (Gadd 1985: 625-631; G. E. Wright 1965). For example, the Assyrian king, Shamshi-adad I (1750-1718 B.C.), not only possessed an Amorite name but traced his ancestry to '17 kings who lived in tents' (Postgate 1992: 270). Also, texts reveal increasing numbers of Amorite names throughout the Fertile Crescent and the emergence of a new Amorite god-Amurru (Posener 1985: 563, 564). The Arrnama Letters, from the fourteenth century B.C., mention Amorite kingdoms in Syria (L'Heureux 1979: 96). Lastly, the Hebrew Bible indicates that the Amorites comprised a major constituent of the pre-Israelite population of the Southern Levant (de Vaux 1978: 129-131).

1.3.3. Settlement Patterns and Social Organization

Broshi and Gophna (1986) state that archaeological surveys have revealed 130 MB IIA sites dispersed throughout Canaan. MB II cities are smaller than those from the MB IIB and more prevalent in northern Canaan than in the south (Figure 1.1-Broshi & Gophna 1986; Dever 1987). Furthermore, more MB IIA sites are found in the lowlands than in the highlands. Ilan (1995) states that pottery from the EB IV /MB I continued in the central highlands during the MB IIA and that this factor accounts for the low visibility of MB settlements in this area (Ilan 1995: 304). This theory is supported in the north where settlements and cemeteries such as Gibeon and Ein Samiyeh contain both EB IV/MB I and MB IIA assemblages (Finkelstein 1988/9: 141). MB IIA cities north of the Yarkon River are found in four geographical regions: Upper Galilee, Coastal Plain, Jezreel/ Jordan Valleys, and Samarian Hill Country. In the Upper Galilee, A. Biran excavated at least two MB IIA occupation levels and four tombs at Tel Dan that predate a MB IIB rampart (Biran 1984). And at the largest Canaanite city, Razor, Y. Yadin excavated the city's MB IIA foundation, as evidenced by pottery from sub phases associated with its earth ramparts (Yadin 1972).

Although it is impossible to state for certain that the Amorites were the only peoples to influence the development of Canaanite civilization, evidence suggests that new populations did migrate into the region during the MB IIA. Arensberg (1973) states that new populations migrated into Canaan during the MB IIA since morphometric differences in human skeletons from the MB IIA show an anatomical variability that is greater than can be expected from a single population. Furthermore, MB IIA features in Canaan such as shaft burials, free-standing and rampart fortifications, and ceramic types such as 'Monochrome Painted Cream Ware' are first found in locales in Syria and Mesopotamia (Ilan 1995: 301; Beck 1985; Kaplan 1971).

In the Coastal (or Sharon) Plain, three types of MB IIA settlements have been excavated: fortified sites at Acre, Tel Burga, Tel Zeror, Tel Po leg, Khirbet Zureikiyeh, and Aphek; unfortified sites at Tel-Mevorakh and Tel Ifshar or 'Refer'; and small sedentary settlements and campsites (Dothan 1976; Dothan and Raban 1980; Kochavi, Beck and Gophna 1979; Stem 1984; Gophna and Ayalon 1980; Gophna and Beck 1981; and Gophna 1984). Raban (1985) suggests that the desire to control exchange networks between the coast and interior facilitated the growth of polities along Canaan's Mediterranean Coast and drainages.

Another exogenous agent that would have facilitated the incorporation of goods and ideas from Mesopotamia and Syria into Canaanite culture is international trade. Knapp (1989) 3

Jool D. Klonck

North of the Yarkon River, from the Jezreel to the Jordan Valley, exist the fortified MB IIA sites ofYoqneam, Megiddo, Tel Amar, the cemetery at Beth-Shan, and Tel el-Hayyat (BenTor 1980; Loud 1948; Guy 1938; Oren 1971, 1973; Falconer & Magness-Gardiner 1984). Lastly, in the Samarian Hill Country, G.E. Wright uncovered a large public building in the MB IIA strata at Shechem, although he found no fortifications (G.E. Wright 1961; Cole 1984).

men of the tribes' which indicates the presence of nomadic confederations. A more autocratic type of political organization is alluded to in Byblos and Shechem. A leader ofByblos refers to himself as the 'ruler of rulers' and a text from Sesostris III notes that the Pharaoh warred against a Canaanite bureaucracy led by Shechem (Posen er 1985: 555). That Syria and Canaan were divided into many polities during the MB IIA is revealed in the Execration Texts and Saqarra figurines which mention 22 and 62 'countries', respectively.

South of the Yarkon River, archaeologists have located four large MB IIA settlements. Two sites are located on the Coastal Plain: the fortified site ofYavneh-Yam and the cemetery at Tell el-Ajjul (Kaplan 1975, Tufnell 1962). Located in the Northern Negev, Tell Beit Mirsim and Gezer are the only inland sites where archaeologists have found MB IIA occupation levels (Dever (ed.) 1986;Dever 1974; Dever, Lance & Wright 1970; Albright 1933, 1938; Eitan 1972: 19-24).

The Saqarra figurines, which postdate the Execration Texts, mention that 1) most of the countries are led by a single ruler; 2) other countries are led "by the great ones" or "all the rulers"; and 3) two countries are mentioned only as 'tribes' (Posener 1985: 555,556). The highly fluid nature of Canaanite polities, where countries merged together and divided based on the political situation of the land, alludes to tribal polities based on kinship which are common in nomadic societies. Posener ( 1985) states that texts suggest that Canaanite polities emerged from nomadic populations and that during the MB IIA these nomadic polities increasingly became more sedentary (Posener 1985: 554,555).

Based on rank-size distributions of MB IIA settlements in Canaan, Ilan (1995: 305) suggests that the Canaanite settlement hierarchy comprised four tiers: 1. Regional centers and gateways (e.g., Razor); 2. Subregional centers and/or loci of specialist production or services (e.g., cult centers such as Nahariyah); 3. Villages; 4. Farmsteads.

In addition to Amorite and other nomadic populations from northern Syria, the Egyptian pharaohs had an impact on the region although it is unclear as to the nature of their influence. Egypt's ties with Byblos during the MB IIA are well documented (Ilan 1995: 308). MB IIA tombs from Byblos contained a gold pectoral of Ammenemes III (1842-1797 B. C.), a gold casket with the name of Ammenemes IV ( 17971788 B.C.), and inscriptions of the rulers of Byblos which contain the Egyptian title for 'governor' which Posen er notes "was used in the pharaoh's government service by the heads of administrative districts" (Posener 1985: 545). Other major artifacts found in MB IIA contexts in Canaan, Phoenicia, and Syria include sphinxes with the cartuouche of Ammenemes III (1842-1797 B.C.) found at the entrance of the 'temple of Ba'al at Ugarit; a broken sphinx of the daughter of Ammenemes II (1929-1895 B.C.) at Qatna; and figure of the Egyptian nomarch Thuthotpe, who governed between 19291843 B.C. atMegiddo (Posener 1985: 545-546). Furthermore, Egyptian seals from the Twelfth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.) have been recovered from MB IIA contexts in Canaan and Phoenicia: the scarabs of 'Chief Treasurer Senbi' and 'Great Scribe of the Chief Treasurer' at Tell el-' Ajjul; 'Scribe of the Vizier' atJericho; 'Steward, Accountant of Cattle' at Megiddo, and 'Scribe of the Troops' at Byblos (Posener 1985: 547).

Razor was established at the end of the MB IIA and became the largest city in Canaan (80 ha.) and a powerful polity during the MB IIB/C. Possible reasons for Razor's success include its location between Syria, Phoenician, and Canaan and the immigration of Amorites and other nomadic populations with extant social and martial hierarchies. Furthermore, the irrigation of the nearby Hula Valley facilitated surplus agricultural production (Ilan 1995: 307; Marfoe 1979: 5-12; Yadin 1972: 106) From Egypt, the story of Sinuhe, written during the nineteenth century B.C., provides notes on the semi-nomadic cultures in the interior of southern Syria and Canaan during this time. An Egyptian official, Sinuhe, angered a Pharaoh, fled Egypt, through political machinations acquired a territory at the behest of a Retenu prince, and became the 'ruler of a tribe.' While discussing the Retenu, only "encampments" and "tents" are mentioned and not towns or cities (Posener 1985: 553554). The Egyptian Execration Texts, dated during or near the reign of Sesostris III (1878-1843 B.C.), allude to both sedentary and nomadic cultures in Canaan during the MB IIA. The social hierarchy as recorded by the Execration Texts and Sinuhe account was as follows:

Although it is clear that Egypt maintained a presence in Canaan, Phoenicia, and Syria, the precise nature of this presence is unknown. The Execration Texts, which curse the enemies of Egypt, do not mention Byblos, U garit, Qatna, or Megiddo so it is likely that these cities fell under the sphere of Egypt's political influence. However, it is doubtful that Egypt conquered these cities and based on parallels with official establishments in Sudan it is likely that Egyptian maintained permanent political missions in major cities of the Levant to preserve political ties and facilitate trade relations (Posener 1985: 549). Just as Egypt had friends in the Levant, it also had many enemies. A text of Pharaoh Achthoes (ca. 2134-2118 B.C.) to his son Merykare indicates

1. A tribe or whyt was led by a nht or champion. 2. Several tribes belonged to a larger polity which translates into 'foreign country.' 3. This 'foreign country' was led by a ruler who had authority over tribes in his dominion and possessed an army (Posener 1985: 554). Textual sources during the Twelfth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.) denote at least two types of political organizations belonging to 'countries.' First, the Kwsw or Midian was led by 'great 4

Tho

how much the Egyptian's court despised the nomadic tribes that migrated to Canaan: "The wretched Asiatic, bad is the country where he lives, inconvenient in respect of water, impracticable because of many trees, its roads are bad on account of the mountains. He does not settle in one single place, for (lack of) food makes his legs take flight. Since the time of Horus he has been at war; he does not conquer, nor yet can he be conquered. He does not announce the day offighting ...Do not trouble thyself concerning him. The Asiatic is a crocodile on his bank; he leads towards an isolated way, he bears not towards the port of a populous city" (Posener 1985: 534). To sum, Egypt maintained a diplomatic effort in Canaan to preserve its economic interests and bureaucratic ties in a region that was undergoing dramatic social, martial, and political change.

1.3.4. Architecture

With regard to architecture, MB IIA sites were built on virgin soil or on settlements that had been abandoned for long periods of time. Many MB IIA settlements had fortification systems similar to those found in Syria (Kempinski 1992: 175). For example, freestanding earth ramparts at Acre, Tel Burgah, Tel Zeror, and Yavneh-Yam are similar to those found at Ebla in northern Syria (Dothan and Raban 1980; Kochavi, Beck and Gophna 1979; Kaplan 1975; and Matthiae 1980). These ramparts contrast with the more modest revetments used to support city walls in the E.B. and probably required centralized control to organize labor (A. Mazar 1990). In addition, archaeologists have excavated mud-brick walls, 34 meters thick, with stone foundations, at Yoqneam, Megiddo, Tel Po leg, Aphek, and Tell Beit Mirsim and rectangular towers at Megiddo, Tel Poleg, and Tel Zeror (Loud 1948; Kochavi, Beck and Gophna 1979, Yadin 1978; Eitan 1972). Lastly, city gates with ramparts were uncovered at Megiddo and Acre (Loud 1948; Dothan and Raban 1980). Large public buildings at Aphek, Megiddo, and Shechem are characterized by courtyards surrounded by thick mud-brick walls and, at Aphek, plaster floors (Kochavi, Beck and Gophna 1979; Ory 1937; Loud 1948; G.E. Wright 1961).

Cultic Milieu

and 3) from the region of northern Canaan; the last are described as being "indigenous" to Canaan. Ceramic types from the Phoenician Coast include a rounded comb-faced bowl (Figure l .2a-l ), carinated bowl with a disk base (Figure l.2a-2), a carinated bowl with concave disk base (Figure l .2a-3), an open bowl with elongated bar handles along the rim (Figure l .2a-6), and two types of mugs (Figure 1.2a- l l & 12). Additional forms that originate from the Phoenician Coast include a piriform juglet (Figure l .2b- l l) and the dipper juglet (Figure 1.2b-12). Ceramic types that find their antecedents in northern and central Syria comprise a krater with horizontal handles (Figure l .2a-9), a handleless goblet (Figure 1.2a-l 3), a handleless jar, often decorated with concentric circles or horizontal bands (Figure 1.2b-3), a jug with sharp carination (Figure l.2b-7), a jug with a cut-away neck (Figure 1.2b-8), a jug that resembles Habur ware in the Mesopotamian tradition (Figure l .2b-9), and juglets decorated with concentric circles on a white or cream background (Figure 1.2b-13 & 14). Pottery types that are considered indigenous or existed in Canaan during the EB IV/MB I period include a holemouth krater (Figure 1.2a-7), a holemouth cooking pot (Figure 1.2a14), a straight-walled cooking pot with thumb-impressed decorations (Figure 1.2a- l 5) and a jar with vertical handles (Figure 1.2b- l ). From the late MB IIA, another pottery style, termed Tel el-Yahudiyehware, developed in the Egyptian delta (Figure 1.2b-15, 16, & 17). This ware is characterized by white pigment being applied to small incisions in black clay; these decorations are found on juglets and, more rarely, zoomorphic vessels (Kempinski 1992: 165). Hence, ceramic styles in deposits from the MB IIA originated from the Phoenician coast, northern and central Syria, and from previous cultures in Canaan during the EB IV/MB I. Along the Phoenician coast, the ceramic assemblages did not feature pottery types from the EB IV /MB I in Canaan but made a direct transition to an MB IIA ceramic tradition (Kempinski 1992: 166). Middle Bronze IIA pottery styles from central and northern Syria are thought to reflect the migration of peoples, especially the Amorites, from this region to Canaan (Kempinski 1992: 166; Mazar 1990; Ilan 1995; Amiran 1970).

1.3.6. Metallurgy 1.3.5. Ceramics

With regard to the production of ceramics, the difference in pottery styles between MB IIA and EB IV/MB I also reflects the emergence of the new Canaanite culture (Beck 1975; Gerstenblith 1980, 1983). Vessels found in northern Canaan with decorations comprising triangles outlined in black surrounding red diagonal lines or net patterns are similar to those found in the Orontes Valley in Syria and along the Habur River in northern Mesopotamia (Gerstenblith 1983). Kempinski (1992: 161-166) states that MB IIA pottery styles originated from three areas: 1) along the Phoenician coast, especially at Byblos; 2) at sites in northern and central Syria;

In the MB IIA, bronze replaced copper as the metal of choice but there is considerable debate where the tin needed to make bronze originated. Although both Afghanistan and Anatolia have deposits of tin, ancient texts such as those from the archives at Mari mention that tin was only traded between the Euphrates and the Levant. Metal artifacts typical of the MB IIA in Canaan, such as the duckbill axehead and socketed spearhead, were also found at contemporary sites in Syria and the Phoenician coast (Oren 1971). These metal artifacts were also found at Tell el-Dab'a, Egypt, in contexts which correspond to the MB IIA in Canaan (Bietak 1979). Metal artifacts from MB IIA contexts found solely in Canaan include a tanged dagger with ridges on the blade and a sickle shaped sword (Oren 1971, Gerstenblith 1983).

Jool D. Klonck

1.3.7. Summary

1.4.1. Burials and Cemeteries in Canaan

The MB IIA culture in Canaan is similar to material assemblages from sites along the Phoenician coast and in Syria where there are few differences between MB and EB assemblages. Similar types of earth ramparts and city gates found in Canaan and the Orantes Valley in Syria during the MB IIA, and similarities between MB IIA painted pottery styles, metal weapons and personal names from sites in Canaan, inland Syria, and the Phoenician coast supports the notion that these regions were culturally and ethnically related (Kenyon 1979; Dever 1976; and A. Mazar 1990).

MB IIA cemeteries have been excavated at various sites in Canaan including Tell el-Ajjul (Petrie 1932, 1933; Tufnell 1962), Nahariyah (Dothan 1956; Dever 1976), 'Ain esSamiyeh (Dever 197 5), Sinjil (Dever 197 5), Gibe on (Pritchard 1963), Ginosar (Epstein 1974), Tel Aphek (Beck 1975, 1985), Megiddo (Guy 1938), Ras el-' Ain (Ory 1937), and Beth-Shan (Oren 1971). Tell el-'Ajjul

At Tell el-' Ajjul, earlier burials contained adult and child skeletons set on their sides with their legs flexed while later graves contained extended burials (Tufnell 1962: 5). Each burial contained an average of three ceramic vessels which comprised mostly carinated bowls, platters, cups, and dipper juglets. Dipper juglets are small reddish brown, brown, or light brown juglets that, in the earlier burials, had flat bases and in the later burials, rounded bases. The dipper juglets with rounded bases continued to be used in the MB IIB/C. A few larger jugs and storage jars were uncovered as well (Tufnell 1962: 24-36; Stewart 1974: 15-16).

Since part of Canaan's material culture, i.e., its architecture, ceramic styles, metallurgy, originated from the Phoenician coast and Syria, it is possible that Canaanites practiced rituals and had ideologies that were similar to their northern neighbors. What follows is a discussion of cult sites and artifacts in Canaan, Phoenicia, and Syria during the MB IIA.

1.4. CANAANITE RELIGION AND IDEOLOGY DURING THE MB IIA (ca. 2000-1800/1750 B.C.)

Metal objects from tombs included two daggers with wooden handles similar to contemporary daggers found at Megiddo and Gezer, three spear heads, a narrow axe of Mesopotamian type, a gold frontlet, and five toggle pins (Stewart 1974: 1618). Also reported are four scarabs although their dates place them in a wide temporal framework between the eleventh and seventeenth Egyptian dynasties (c. 2000-1677 B.C.Tufnell 1962: 24-36). No floral remains are reported.

The similarities between MB IIA cultures in Canaan, the Phoenician coast, and Syria are also evident in burials and architectural configurations thought to have been open air sanctuaries or shrines.

Te/Aphek

Presently, three MB IIA open-air cult sites have been excavated in the Near East as compared to dozens of cemeteries and individual burials throughout the Levant. No recent studies of MB IIA burials have been published which compare all artifacts from a majority of MB IIA graves. However, researchers such as Oren ( 1971) and Dever ( 1975) have provided comparisons of metal artifacts between burials from Canaan, the Phoenician Coast, and Syria. These reports show a similarity in the metal objects from burials in these three regions.

The burials at Tel Aphek were made by breaking the neck off a large storage jar and inserting the remains of a human skeleton. These jars were buried with carinated bowls, open bowls, small jars, and brown and light brown dipper juglets (Beck 1975; 1985: 193). Carinated bowls from the MB IIA burials at Tel Aphek and Tell el 'Ajjul are found in contemporary tombs at Jericho (Kenyon 1960). Furthermore, a juglet with a stepped-rim, found in Tomb 427 at Tel Aphek, is identical to juglets found in MB contexts at U garit and tombs at Madjudaluna on the Phoenician coast (Beck 1975: 71,72). Also, archaeologists retrieved in Tomb 7 at Tel Aphek, a piriform juglet with decorations of concentric circles painted around a cross. These juglets were also found in MB IIA contexts at Nahariyah, Megiddo, and Lebe'a on the Phoenician coast. In addition, decorations of concentric circles are found on other types of vessels in tombs at Jericho, Tell el-' Ajjul, Ugarit, and from tombs at Majdaluna (Beck 1975: 76,77). Finally, dipper juglets similar to those in Aphek's burials were found in MB IIA burials at Byblos on the Phoenician coast (Beck 1985: 196). Parallels between the ceramic vessels at Aphek and inland Syria are few and tenuous: stepped-rim juglets and carinated bowls with a disc base found at Aphek are similar to those found at Rama. However, Beck ( 1985) suggests that the correlation is problematic since the carinated bowl and disc base are found

The study of MB IIA burials in the Levant is important for three reasons. First, similar burial artifacts in graves from Phoenicia, Syrian, and Canaan provide additional support for theories that the populations in these areas were at least culturally, if not ethnically, related. Second, if artifactual and architectural similarities exist in the burials between Phoenicia, Syria, and Canaan, then it is possible that the populations from these three regions practiced similar burial rituals, or shared common ideologies, or both. Lastly, the study of artifacts associated with burials might provide data that elucidate the function(s) of certain artifacts and their import in ritual behavior. Once the function( s) of specific artifacts in burial rituals are established, these functions might be attributed to similar artifacts from non-burial cult sites (e.g., at shrines or temples-Renfrew 1985: 25). 6

Tho

separately at Aphek in earlier and later contexts, respectively, while at Rama they are found together.

Cultic Milieu

beads (Engberg 1938: 164, 168, 180) were also mentioned by Engberg (1938). Another group of burials that Kenyon states are transitional MB IIA/B graves contain the aforementioned vessels plus "bowls with bar handles, platters with disk bases, and platters with inverted rim and ring bases" (Kenyon 1969: 28).

'Ain es-Samiyeh and Sinjil Dever (1975) analyzed ceramic vessels and bronze weaponry from the MB IIA cemeteries at 'Ain es-Samiyeh and Sinjil. Although the tombs had unfortunately been plundered by grave robbers, their artifacts were acquired from a Jerusalem antiquities dealer (Dever 1975: 23). The MB IIA burials at 'Ain es-Samiyeh and Sinjil were deposited in a shaft tomb that was excavated during the EB IV /MB I. MB IIA burials which are deposited in EB IV/MB I shaft tombs are a common phenomenon in Canaan during the MB IIA. Burial deposits like these are found at Megiddo, Barqai, Gibeon, Moza, and other sites (Dever 1975: 34 ). Artifacts that were studied from 'Ain es-Samiyeh and Sinjil include "a fenestrated crescentic [or "duckbill"] axehead, a simple notched axehead, two socketed spearheads, ... a rilled dagger ... , a flask without handles, a small flaringjuglet, a piriform juglet, a four handled bowl, and five small cups" (Dever 1975: 23, 31). Socketed spearheads are found in all the aforementioned Canaanite burials except Aphek and in contemporary contexts on the Phoenician coast at Byblos and in Syria at U garit and Tell etTin (Dever 1975: 23; Oren 1971). The rilled dagger is found in MB IIA contexts in Byblos, U garit, Rama in Syria, and in Canaan at Beth-Shan and Ras el-' Ain. Analogs to the notched axehead have been found in Syria at Kafer Garra and Ugarit as well as in Canaanite cemeteries at Megiddo, Tell el-' Ajjul, Gibeon, Moza and Ginosar. The "duck-bill" axe is found throughout Canaan in MB IIA sites and is present in contemporary tombs at Byblos, U garit, Rama, Baghuz near Mari, and other sites (Dever 1975: 30; Oren 1971: 111-114, 133-135).

Gibeon At Gibeon, Pritchard excavated and analyzed the artifacts from 26 shaft tombs that were probably excavated in the EB IV/MB I but which were used in the MB IIA (Pritchard 1963: 66). Most of the pottery from these tombs comprise small jars with flat bases, high or flaring necks, and globular bodies. These jars resemble jars found in MB IIA burials at Jericho (Pritchard 1963: 5). Also found were many fournozzled lamps with flat or round bases, three daggers, three spearheads, and 167 beads (Pritchard 1963: 70). Of the 167 total beads, 165 beads originated from Tomb 32 which also contained a funerary jar decorated with eight ibexes on its shoulder (Pritchard 1963: 44).

Beth-Shan Oren ( 1971) analyzed MB IIA burial deposits in a threechambered shaft tomb at Beth-Shan. This tomb was originally dug in the EB IV /MB I at Beth-Shan. The artifacts retrieved from the tombs included a socketed "duckbill" axe head, socketed spearhead, dagger blade, and arrowhead. Oren notes parallels between the duckbill axe head found at Beth-Shan and those found in MB IIA tombs north of Canaan at Safed, Byblos, Ras-Shamra, Lebe'a, Kafer Garra, Sin el-Fil, Tell el-Tin, Yabrud, Hama, and Baghuz. The author also records spearheads, similar to the one found in Beth-Shan, in Ras el-' Ain, Megiddo, Safed, Byblos, RasShamra, Lebe'a, Kafer Garra, Tell el-Tin, Yabrud, and Baghuz. Oren also notes parallels between the dagger blade at Beth-Shan and those in MB IIA tombs at Safed, RasShamra, Lebe'a, and Kafer Garra and between the BethShan arrowhead and those found at Ras-Shamra and Yabrud. In light of these parallels, Oren ( 1971) suggests that the aforementioned artifacts, with the exception of the arrowhead which is rare, are common in MB IIA tombs in the Phoenician coast, Syria, and Canaan. Furthermore, he states that the duckbill axe and socketed spearheads became widely used in the MB IIA and evolved from their predecessors in the EB IV /MB I. These predecessors were the eye axe, which had a shorter blade and wider edge than the duckbill axehead, and the tanged spearhead (Oren 1971: 111-115, 133-137).

The ceramic artifacts from' Ain es-Samiyeh and Sinjil, which include piriformjuglets, a small flaringjuglet, and a ceramic flask without handles, have many parallels at MB IIA sites in Canaan and Syria. Piriform juglets are common in contemporary sites in Canaan and Syria and the small flaring juglet is similar to those found at the sites of Ruweiseh in Syria and Lebe'a in Lebanon (Dever 1975: 31, 34). Furthermore, the ceramic flask without handles from either 'Ain es-Samiyeh or Sinjil, was also present at Ras el-' Ain (Dever 1975: 31, 34).

Megiddo Kenyon (1969) analyzed the pottery from the MB IIA (what she called the MB I) burials at Megiddo. The MB IIA tombs were characterized by three chambers connected to a main chamber that was accessed by a vertical shaft (Guy 1938: 136). The MB IIA burials in Stratum XIV contained "a wealth of bowls with thickened rims, decorated with a red band on the rim,jugs with oblique mouths, ...jars and juglets decorated with red bands ..., [and] jugs with handles of multiple strands" (Kenyon 1969: 26). Engberg (1938) mentions additional ceramic forms including small handmade 'teapots,' bowls, cups, jugs with a pinched lip, and two lamps with single and four pinched lips (Engberg 1938: 148-149). MB IIA burial artifacts including a copper dagger, toggle pins, and faience

1.4.2 Burials and Cemeteries in Phoenicia and Ancient Syria In addition, MB IIA cemeteries were excavated at various sites in Phoenicia and Syria including Byblos (Montet 1928), Lebe'a (Guigues 1937), Kafer Garra (Guigues 1938), Sin elFil (Chehab 1939), Tellet-Tin(Gautier 1895), Yabrud(Assaf 1967), Rama (Ingholt 1940; Fugmann 1958), and Baghuz (Oren 1971). 7

Jool D. Klonck

Byblos

Tomb III at Byblos contained an assemblage of artifacts characteristic of the MB IIA . This assemblage included a cup with a side loop handle, trefoil-mouthed jug, cup with handle and wheel combings, storage jars with profiled rims, and dipper juglets with a pinched mouth (Montet 1928: 931934). A pair of duckbill axes and dagger blades and a single spearhead were also found in Tomb III (Montet 1928: 247248). Lebe'a

At Lebe'a on the Phoenician coast, MB IIA burials were deposited in a three-chambered tomb accessible by a vertical shaft that was probably dug in the EB IV /MB I. The deposits contained a duckbill axehead, two socketed spearheads, ribbed dagger, toggle pin, globular jug with a long neck decorated with concentric circles, burnished dipper juglets, and one elliptical handled jug (Guigues 1937; Oren 1971: 119). Kafer Garra

Guigues (1938) also reported on the finds from the grave deposits at Kafer Garra on the Phoenician coast. The graves were deposited in an EB IV tomb (Tomb 57) which comprised a single chamber with an entrance shaft. The tomb contained MB IIA artifacts including a duckbill axehead, socketed spearhead, dagger blade, small widemouthed jar, elongated cylindrical juglet, elliptical burnished jug, shoulder-handled jug, storage jar, carinated bowl, elongated cylindrical juglet, and cylinder seal dating no later than the reign of Hammurapi (1728-1686 B.C.Guigues 1938; Oren 1971: 120). The grave deposits at Kafer Garra probably belong to an MB IIA/B transitional period along with the duckbill axe. Archaeologists also retrieved chisel-like axes from Tomb 57 which are characteristic of the MB IIB (Guigues 1938; Oren 1971: 120). Sin el-Fil

At Sin el-Fil on the Phoenician coast, a single-chambered tomb (Tomb I), had the following artifacts: decorated pots of the Khabur and 'Atchana' style, long-necked jugs, red burnished chalice with an elevated trumpet foot and handle, cup, collar-necked juglet, burnished dipper juglet with a pinched mouth, and a duckbill axehead (Chehab 1939: 121; Oren 1971: 121). Oren (1971) notes that the tomb's artifacts represent a transitional MB IIA/B period since excavators retrieved sherds of Tell el-Yahudiyeh Ware characteristic of the MB IIB (Oren 1971: 122). Tell et-Tin

At Tell et-Tin, in the Orantes Valley in Syria, archaeologists excavated human skeletons in contracted positions in pottery containers. These ceramic containers were placed in stonebuilt cists, a burial arrangement typical to Northern Syria. The artifacts from these deposits included a duckbill axehead, socketed spearhead, ribbed dagger, and toggle pin. The ceramic vessels comprised a "one-handled, wide-bellied

pitcher with round moulded rim, ...vases with lozenges in black paint on upper part of body, ...deep, necked bowl, ...onehandled jug, ...and bowl with flanged rim and horns" (Oren 1971: 122; Gautier 1895). Yabrud

In Tomb 4 at Yabrud, Syria, archaeologists excavated another MB IIA burial deposit located in a rectangular stone cist grave. Unfortunately, the skeletons were badly fragmented and the pottery included types from the MB IIB (e.g., carinated bowls) and LB I (e.g., black lustrous juglets). Still, MB IIA artifacts were retrieved and comprised a duckbill axe, socketed spearhead, ribbed dagger, arrowheads, toggle pins, bracelets, earrings, necked bowls, juglets with a pinched mouth, and a cylinder seal dating to the First Babylonian Dynasty (18301531 B.C.-Assaf 1967; Oren 1971: 123). Hama

At Hama in Syria, tombs from Stratum H which included a two-chambered burial accessible by a deep vertical shaft, contained mostly MB IIA artifacts. These artifacts included duckbill axeheads, toggle pins, elliptical wide-mouthed jugs, bowls with moulded rims, two socketed spearheads, and a dagger. The artifacts characteristic of EB IV assemblages included an eye axehead and wavy combed ware. In light of the artifactual evidence, the tombs, especially Tomb G IV, probably represent an EB IV/MB I-MB IIA transitional context (Oren 1971: 123; Ingholt 1940; Fugmann 1958). Baghuz

Lastly, the cemetery at Baghuz, near Mari, in Syria comprises three types of single burials: 1) rectangular stone-lined graves; 2) rectangular stone-lined cist graves covered with stone slabs; and 3) stone-lined cists covered with stone slabs surrounded by a ring of stones and topped with a lithic and earthen fill. Artifacts in these graves, especially the latter, include eleven duckbill axeheads, socketed spearheads, two daggers, widemouthed pots, and bowls with spirals or raised bands on or below their rims (du Buisson 1948; Oren 1971: 126). Although, these decorations are found in MB IIA contexts in Canaan (e.g., at Megiddo and Ras el-' Ain), they are more characteristic of assemblages in northern Mesopotamia and inland Syria (e.g., Chagar Bazar, Tel Brak, Qatna, etc.-Oren 1971: 126). In summary, similarities between MB IIA burials in Canaan, the Phoenician coast, and Syria are present in the architecture of the tombs and in the ceramic and metal artifacts. Features, such as shaft tombs and artifacts including juglets (piriform and dipper), carinated bowls, duckbill axeheads, and socketed spearheads, are found in most burial sites in all three geographical areas. The evidence from the tombs suggest that populations in Canaan, the Phoenician coast, and Syria either practiced similar burial rituals, originated from a common culture, or both. In addition, burials with weaponry may indicate the presence of military personnel, although again the weapons may have been buried for ceremonial purposes only (Ilan 1995).

Tho

1.4.3. Open Air Cult Sites

Cultic Milieu

circumscribed by an outer wall (Figure 1.5-from Dunand 1950: PL XXXIV). Dunand reconstructed the temporal phases of the sanctuary by deconstructing the temple and then rebuilding it on sterile bedrock in another area of the site. As a result, he exposed five construction stages of the temenos and then dated these stages by analyzing their Egyptian artifacts. Using this method he dated the first construction stage to the Egyptian Middle Kingdom (2133-1991 B.C.) and the last building phases to the reign ofRamesses II (ca. 12901224 B.C.-Glueck 1938: 172). The obelisks and many of the artifacts originated from the first four building stages which roughly correspond to the MB II B & C (1800/1750-1650 B.C.).

What have been identified as open air cult sites have been excavated at Megiddo (Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973; Epstein 1965), Nahariyah (Ben-Dor 1950; Dothan 1956, 1965, 1977b, 1981), andByblos (Dunand 1937, 1950; Montet 1928-Figures l.3a-c, 1.4, 1.5). Megiddo

At Megiddo, the MB IIA population built a perimeter wall enclosing an open area that was built directly over an Early Bronze Age temple (Temple 4040). Dunayevsky and Kempinski (1973) pieced together the three strata (i.e., XIII B, XIII A, and XII) of the sacred area that belonged to the MB IIA (Figures l .3a,b,c). The earliest MB IIA stratum, XIII B, comprised a path built around an EB IV/MB I courtyard and cult chamber with an apse that originated from the Early Bronze shrine-Temple 4040 (Figure l.3a-Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 175-177).

The sanctuary itself measured 9.6 m by 6.3 m with an outer wall that was 1.1 m thick. The structure consisted of a procella, situated between two rectangular antechambers, and a main cella. In the pro-cella there were rectangular niches measuring 30 cm in width (Dunand 1950: 644,655). In the courtyard, several favissae were excavated. One favissae contained nine gold fenestrated axes and gold vases with lapis lazuli decorations. Another deposit comprised a jar with 50 gold torques, three silver birds, silver vase, and gold disks. Also, excavators found a cache of miniature bowls, cups, and lids (Figure 1.6-from Dunand 1950: PL LXXX).

In Stratum XIII A, the MB inhabitants of Megiddo built a wall around the sacred area (Figure 1.3b). Residential areas were also built to the west and east of the sacred precinct (Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 177). The EB/MB transition was gradual at Megiddo as evidenced by EB IIIb pottery types from the MB IIA stratum, XIII B. These EB IIIb pottery types include the platter with discus-like base, combed jar, small jar with button base, and pot with foldedin rim (Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 175, fn. 33). Also, in Stratum XIII A, there were offering bowls like those found at N ahariyah and metal figurines (Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 178, fn. 36).

Other artifacts found in the temenos included jewelry such as bracelets and beads, seals, zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines, statues, socketed spearheads, duckbill axes, cult stands, bowls, large storage jars, dipper juglets, and seven cup vessels identical to those found at Nahariyah (Dunand 1950: Pls. LXXXII-CV). Animal bones were also present in the temenos but the examples Dunand show were of bone tools some of which appear to originate from caprovine tibias and metapodials (Dunand 1950: 570,583).

During Stratum XII, Megiddo's inhabitants built a wall around the temenos, filled the previous cult chamber, and built a new structure surrounded by stelae (Figure 1.3c). Megiddo's inhabitants built residential structures around the sacred precinct in Stratum XII and to the west constructed a large 'palace.' Dunayevsky and Kempinski (1973: 178) suggest that the palace, sacred area, and residences were constructed for the rulers and priests. Stratum XII, they suggest, should be considered as a transitional MB IIA/B stratum since MB IIB pottery types are introduced in this phase.

The three open air cult sites exhibit differences in their architecture. The cult sites at Byblos and Megiddo are more alike architecturally than the bammah at Nahariyah. Both possess stealea and are circumscribed by a perimeter wall. All three sites, however, do exhibit artifactual similarities as evidenced by the retrieval of miniature ceramic vessels and figurines. Furthermore, the cult sites at Byblos and Nahariyah contained dipper juglets.

Nahariyah

The MB IIA sacred area at Nahariyah in Stratum A was characterized by a 6 x 6 m square room. To the south of the room was attached a bammah or high place which measured around 6 m diameter (Figure 1.4). On the bammah was a variety of objects such as juglets, miniature cups and bowls, jars, and figurines. These artifacts, however, are dated to the MB IIB (Dothan 1956, 1977b; Ben-Dor 1950).

1.5. THE FLORUIT OF CANAANITE CIVILIZATION: MB IIB/C (1800/17501550 B.C.). While the MB IIA corresponds with the emergence of Canaanite culture, the MB IIB and C correlates with the zenith and decline of the Canaanite civilization. Below is a summary of the chronology of the MB IIB/C and overviews which detail international events and developmental factors that affected the growth of Canaanite societies. Descriptions are provided of Canaanite material culture, religion, and ideology during these periods.

Byblos

M. Dunand excavated the Temple of the Obelisks at Byblos in 1937. The temple was characterized by a raised rectangular surrounded by stelae. The stelae which were primarily found toward the western side of the edifice were in turn 9

Jool D. Klonck

1.5.1. Chronology of the MB 118(1800/1750-1650 B.C.) and MB IIC (1650-1550 B.C.)

to war against southern cities such as Yamhad and Alalakh (Gurney 1978: 241; Albright 1957: 30).

The transition from the MB IIB (1800/1750-1650 B.C.) to the MB IIC (1650-1550 B.C.) is gradual and based on a refined ceramic typology from relative strata at Shechem, Gezer, and a series of tombs from Jericho (Cole 1984; Kenyon 1960, 1965). Because of the overlap between the two material cultures and the expertise that is needed to differentiate between them, many scholars group the two phases together in their analysis of Middle Bronze Age sites. Below, I review the artifacts from the MB IIB and C and describe them either separately or as one period, the MB IIB/C.

The MB IIB in Canaan corresponds to the Thirteenth Dynasty (1785-1663) in Egypt. Although this Dynasty experienced a successful campaign under Neferhotep I (ca. 1740-1730 B.C.) who invaded Byblos under Amorite leadership, the dynasty was marked by the general decline of Egyptian sovereignty (Bright 1981). This decline was encouraged by weak leadership, the growing independence of Canaanite cities in the North, and most importantly, the influx of foreigners called hekau khasut or "foreign rulers" into the Nile Delta. The "Hyksos," a term later used to describe these people by the Hellenistic historian, Manetho, comprised mostly Canaanites (Mazar 1990: 191; Hayes 1978: 54-60). At the beginning of the seventeenth century B.C., the Hyksos founded their capital at Avaris: the archaeological site of Tell el-Dab'a in the Nile Delta (Hayes 1978a: 60-64). Many types of ceramic vessels including storage jars, dipper juglets, bowls, and metal weapons from Canaan (described below) were found in strata at Tell elDab' a (Bietak 1979, 1984).

1.5.2. International Events During the MB 118 (1800/1750-1650 B.C.) and MB IIC (1650-1550 B.C.)

At the beginning of the eighteenth century B.C., Mesopotamian city states were embroiled in battles to attain political hegemony. Among the chief contestants were Larsa, Assyria, Mari, and Babylon. In Lower Mesopotamia, Larsa, under the able leadership of Rim-sin ( 1798-17 58), defeated Isin and expanded its territory to the southern boundaries of Babylon(Gadd 1985: 641: 643). In Upper Mesopotamia, the native line of kings of Assyria was replaced by an Amorite lineage. The first king from this Amorite lineage, Shamshiadad I (1750-1718 B.C.), expanded Assyria's territory to the Mediterranean in the West, Zagros Mountains in the North, and to the borders of Babylon in the South (Gadd 1985: 639). Although Assyria conquered Mari and disposed of its kingZimri-lin (1730-1697 B.C.), Zimri-lin returned, took control of Mari again, expelled the Assyrians, and forged his state into a major power (Lewy 1985: 712-713; Kupper 1978: 414).

In summary, during the period corresponding to the MB IIB, stable Mesopotamian city-states fought each other, Babylon rose and fell, and Hurrians and Kassites migrated into the region. Meanwhile, Hittite polities began unifying in Anatolia and made occasional military forays against cities along the Phoenician coast and in Northern Syria. Lastly, in Egypt, the expansion ofHyksos into the Egyptian Delta culminated with their occupation of the region and the establishment of the Hyksos Dynasty in 1650 B.C. During the MB IIC (1650-1550), Babylon was beset by many problems especially weak leadership and the migration of Kassites into the region (Gadd 1978: 223-224). After a Hittite raid by Murisilis I in 1595 B.C., Kassites occupied Babylon, began their own dynastic tradition, and ruled for four centuries (Kupper 1978: 224-227). Although the Kassites warred against the "Kings of the Sea Land" to the South, they rarely conducted military campaigns outside of Mesopotamia (Drower 1978: 439-444). Meanwhile Assyria was reduced to a small state due to the expansion of her neighbors: the Kassites in the South and the Hurrian kingdom ofMitanni to the West.

The greatest king of Mesopotamia proved to be Hammurapi (1728-1686 B.C.), the King of Babylon, who ascended the throne in 1756 B.C. Soon after his ascension, Hammurabi began conquering Mesopotamia. Babylon subjugated Larsa, then Assyria, and in 1792 B.C. destroyed Mari thus securing Syria(Gadd 1985: 639; 1978: 176-189). Babylon's hegemony did not last long. The successor of Hammurapi, Samsu-iluna (1685-1648 B.C.), inherited many problems. To the south, Ilu-ma-ilu, from the lineage of the kings oflsin, founded the "Dynasty of the Sea Land" which divided Babylonian territory. To the North, Babylon was threatened by the expansion of two immigrant populations: Hurrians from the mountains of Armenia and the Kassites from the Iranian highlands (Mellaart 1985: 749; Gadd 1978: 220-227; Kupper 1978: 36-38).

In the late seventeenth century B.C., Hurrian populations were dispersed throughout Upper Mesopotamia and Northern Syria. By the late sixteenth century B.C., populations who used Inda-European and Hurrian languages founded the Kingdom ofMitanni with its capital at Nuzi in the East-Tigris region(Drower 1978: 417-423; Kupper 1978: 36-38). In 1630 B.C., in the first part of the MB IIC, Murisilis I (c. 1630-1590 B.C.), the successor to Khattushilish I (c. 16601630 B.C.), conquered Yamhad and Qatna in Northern Syria as well as Alalakh on the Phoenician coast. In 1595 B.C., he raided Mesopotamia and sacked Babylon (Gurney 1978: 247250; Kupper 1978: 225-226). Hittite expansion, however, was short-lived. Murisilis was murdered and the Hittite succession was plagued by violence and civil strife (Gurney 1978: 251).

Along the Phoenician coast and in Syria, urban centers at Yamhad, Qatna, and Alalakh, prospered as did trade with Canaan (Kupper 1978: 14-22). At the beginning of the seventeenth century B.C., however, the kings ofKussara began to conquer and unify the Hittite polities (Gurney 1978: 235240). Around 1650 B.C. these kings, especially Khattushilish I (c. 1660-1630 B.C.) soon made forays into Syria and began iO

Tho

Coupled with the Hittite state's internal problems was the expansion of the Mitanni state in Upper Mesopotamia. By the end of the MB IIC, Hittite power declined and was restricted to the confines of Asia Minor (Gurney 1978: 659665).

Cultic Milieu

and the number of mid-sized sites increased (Gophna & Portugali 1988: 17-18, 26; Broshi & Gophna 1986: 86). On the Canaanite Coastal Plain, South of Mount Carmel, populations abandoned three fortified sites at Tel Burga, Tel Zeror, and Tel Poleg and established 44 new settlements. At least eleven of these new settlements were fortified including Tel Haror (Gophna & Portugali 1988: 26).

The beginning of the MB IIC (1650 B.C.) corresponds with the beginning of the reign ofHyksos kings in the Nile Delta. The Hyksos lineage comprised the Fifteenth Dynasty and lasted for nearly a century, from 1650 to 1540 B.C. (Hayes 1978a: 54-60). In the mid-fifteenth century B.C., Theban princes who were vassals of the Hyksos led a rebellion against the foreigners (James 1978: 289-293). Around 1560 B.C., the Hyksos capital, Avaris, fell to this Theban lineage, which became the Seventeenth Dynasty, under the leadership of prince Ahmose (ca. 1570-1546 B.C.-Gonen 1992: 211). The Hyksos abandoned Egypt and fled to Sharukhen (Tell elAjjul?), a city in southern Canaan. Here, Ahmose pursued the Hyksos, laid siege to the city, and after three years destroyed Sharukhen (James 1978: 293-296). After the fall of the Hyksos, Egypt continued to raid Canaan before Tuthmose III (1469-1436 B.C.) conquered Canaan in its entirety (Hayes 1978b: 317-320).

In the Galilee, during the MB IIB/C, Hazor and Dan expanded in size and continued to flourish (Yadin 1972; Biran 1984). Hazor is noted as being the most influential city in northern Canaan in Biblical texts (Joshua 11:10) and in manuscripts from Mari (Yadin 1972). From the Jezreel to the Jordan Valley Yoqneam, Megiddo, and Beth Shean continue to expand in size and new sites are established at Taanach, Tel Shimron, and Rehob (Loud 1948; Rowe 1930, 1940). As local populations built Kabri and Tel Gerisa (Dothan 1976; Kochavi, Beck & Gophna 1979), the Coastal (Sharon) Plain Acre and Aphek continued to expand. In the Samarian Hill Country, Shechem expanded as settlements were established at Tell el-Far'ah (north), Shiloh, and Tell Sheikh Abu-Zarad (G.E. Wright 1961). Lastly, in the Transjordan, Amman's perimeter increased as inhabitants built cities at Sahab and Tell Safut (A. Mazar 1990: 197).

Thus the MB IIC corresponded with the emergence of the Kassite Dynasty in Babylon, the expansion and retraction of the Hittite state, the beginning of the Hurrian kingdom of Mitanni, the floruit of the Hyksos, and the destruction of the Hyksos by the Egyptian pharaoh Ahmose.

During the MB IIB/C, many more cities were established south of the Yarkon River than were there in the MB IIA. On the coastal plain, inhabitants built fortified sites at Tell elAjjul, Jaffa, Tel Poran, Tel Nagila, Ashdod, and Tel Mor. In the arable Shephelah, Tel Beit Mirsim expanded and populations established fortified cities at Gezer, Tel Batash, Beit-Shemesh, and Lachish (Dever (ed.) 1986, Dever 1971; Dever, Lance and Wright 1970; Albright 1933, 1938). Further inland, on the J udean Hills, populations founded the cities of Bethel, Gibeon, Jerusalem, Beth-Zur, and Hebron (Tufnell 1962; Amiran and Eitan 1977; Artzy, Asaro and Perlman 1975; Dothan 1977a, 1973). In the Northern Negev, MB IIB populations built Tel Malhata, Tel Masos, Tel el-Far'ah (south), and, the site that is the focus of this thesis, Tel Haror (Kochavi 1967, 1977; Kempinski 1977; Fritz & Kempinski 1976). Lastly, the Hyksos constructed Avaris, the Canaanite counterpart to Hazor in Egypt, during this period (Bietak 1979).

1.5.3. Factors Affecting the Development of Canaanite Culture An important factor which facilitated Canaan's expansion during the MB IIB (1800/1750-1650 B.C.) and MB IIC (16501550 B.C.) is the turmoil that other kingdoms faced in the geographical areas surrounding Canaan. Cultural homogeneity between Canaan, Phoenicia, and Northern Egypt encouraged trade during the MB IIB/C. Traded items during this period include Cypriot pottery and copper ingots, scarabs from Hyksos controlled Egypt (Kempinski 1983; Weinstein 1981), and cylinder seals of the 'Syrian Style.' The latter show Mesopotamian themes, local designs, and (rarely) Egyptian motifs. These seals were produced at Aleppo and possibly at Qatna and Hazor (Collon 1975, 1981).

Ilan (1995) has suggested that during the MB IIB/C, Canaan possessed a society with a multi-tiered settlement hierarchy. Based on rank-size distributions (from Kotter 1986) and exchange and production factors (from Knapp 1989), Ilan suggests that Canaanite civilization had seven tiers of settlements:

During the MB IIB, more settlements were constructed in the highlands. Finkelstein (1988/9: 141), suggests that population pressure in the lowlands may have encouraged the habitation of the highlands.

1. First order gateway (Hazor and Tell el-Dab'a); 2. Second order gateway (e.g., Ashkelon, Kabri, Pella); 3. Third order gateway (e.g., Masos, Dan, Jericho, Dor, Jaffa); 4. Regional center (e.g., Megiddo, Beth Shean, Shimron, Shechem, Gezer); 5. Subregional center and/or locus of specialist production (e.g., Tell el-Hayyat, Afula, Tel Kittan); 6. Village; 7. Farmstead or hamlet (Ilan 1995: 305).

1.5.4. Settlement Patterns and Social Organization From the MB IIA to the MB IIB/C the number of sites in Northern Canaan grew from 130 to 337 (Broshi & Gophna 1986: 86). During the MB IIB/C, Canaan became more urbanized-the ratio of small to large settlements decreased ii

Jool D. Klonck

Hazor is mentioned with other major kingdoms such as Babylon, Qatna, Yamhad, and Ugarit. A text from Mari from the Assyrian King, Shamshi Adad I (1750-1718 B.C.), states that ambassadors from Hazor were to be treated with respect (Ilan 1995: 307). During the MB IIB/C, Tell el-Dab'a became the major gateway city for Southern Canaan as the Hyksos, a majority of whom were probably Canaanites, managed the overland and maritime trade routes between Upper Egypt, Canaan, and Byblos (Bietak 1991: 29-32). Presently, there is no textual information about Canaanite social structure other than brief inscriptions noting titles of royalty and other prominent personages. U garitic texts dating to the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries B.C., however, may lend insight into Canaanite social structure. The rulers of the cities were called mlk or king. These rulers allocated smaller cities and their surrounding lands, in the vicinity of the capital, to privileged subordinates to rule. These "daughter-cities" were governed by a hazannu or 'mayor' (Heltzer 1976: 529). Working for the hazannu were officials who helped with the maintenance of the smaller city and who also doubled as the chieflabor bosses of a particular craft. These bosses or rb had both the free population, 'm, and the slave population, 'bd, working for them. The 'bd or slaves were owned by all non-slave members of the society from the king to the free commoners (Heltzer 1976: 29-32). Since U garit was linguistically and culturally related to Canaan, it is possible that the social structures in the two regions were similar. Heltzer's mentioning of'daughter cities' being attached to primary cities and the existence of labor bosses correlates well with the growing hierarchy and the increase in craft specialization in MB IIB Canaan. During the MB IIB/C, populations focused their energies on bureaucratic, martial, and religious pursuits as they built and maintained their settlements.

1.5.5. Architecture

Fortifications in MB IIB/C Canaan are similar to those in Syria. Earth ramparts that were built during the MB IIA at Acre, Tel Burgah, Tel Zeror, and Yavneh-Yam and became common in the MB IIB and when they constructed at Hazor, Kabri, Dan, Ashkelon, Shechem, Tel Batash, and Tel Mevorakh (Yadin 1972; Biran 1984; Dever 1974; G.E. Wright 1965; Stern 1984). These ramparts, which were first constructed in Israel during the eighteenth century B.C., were first built in Syria. During the twentieth and nineteenth centuries B.C., earth ramparts, similar to those found in Canaan during the MB IIA, B, and C, were constructed in the Upper Euphrates region at Carchemish, in the Orontes Valley at Ebla and Qatna, and near Damascus at Tell Sefinet Nuh. Another architectural innovation during the MB IIB was the glacis. Glacis were made by placing earth on the side of a mound or hill. This activity formed steeper and more massive slopes. Archaeologists have uncovered glacis at Tel Gerisa, Jericho, Gezer, Lachish, Shiloh, Tel Nagila, Tel el-Far'ah and Tell el-Ajjul (Kaplan 1975; Parr 1968).

Glacis are probably indigenous to Canaan and are not found in northern Mesopotamia or Syria. Furthermore, a new type of fortified city gate was built during the MB IIB. This new gate featured two towers, one on either side of an elongated entrance that was divided by three pilasters into two defensive chambers. Access to these gates was direct and wide, perhaps intended for wheeled carts and chariots. These fortified gates were built during the MB IIB at Razor, Megiddo, Shechem, Gezer, Beth-Shemesh, Yavneh-Yam, and Tel el Far'ah (south) (Herzog 1986). These fortified gates originated farther north: at Ebla archaeologists excavated fortified city gates built between the nineteenth and eighteenth centuries B.C. MB IIB/C cities show forethought and planning in their construction. At Shechem, Kabri, Tell el-Ajjul, Gezer, Beth Shemesh, and Megiddo archaeologists have found paved streets meeting at right angles and town squares. In addition, palaces were excavated at Razor, Tell el-Ajjul, Lachish, Aphek, Kabri, and Megiddo; these are characterized by large courtyards surrounded by halls and rooms and mud-brick walls with orthostats (Yadin 1972; Ussishkin 1983; Stewart 1974; Tufnell 1958; Loud 1948). Walls with orthostats which was found at Lachish and Tell el-Ajjul is similar to those found at Alalakh and Ebla in Syria. At a majority of the MB IIB/C sites archaeologists uncovered domestic architecture comprising rectangular mud-brick houses that come to be clustered even closer together as the cities' populations grew. A good example of space management in Canaanite domestic architecture is found at Tell el-Dab'a-commonly believed to be Avaris, the capital of the Hyksos. In the earliest stratum (G) at Tell el-Dab'a, archaeologists uncovered rectangular domestic dwellings of sand-brick which either had two rooms or were simple rectangular huts. Also, archaeologists excavated small buildings with wide entrances facing the street and containing Syro-Palestinian pottery including amphorae. The architecture and pottery led Bietak ( 1979) to suggest that these buildings represented MB IIB shops (Bietak 1979: 238). Other types of pottery from the domestic dwellings and street in Stratum G include: 1) imports such as large hand-made oval bowls with net, fish, and flower decorations, and a black-polished jug with white decorations of jumping fish and 2) indigenous MB wares such as large pots and coarse, straw-tempered cooking pots (Bietak 1979: 238-239). In Stratum F, the buildings which previously had been built close together became more widely separated. These new buildings were small and built of mud-brick. In Strata El, small mud-brick houses were built directly over the cemetery to the south of the mortuary temple. These domestic dwellings contained silos and burials beneath their entrances. In Stratum D3, larger one or two-room rectangular houses were built over the cemetery. In Stratum D2, inhabitants built small houses with large foundations which might indicate multi-storied dwellings (Bietak 1979: 266). Also in Stratum D2, family chamber tombs were built under houses because, as Bietak suggests (1979: 267), there was a lack of space in the city. Tightly packed houses with underground burial chambers

The Canaanite Cultic Milieu

also characterize Tell el-Ajjul, Megiddo, and Ras Shamra during the MB (Bietak 1979: 267; Petrie 1931; Kenyon 1957; Schaeffer 1933, 1935).

1.6 CANAANITE RELIGION AND IDEOLOGY DURING THE MB IIB/C (1800/1750-1550 B.C.)

1.5.6. Ceramics

1.6.1. Textual Evidence

Figures 1.2c and 1.2d exhibit ceramic styles from the MB IIB and C (from Kempinski 1992: 180). Burnished red slipped and decorated wares, popular in the MB lIA, were replaced in the MB IIB and C by white or cream slip ware and designs comprising horizontal stripes and concentric circles. Occasionally, bird and antelope designs appear on vessels. Tell el-Yehudiyeh ware is found less in Canaan but is increasingly popular in Phoenicia, northern Syria, and Cyprus (Amiran 1970).

An analysis of Canaanite religion requires a brief discussion of the theology of this religion, specifically the origin of the deities and their impact on Canaanite society. Since there are few extant Canaanite religious documents from the Middle Bronze Age, most of the information on Canaanite religion must be inferred from texts that were written: 1) by foreigners during the MB; 2) by cultures with similar ideologies and origins during or after the decline of Canaanite civilization; and 3) by foreign cultures that emerged after the fall of Canaan. Foreign texts written during the Middle Bronze Age include texts from Mari, dated between the twentieth and seventeenth centuries B.C., and Egyptian manuscripts dating to the Twelfth Dynasty (ca. 1991-1786 B.C.-Pettinato 1981). The latter comprise the Execration Texts which record detailed curses of the enemies of Egypt and their gods. Manuscripts written by societies ideologically or culturally related to Canaan include documents from U garit, Phoenicia, and Carthage. At Ras Shamra (Ugarit) in Northern Syria, tablets were written using an archaic form of the Canaanite language during the city's floruit, c. 1440-1360 B.C. (Ringgren 1973: 127; Handy 1994: 19,20). These texts offer a detailed description ofU garit religion and society that show similarities with Canaanite deities and rituals mentioned in other philological sources. Phoenician city-states such as Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre continued to worship Canaanite deities after the demise of Canaan. Phoenician texts were written between ca. 1000-600 B.C. Carthaginian (Punic) religion was heavily influenced by Phoenician society and Punic religion might reveal some aspects about Canaanite religion. Most documents originate from the fourth and third centuries B.C. Texts written by foreigners that mention Canaanite deities and rituals include Egyptian and Biblical (Israelite) manuscripts. Egyptian texts written during the New Kingdom (ca. 1552-1306) mention the Canaanite gods incorporated in the Egyptian pantheon after the expulsion of the Hyksos (ca. 1550 B.C.-Morenz 1973: 238-39; Lichtheim 1976). Israelite texts were most likely written after the eleventh century B.C. and describe Canaanite society and religion in a highly polemical fashionCanaanite civilization was to be extirpated and replaced (Handy 1994: 37-44).

Most ceramic styles during the MB IIB/C periods emerged from the indigenous Canaanite ceramic repertoire of the MB IIA and not from foreign cultures. The principal problem during the MB IIB is delineating where in Canaan (i.e., northern or southern Canaan) certain styles were popular and determining the manufacturing centers for these vessels. Kempinski (1992: 182) states, " ...new styles [of ceramic vessels] appear, increasing in numbers as the year 1600 B.C.E. approaches. This phenomenon is more clearly marked in the south than in the north, possibly because the south was more industrialized and hence had fewer potter's workshops than the north." During MB IIC, Chocolate on White Ware was produced mainly in the northern Canaan, while 'Eggshell' Ware (thin pottery composed of fine clay) and Bi chrome Ware are found throughout Canaan and in northern Egypt before the fall of the Hyksos (Amiran 1970). An exception to the indigenous styles in Canaan is the presence of Bichrome Ware vessels, imported from Cyprus during the MB IIB and C. These vessels attest to the development of international maritime trade. Bichrome Ware containers were manufactured on a fast wheel and bear zoomorphic and geometric designs. These vessels have been excavated from MB IIB/C contexts at Tel Nagila, Ugarit, Tell el-' Ajjul, and Megiddo (Artzy, Asaro & Perlman 1975: 129, 133).

1.5.7. Metallurgy

Developments in metallurgy during the MB IIB/C include a small, chisel-shaped axe, double-ridged daggers with wooden handles, and long spearheads with deep shafts (Oren 1973, 1971). In addition, during the MB IIB, metal figurines of male and female deities became popular in Canaan. These artifacts appeared first during 20-l 8th centuries B.C. along the Lebanese Coast and in Syria (Weinstein 1981, Seger 1976, Negbi 1976, and Kempinski 1974). More artistic metallurgical developments in the MB IIB/C include bronze and silver toggle pins to fasten clothing. Furthermore, gold and silver jewelry were excavated (pins, rings, earrings, and pendants) at Tell el-Ajjul and Shiloh and are similar to those found in cemeteries at Tell-el Dab'a and Ebla (Bietak 1979).

There are difficulties in analyzing Canaanite religion. First, most of the information on Canaanite gods originates from U garitic texts where gods are featured in epics or mentioned in rituals and temple activities. The problem is that the gods that are mentioned in the myths and rituals often differ. Furthermore, the esteem and rank given to Canaanite deities varied between cities. For example, although the principal Canaanite deities such as Baal, Asherah, and Anat were worshipped throughout the Syria-Canaan region, each city had its own principal god (L'Heureux 1979: 106-107). At Ugarit, during the fourteenth century B.C., El was the supreme creator god

Jool D. Klonck

although Baal was the most active deity. The pantheons of Tyre and Sidon (ca. eighth century B.C.) possessed as their chief gods Melcarth and Eshmun, respectively. And the principal goddess ofByblos (eighteenth century B.C.) was Ba'lat-possibly a female representation of Baal (Albright 1968: 145-150).

in philological sources including Ugaritic and Biblical texts and the Armarna letters. Baal is described as 'he who rides on the clouds' and is characterized as the storm god (Albright 1968: 124-127; Ringgren 1973: 132). The god is also referred to as the 'king of heaven and earth' and Baal is recorded in epics as both being killed by Mot or death and killing this deity-which Albright suggests represents seasonal changes (Albright 1968: 127). In addition to the deity's influence on the seasons, he is recorded as causing life-giving rain and is therefore considered a fertility god (Handy 1994: 100). Baal is also associated with the term aliyan meaning 'victorious' and another epithet which translates 'the strong, the mighty' (Ringgren 1973: 132; Handy 1994: 102). Ugaritic texts mention that Baal is the 'son of Dagan' but also note that 'Bull El [is] his father.' In one U garitic text, Baal calls El 'our creator,' while conversing with Anat (L'Heureux 1979: 12,13).

In addition, the principal male and female deities often possessed similar attributes and domains, and hence it is difficult to know the precise theological and hierarchical relationships between these deities. This point is exemplified in the relationship between the primary male gods of El and Baal and among the principal, female deities: Astarte, Anath, and Asherah. In Ugaritic texts the god El was considered as the head of the epic pantheon and referred to as the 'father of mankind,' 'father of the sons of the gods,' and 'creator of that which is created' (Ringgren 1973: 128-131). Although El was the highest authority and king of the gods. Albright describes El as being remote and inactive (Albright 1968: 120-121). In addition, Ugaritic texts describe El as the owner of heaven and earth and as a parent to the gods. El is also described as designating or allowing gods such as Baal, Mot, and Yam to rule specific domains: the earth, underworld, and sea, respectively (Handy 1994: 76-80).

With the philological studies ofU garitic texts came the notion that Baal often went by other names and served as the tutelary deity for individual cities. U garitic texts show that the name Hadad was used interchangeably with Baal. Ringgren (1973: 132) states, " ...Baal and the thunder god Hadad ...appear to be identical...It looks, therefore, as if Baal, 'the lord,' is the Canaanites' name for the god who among the Aramaeans and in Mesopotamia is called Hadad." Albright states that Hadad was rarely used until the fifteenth century B.C. and that this name of Baal probably developed during the sixteenth century B.C. (Albright 1968: 120-121).

The goddess Asherah was another major deity in Ugarit. She is described as 'the lady who transverses the sea,' 'she who gives birth to the gods,' and Qudsu or 'holiness.' In Syria and Canaan, this goddess is mentioned in texts dating from 1700 to 1200 B.C. and is depicted in some epics as the enemy of Baal and his sister Anat (Albright 1968: 121). In Egypt, Qds is shown nude with curled locks, raised hands grasping lilies and serpents, and standing on a lion (Albright 1968: 122). Asherah is the only other deity who shares with El the title 'qny' or owner and who is described as either the real or legal mother of the gods (Handy 1994: 76,77). Furthermore, only Asherah shares with El the power to project lesser gods into positions of power. For example, a Ugaritic passage describes "Asherah's decision to make the god Athtar a king in Baal's stead ...As Queen Mother she was able to nominate the child who was to be next to rule. The office of Queen Mother was sufficiently powerful that Asherah 's decision was final. Athtar was heir to Baal's throne on the basis of her word alone" (Handy 1994: 84). The worship of Asherah is associated with Amorite populations at the advent of the first Babylonian dynasty (ca. 1830), where she is recorded as the consort of the national god Amurru. Also from Mesopotamian sources, Asherah bears the epithets 'the daughter-in-law of the king of heaven' and 'the mistress of fruitfulness and sensual pleasure' (Ringgren 1973: 140).

In Egypt, Baal was used as a title for the Egyptian god Seth (Handy 1994: 100). During the MB IIB/C, Seth was the chief god of Avaris, the Hyksos capital (Albright 1968:120-121). During the New Kingdom (ca. 1550-1250 B.C.), Egyptian texts associate Baal with panic, terror, and warfare (Lichtheim 1976: 64-69, 71). Numerous forms of Baal are mentioned throughout the Mediterranean coast. Baal-Saphon is the principal form of Baal at Ugarit and is mentioned as the god of the north and of storms, especially maritime storms. He is also mentioned as the protector of mariners against storms (Albright 1968: 127128). Baal-shamem or 'the Baal of heaven' is noted in Phoenician inscriptions including a treaty between the king of Tyre and Esarhaddon (680-669 B.C.), the king of Assyria (Ringgren 1973: 135). At Megiddo populations held an annual weeping ceremony for Hadad-Rimon (Albright 1968: 127). In Carthage, Baal-Hammon or 'the lord of the altar ofincense' was a major deity although when Baal and the goddess Tinnit were recorded together, her name preceded his (Ringgren 1973: 135). Anat is described in U garitic texts as virgin sister of Baal and his consort. Her roles in the epic myths vary: she is raped by Baal and then comes to his rescue. She is often represented as an armed man-like goddess and her titles include 'Mistress of Kingship,' 'Mistress of Dominion,' 'Mistress of the High Heavens,' and Anat-pane-Ba 'al or the 'Wrath of Baal' (Albright 1968: 128-132). Anat is usually portrayed as a cruel goddess who both protects and destroys human populations (Handy 1994: 104,105; Albright 1968: 135).

Albright states that Baal was the most important Canaanite deity (1968: 124-127). The word Baal means 'lord' and can be used in the plural, e.g., Baalim or 'the baals.' The word was also used as a prefix for local male and female deities; for example, Baal-Hazor, Baal-Lebanon, and Ba 'alat-Gebal or 'the mistress ofByblos' (Ringgren 1973: 131). In addition to the previous uses of the word, Baal was also the name of a significant and popular deity which is mentioned frequently

44

Tho

The Hyksos (ca. 1740-1550 B.C.) introduced the worship of Anat in Egypt. Following the expulsion of the Hyksos, Anat and Astarte were both incorporated into Egyptian mythology where Anat became the goddess of war (Lichtheim 1976: 215). Similar to Anat was another goddess Astarte. This goddess is rarely found in the U garitic epics but is mentioned in cultic and liturgical texts. Astarte is assumed to derive from the Mesopotamian goddess, Ishtar, who is the goddess of both love and war (Handy 1994: 108; Ringgren 1973: 141). Associated with the Hyksos, who introduced the use of equids and chariots in Egypt, Astarte was described as the 'goddess of the Asiatics,' 'mighty on horseback,' and 'mistress of horses and ofchariots' (Ringgren 1973: 141). Like Anat, Egyptians incorporated Astarte into their religion and representations ofher during the New Kingdom (ca. 1552-1306 B.C.) portray the goddess with immature breasts, naked, armed with a bow, shield, astride a stallion, and bearing the epithet 'Splendor of the name of Baal' (Albright 1968: 132-134). Although there is evidence that shows differences between Asherah, Anat, and Astarte, questions remain as to their individuality. Due to the similar characteristics between Anat and Astarte, Egyptians during the New Kingdom merged these goddesses together (Morenz 1973: 143). Scholars note that in both ancient and modem times Astarte is often confused with Anat and Asherah (Handy 1994: 108; Freedman 1987: 246; Eliade 1978-1985: 422). An example of this confusion is found in the alleged origin ofTinnit. Albright (1968: 130) states that Tinnit is the form of Anath in Carthage while Ringgren (1973: 143) remarks that the same goddess "is the special Carthaginian form of Astarte." Like Anat, Tinnit bears the epithet pane-Ba 'al and is referred to as the 'Mistress of Heaven' possessing the qualities ofboth a virgin and mother (Albright 1968: 130). In Carthage, Tinnit was usually listed first among the deities and had many symbols ascribed to her including the pomegranate, ear of wheat, dove, and open hand, which allegedly portrays her protection or blessing (Ringgren 1973: 143,144). Besides the principal male and female deities were other gods and goddesses that controlled specific domains. These gods included Resheph, Horon, Dagan, Mot, and Yam. The population at Ugarit worshipped Resheph as evidenced by remarks about him in ritual texts. In the Kirta Legend from U garit, he is mentioned as having banqueted with other gods and being associated with a death (Handy 1994: 109). Originally mentioned in Mari texts from the seventeenth century B.C., Resheph is featured in Ugaritic, Egyptian, and Punic inscriptions. His name means 'fire' or pestilence and this deity bears the epithet 'He who bums.' During the New Kingdom, Egyptians described him mostly as a war god and portrayed him with a shield, spear, battle axe, and with a gazelle head on his crown (Ringgren 1973: 137; Albright 1968: 139). Resheph is identified with other chthonic deities such as the Babylonian god, Nergal; the Syrian god Shulman; and the Canaanite god, Horon. Although Resheph is mostly known as the god of pestilence, destruction, death, and war, he also appears in Ugaritic texts as the 'Lord of good fortune,'

Cultic Milieu

and is invoked in a healing text (Ringgren 1973: 137; Albright 1968: 139). Horon is known from inscriptions dating to 1900 B.C. An Egyptian text from the Twelfth Dynasty (ca. 1991-1786 B.C.) mentions a curse on a prince named Haruan-abum or' Horon is the father.' Furthermore, from Egyptian texts dating to the Eighteenth Dynasty (ca. 1552-1306 B.C.), Horon is grouped together with Resheph and Anat but also mentioned as a god of healing (Gray 1949). Lastly, from Ugaritic texts, Horon is called upon in the formulation of a curse. Not much else is known about Horon and he is assumed to be a chthonic deity (Ringgren 1973: 139). The center of Dagan worship began in the third millennium B.C. and was centered at the Mesopotamian city of Tuttul (now Terqa), in the Middle Euphrates region (L'Heureux 1979: 13; Handy 1994: 109). Dagan worship is recorded in U garit and was especially popular in the Philistine region during the Israelite era. In U garitic texts, Dagan bears the epithet 'Father of Baal,' and is noted as having a temple in the city. Although Dagan was a popular deity, details of his attributes are unknown and various conjectures associate him with grain, fertility, and storms (Handy 1994: 109). Other gods may have contributed to Canaanite religion, but they are either confined to Ugaritic epics or emerge after the decline of Canaanite civilization. The god Mot or 'death' is featured in Ugaritic myths but is absent from ritual texts. There is considerable debate as whether Mot was a deity that populations worshipped or an allegory for the inevitable (Healey 1986: 29). There are many Phoenician descriptions of the gods Melcarth and Eshmun who were the principal deities of Tyre and Sidon. However, the mention of these gods emerges in the first millennium B.C.; hence, these gods were probably not known to the Canaanite populations in the previous millennium (Ringgren 1973: 137, 138). Foreign deities mentioned in Ugaritic texts include Sin, the Assyrian moon god; Ae, the Babylonian god of wisdom; Nergal and Allatum, Babylonian chthonic deities; Damu, Sumerian fertility god; and Dadmis, a Hurrian deity. These foreign deities are briefly noted in U garit epic and ritual texts and seem to have played a negligible role in Ugaritic religion (Albright 1968: 120-121; 145-149). The potential in studying these foreign gods is that their characteristics were often incorporated by Canaanite deities. For example, Arsay, the daughter ofBaal, was identified with the Babylonian goddess of the underworld-Allatum. Furthermore, Horon incorporated characteristics of the Assyrian war god Ninurta and appears in Ugarit epics with Astarte as a champion of Baal (Albright 1968: 138, 144-145). Kothar-wa-Hasis is mentioned in U garitic texts as the god of metallurgy and construction. In the epics, this god manufactures the weapons used by Baal to defeat Yam or the 'Sea'; he also builds a temple for Baal (Handy 1994: 134). As the patron of craftsmanship, Kothar-wa-Hasis is identified in U garit with Babylonian Ea, god of wisdom. Kothar-waHasis was worshipped as far away as Memphis and Crete and bears the title 'skillful and intelligent one' (Albright

Jool D. Klonck

1968:135-137). Another Phoenician artisan deity is Taautos mentioned by Philo ofByblos (first century A.D.). Taatous was regarded as a scribal deity and described as the inventor of writing and religious symbols (Attridge and Oden 1981: 1.10.18; 36-37).

of the Middle Bronze Age as proposed by Diakonoff (1982) who based his divisions on levels recorded by ancient scribes (Handy 1994: 170; Diakonoff 1982: 94-98). Deities

Messenger-gods are found in Ugaritic narratives and parallel the roles of angels in the Biblical Pentateuch. Messengergods in Ugaritic texts include the messenger of Yam, mlak; Asherah's attendants, qds and amrr; and Baal's servants, gpn and ugr (Handy 1994: 157, 159). The names of Yam's attendants were similar to the Israelites word for angels, mlakm (Mullen 1980: 210). These gods show "no individual volition" and acted "as animated letters" and did what they were commanded (Handy 1994: 151, 162-163).

Society

Authoritative

El

Aristocracy

Active

Baal

Governors/Officials

Artisan

Kothar

Laborers/Craftsmen

Messenger

gpn wugr

Slaves

More problematic for archaeologists is the attempt to correlate Canaanite gods mentioned in ancients texts with alleged representations of deities such as figurines and statues found in the archaeological record. Various studies have attempted to make such correlations (Negbi 1976; Caquot & Sznycer 1980; Pritchard 1969), but they have encountered two major problems. First, in most cases, it is far from certain whether a figurine can be associated with a specific deity. For example, a familiar figurine in Canaan is a nude human female holding one or both breasts. These were interpreted by Pritchard (1943) as 'Astarte plaques' although it is possible these images represent Anat, Asherah, or another unknown female deity. Second, Tigay (1986) noted that some figurines, especially those without symbols of divinity, (e.g., papyrus stalks, lotus blossoms, headdresses) may not represent deities but ordinary humans, for example, worshippers, cult prostitutes, and pregnant females (Tigay 1986: 91-92). Still, there are some instances where the figure of a goddess not only has the stereotypical features and symbols of divinity but also the divine name printed on the likeness (Pritchard 1969: 471, 473-474).

Albright (1968) notes that the worship of El declined in importance throughout the MB and was generally replaced by Baal as the most worshipped deity although a few local pantheons considered him the chief god (Albright 1968: 120121). However, Handy states that El was not replaced by Baal but rather regarded as the supreme creator god while Baal was a more active god designated by El to rule the earth (Handy 1994: 72, 176). El and Asherah are considered by C.E. L'Heurex (1979) and L.K. Handy (1994) to be the first level of deities. "The first level was that of ultimate authority or highest authority. The gods on this level owned the universe and ensured that the functions of the lower levels were carried out. They were especially renowned for wisdom and the capacity to assign competent personnel to the lower levels; therefore, they were somewhat less active than the gods of the other levels, because their responsibility was primarily to see that the rest of the organization was working. In Syria-Palestine the deities of the first levels were El (or his equivalents) and Asherah (Handy 1994: 176)."

Several studies have proposed a relationship between animal figurines and specific deities. Snake figurines have been associated with both the healing god, Horon, and therapeutic rituals (Gray 1949; Joines 1974). Another popular zoomorphic figure is the bovine; however, any relationship with a specific deity is unclear. Handy (1994) states that "bull, heifer, and calf...figures seem to signify divinity in a more general manner" and probably do not correlate with a specific god or goddess (Handy 1994: 53).

The second level of deities were more active than the first level and were designated to rule portions of the cosmos. "The gods of the second level were the active deities or the patron gods. They were the deities to whom authority to rule the various portions of the cosmos was given. They were placed in office by the highest authorities and functioned under their superiors' jurisdiction. Natural, political, and abstract spheres of influence were allotted to them. Baal, Anat, Mot, Shapshu, and a host of other deities filled these offices in the hierarchy (Handy 1994: 176)."

To summarize, although philological sources provide invaluable insight into the theology behind Canaanite religion, it is still difficult to associate textual data with artifactual evidence. At this point archaeologists who are studying Canaanite religion can only make tenuous references to philological sources to support their hypotheses.

1.6.2. Burials

Also mentioned by Handy are two additional deity levels: the artisan gods and the messenger-gods. The former is well represented by Kothar-wa-Hasis. The latter are eluded to but were not given individual names. These messenger-gods followed the orders of their superiors and had no decision making ability (Handy 1994: 176).

Three large MB IIB burial sites were excavated at Tell elDab'a, Megiddo, and Jericho. Below are descriptions of the burials found at these sites and their artifactual assemblages. Tell e/-Oab'a

Excavations at Tell el-Dab'a, the Hyksos capital Avaris in the Egyptian delta, revealed many Canaanite burials. In the

Handy (1994) states that the stratification ofSyro-Palestinian deities into four groups reflected the existing social structure 46

Tho

earliest stratum (G), burials of adults and a 6-12 year old child were found. The bodies were placed in a limestone coffin, vaulted chambers, or pits in front of domestic dwellings. Burials contained a range of objects from a single kohl-pot and beads to copper objects including a belt, dagger, and ring-stand as well as a large ceramic plate and MB IIA Canaanite drinking cups. In addition, archaeologists found the butchered remains of a sheep including " ...the back, the ribs, the mandible, and the legs" (Bietak 1979: 240). In Stratum F, a new set of burials was deposited in clusters near the temples that were used definitely in later stratum (beginning with E/3) but that may have been built as early as Stratum F. Only one burial, which was placed in a limestone coffin, showed any Egyptian influence. The ceramic vessels contained in these burials were transitional MB IIA/B pottery. The rest of the burials were in chamber-graves, included both males and females, and contained many artifacts. These artifacts included a gold diadem, a necklace with golden pendants and carnelian and faience beads, a golden lion amulet, bronze daggers, battle axes, a kohl-pot, alabaster vases, incised juglets, and unspecified pottery with black-grey, brown, and red polish (Bietak 1979: 242). In StratumF, burials of donkeys were excavated at the entrances to human tombs. These donkeys were usually deposited in pairs, although in front of one tomb the inhabitants buried five donkeys. The donkeys were placed in round pits and in one instance were buried with a drinking cup (Bietak 1979: 245-246; Boessneck 1976). Donkey burials are also present in Hyksos sites at Inshas, Tell el-Farasha, Tell el-Maskhuta, and in Canaan at Tell el-Ajjul and Jericho (Bietak 1979: 246; Petrie 1931: Plates VII, VIII, IX, LVII; and Ellis 1960). In Stratum E3, a previously unknown Canaanite structure was built which Bietak calls a "mortuary temple." The structure consisted of a narrow broad-room with three rectangular rooms. The mud-brick mortuary temple measured 12.8 x 4.3 m and had walls that were covered with plaster, painted blue, and decorated with figures that at the time of excavation were destroyed. On the right of the temple's entrance was a tower measuring 4.5 x 5 m. Near the mortuary temple were two cemeteries with mud-brick or sand-brick chamber tombs with barrel vaults, one having a pair of donkeys buried in a pit before its entrance. These burials of adults and children contained many MB IIB artifacts including red and black polished juglets, Canaanite two-handled amphorae, Tell elYahudiya ware, white incised small juglets, copper toggle pins, and scarabs on corroded silver rings. In addition, near the entrance of these burials, the inhabitants placed big plates piled with butchered sheep remains. In Stratum E2, the mortuary temple had mud-brick benches built between the broad pro-cella and the three cellas at the back of the temple. The western cella contained a child's burial and the eastern cella a cult stand and "big-footed" bowl. The western part of the pro-cella contained charred remains of sheep, cattle, and pig. The eastern part of the pro-cella contained two large juglets that were polished black. Inside the pro-cella and outside near the entrance of the mortuary temple, archaeologists retrieved ring stands, round-bottomed drinking cups, and votive pottery. The votive pottery

Cultic Milieu

comprised miniature plates and bottles (Bietak 1979: 256257). To the south or behind the mortuary temple, MB IIB inhabitants of Tell el-Dab'a dug more burials including a tomb measuring 4.95 x 2.75 m that had a chamber for meat-offerings and a donkey burial in front of its entrance. This chamber contained a woman and two infants and, although grave robbers had broken into it, the grave still contained two juglets with lotus designs (Bietak 1979: 258-259). In Stratum E2, the city's MB IIB inhabitants continued to build mud-brick chamber-burials as well as graves in round or oval pits. The bodies in these burials are extended on their backs and sides or are semi-contracted. The chamber-burials contain battle-axes, daggers, and Tell el-Yahudiya ware that is polished black and has a white incision featuring new shapes including slim juglets with button bases and distended globular juglets. These shapes also existed in vessels that were polished black or red. All vessels were made oflocal clay. Bietak states that this corpus of pottery is indicative of the MB IIB (3) Culture of the Delta: a material culture that "started to develop along its own line and distinct from Syria and Palestine" (Bietak 1979: 262). In Stratum D3, the citizens of Tell el-Dab'a continued to build mud- brick chamber burials behind the mortuary temple. One burial contained the remains of three warriors with numerous artifacts such as knives, battle-axes, daggers, golden diadems, scarabs, an alabaster ointment jar, pear-shaped vessels, and a drinking cup. Beside the burial were placed two wine amphorae with red-polished dipper juglets. At the head of the tomb, the inhabitants built a small compartment which contained animal bones from what were presumably meat offerings (Bietak 1979: 262). In Stratum D2, the last Hyksos habitation stratum at Tell elDab' a; underground family chamber tombs were built which had shafts that led to the midden floors in or near houses. The underground tombs destroyed tombs from previous strata and were probably built because of the lack of space in the city. All the pottery from this stratum was Egyptian and all the graves were plundered which leads Bietak to suggest that the area was abandoned quickly and taken over by Egyptian forces. Megiddo

Turning to Canaan, at Megiddo, the MB IIB burial deposits were placed in pre-existing tombs built in the MB IIA, in stone-lined pits, or in ceramic jars. The skeletons either were found in contracted positions or were badly fragmented (Guy 1938: 137). Kenyon (1969) analyzed the pottery from these tombs. The tombs with only MB II pottery are divided into seven groups (A-G) based on their stratigraphy. Group A contained a ceramic corpus of platters with inverted rims and disk bases, small globular bowls, large dipper flasks, pointed and often burnished dipper flasks, piriformjuglets that were usually burnished, trefoil mouthed jugs with wide and narrow necks, and shoulder-handled jugs (Kenyon 1969: 31). In burial Group B, the globular bowls disappeared and were replaced by platters with ring bases and flaring carinated bowls appeared (Kenyon 1969: 31). Burial Group C contained all

Jool D. Klonck

vessels from Group B with the addition of wide carinated bowls (Kenyon 1969: 31). The pottery from the burial in Group D is much like the vessels from B and C except for the addition of Cypriot pottery (Kenyon 1969: 31). The ceramic vessels from Group E are similar to those from B to D except for the introduction of platters with high ring and low pedestal bases, an increase in cylindricaljuglets, and carinated bowls with higher rims (Kenyon 1969: 33). InGroupF, storage jars are reported along with jugs with pinched mouths and goblets (Kenyon 1969: 34). Vessels that disappear include the platters with inverted rims and shoulder-handled jugs. Finally, in Group Gall types from F continue except the piriform juglet which disappears (Kenyon 1969: 35). Enberg notes additional pottery forms including the Tell el-Yahudiyahjar, a jug with flat or slightly rounded bottom, carinated bowls with a pedestal base, lamps with a rounded bottom and pinched lip, and a Cypriot decorated handmade jug (Engberg 1938: 150-151). Also, in the MB IIB burials at Megiddo, archaeologists found socketed spearheads, ribbed daggers, socketed axeheads, toggle pins, ceramic whorls, bronze and silver jewelry, beads of carnelian, faience, and glass, bone inlays, alabaster and faience vessels, and Hyksos scarabs (Engberg 1938: 163-180, 184-186, 188). Lastly, Bate notes that the fragmented remains of sheep and goat were found in MB IIB burials in Tombs 911 and 912 (Bate 1938: 210).

carpinifolia, Crataegus azarollusa, date palm, pomegranate, and grapevine. Liquids were put in large storage jars with dipper flasks nearby which, according to Kenyon (1960: 266), were used to ladle the drink out. Indeed, Tomb H6 contained a storage jar with the dipper juglet in the mouth of the jar (Kenyon 1960: 567, pl. XXV.2). This dipper juglet was suspended in the air by the dried liquid remains which anchored the small vessel to the mouth of the larger jar. Hence, at Jericho the term "dipper juglet" is appropriate and correctly identifies the functionality of the vessel. Commonalities at all three burial sites include the presence of bronze axes, daggers, juglets, and caprovine (sheep and goat) bones. Beyond, this similiarity, Megiddo's assemblage, typified by carinated and piriform juglets, large jugs, and platters differ from the burial artifacts at Jericho and Avaris. The latter sites are associated with equid burials, miniature ceramic vessels, dipper juglets, and figurines.

1.6.3. Temples

Two types of cult areas have been excavated during the MB IIB/C: open air cult sites and monumental symmetrical temples (Mazar 1992: 162, 164).

Jericho

1.6.3.1. Open Air Cult Sites

Kenyon analyzed the MB IIB/C tombs at Jericho from the 1952-1954 seasons and from the tombs excavated in 19551958 (Kenyon 1960: 263-518; 1965: 167-478). The MB IIB/C populations at Jericho usually buried their dead in shaft tombs that were excavated during the EB IV /MB I. Most of the skeletons were fragmentary since the MB II Bl C populations pushed them aside to make way for newer bodies. The bodies that were found intact were placed on their backs and occasionally had their legs raised or leaning to one side. Also, two tombs with single bodies were found in B46 and J3 (Kenyon 1960: 263-264). Archaeologists retrieved many superbly preserved items from the tombs at Jericho including furniture, textiles, fruit, animal meat, and human flesh (Kenyon 1960: 265). Artifacts of a more permanent nature included combs, juglets which probably contained scent or oil, alabaster juglets, small wooden boxes with bone inlay, wooden bowls-some with handles shaped like ram's heads, toggle pins, scarabs, beads, faience bottles, fibrous material that may be part of wigs, bronze daggers, single-eye axeheads, socketed spearheads, and mats. The main pottery types from the tombs include shallow bowls or 'platters' with flat or ring bases, small globular bowls with short curved necks, necked bowls, deep globular bowls, piriformjuglets, cups, flaring carinated bowls, pedestal vases without cordons, wide bowls with upright walls and plain rims, cylindrical juglets, dipper juglets, shoulder-handled jugs, storage jars, ovoid jugs with pinched mouths, and a lamp with spout folded approaching squarely. Carvings on ornately decorated pottery and alabaster vessels included ram's heads, snakes, and birds.

Open air cult sites, extant during the MB IIB, were excavated at Nahariyah (Figure 1.4-Dothan 1981, 1977b; Kaplan 1971) and Gezer (Figure 1.7-Dever 1971, 1973). Nahariyah

During the MB IIB in Strata B and C, Nahariyah's population expanded the bammah from 6 m (in the MB IIA) to 14 min diameter, thus covering the square structure from the MB IIA(StratumA-Dothan 1977b: 910-911). Also, during the MB IIB, Nahariyah's inhabitants built a long building three meters to the north of the bammah with four columns set lengthwise inside the structure. During the first MB phase (B), the structure measured 6.2 x 10.7 m, and during the second MB phase (C), Nahariyah's inhabitants rebuilt the outer walls of the edifice and added two rooms at either end of the structure. Two smaller rooms were built in the northeast corner of the structure (Dothan 1977b: 909). Dothan believes the structure was used as an additional chamber where rituals were conducted beside the bammah (e.g., I Samuel 9:22-Dothan 1981: 74-81). Most of the finds were from the MB IIB and came outside the long-balled temple. Near or on the bammah, excavators uncovered a pottery vessel with seven miniature cups, a seven wick lamp, miniature bowls, juglets, and jars. In the courtyard, archaeologists found cooking pots with animal bones mainly of goats (Dothan 1977b: 911). Furthermore, excavators retrieved bronze weapons, beads, gold and silver jewelry, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic ceramic figurines (e.g., doves), hole-mouth jars, juglets, silver and bronze female figurines, and a stone mold of probably Asherath-Yam or

Wood samples that were taken from the furniture included Tamarix sp., willow or Salix sp., prune or Prunus sp., Ostrya 48

Tho

'Asherah of the Sea,' the three-homed goddess of sailors and ofUgarit (Dothan 1977b: 912). Gezer

The open air cult site at Gezer was excavated by R.A.S. Macalister in 1902-1909 and reexcavated by W.G. Dever in 1968 (Macalister 1912: 105-107, 381-406; Dever 1971: 120124). The site comprised a row of limestone monoliths and rocks which measured up to ten feet in height (Figure 1.7). Recorded artifacts near the site included a rectangular limestone block with a square cavity and a platform with a 'plaster-like' surface. This platform contained burned animal bones and teeth (Dever 1971: 120-122). Dever (1971: 122) dates the construction of the "High Place" at Gezer to ca. 1600 B.C. 1.6.3.2. Monumental Symmetrical Temples The second type of cultic structure in Canaan during the MB IIB/C is the 'monumental symmetrical temple' or 'Syrian Temple' (Mazar 1992: 164). This type of temple has been found in MB IIB/C contexts in Canaan at Shechem (Figures l.8a,b-Busink 1970; Wright 1968), Megiddo (Figure 1.9Dunayevsky & Kempinski 1973; G.R.H. Wright 1968; Epstein 1965), Razor (Figures I. I 0a,b-Yadin 1958, 1972), and Tel Kittan (Figures 1.1la,b-Eisenberg 1977); in Jordan at Tell el-Hayyat (Figure 1.12-Falconer & Magness-Gardiner 1984); and in Hyksos Egypt at Tell ed-Daba' (Figure 1.13Bietak 1979). Mazar (1992: 166-167) states that the monumental symmetrical temples have six common features: "1. several are constructed on raised ground high above their surrounding (Shechem, Megiddo and Razor, Area H); 2. their walls are thick (more than 2 m wide) and consist of stone foundations and brick superstructures; 3. the entrances are placed along a longitudinal central axis; 4. they contain no more than two architectural units, the main one (the cella) large and either a long-room or broadroom; 5. the holy-of-holies is usually a clearly defined element represented by a niche or a raised platform attached to the back wall, directly opposite the entrance; and 6. the facade of the temple is plain but it sometimes has two front towers which rise above the other parts of the building and give access to the roof or the upper parts of the building." B. Mazar ( 1968) suggested that the monumental symmetrical temples be called 'Tower or migdal Temples' based on his association of a Biblical reference in the story of Abimelech of the migdal baal barit or the 'tower of Baal-berith' at Shechem (Genesis 34: 2) and a multi-storied structure found there in LB and MB strata (B. Mazar 1968: 92-93). The monumental symmetrical temples have their antecedents in northern Mesopotamia. At Tell Chuera in northeastern Syria, the inhabitants built a temple during the third millennium B. C. that comprised a long room with an entrance which had two side rooms or antae (Moortgat 1962, 1965,

Cultic Milieu

1967). The Dagan Temple at Mari is also similar to MB IIB/ C Canaanite temples. The symmetrical Dagan Temple had an entrance with a porch and antae, a long-room cella, and an elevated platform along the back wall of the temple (Figure 1.15-Parrot 1938, 1939). The Dagan Temple at Mari was built during the twentieth or nineteenth century B. C. and continued to be used until the eighteenth century B.C. Furthermore, in northern Syria, MB IIA (2000-1800 B.C.) temples were excavated at Ebia (Tell Mardikh) which are prototypes of the 'Migdal' temples built in Canaan during the MB IIB/C (Figures 1.16a,b,c-Matthiae 1980). One of these temples at Ebia, in Area D, contains a long-room cella and a porch between the antae near the entrance, very similar to MB IIB/ C temples at Razor and Shechem (Figure 1.16c). A. Mazar (1992) also notes that two other smaller temples at Tel Mardikh, in Areas Bl and N, resemble Razor's temple in Area A. Like Razor's temple in Area A, these smaller temples at Ebia have a single long-room with an elevated platform next to the back wall of the structure (A. Mazar 1992: 167; Matthiae 1980). Razor's other temple in Area His different from the rest of the Canaanite temples in that it has a broad-room and not a long-room cella (Figure 1.10a). The earliest temples with broad-room cellas are found in the Early Bronze III period (2700-2300 B.C.) at Megiddo and in southern Syria at Mari (Dunayevsky & Kempinski 1973; Parrot 1956). With these early broad-room temples in mind, A. Mazar states that "The tradition of 'broad-room' temples is indigenous to Canaan and probably to central and southern Syria in contrast to the tradition of long-rooms predominant in northern Syria and northern Mesopotamia" (A. Mazar 1992: 168). Two temples with broad-room cella have been found at the Hyksos capital at Avaris (Tell ed-Dab'a) during the MB IIB/C (Figure 1.13Bietak 1979). These temples resemble Razor's temple in Area Hand have broad-room cellas, thick walls, and entrances with a porch and antae (Bietak 1979). Other broad-room temple sites that are contemporary with Razor's temple in Area H include the temple in Level VII at Alalakh (Figure 1.17Woolley 1955) and the Dagan and Baal temples at Ugarit (Figure 1.14-Schaeffer 1931, 1933, 1935). Megiddo

In the first MB IIB stratum (XI alb) at Megiddo, the temenos continued on as before. The palace, however, was rebuilt on a west-east axis unlike in Stratum XII, where it was oriented along a north-south line (Figure l.3c-Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 178). In Strata XI and XII (the latest MB IIA stratum), artifacts originated from the small rooms that surrounded the cultic chamber. From these side rooms, excavators retrieved chalices, bronze figurines of the fertility goddess, pottery animal figurines including one of a bull, a ceramic sherd with red anthropomorphic figures, a chalice top which had decorations of snakes and bulls, a Tell elYahudiyeh sherd, three complete storage jars, toggle pins, and miniature votive vessels (Epstein 1965: 213; Loud 1948: 145). The presence of the storage jars from these rooms "provided additional evidence of their use as store-rooms" (Epstein 1965: 213). The author also notes that bowls, lamps, piriform juglets, and cylindrical juglets were conspicuously

Jool D. Klonck

absent from the rooms in contrast to assemblages from domestic dwellings and tombs from this period at Megiddo.

comprised 2.35 m thick walls, a single long-cella with no pro-cella, plain entrance with no antae or towers, and pedestal along the back wall (Figure 1.1Ob). The structure was constructed of mud-brick walls that were covered with painted plaster and built on a stone foundation (Yadin 1972: 102103). Although the temple was built in the MB II, its artifacts corresponding to this period were cleared as Razor's inhabitants continued to use the temple in the LB I. These LB I artifacts comprised bowls of various shapes (e.g., shallow bowls (platters) and deeper bowls with handles), gold pendants, miniature bowls, a few jars and kraters, chalices, stands, two lamps with a single wick, zoomorphic figurines, and a female figurine. In the LB I temple, miniature bowls and an incense or cult stand, described by Yadin as a "conical clay phallus-like vessel with a hole at the top and a flat base," were found inside the temple near the platform (Yadin 1972: 103; Yadin 1958: pls. CLIX, 26-36; CCCIX, 7-11). Yadin (1972: 103) notes that "around the perimeter of the ruined temple ...were many heaps and pits containing sacrificial remains (bones and votive vessels)."

Temple 2048 of Megiddo was built in Stratum X and comprised a 16.5 x 21.5 m structure with 4 m thick walls, a long-room cella, pro-cella like entrance porch, entrance with antae, and a niche (Figure 1.9-Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973: 179). The temple continued to be used in the following LB phase and artifacts from both strata were found in mixed contexts. In Stratum X and IX (the earliest LB I stratum), archaeologists retrieved artifacts in or near Temple 2048. These artifacts include: " ...offering stands, chalices, a large number of bowls, lamps (one being of the seven-cupped variety), a serpentine votive axe-head, a bronze figure of a seated god, bronze and lead figurines of the fertility goddess, a bronze serpent, pins and toggle-pins, beads, water-worn smooth pebbles, a bronze bracelet, miniature votive vessels, ...and ... two dipper juglets" (Epstein 1965: 210-211; Loud 1948). Again, larger jugs, piriform juglets, and cylindrical juglets found in MB IIB tombs and domestic dwellings at Megiddo, are absent.

Shechem Hazor

At Shechem, a series of superimposed temples that were built in the MB IIB to the LB were excavated by Sellin and Welter in 1926 and by G.E. Wright in the 1960s (Figures l.8a,b-A. Mazar 1992: 164; G. E. Wright 1965: 80-102). The MB IIB/ C temples, in Strata Ia and lb, respectively, measured 21.2 x 26.3 m and comprised 5.1 m thick walls, a long-room cella with two rows of columns, an entrance flanked with antae, towers, and (in Stratum lb) stone bases which probably held stelae, and an entrance porch with a single column (G. E. Wright 1965: 87, 89-90). The floor of the temple was made ofbeaten lime and had two cisterns which measured 2.5 min diameter and 2 m deep. These cisterns probably once contained perishable materials such as organic liquids. Shechem's inhabitants built the temple of mud-brick on a stone foundation which in tum overlaid a fill constructed of gray occupation debris and reddish field clay (G. E. Wright 1965: 88). In front of the temple's entrance, Shechem's MB II inhabitants built a 4.2 x 4.2 m mud-brick altar (G. E. Wright 1965: 93).

As mentioned previously, archaeologists excavated two temples at Razor that were built during the MB IIB/C. From Stratum 3, the temple in Area H was built during the MB IIC (Figure 1.10a). This temple measured 18 x 20 m and comprised a broad-room cella with two columns in the center of the room, 2.3 m thick walls, an entrance flanked by two rooms (probably the foundations of towers) and a niche along the back wall (Yadin 1972: 75-77). The temple was built on "specially prepared ground" that was constructed by cutting into an adjacent rampart and leveling the area with layers of dark and yellowish chalk (Yadin 1972: 78). A courtyard with a pebble floor extended out from the front of the temple for a distance of thirty meters (Yadin 1972: 78). Although Razor's MB IIC population cleared the temple in Stratum 3 of most artifacts before her LB I inhabitants built another temple directly over the previous one, archaeologists retrieved some artifacts from Stratum 3. Most of these artifacts were excavated in a narrow strip to the east of the temple (Ben-Tor (ed.) 1989: 220). Artifacts from Stratum 3 comprised shallow rounded bowls (similar to the 'platters' reported in Jericho's tombs), carinated bowls of various sizes, kraters, cooking pots, jugs, storage jars, lamps with a single wick, a baking tray, stands, a bowl with snake decoration, miniature bowls, a fragment of a figurine, a bronze knife, a fragment of bone inlay, a stone game board, and a bronze crescent shaped pendant (Yadin 1958: pis. CCLIX-CCLXXXV; Ben-Tor (ed.) 1989: 219-223). In the succeeding stratum (2), the architecture of Razor's LB I temple and her artifacts show continuity with the past. Archaeologists excavated a larger assemblage of artifacts in Stratum 2 than in Stratum 3. These include most of the aforementioned artifacts plus dipper juglets, incense (cult) stands, beads, bronze arrowheads, goblets, mortars and pestles of basalt, and an inscribed clay model of a liver (Yadin 1958: CCLXI-CCLXXXV).

Tell el-Dab'a

As mentioned previously, archaeologists have excavated eight strata of Canaanite settlements along with several alleged temples at Tell el-Dab'a which is thought to represent the Hyksos capital Avaris on the Egyptian delta (Bietak 1979). The first stratum where alleged temple structures can be securely attributed to is in Stratum E3. Here, archaeologists uncovered several large temples including a well preserved mud-brick structure (Temple III) which measured 33.75 x 21.5 m and had four to five meter thick walls and a broadroom cella and pro-cella similar to the Razor's temple in Area H (Figure 1.13-Bietak 1979: 247-248). The temple was covered by a coat of white washed mud and, as evidenced by paint fragments, could have been painted blue. There were three entrances to the broad entrance hall of the temple and to the right of the front of the temple a small square building was built which Bietak suggests was a guard house. A similar

In Area A at Razor, another temple was constructed during the MB II-LB I. This structure measured 11.6 x 16.2 m and

20

Tho

structure was excavated on the left side ofHazor's MB temple in Area H. Fifteen meters in front of the main temple was placed a 3 x 2 m mud-brick altar which was filled with ashes and charred bones. Around the altar were deep pits which contained charred bones of cattle and sheep (but no pig), MB IIB drinking cups, drinking vases, bowls and plates of Nile clay, and Canaanite dipper juglets (Bietak 1979: 248-251).

Cultic Milieu

and a 2.75 m wide stone platform which the authors call an altar (Woolley 1955: 61-63). The altar contained many artifacts including a basalt pedestal lamp, a clay pot-stand, fragments of heads of male statues, a basalt bull's head, cuneiform tablets, a cylinder seal, an ivory comb, fragments of bone and ivory inlay, gold foil, beads of carnelian, chalcedony and glass, a fish amulet, an alabaster vase, paste rings and scaraboids, two shell whorls, an ivory egg, and some small potsherds (Woolley 1955: 64-65). Most of the smaller objects probably came from wooden boxes which were hidden in the hollow benches inside the cella. Although Woolley notes that the floor of the shrine was covered with burnt brick and wood ash he does not mention the presence of bone material in Alalakh's temple. Whoever destroyed the temple in Level VII tore open the concrete and brick benches and the wooden boxes, with the ivory and bone inlay, to take the temple treasures (Woolley 1955: 64).

Kittan

Two temples were found at Kittan which were dated to the MB IIB on the basis of pottery sherds (Eisenberg 1977). The earliest temple in Stratum V measured 5.5 x 6.9 m and comprised a single long-room cella with benches surrounding the room but without a pro-cella or niche (Figure 1.11a). There were a pair of antae and pillars on either side of the entrance. Five meters in front of the entrance stood a row of stelae. Between the stelae were three small square pits that probably contained perishable material and a stelae probably representing Astarte, the goddess of fertility. The stelae was naked, her face and hair were visible, and the figure held her breasts in her hands. The excavators found no offering vessels in the temple (Eisenberg 1977: 78).

1.7. FLORAL AND FAUNAL REMAINS In Canaan, faunal remains have been excavated primarily from three contexts: middens, burials, and temple complexes. These remains are described here. Faunal material from middens comprise the bone remains from floors, refuse pits, and fill layers which were associated with domestic structures. Animal bone remains from burials are discussed separately since they elucidate aspects of Canaanite ritual behavior.

In Stratum IV at Kittan, the temple measured 11.5 x 14.3 m and was built of unfired mud-bricks on a stone foundation (Figure l.llb). The structure was superimposed over the temple in Stratum V and comprised a single long-room cella and an entrance which lacked antae or pillars. A curved bench was excavated in front of the entrance. Beside the bench the author states "ash piles were found containing bones of animals, obviously sacrificial" (Eisenberg 1977: 79). Also, to the right of the entrance, archaeologists found a flat slab and two rounded bases ofbasalt which Eisenberg states, "were probably used as pedestals for stelae and the slab as an offering table" (Eisenberg 1977: 79). Adjacent to these artifacts were four anthropomorphic figurines. To the south of the temple, archaeologist uncovered part of a structure (for storage?) which probably served as the boundary for the sacred precinct (Eisenberg 1977: 79-80). This in tum suggests that the sacred precinct in Stratum IV at Kittan also included a courtyard of unknown dimensions.

1.7.1 Faunal Remains from MB IIA Middens

There is a paucity of data with regard to the diet of Canaan's inhabitants during the MB IIA. First, no data are available on the vegetal remains from MB IIA sites. Second, archaeozoologists have analyzed only the faunal remains from a single MB IIA settlement, Tel Aphek. The faunal assemblage from Tel Aphek comprised mostly caprovine, cattle, pig, and deer bones. Hellwing (1984) suggests that Aphek's inhabitants relied heavily on sheep and goat for meat and milk products, used cattle as beasts of burden, and supplemented their diets with pig and deer meat (Hellwing & Gophna 1984).

Alalakh

Compared to faunal and floral evidence, philological information about the Levantine diet during the MB Ila is comparatively rich. The story of Sinuhe, written during the reign of Sesostris I (1971-1928 B.C.) notes that in Upper Retenu (southern Syria) the agricultural and horticultural produce included barley and spelt fields, vineyards, olive groves, fruit orchards, fig trees, and honey. Meat produce included cattle, sheep, goat, unspecified poultry, as well as game animals (Posener 1985: 552-553). Although Canaanite diet and animal husbandry practices are discussed with much detail in the third and fourth chapters of this thesis, it should be noted that all major domesticates: cattle, sheep, goat, dog, donkey, and horse; were present in the Near East by the MB Ila. Some species, such as the horse (Equus caballus ), however, were not popular in Canaan during this period. Furthermore, both archaeological and philological evidence suggests that in the millennium preceding the MB Ila,

The temple in Level VII at Alalakh, located along the Mediterranean Coast in Syria, was built during the MB IIC and is similar to temples found in Area Hat Hazor and Temple Vat Tell ed-Dab'a (Figure 1.17-Woolley 1955: 59-65). The temple in Level VII was built using the mud-brick remains of the temple in Level VIII that was destroyed by fire. Alalakh's inhabitants poured concrete in the empty rooms of the previous temple to create a more secure foundation for the temple in Level VII (Woolley 1955: 59). The temple in Level VII measured c. 19.5 x 19.8 m with 4 m thick walls, a broadroom cella, and pro-cella (Woolley 1955: Fig 35). In front of the temple, was a courtyard which measured ca. 16 x 13 m. To the east of the temple, Alalakh's inhabitants built what the excavators described as a palace (Woolley 1955: 60). The temple contained stairs to a second story, a cement floor, benches along the northwest and southeast walls of the cella, 2i

Jool D. Klonck

inhabitants of Canaan and Mesopotamia began experimenting with their domesticates. Cattle, goats, equids, and canids were bred with their wild counterparts to produce different breeds with hybrid vigor (Clutton-Brock 1989; Davis 1976; Green 1980; Steinkeller 1989).

1.7.2. Fauna from MB IIA Burials

Animal bones have been reported in several MB IIA human burial deposits. Although the evidence is meager, certain trends appear in the MB IIA burials which continue in the MB II B & C (1800-1550 B.C.). Tufnell reports that animal bones were often found in the dishes and bowls from the burials at Tell el-' Ajjul (Tufnell 1962: 4, 8). Furthermore, Stewart notes that to the east of Tomb 1417, archaeologists found the complete skeleton ofa donkey (Stewart 1974: 9-10). In Bate's analysis of the animal bones from Megiddo's tombs she notes that in the MB IIA tomb, 1100, Equus remains were found either representing "one of the E. hemionus group or a true ass [E. asinus ]" (Bate 1938: 210). The author also notes that fragmented sheep and goat bones were found in MB IIA Tombs 911,912,989, and 1100 (Bate 1938: 210). Horwitz analyzed the animal bones from two tombs at Sasa (Horwitz 1987). One tomb dated to the MB IIA/B (20001650 B.C.) and the other had pottery from the MB IIA-C (2000-1550 B.C.) but contained mostly pottery from the MB IIC (1650-1550 B.C.). In both tombs animal remains were associated with human burials. Sixty-two bones were retrieved: 49 from caprovines ( Ovis/Capra), 7 from domestic pig (Sus scrofa), 5 from domestic cattle (Bos taurus), and 1 from a catfish (Clarias lazera). Of the caprovine bones with epiphyseal ends, 35% were not fused and thus originated from animals less than three years of age. All cranial and post-cranial remains were represented and archaeologists retrieved an unspecified number of articulated bones which suggests that whole joints were placed in the tomb (Horwitz 1987: 253-254). Horwitz (1987) suggests that the relatively large number of mature epiphyseal ends indicates that the inhabitants around Sasa raised sheep and goat for fibre, wool production, and milk. Alternatively, the higher numbers of mature caprovines at Sasa may reflect burial offering customs that may have nothing to do with Sasa's subsistence economy. Since there are few published reports on animal bones from MB II burials, all suggestions are tenuous. Relatively complete caprovine skeletons in a MB IIA cultic contexts is a trend that occurs again in MB II B & C tombs and temple complexes. Furthermore, the excavation of a complete donkey skeleton near Tomb 1417 at Tell el-' Ajjul and the recovery of hemione or donkey remains in an MB IIA tomb at Megiddo is repeated in MB IIB & C sites and indicates that the association of equid remains in or near cult areas began during the MB IIA. Both lines of evidence: complete caprovine skeletons and equid remains, figure prominently in the evaluation of Tel Haror's faunal remains.

1.7.3. Faunal Remains from MB IIB/C Middens

Very little is known of the diet of Canaan's inhabitants during the MB IIB/C. Few reports have been published to date on the floral remains from Canaanite cities during this period. At Tell el-Hayyat, Metzger reports that samples of emmer wheat ( Triticum dicoccum ), two-row hulled barley (Hordeum distichum), and olive (Olea sp.) were found in MB contexts (Metzger 1984: 69-70). Faunal remains have been analyzed from Tel Jemmeh (Wapnish & Hesse 1988), Tel Ifshar or 'Hefer' (Henson 1988), Shiloh (Hellwing & Sadeh 1985), Tel Michal (Hellwing & Feig 1989), and Tel el-Hayyat (Falconer & Magness-Gardiner 1984). These authors suggest that the inhabitants of these cities relied heavily on caprovine meat and milk products. At Tell El-Hayyat, Metzger reports that of2337 identifiable remains, 96% comprised domestic animals. Of those, 41.5% comprised caprovine bones, 32.3%-pig bones, and 26.2%the remains of cattle (Metzger 1984: 69). Sheep dominated goat bones in MB assemblages and preliminary results indicate that 45% of caprovines were killed before their second year and 14% were killed before their fourth year. Metzger also reports that 65% of the pigs were killed before their first year while the remainder were killed before 18 months (Metzger 1984: 69). The author states that the caprovine survivorship curve suggests that Tell el-Hayyat's inhabitants raised sheep and goat for their secondary productsfibre and dairy products (Metzger 1984: 69). She suggests further that the increase in sheep over goat remains in MB contexts might indicate that mutton and wool was prized more highly than goat hair and meat and that Tell el-Hayyat's inhabitants perhaps encouraged the production of these goods for trade (Metzger 1984: 69). Cattle were used as beasts of burden and for their milk products. At Tel Ifshar, Tel Michal, and Tel el-Hayyat, excavators retrieved butchered Bos remains, indicating that the inhabitants of these cities supplemented their diet with beef. Pig bones comprised ca. 25% of the assemblage from Tel-Ifshar indicating that Sus was a major component of the diet at this locale. Other animals, including deer and gazelle, were rarely identified and probably had little impact on the subsistence economies of Canaanite populations.

1.7.4. Fauna from MB IIB/C Burials and Temples

The faunal remains from Jericho's MB IIB/C tombs comprised mostly joints of mutton (Kenyon 1960: 266). What follows is a description of the animal bones from Jericho listed tomb by tomb: Tomb J3: "Of considerable interest, also, is the fact that in the fill of the tomb shaft were portions of two equids, a skull and forelegs at a depth of 1.50 m, and two skulls at 3 m. Such a deposit is again unique ...The remains of a wooden object on the right hand side of the tomb may represent a table, on which probably rested the food represented by the sheep's bones found in the same area.

Tho

Other sheep's bones were in two groups towards the rear of the tomb" (Kenyon 1960: 308).

Cultic Milieu

Besides what was on the table, further joints lay beside it, and on the opposite side of the tomb, bowl 24 contained a sheep's head and other joints of mutton (pl. XXV.3) ...With the exception ofbody E, ...all the bones are in a complete jumble and are mixed with animal bones and other objects" (Kenyon 1960: 455).

Based on Hilzheimer 's ( 1941) picture of an onager metacarpal from Tell Asmar showing "that the joint ends [of the metacarpal] are hardly thickened at all laterally in relation to the middle of the diaphysis", Ellis (1960) states that an equid metacarpal from Tomb J3 most resembles Equus onager hemippus. The measurements for the metacarpal from Tomb J3 are as follows: length= 183 mm; medial width= 26 mm; and length/width index = 14.2 mm (Ellis 1960: 535). In addition, Ellis notes that several equid cheek teeth were found in the tomb; some of them "not yet in full wear" (Ellis 1960: 536). Ellis states that the numbers of cheek teeth indicated the presence of at least two individuals and according to their size "appear more to resemble a half-ass or ass than [a] true horse" (Ellis 1960: 536).

In Plate XXV.3, the sheep bones are again placed in a shallow bowl. In the bowl are at least five lumbar vertebrae, a thoracic vertebra, the complete cranium of a ewe with mandibles, right caprovine (sheep or goat, I cannot distinguish with certainty from the picture) radius, right sheep humerus, a sheep metapodial, caprovine patella, probably carpals and two more thoracic vertebrae, and remains I could not identify. All epiphyseal ends of the long bones appear to be fused except the proximal humerus which is unfused. Following Silver (1969) the right sheep humerus probably comes from an animal less than 42 months of age. If the remains in the bow 1 are all from the same animal, the skeleton remains originated from a female sheep between 3 and 3 1/2 years of age.

Tomb G46: "Below these burials was an almost solid mass of bones in dark powdery earth, together with many fragments of roasted flesh ...On the right hand side were the remains of probably a complete roasted sheep, with the bones showing traces of charring, and the roasted flesh still adhering to some. Another pile of animal bones, including a sheep's head, lay under basket 18, over which were traces ofa rush mat...The comb 32 and the wooden toilet box 33 lay beneath the remains of the sheep on the right hand side, and scarabs 34 and 35 were mixed up with the animal bones beneath burial C." [It should be noted all these bones might come from the preceding EB IV/MB I period or the phase that the tomb was excavatedKenyon 1960: 332]

Tomb H18: "The jointed remains of three sheep were provided, mainly in a pile between the table 2 and the wall of the tomb, where the three sheep heads were piled" (Kenyon 1960: 488). Tomb H22: "The provision of meat was placed at the rear of the tomb. Against the wall were remains ofa least four sheep or goats, jointed, but with large parts of the body in articulation. Some bones showed signs ofburning, so the joints had been roasted before being placed in the tombs. Large fragments of flesh were still adhering to the bones and lying amongst them. One of the skulls had been split down the centre, and the two halves were found separated. To the right of the pile of animals was a bowl, 28 (fig. 218.2, A.3.b) which also contained some joints" (Kenyon 1960: 502).

Tomb A34: "Stratum 3 was distinctive in that it was contained in a reddish-brown powdery fill, which included also a great quantity of sheeps' bones; the reddish material was probably derived from decayed flesh" (Kenyon 1960: 352).

Tomb B48: Adjacent to a skeleton, archaeologists found the bones ofa young sheep (Kenyon 1965: 208).

Tomb Gl: " ...flesh from the provision of food was also preserved. The most striking instance was a bowl, I, just inside the entrance containing a large slab of meat (pl. XXIIl.3). Another slab of boneless meat lay beneath the jar 9. Against the wall at this point was the complete skeleton of a young sheep, to the body of which a considerable amount of flesh still adhered" (pl. XXIV.3 and 4-Kenyon 1960: 443).

Tomb Mll: "The furniture ... included tables and stools ...also ...a great number of animal bones, many of them with flesh adhering. Since no flesh survived on the human bones, this is probably an indication that the food had been roasted" (Kenyon 1965: 229). Tomb J19: "Numerous animal joints were found in this tomb" (Kenyon 1965: 373). Tomb G73: " ...to the right of the chamber was table 29 ..., intact with a load of food, a jointed sheep (a young animal) with flesh still present "(Kenyon 1965: 447).

The large slab of meat in Kenyon's pl. XXIII.3 was placed in a shallow bowl. Plate XXIV.3 shows a mass of flesh surrounding an unfused, left caprovine scapula; no doubt the remains of a shoulder cut. Finally, the male sheep cranium shown in Plate XXIV.4 is complete. The posterior cusp of the dp4 on the left mandible, which is clearly visible, is either unworn or barely worn and the Ml has not perforated the mandible (Kenyon 1960: 566). According to Payne's mandible recording scheme, the sheep mandible from Tomb G, belongs to stage A, with a suggested age ofno more than two months old (Payne 1973: 293).

Ellis and Westley (1965: 694) provided a summary of the animal bones from the MB IIB/C tombs excavated in 19521954 and 1955-1958. From the tombs, the minimum number of individuals (MNI) was calculated in the following manner: " ...thus in Tomb B51 there are 16 right and 16 left humerus of small ruminants, among which are six possible "pairs," leaving a total of 26 possible individuals" (Ellis and Westley 1965: 694). For a summary the authors add the MNI of each species from each tomb and then calculate the total MNI for each species. MNI counts for the following species are below:

Tomb H6: "The tomb was notably well-equipped with furniture ...On ...[a] table had been placed a jointed sheep, including the head ...The provision of food was lavish.

23

Jool D. Klonck

Small ruminants (sheep/goat or deer? or gazelle?) Equid Large ruminant (cattle?)

129

economically oriented prime movers such as population pressure (Young 1972), irrigation management (Steward 1949; Wittfogel 1957), the procurement, storage, and exchange of raw materials (Rathje 1975), administrative organization (Flannery 1972; Johnson 1978), and resource competition (Carneiro 1970). As the development of societies were seen in economic terms, religious rituals and institutions were either ignored or 'deconstructed' to their materialist core and viewed as functional responses to ecological change (Harris 1977, 1979).

15 1

Pig

1

B~

2

Hare Fruit Bat The authors distinguished between sheep and goats by their horncores which yielded a 39 : 1 sheep to goat ratio. Also, Ellis and Westley stated that a high proportion of the ruminant bones were from immature individuals whose bones had not completely fused (Ellis and Westley 1965: 694). More specific information is not given which means that a high proportion of the ruminant bones are from animals 42 months of age or younger.

In the Near East, R. McC. Adams (1966) and C. L. Redman ( 1978) regarded Mesopotamian temples as primarily economic establishments where tax collection occurred and where priests rationed out meat products and other food stuffs. Mesopotamian religion supported the social status of and encouraged the maintenance ofreligious institutions.

Although animal bones from the temple complex surrounding Temple 2048 at Megiddo have not been analyzed, Gordon Loud wrote in his field diary on February 18, 1936, that there were "Quantities of pottery and animal bones helter-skelter in the section immediately to the west of the temple and within the temenos enclosure ...the pottery appears to be late MB, IX or X" (G. Loud's Megiddo Field Diary-transcribed by Epstein 1965: 209).

Neo-evolutionism and its materialistic explanations of societal development encountered problems when scholars began refuting the assumptions on which these models were based. G. L. Cowgill (1975) showed that population growth did not automatically occur nor was it a prerequisite for economic intensification. Furthermore, Adams (1965, 1966) stated that early Mesopotamian states emerged before major irrigation works were built and that the evolution of these states was based on the complex feedback relationships of many related variables.

1.8. THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF CULT

C. Renfrew (1972) clarified this feedback by defining a 'multiplier effect' where alterations in one human behavior (e.g., food production) affect changes in other spheres of human activity (e.g., population growth, warfare, societal stratification) which in tum generate still more changes in the original behavior. From the dynamic feedback model came a systems approach where human activities were grouped into 'boxes' which archaeologists could use to visualize how cultural activities were related, maintained, and why they changed (Flannery 1968, Rathje 1971). The positive aspect about the systems theory approach is that it encouraged the incorporation of religion and ideology into discussions of why cultures change. K. V. Flannery (1972: 400) remarked,

It is difficult for Near Eastern archaeologists to determine whether or not an archaeological feature represents a shrine or a temple. Even more problematic is reconstructing religious rituals and ideologies from archaeological contexts. Present views on the archaeology of cult emerge from several schools of thought. In North America and Europe, archaeological method and theory attempted to incorporate evolutionary theory, with its focus on the adaptation of species to changing environments (Trigger 1989: 289-326). Meanwhile, Near Eastern archaeologists such W. F. Albright and W. F. Petrie were focusing less on anthropological thought and more on philological studies as they tried to reconstruct the past. From these archaeologists came the 'historicalgeographical' school which emphasized correlations between ancient documents and archaeological phenomena.

" ... ecologists must cease to regard art, religion, and ideology as mere 'epiphenomena' without causal significance. In an ecosystem approach to the analysis of human societies, everything which transmits information is within the province of ecology."

After World War II, 'neo-evolutionists' rejected nineteenth century evolutionists such as Morgan (1878) who believed all cultures would independently evolve in a unilineal manner. Neo-evolutionists such as L. A. White (1959) and J. H. Steward (1955) postulated that societies evolve in a general or multi-linear manner as described by ecological, demographic, and technological variables. Although neoevolutionists elucidated the dynamic relationships between cultures and their environments, the pertinence of religion was marginalized as scholars focused on ecological and economic prime movers to explain societal evolution. Explanatory models of cultural change were based on

Although systems theory included religion and ideology into discussions of societal change, it was problematic to archeological research because certain spheres of human activity such as religion and belief may not be evident in the archaeological record. Therefore, the lack of knowledge in a particular sphere generates a 'black box,' the relation of which to other spheres remains unknown. In the 1950s and 1960s, American archaeologists incorporated neo-evolutionary ideas such as dynamic feedback and the importance of ecological variables and promoted a new school ofthought-"The New Archaeology" or "Cultural-Processual." 24

Tho

According to L. Binford (1962), archaeological research prior to the New Archaeology was 'normative' and focused too much on functional descriptions of material cultures from successive societies rather than on the identification of processes responsible for cultural change (see also Willey & Phillips 1958: 5). Furthermore, New Archaeology emphasized the use of the "scientific method" wherein, various hypotheses would be tested against archaeological data bolstered by improved sampling techniques and statistical analyses (Binford 1964, 1965).

Cultic Milieu

assumption that there are or can be correct interpretations of archaeological phenomena. Nevertheless, the hermeneutic approach espoused by postprocessualism and its tenet, that archaeological features act as metaphors which archaeologists can perceive, provides a framework which enables archaeological research to incorporate the study ofreligion (Barret 1991: 4). While most North American and European archaeologists had to excavate the remains of cultures without written texts, the opposite was true of Near Eastern archaeologists who often had access to copious amounts of ancient literature originating from cultures they studied or from temporally or culturally related civilizations. Because written records were available, archaeologists often used these manuscripts to explain archaeological phenomenon. For example, B. Mazar (1968) noted a correlation between the large Middle Bronze temple at Shechem and a Biblical reference in Genesis 34: 2 which mentions the "Migdal ofBaal-berith." From this correlation he defined the structure at Shechem as a 'Migdal' or 'Tower' Temple (B. Mazar 1968: 92-93).

The New Archaeology was positive in that it promoted critical discussions of archaeological method and theory, encouraged scientific rigor, and facilitated the use of explanatory models in archaeological research. A major limitation of the New Archaeology is that it assumed a one to one correlation between human activities and the archaeological record, and presupposed that a final explanation of an archaeological phenomenon could be generated by applying "scientific method." The reality was that human activities generate a range of archaeological signatures that may or may not be visible to the archaeological researcher despite improved sampling techniques and statistical analyses. Since traces of economic activities such as faunal, floral, lithic, and ceramic remains are much more visible in the archaeological record than are religious or political ideas, 'New Archaeology' studies of processual changes in archaeological cultures focused on external and local agents, usually ecological adaptation and demographic pressure (e.g., Hill 1977; Longacre 1970).

The major criticism of the historical-geographical school is that much of its reasoning was tautological. A textual reference identified an archaeological feature which in turn clarified the reference. Although it is true that some 'scholars' such as W. Keller (1956) frequently employed tautological arguments to "prove the Bible," it is unfair to characterize the entire historical-geographical school as merely tautological. Even though many studies from this school utilized textual references, they also fortified their arguments with non-philological analogies and comparative studies -methods used by anthropological archaeologists (Taylor 1948: 95).

Influenced by Marxist theory, I. M. Diakonoff(1969) argued that internal structural dynamics, or power relations between social groups, encouraged the growth of archaic states. Furthermore, Marxist theory incorporated religion and ideology into its theoretical framework-religion was part of the superstructure in a society which legitimates authority. However, Marxist theory was dogmatic in its assumptions that economic factors foster social competition and that ideology acts as a facade to obscure the exploitation of the masses by elites.

For example, C. Epstein (1965: 210) reasoned that at Megiddo, in Strata IX and X, the area surrounding the alleged temple was filled with artifacts" ... known to have been used in the practice of a cult or to have been brought to shrines and temples either as actual offerings or as containers for offerings (e.g., offering stands, chalices, figurines, miniature votive bowls, etc.)." According to Epstein (1965: 210-212), the "cultic and votive" character of this assemblage is "striking" and quite unlike the archaeological assemblages from Megiddo's tombs and occupation levels which feature larger jugs and piriform and cylindrical juglets. Therefore, she suggests that "In light of the above assemblage ..." a temple existed in Strata IX and X at Megiddo which concurs with architectural evidence (Epstein 1965: 212).

More productive was the work of 'Post-Processual' archaeologists such as I. Hodder. Post-Processualists postulated that no final 'scientific' explanation in archaeology was possible. Instead, archaeology was viewed not as scientific but hermeneutic in that explanations emerged from the dynamic feedback between the interpreter (archaeologist) and the interpreted (archaeological feature or artifact-Hodder 1991 ). Furthermore, post-processualists warned archaeologists to identify themselves as interpreters who were subjected to personal views which may cloud or foster incorrect interpretations. Hence, the subjective renderings by archaeologists could differ from the 'reality' communicated by the culture that deposited the feature or artifact (Shanks & Tilley 1988). A problem with post-processualism is found in its emphasis on the subjectivity of the interpreter. The notion that every interpreter and therefore every interpretation is clouded by cultural and theoretical biases encourages a nihilist attitude. To reiterate, the notion that all interpretations are biased or subjective undercuts the

This type of reasoning is commonplace in historicalgeographical articles where a temple is identified by l) intrasite comparisons between an alleged temenos, with its artifacts, and other presumably non-cultic loci and their artifacts; 2) inter-site comparisons between a hypothetical temple, with its objects and other 'identified' cultic structures and their paraphernalia; and 3) analogies between a perceived cultic structure and/or artifacts and descriptions ofreligious articles and features from ancient documents (e.g., A. Mazar 1992; Biran 1981; Eisenberg 1977: 80; Falconer & Magness-

25

Jool D. Klonck

Gardiner 1989: 343; and from the Israelite era-Holladay 1987).

(Tambiah 1985; Rappaport 1971: 25). The potential of this anthropological view of ritual for the discipline of archaeology was noted by Renfrew (1985). Because rituals are repetitive, formal, and patterned, the remains from religious rituals might also exhibit patterns-patterns that could then be recorded and interpreted by archaeologists (Renfrew 1985: 15).

With the third line of reasoning, historical-geographical articles often assume that the reader has knowledge of ancient religious texts and the artifacts "known to have been used in the practice of a cult..." (Epstein 1965: 210). Although no texts exist that detail religious paraphernalia from MB II temples in Canaan, ancient descriptions of tools and vessels from earlier Mesopotamian temples (Postgate 1992: 109-128) and later Israelite cult sites (Ottosson 1988) are abundant. Furthermore, these descriptions are mostly congruent: common in temples from both areas were altars, temple courtyards, the remains of sacrificed animals and of liquid and grain offerings, precious metals, jewelry, fine robes, burned incense, lamps, cult stands, tables, figurines, and statues of deities (the latter two excluded in later Israelite contexts-Holladay 1987). In some instances, Mesopotamian temples have the names of the god inscribed on the structure itself. For example, Postgate (1992: 266) remarks that the Old Babylonian temple at Tell Asmar had an inscription on the door socket of the edifice stating that the temple was dedicated to the divine Su-Sin and that the architectural features of the building resembled the shrines of other gods.

Based on anthropological studies, Renfrew (1985: 19-20) proposed characteristics that would help archaeologists systematize the identification of cultic loci rather than rely on the more ad hoc analogies in most historical-geographical discussions of Near Eastern temples. These correlates, from Renfrew (1985: 19-20) are listed below: !."Ritual may take place in a spot with special, natural associations: e.g., a cave, a grove of trees, a spring, a mountain top ... [or a] special building ..." 2. "Alternatively [ritual activity] may take place in a special building set apart" from other non-sacred areas. 3. "The structure and equipment used may employ a number of attention-focussing devices" which exhibit a finer quality compared to non-sacred artifacts. 4. "Concepts of cleanliness and pollution [i.e., ritual purification] may be reflected in the facilities and maintenance of the sacred area."

The last line of reasoning that the historical-geographical studies employ is based on the deep stratigraphy common to many Near Eastern tels and generally lacking at EuroAmerican sites. Here, alleged cult places are detennined by 'securely' identified temples built over or beneath them. For example, the MB IIA cult areas at Megiddo were built over EB Megaron Temples and were in turn superimposed by temples built in the MB and Late Bronze Age or LB (Dunayevsky and Kempinski 1973; A. Mazar 1992: 170).

5. The sacred structure "may involve both conspicuous public display, and hidden exclusive mysteries, whose practice will be reflected in the architecture"-e.g., a gate or passageway between sacred and non-sacred areas. 6. "The chosen place will have special facilities for the practice of ritual, e.g. altars, benches, pools or basins of water, hearths, pits for libations." 7. "The ritual may employ various devices for inducing religious experience, such as dance, music and drugs" ...and food, fire, water, symbols, and objects (both living and inanimate).

Prior anthropological studies viewed religious ritual as a tool by which social structure was supported and maintained (Spiro 1952; Kluckhohn 1942; Malinowski 1925). Current anthropological studies view religious ritual as a 'drama' symbolic communication which comprises words and deeds that is performed for the benefit of the community (Turner 1974; Thompson 1984). A complete definition of ritual is provided by S. Tambiah (Tambiah 1985: 128):

8. "The sacred area is likely to be rich in repeated symbols (redundancy)." 9. "The symbols used will often relate iconographically to the deities worshipped and to their associated myth. In particular specific animal symbolism ( of real or mythical animals) may be employed, particular animals relating to specific deities or powers."

Ritual is a culturally constructed system of symbolic communication. It is constituted of patterned and ordered sequences of words and acts, often expressed in multiple media, whose content and arrangement are characterized in varying degree by formality ( conventionality), stereotypy (rigidity), condensation (fusion), and redundancy (repetition). Ritual action in its constitutive features is performative in these three senses: (1) saying something is also doing something as a conventional act; (2) in the quite different sense of a staged performance that uses multiple media by which the participants experience the event intensively; and (3) in the sense of indexical values being attached to and inferred during the performance.

10. "The association with the omnipresent power(s) may be reflected in the use of a cult image or that power, or its aniconic representation." 11. "Worship will involve prayer and special movementsgestures of adoration-and these may be reflected in the iconography of decorations or images." 12. "The sacrifice of humans or animals may be practiced. Food and drink [and other material objects] may be brought, and possibly consumed as offerings, or burnt/ poured away. The act of offering may entail breakage." Hence, the materials associated with sacrificial rituals and offerings might include I) human, animal, or vegital remains; 2) knives, hearths, or other artifacts to prepare the sacred meals; 3) and "special receptacles" such as cups and bowls to contain the offerings.

For contemporary anthropologists, rituals are considered predictable, communicative displays that show patterning 26

Tho

13. "Special portable equipment may be employed in the cult practice, e.g. special receptacles lamps, etc."

Cultic Milieu

To test whether or not an MB temenos exists in Area Kat Tel Haror, structures and artifacts from this area will be compared with the correlates from Renfrew (1985), which are based on anthropological studies, and criteria provided by A. Mazar (1992-Section 1.6.3), based on his comparative study (Section 2.4.). The following chapter also features descriptions of the Middle Bronze Age donkey burial (Structure 8624) and well.

14. A greater "investment of wealth" may be reflected in the structure(s), facilities, equipment, and material assemblages that comprise cult sites compared to nonsacred areas.

27

Jool D. Klonck

Chapter 2 AREA KAND THE WELL AT TEL HAROR 20-30 C and, during the winters, drop between 5-15 C (Goring-Morris 1987: 32). Rainfall is concentrated between November and April and when rainfall does occur it tends to be torrential and localized (Goldberg 1986: 226). Mean rainfall in the Beer Sheva Region is approximately 250 mm but varies seasonally and annually (Evenari et al., 1971; Goring-Morris 1987: 33). Farming is possible today because Israelis use well water or water piped in from sources in northern Israel. Winds in the Negev are usually westerlies and blow to the east in the morning and at night. In the afternoon winds generally orient to the northwest (GoringMorris 1987: 34). Tel Haror is located on the northern edge of the Nahal Gerar which is part of the main Gerar-Beer ShevaBesor wadi system in the north of the Beer Sheva Region (Goring-Morris 1987: 32). The Nahal Gerar extends to the Mediterranean and at Tel Haror contains water all year long.

2.1. ENVIRONMENT Tel Haror is set on the northern bank of the Nahal Gerar. The tel is located about 20 km northwest of Beer Sheva, on the road to Gaza, between the ancient sites of Tel Jemmeh and Tel Sera (Figure 2.1 ). The mound comprises a lower, more ancient tel, which extends to the gorge of the Nahal Gerar, and an upper tel, located at the northern edge of the mound, which was erected during the Iron Age (Figure 2.2). The entire tel covers approximately 40 acres and the estimated size of the Middle Bronze Age settlement is around 150 dunams or 38 acres. The upper tel is 130 meters above sea level and 10 meters above the lower tel.

2.1.1. Climate and Flora

In terms of flora, Tel Haror is located on the border between two phytogeographical regions: 1) the Mediterranean, with forest and shrub vegetation; and 2) the Irano-Turanian which contains herbaceous and dwarf shrub communities with ahnost no arboreal climax (Zohary 1962: 51). Darrin (1983) divided the Negev and Sinai into 19 vegetation districts (Figure 2.3from Goring-Morris 1987: 39). Tel Haror is within the boundaries of 'District 6' which features dwarf shrubs includingArtemisia herba alba andAnabasis articulata; and arboreal species such as Juniperus phoenicia, Pistacia atlantica, and Amygdalus. Prevalent in the wadis are tall grasses and trees such as Tamarix andAcacia (Goring-Morris 1987: 38; Darrin 1983).

Tel Haror is located in the Beer Sheva Region at the apex of the Northern Negev (Goring-Morris 1987: 30; Evenari et al. 1971). The Beer Sheva Region is a triangular basin located between the Judean and Central Negev Hills. From the Mediterranean Coast, the land rises from between 50 and 100 meters in the west to 500 meters above sea level in the east. The Beer Sheva Region is filled with aeolian/fluvial loess as much as 30 meters thick (Goring-Morris 1987: 30). Associated with the loess are a series of Pleistocene eolianite (kurkar) ridges that run parallel to the coast. These ridges most likely represent the position of Pleistocene sea levels (Goldberg 1986: 225; Horowitz 1979). Furthermore, Tel Haror's soil zone features loess and regs (hammadas), which comprise aeolian silts and clays. Loess and regs "are characterized by a surface mineral and biological crust sealing the soil, resulting in restricted infiltration and a high rate of runoff' (Goring-Morris 1987: 34).

2.1.2. Fauna

In the past four decades, water pipelines from Northern Israel have facilitated the expansion of farmland in the Northern Negev. Taxa which are widespread in Israel and the Negev despite the increase of arable land include Lepus capensis syriacus (Cape Hare), Canis aureus (Asiatic Jackal), Canis

The Negev is located at the northern edge of the subtropical belt of deserts with an arid climate, cold winters, and hot summers. Mean temperatures during the hot summers reach

28

Tho

lupus (Wolf), Vulpesvulpes (Fox), Gazella gaze/la (Mountain Gazelle-Harrison & Bates 1991: 213, 113, 115, 118, 194, 196). The range of Dorcas Gazelle ( Gazella dorcus) overlaps that of Gazella gaze/la and correlates with the abundance of Acacia trees which are found along wadis such as the Nahal Gerar (Harrison & Bates 1991: 202).

Cultic Milieu

termed Saltus Gerariticus, a designation for Rome's imperial domain in Southern Israel. The term for the region continued to be used during the Byzantine empire (B. Mazar 1975: 114; 1974: 123, 136). Eussebius's Onomasticon mentions that Gerar is located 25 miles south of Eleutheropolois (Beit Govrin) which makes the correlation between the city ofGerar and Tel Haror more plausible (Oren 1992: 989).

Among those species that have been decimated by recent human activity but still exist in a wildlife preserve in Israel include Capra ibex nubiana (Ibex) and Sus scrofa libycus (Wild Boar). The latter was common in the late 1800s and was sighted recently near Mount Hermon (Harrison & Bates 1991: 182,212).

2.2.2. History of Archaeological Research

Beginning in 1982, archaeological expeditions from BenGurion University, directed by Eliezer Oren, excavated numerous occupation levels extending as far back as the Chalcolithic period. Actual excavation took place during the summers of 1982-1986, 1988, 1990, and 1992. Seven areas and six trenches (E) were excavated: A, B, C, D, El-3, E4-5, E7, G, K, L along with a well (Figure 2.2). The aforementioned areas and trenches were dug during summer excavation seasons which lasted from two to eight weeks during the months of June, July, and August. Below is a list of the different areas and trenches and the years they were excavated (Oren, personal communication).

Due to hunting and deforestation, cervids, especially Dama mesopotamica (Persian Fallow Deer), Dama dama (Fallow Deer), and Capreolus capreolus (Roe Deer) no longer exist in Israel. In the late 1800s, sightings of D. mesopotamica and C. capreolus were recorded in Northern Israel, and in ancient history and prehistory all three species were common in the region (Ferguson, Porath & Paley 1985; Harrison & Bates 1991: 207,209).

Area Seasons

2.2. THE TEL Tel Haror was first identified with cities such as Beit Merkavot in the region of Simeon. This notion was based on the belief that the mound contained no occupation levels before the Iron Age (Albright 1923). During the 1950s, D. Alon and Y. Aharoni conducted surface surveys that showed that Tel Haror was settled during the Bronze and Iron Ages. The extent of the site during the Middle Bronze Age bolstered its reputation as a possible site of the Canaanite/Philistine city of Gerar (Aharoni 1954). The city and region of Gerar is mentioned frequently in the Bible, especially in Genesis where the region, the city, and its king, Abimelech, figure prominently in stories about the Hebrew patriarchs Abraham and Isaac (Oren 1992: 989).

Area Seasons

A

1982

E4

1988

B

1988, 1990

E5

1990

C

1982

E7

1992

D

1982, 1983, 1984, 1985

G

1982,1983,1984,1985

E1

1984

K

1986,1988,1990,1992

E2

1986

L

1990

E3

1986

Well

1990, 1992

Although Areas A and C comprised mostly archaeological features from Islamic periods, especially Bedouin remains (e.g., burials), the other areas contained more ancient settlements. The major occupation periods at Tel Haror before Islamic times are: Iron Age III (Persian Period-8-4 th cent. B.C.) Areas D, El, E2, E3, G, and K.

2.2.1. Biblical Background

Iron Age I (12-11 cent. B.C.) 'Gerar' has been interpreted by biblical scholars as representing a region or a city. The region of Gerar, of which Tel Haror is a part, figures prominently in Biblical texts. In the Table of Nations, Genesis 10:19 states that Gerar was located in the southern border of Canaan. According to Genesis 20 and 21, the king of Gerar, Abimelech, allowed the Patriarch Abraham to settle in the region near Beer Sheva. Genesis 26 states that the Patriarch Isaac continued to live in the region with Abimelech's permission. After the Canaanites were conquered, 1 Chronicles 4: 28-33 notes that the families of Simeon were given the region of Gerar for their families as a tribal inheritance. During the reign of Judah's King Asa, the Ethiopian army under Zerah was defeated and pursued as far as Gerar (2 Chronicles 14: 13-15).

Areas B, D, K, and L. Late Bronze Age II (15-14 cent. B.C.) Areas K and L. Middle Bronze Age II (18-16 th cent. B.C.). Areas B, E4, E5, E7, K, L, and the well.

2.2.3. Pre-Islamic Archaeological Strata at TelHaror

The Iron Age Ill settlement was located in the upper tel and excavated in Areas D and G and Trenches El-3 (Oren & Morrison 1986). As revealed in Trenches El-3, the fortification system comprised earth and kurkar ramparts that were secured by large kurkar slabs, ash, and mud-brick. A 4 meter thick mud-brick wall and a tower (in Area D)

Besides biblical sources, references to the city or region of Gerar are not found until Roman times where the region was

29

Jool D. Klonck

were built on the rampart and supported by soil, brick material and, in one case, a 150 sq m mud-brick platform that was most likely the base for another tower, The settlement's inhabitants also built a glacis against the outside of the city wall to the summit of the rampart. The glacis was set with kurkar stones and grey clay. In Area G, excavation crews uncovered storerooms and long, rectangular halled structures that were built on mud-brick platforms adjacent to the city wall (Oren & Morrison 1986: 59). In the late Iron Age, the aforementioned buildings were filled with earth and all doors and windows blocked to raise the floor of the tel two meters. Soon after the renovations, the city was destroyed. Large numbers of well-preserved artifacts, including storage jars, were found inside the collapsed upper floors of the storehouses. As evidenced by ceramics associated with the earliest floors adjacent to the defence wall, the fortification system was built in the late Iron Age ca. eighth century B.C. and destroyed, as suggested by the pottery on top of the rampart, in the seventh century B.C. (Oren 1992: 990).

different kinds of archaeological data about the Middle Bronze Age settlements at Tel Haror. Trenches E4, ES, and E7 were excavated to elucidate the fortification system Haror's inhabitants erected during the MB period. Bulldozers were used to cut 5-10 meter wide trenches into the mound to reveal cross sections of the outer fortifications of the tel. Few artifacts were collected. The best glimpse of this fortification system came from Trench E7, near Area B, located in the northwestern comer of the tel. The trench's cross section revealed an earthen rampart secured with kurkar facing. The cross section also revealed a depression, possibly a moat, at the base of the rampart. The most likely scenario for the construction of this fortification is: 1) Haror's MB inhabitants dug a moat at the base of the tel; 2) they used this earth to build a rampart on the side of the tel; and 3) they capped this edifice with slabs ofkurkar so as to secure the rampart (Oren 1991). In Area B, a Middle Bronze IIB stratum was found beneath seven building phases which dated from the Late Bronze to the Iron I periods. The excavation of the MB stratum in Area B revealed a deposit of three human infant skeletons lying next to an adult. Adjacent to the skeletons were two storage jars, a juglet and one two-handled deep bowl (Oren 1991: 507). No other MB artifacts were retrieved from Area B.

After the Iron Age Ill habitation was destroyed, the site was settled during the Persian Period in the fourth and fifth century B.C. Excavation crews uncovered grain and refuse pits, paved floors, and a large building that comprised this strata. In addition, refuse pits were found in Area K dating to the Iron Age Ill (Oren 1992: 990). The Iron Age I occupation is located principally in Area B, a one acre site in the northwest part of the lower tel. Four occupation levels were superimposed over a deeper Middle Bronze Age A settlement. The settlement from the 11 cent. B.C. was fortified by a 6 m wide mud-brick wall. Earlier strata, from the 12-llth cent. B.C. comprised a building, a stonelined grain silo, trash pits, and floors containing early and late Philistine decorated pottery. In Area D, archaeological probes in the lowest levels of the upper tel yielded midden layers with Iron Age I ceramics. Furthermore, in Areas K and L, crews excavated numerous Iron Age I refuse pits (Oren 1992: 990).

Excavations in Area L uncovered a section of a large buttressed wall and another building to the east. These appear to have been built in the Middle Bronze Age (Oren 1991). Few Middle Bronze artifacts were found from these strata, however, except a handful of MB pottery.

2.3. AREA K Although Areas B and L yielded few Middle Bronze artifacts and architectural features, many MB features and artifacts were found in Area Kand in the well. Area K is located at the southwestern comer of the lower tel while the well is placed at the southern edge of the tel, 80 meters southeast of Area K (Figure 2.2). Area Kand the well overlook the Nahal Gerar and are c. 115 m and 112 m above sea level, respectively. Area K covers approximately 800 sq. m and is situated 110 m above the Nahal Gerar, to the south of the site, and 10 m below the Iron Age III settlement that is north of the tel.

The Late Bronze Age settlement covers a few acres and is located mainly in Area L in the southeast quadrant of the lower tel. Area L overlooks the Nahal Gerar and comprises four occupation strata, two of which (Strata II and Ill) belong to the Late Bronze Age. Stratum II contained a large building which had thick mud-brick walls and a large pebbled courtyard with imported Cypriot ceramics. The earlier level, Stratum III, contained fragments of a "buttressed building" that must have served as a large public building or palace. In Area K, crews excavated many refuse pits and a kiln belonging to the Late Bronze Age (Oren 1991; 508).

Seven archaeological strata from five periods were excavated inAreaK: Stratum I-Post Iron Age Stratum II-Iron Age I & II

The estimated size of the Middle Bronze Age settlement at Tel Haror is 150 dunams or 38 acres. The size of Tel Haror's Middle Bronze Age settlement makes it one of the largest sites in Southern Canaan (Oren 1991; 509).

Stratum Ill A/B-Late Bronze Ill Stratum IVA/B-Middle Bronze IIB/C Stratum V-Middle Bronze IIB

Although Middle Bronze Age features were found in Areas B, K, L, the well, and Trenches E4, ES, and E7, the various Areas were excavated using different methods and yielded

The uppermost stratum, Stratum I, included surface and subsurface artifacts from Roman and Islamic periods and World 30

Tho

War I. During World War I, the Turks constructed an elaborate system of trenches on various tels, one of them being Tel Haror, to stop the northward advance of the British through Palestine. Unfortunately, the Turks dug some of their trenches across Area K. The depth of these trenches exceeded two meters and extended through Iron Age, Late Bronze, and Middle Bronze strata.

Cultic Milieu

8624-a domed edifice which contained equid remains, located to the north and outside the enclosed area. The foundation of Area K is of two different types: kurkar and loess. The transition area between the kurkar and loess foundations starts roughly down the center of Grid Squares EJ 24 to EM 24 or beneath Wall 8155/8262. To the west of Wall 8155/8262, all structures were built on the kurkar foundation while to the east, all features were set on a loess foundation.

Although the World War I trenches destroyed many features in Area K, they facilitated the identification of the Middle Bronze temple complex in Area K. When the trenches were abandoned, pottery sherds from cult vessels were left in the back dirt. In 1982, archaeological surveyors from Ben-Gurion University led by Prof. Eliezer Oren noticed these alleged votive objects and began an archaeological investigation of AreaK.

Stratum V corresponds to the initial occupation of Area K and comprises five features: I) a large, thick walled structure 8630; 2) the previously mentioned edifice (8624) with the equid remains; 3) a large pit-Locus 8253; 4) Wall 8264; and 5) Wall 8729. The latter two walls are located to the northeast of Pit 8253 (Figure 2.4).

Stratum II comprises archaeological features and artifacts from the Iron Age (1200-587 B.C.). During the Iron Age, the inhabitants of the tel excavated numerous refuse pits in Area K. These pits contained pottery mostly from the IA I period (1200-900 B.C.), although IA II (900-587 B.C.) sherds were also found. Furthermore, a badly preserved Persian period burial was excavated in Area K that contained Egyptian pottery and a Greek fibula.

Beginning with the western part of the site, the largest structure built in Stratum V was Structure 8630. Structure 8630 was built on a northwest-southeast axis, measured 9 x 15 m, and was uncovered 5-20 cm below the surface by Haror's excavation crews. After this building was constructed, Haror's inhabitants built the northern perimeter wall of the temple complex which is labeled Wall 8022 and Wall 8659. Wall 8659 is located at the northern edge of Structure 8630 and is a continuation to the southwest of Wall 8022. Each part of the wall was given a locus number since the parts were bisected by a Turkish trench. It is clear that the stone foundations ofWall 8022/8659 were built after Structure 8630 because the former cut into the northern wall of the edifice.

Stratum Ill is divided into two sub-phases: A and B. Stratum Ill comprises archaeological contexts from the Late Bronze II period (1350-1200 B.C.). Two types of archaeological features belonging to this period were excavated in Area K: refuse pits and a kiln (Figure 2.4). The refuse pits presented real problems to our crews excavating the MB temple complex because the LB refuse pits were up to eight meters in diameter and were located in areas of archaeological significance. Although most of the ceramic remains from the LB refuse pits contained mostly sherds of common utilitarian vessels, a few pits possessed "a wealthy collection of 13th-century pottery ...[including] Egyptian-style cups and bowls, Cypriot WS3, BR2, and WSH, Mycenaean IIIB, Levanto-Helladic wares, ...[and] an ostracon with hieratic script" (Oren 1991: 10).

There were three sets of stone steps leading up to Structure 8630 (Locus 8497) which were 20 cm high, 40 cm deep, and 50 cm to 1 m wide. The foundations of the steps were carved into the kurkar bank and small stones were used to stabilize the structure. In front of the first step, a thick layer of plaster was found. Hence, we believe that all the steps were originally plastered, but the plaster wore off during the time the edifice was in use. Inside the walls of the structure, starting with the main entrance (Locus 8603), the walls were lined with plaster which aided in the identification of the structure's main cella. In Locus 8603, a cooking pot was found on a few stones. However, no ash or traces of burning under the pot or around the stones were found so the area could not have been a hearth.

During the 1992 season, the crew uncovered a kiln in Square EK26. Late Bronze pottery was found at the base of the kiln but it was unclear if the LB refuse pits were contemporaneous with the kiln. Hence, separate sub-stratum were assigned to the kiln (A) and refuse pits (B).

The eastern wall of Structure 8630 was at least 2.5 m thick. I use the term 'at least' because a Turkish trench was cut through part of the wall obscuring the width of the wall in its entirety. On either side of the narrow entrance (Locus 8661) that led to the inner room of the edifice were 'side walls' which measured 2.8 m thick and were made of 40 x 40 cm mudbricks. The entrance itself (Locus 8661) measured 2.8 x 1.5 min plan. In the entrance were three lines of bricks that may have represented part of the floor's foundation. Also in the entrance was a collection of stones which might indicate that the floor of the installation was paved or that the entrance to the structure was blocked.

2.3.1. Middle Bronze Stratigraphy in Area K There are at least three Middle Bronze occupation layers in Area K: Stratum IVA, Stratum IVB, and Stratum V (Figure 2.4). These strata are described from earliest to latest (i.e., V to IVA). This information recorded below is primarily from an unpublished report written in Hebrew by Prof. Oren and Yuval Yekutieli and from my field notes. Area K contains two primary Middle Bronze features: I) the enclosed area or a series of structures and features circumscribed by a stone and mud-brick wall; and 2) Structure

Other than in the main and narrow entrances (Loci 8603 & 8661) and some sections of the main room, Structure 8630 3i

Jool D. Klonck

was badly affected by: 1) erosion that wore away most of the southwestern wall of the edifice; 2) a LB III refuse pit 4.5 m in diameter (Locus 8154) that cut through the northern end of the structure; and 3) three Turkish trenches that removed the northwestern, central, and southeastern parts of the building. The main room of Structure 8630 was 5.5 m wide and 7.5 m long. Inside the main room, in front of the narrow entrance, was a round depression (Locus 8704) that was mostly destroyed by a Turkish trench. Directly to the left of this depression, against the wall, were storage jars. The pottery colors comprised whitewash overlaid with blue and black markings. The floor of the temple comprised three layers: soil, limestone, and the underlying kurkar. The main room (Locus 8360) of Structure 8630 contained few artifacts in contrast to what was found outside the edifice. On the steps of the edifice and near the entrance (Locus 8530), many broken vessels were found scattered on the floor. This area was covered with 50 cm to 1 m of mud-brick debris. To the east of the entrance of8630 was found a rectangular feature (Locus 8705) measuring 1 x 2 m. Locus 8705 comprised a basin, surrounded by mud-brick, and lined with plaster. The basin had undergone significant amounts of burning where both the mud-brick and plaster were charred, and the basin was filled with what looked like an organic and greasy material. East of Structure 8630 was an open area-Locus 8061. The floor of this open area represents the kurkar foundation of the site. East of the open area is a large pit (Locus 8253) which also belongs to Stratum V. The interior of Pit 8253 contained a darker ashy fill. Within the fill of Pit 8253 a series of smaller pits were visible. Inside these pits were faunal remains, especially canid and corvid bones, figurines, small ceramic vessels, and other objects. The oblong pit is 5 m long, 3 m wide, and 1 m deep. The average dimensions of these smaller pits in Feature 8253 were 25 cm in diameter and 30 cm deep. Although Locus 8253 was excavated in Stratum V, it continued to be used in Stratum IVB. Hence, it is difficult to assign every pit to a particular stratum. Also from Stratum V, to the northeast of Pit 8253, are Walls 8264 and 8729. These walls were beneath Walls 8262 and 8751, respectively, which belong to Stratum IVB. Walls 8729 and 8264 might be part of the same structure. However, so little of these walls remain that it is impossible to ascertain the function or connection between these features. Structure 8624 is located to the northeast of Pit 8253 (Figures 2.4 & 2.5). The structure is located on the kurkar/loess divide that runs through the middle of Area K's MB occupation levels. This structure was constructed in Stratum V. The west side of the structure's foundation was quarried into the site's kurkar substrate. The interior chamber, Locus 8740, which contained disarticulated donkey bones together with the complete skeleton of a donkey, measured 3 .5 m in diameter at its base. The feature and donkey bones were first identified when a volunteer disturbed an Equus asinus cranium associated with a metal bit (Plate 2.1 ). The chamber's interior

was covered by a layer of plaster. Some plaster fragments found intact inside the dome measured as much as 5 cm thick. The domed structure's roofhad unfortunately collapsed. Still, the highest intact portion of the dome measured 1.4 m high. The dome was constructed of mud-brick and was probably reinforced or faced with kurkar slabs as indicated by some kurkar rocks inside the structure and a concentrated collection ofkurkar material at the northwest corner of the dome-Locus 8736 (Figure 2.5). The entrance into Structure 8624 is located on the eastern side of the dome (Locus 8753) and was excavated through a loess foundation. The larger entrance, Locus 8753, gives way to a narrow passage, Locus 8752, which leads directly to the interior of the domed chamber. The narrow passage (Locus 8752) was 75 cm wide and 65 cm high. The floor of this narrow passage was 30 cm higher than the floor of the tomb. Furthermore, steps measuring 10 cm wide and 15 cm high lead from the floor of the narrow passage to the floor of the domed chamber. Eventually, both entrances were filled by mud-brick either as the result of a deliberate attempt by Haror's inhabitants to block both entrances or due to the collapse of the edifice. As of the 1993 season, a pie shaped probe (Locus 8744) exposed the buried carcass of an equid. At an approximate depth of 112.33 m above sea level (a.s.l.), the forelimbs, cervical vertebrae, mandible, and cranium of a fully articulated donkey (Equus asinus) skeleton were uncovered (Plate 2.2). The articulated skeleton was covered by soil and ashes that contained other disarticulated donkey bones. The most elevated donkey remains were found in the southern and southeastern part of the dome. At an elevation of 113.28 m a.s.l. was a mandible of E. asinus (Locus 8746); and at 113.38 m a.s.l., was a storage jar that was upside down over another donkey mandible (Locus 8737). Although we cannot be sure that Structures 8624 and 8630 were built at the same time, we are sure that the foundation of the northern perimeter wall (Wall 8659/8022) of the enclosed area was built after both structures had been erected. The foundation of Wall 8022 cut into the entrance (Locus 8753) of Structure 8624. Wall 8022 was therefore assigned to Stratum IVB. Although we are not sure of the temporal relationship between the Structures 8630 and 8624 and Pit 8253, all three structures were built before Haror's inhabitants erected architectural additions within the enclosed area in Stratum IVB. Hence, due to the primacy of these structures,and our lack ofknow ledge as to the refined temporal relationships between them, these archaeological features are grouped into Stratum V. Stratum IV has been divided into two phases: IVB, the earlier phase where Haror's inhabitants constructed most of their architectural additions in the enclosed area; and IVA, the later strata phase which features minor additions to preexisting architectural features. In Stratum IVB, the perimeter wall of the enclosed area was built (Figure 2.4). Haror's inhabitants built the northern wall

Tho

of the enclosure mindful of the two types of foundation (kurkar and loess) that ran through the center of the area and hence, the northern perimeter wall. West of Square EJ 23, the perimeter wall (Wall 8022) was built on kurkar bedrock. The greatest height of this section of the perimeter wall was 3 5 cm above the kurkar bank. The wall measured 1.1 m thick and was supported by one layer of field stones. East of Wall EJ 23, the perimeter wall (Wall 8168) was also 1.1 m thick but the mud-brick wall was dug through soft loess soil, to a depth of2.5 m below the highest point of the Wall 8022, in the western area of the site. This section of the wall was also built on several layers of field stones. There are two possibilities why the wall is higher in the eastern part of Area K than in the western part. Haror's inhabitants could have excavated the eastern part of the perimeter wall to such a depth because: 1) the loess soil was easier to remove than sections of the kurkar bedrock in the western part of the site; 2) they wanted to build a solid foundation for this part of the wall; and 3) the wall was built as a retaining wall for loess that was used to level the floor of the enclosed area that had originally been built on a kurkar slope. Jutting out from the northern perimeter wall (Wall 8022) of the enclosed area are Walls 8062 and 8069 which form an Lshaped room: Structure 8094. The walls are built on kurkar bedrock and the installation measures 2.5 m x 5.5 m. Structure 8094 contained a layer of earth packed with ashes, bones, and pottery. Along the inner walls of the Locus 8094 were niches that were lined with plaster and that contained various objects including pottery and unbaked clay cylinders. In the eastern part of the enclosed area, a series of walls were constructed in Stratum IVB. These walls are 8262, 8213, and 8751. The walls are one brick thick. Wall 8213 was built over Pit 8253. It is possible that Walls 8069 and 8262 were joined together in this stratum. Wall 8262 is connected to another wall, Wall 8242, which is in line with Wall 8069. Unfortunately, the Turks dug a trench that cut through Wall 8069 and destroyed Wall 8242. Hence, the suggestion that Walls 8069, 8242, and 8262 were connected cannot be confirmed. In the center of Walls 8069, 8262, and the right angle that joins Walls 8155 and 8213 is a square mud-brick featureLocus 8269. This feature is placed 1.5 m south of Wall 8069, 1.5 m north of the corner of Walls 8155 and 8213, and 1.5 m west of Wall 8262. The greatest height of installation 8269 at the time of excavation was 27 cm. The structure was two bricks high and the edges and sides of the structure had been charred black or dark brown by fire. Around the feature, Haror's inhabitants dug small pits measuring c. 30 cm in diameter and c. 30 cm deep. These small pits contained mostly crow, raven, puppy bones, and other objects including a bronze arrowhead, Cypriot jar, bowl with a pentagram design on the bottom of the bowl, bowls with snake figures, and dipper juglets. Walls 8340 and 8547 are part of one wall and define the eastern perimeter of the enclosed area. Walls 8340 and 854 7

Cultic Milieu

are part of Stratum IVB, have a uniform width of 50 cm, and were both built on a loess foundation. The eastern wall of the enclosed area was bisected by an Late Bronze refuse pit-Locus 8332. The construction of the wall differs radically on either side of the pit, therefore, this LB pit may have been dug over an entrance. While Wall 8340 is built entirely of stones, Wall 854 7 was constructed of mud-bricks with a stone foundation. The mud-brick portion ofWall 854 7 was preserved to a height of 60 cm and was built on a shallow slope. East of Wall 8340, in the northeast corner of Area K, crews uncovered Locus 83 75 which contained a floor with numerous sherds of large storage vessels. Another wall built in IVB is Wall 87 51 built above Wall 8729, east of Pit 8253. Wall 8751 was poorly preserved and its highest point of the wall at the time of excavation reached only 30 cm. North of 8751, between Walls 8262, 8168, and 8340, was an open area, Locus 8551, that measured 20 m long and 17 m wide. Most of Locus 8551 was destroyed when Haror's Late Bronze population dug a massive refuse pitLocus 8439. Despite the destructive influences of the LB pit in Locus 8551, we retrieved numerous Middle Bronze IIB ceramic bowls and other artifacts were retrieved including a ceramic handle that was shaped in the form of a human nose. Furthermore, we excavated three small pits from this area: Loci 8707, 8386, and 8714. Locus 8707 was 40 cm in diameter, 20 cm deep, and contained pottery sherds and canid and corvid remains. Locus 8386 was 40 cm in diameter, 40 cm deep, and contained bowls and juglets. Locus 8714 was 50 cm in diameter, 50 cm deep and contained 35 miniature ceramic vessels. To the south of Wall 8751 was another room, Locus 8560. Although no small pits were found, the crew did retrieve a goblet with ornate handles and a funnel shaped bowl which fit into a 60 cm tubular stand located directly east of Wall 8213. Stratum IVA corresponds to the final Middle Bronze IIB/C occupation level in Area K (Figure 2.4). Many intact ceramic vessels and other artifacts were retrieved from Stratum IVA since the collapse and abandonment of structures in the enclosed area also correspond to this stratum (see Plate 2.3). In Stratum IVA, Haror's inhabitants repaired old walls and built new ones. Furthermore, in Stratum IVA, floors were raised all over the enclosed area which covered many preexisting features corresponding to Stratum IVB including the square mud-brick feature (Locus 8269), the niches and benches in Locus 8094, and Walls 8262 and 8751. It is interesting to note that Wall 8262 displays a large crack running the entire width of the wall. Therefore, it is possible that the repairs in Stratum IVA (e.g., Wall 8155) were completed to compensate for structural weaknesses in the architecture in IVB (e.g., Wall 8262). In Stratum IVA, the rooms north and south ofWall 8751 (i.e., Loci 8551 & 8560) were divided into smaller compartments by a series of walls. These walls built in Stratum IVA include, from north to south, Walls 8263, 8454, 8376, and 8635. The room (Locus 8698) between Walls 8263 and 8168, the latter

Jool D. Klonck

being the northern perimeter wall of the temenos, was partially destroyed by a large Late Bronze refuse pit, Locus 8439.

of this structure cut into Wall 8022, which corresponds to Stratum IVB, the new building is ascribed as being from the later construction period-Stratum IVA.

The area between Walls 8213, 8454, and 8376 is Locus 8672. Locus 8672 contained a small platform that was one brick high and capped by a flat stone slab. Locus 8672 also contained the fragments of a complete and ornately decorated ceramic stand along with MB bowls and juglets. Along the eastern side of Locus 8672, adjacent to the eastern side of Wall 8213, is a row of stones (Locus 8214) which appear to be the foundation of another feature such as a wall or bench. South of Wall 8635, was another installation, Locus 8676, which contained a large mud-brick platform and pieces of a ceramic stand.

Several lines of archaeological evidence lead us to believe that the later structure from Stratum IVA, to which Walls 8525, 8524, and 8658 belong, was erected with full knowledge of the position of the domed chamber in Stratum V The highest elevation for the collapsed walls of Structure 8624 (113.50 m-Locus 8733) is about even with the lowest elevations for the walls in the new structure corresponding to Stratum IVA (113.49 m-Wall 8658). Also, coinciding with the walls from IVA, was a pit dug by Haror's inhabitants. This pit (Locus 8745) was placed over the center of the collapsed remains of Structure 8624 and the pit's base was lined with ashes and ceramic debris (Figure 2.5). Thus it is possible that Haror's Middle Bronze II inhabitants built the later structure in Stratum IVA, to which are associated Walls 8528, 8524, and 8658, with knowledge of the structure erected in Stratum V.

In Stratum IVA, Wall 8262 near Feature 8269 was replaced by Wall 8155. Wall 8155 was built over a stone foundation which was placed on the kurkar bedrock. At the northern end ofWall 8155 a niche, Locus 8270, was cut. Also, in Stratum IVA, anL-shapedaddition was erected to connect Walls 8155 and 8213. Although Haror's inhabitants built Wall 8213 in Stratum IVB, they continued to use it in Stratum IVA.

2.3.2. The Well

The well is located at the southern edge of the tel and was excavated by Ya'aqov Nir and Iris Eldar in 1990 and 1992 (Figure 2.2). The 3 m diameter well was excavated to a depth of 11.5 m despite the fact that as much as a third of the original well had eroded before the time of excavation. Of the excavated well, the upper 7 m was composed of local sandstone and the remainder was cut through the local kurkar bedrock. The remains in the well comprised utilitarian pottery from the MB II period and numerous faunal remains.

Although Walls 8062 and 8069 continued to be used in Stratum IVA, a row of bricks was added to the northern face of Wall 8069. This row of bricks either served as benches for the room (Locus 8094) or rose to the top of the roof and thus acted as an additional supporting wall to strengthen the structure. A niche, Locus 8321, was cut into this additional row of bricks and contained unbaked clay cylinders. The final phase ofIVA is associated with the collapse of the structures in the enclosed area. Walls from Structure 8630 and other installations crumbled or fell intact burying the surface of the enclosed area under meters of mud-brick debris. Especially impressive are the fallen walls in Loci 8371 (EM 23) and 8367 (EL 25). The greatest height of Wall 8371 measured 4 m or 20 courses. Although no human skeletons were found under the mud-brick debris, the crushed skeleton of a newborn lamb was found in Locus 8683 (Plate 2.4). Furthermore, numerous complete or completely restorable ceramic vessels, as well as figurines and large quantities of faunal remains, were found strewn across the uppermost floors within the enclosed area, especially near the entrance of Structure 8630.

It is not possible to elucidate the temporal relationship between

the well and MB strata from Area K other than the fact that both belonged to the MB period.

2.4. FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF MB STRUCTURES FROM THE ENCLOSED AREA IN AREA K Until this point, I have not ventured into a functional determination of the MB structures in the 'enclosed area' in Area K. To analyze the function of structures in Area K, I will use methodologies from two schools of thought in archaeology. First, I will use Renfrew's correlates which he proposed would help archaeologists systematize the identification of cultic loci at archaeological sites. These correlates are based on global anthropological studies and ethnographic accounts (Renfrew 1985) and can conceivably be used to validate the existence of a cultic locus in any culture, for any time period (e.g., see Alon & Levy 1989).

Oren (pers. comm. 8/92) has suggested that the sudden abandonment and collapse of the structures within the enclosed area in Area K may have been due to an earthquake. The suggestion may be supported by evidence such as the crack through Wall 8262, the apparent abandonment of all ceramic vessels and artifacts, the crushed lamb skeleton in Locus 8683, and the paucity of scavenging or weather marks on the faunal remains. In any case, after the destruction in Stratum IVA, structures within the enclosed area were never rebuilt.

The problem with Renfrew's scheme is that many of his correlates for identifying cultic contexts are very broad and are therefore open to extreme interpretations. For example, his second correlate for a cultic loci states, " ...It may take place in a special building set apart from sacred funtions (Renfrew 1985: 19)." Although this criterion can conceivably

Outside the enclosed area, another edifice was built above Structure 8624 which corresponds to Stratum IVA. This installation is defined by Walls 8525, 8524, and 8658 and was erected around the domed edifice. Since the foundation 34

Tho

Cultic Milieu

be used to delineate the architecture of a holy place, it is also very easy to attach this correlate to numerous other "not-socultic" contexts-e.g., a latrine.

4. "Concepts of cleanliness and pollution [i.e., ritual purification] may be reflected in the facilities and maintenance of the sacred area."

While Renfrew's criteria for identifying cultic contexts are extremely broad and based on anthropological and global concepts of cult, A. Mazar's (1992) comparative study of Middle Bronze Age temples is specific and provides a detailed list of what is expected of a Canaanite temple complex. A. Mazar's (1992) cultic requirements are based on comparisons of alleged temples sites in Canaan, Syria, and along the Lebanese Coast during the MB IIB/C (1800/1750-1550 B.C.). In his study, Mazar describes a particular type of temple complex featuring a 'Monumental Symmetrical Temple' at the centerofa temenos (A. Mazar 1992: 164). The architecture and corresponding features that comprise these cult contexts are repeated throughout the Levant and continue in use until the first millennium B.C. One potential problem with Mazar's 'determinations of cult' is that they might be too specific. Canaanite cult sites which do not possess a Monumental Symmetrical Temple or numerous stele, may be described prematurely as 'secular' or 'non-cultic' based on the rigid criteria of what is 'cultic' in Mazar's comparative study.

This is a difficult correlate. Bronze Age religions in the Levant do not mention structures such as baths, basins, etc. used for purification. Furthermore, although Israelite religion equated animal sacrifice for the expiation of sins and purification (Wapnish & Hesse 1992), the same is not true in Mesopotamian and U garitic religion. Here, offerings were used to appease or propitiate a deity and animals were integral to divination (Day 1992: 839; Leichty 1993; Lambert 1993). Hence, although scholars might argue that rituals such as the burning of incense or the slaughter of animals were examples of ritual purification in Mesopotamian and U garitic cults, religious texts do not overtly mention a relationship between cultic activities and ritual purification. Since non-Israelite religions do not specifically equate structures and objects with ritual purity, the correlation between objects/artifacts and ritual purity cannot be verified in the enclosed area in Area K.

What follows is a comparison of the structures within the 'enclosed area' in Area K to the correlates proposed by Renfrew (1985: 19-20). 1. "Ritual may take place in a spot with special, natural associations: e.g., a cave, a grove of trees, a spring, a mountain top ... [or a] special building ..." The primary 'special location' at Tel Haror would be the Structure 8630, identified as a Migdal or 'tower' temple. This alleged temple is similar to other alleged temples in the Levant, the architecture of which may be alluded to in Biblical texts (i.e., the migdal baal barit or 'tower of Baal-barith' at Shechem-Genesis 34: 2). The architectural plan of these Migdal temples was adopted by the culture which succeeded the Canaanites in the Levant (i.e., the Israelites) and was arguably used in the architectural design for their main temple in Jerusalem (Ezekiel 40-44-A. Mazar 1992: 187). 2. "Alternatively [ritual activity] may take place in a special building set apart" from other non-sacred areas. Structure 8630 is set apart from the rest of the MB structures on the tel by a one meter thick mud-brick and stone wall. Inside the enclosed area, Structure 8630 is freestanding and is separated from other structures to the east by an open area measuring approximately 900 sq meters. 3. "The structure and equipment used may employ a number of attention- focussing devices" which exhibit a finer quality compared to non-sacred artifacts. Many ceramic vessels such as tabuns, stands, and bowls from the enclosed area had ornately painted geometric and zoomorphic designs on them. In addition, zoomorphic representations of clay (e.g., the heads of rams) were adhered to some vessels (Figure 2.6).

5. The sacred structure "may involve both conspicuous public display, and hidden exclusive mysteries, whose practice will be reflected in the architecture"-e.g., a gate or passageway between sacred and non-sacred areas. This correlate is related to number 2. Exclusivity in the enclosed area may be verified in light of geographic space where the interior of Structure 8630 is separated from the 'outside' by 2.5 m thick wall; the edifice itself is exclusive of other rooms in the enclosed area in that it is freestanding and surrounded by an open area. Exclusivity may also be correlated with artifact abundance in the enclosed area in Area K. The interior of Structure 8630 contained few remains while outside the edifice, for example, on the steps and entrance to the building, ceramic, lithic, and fauna! remains were retrieved in abundance. In addition, Structure 8630 was originally located on an elevated kurkar shelf that was higher than the surrounding MB structures. The building's massive, thick walls, seen in Locus 8371, indicate that the structure was at least two stories high. Although the facade of the structure was not preserved, the foundation indicates that the entrance of the edifice was flanked by two tower-like structures. 6. "The chosen place will have special facilities for the practice of ritual, e.g. altars, benches, pools or basins of water, hearths, pits for libations." The enclosed area contained features that represent special facilities: 1) benches were excavated in Structure 8094, and are perhaps visible in Locus 8213 (Grid Sq. EL24); 2) feature 8269 (north of Pit 8253) comprises a solid, 1.5 m mud-brick square with charred exterior which is interpreted as an altar; and 3) Locus 8705, located east of Structure 8630's entrance might be either a hearth or an altar (Figure 2.4). Locus 8705 is a rectangular basin surrounded by mud-brick with an exterior lined with plaster. The interior of the basin was charred black and filled with a greasy organic material.

Jool D. Klonck

7. "The ritual may employ various devices for inducing religious experience, such as dance, music and drugs" ...and food, fire, water, symbols, and objects (both living and inanimate). Texts and music were not retrieved from the enclosed area. However, anthropomorphic and zoomorphic figurines were found; with a majority located near the two alleged altars (Loci 8269 and 8705-Figure 2.7). Fire was obviously used within the enclosed area although its function remains unclear. Ten percent of all faunal remains from the enclosed area were burned. That meat was consumed within the enclosed area is shown by the hundreds of butchered and gnawed ungulate remains (see Chapter 3). Water and other libations (and perhaps narcotics) are suggested by numerous cups, jugs, juglets, and ornate goblets that were retrieved from the enclosed area. 8."The sacred area is likely to be rich in repeated symbols (redundancy)." Serpentine iconography is repeated on various types of vessels (e.g., ceramic stands and funneled platters) found in the enclosed area (Figure 2.8). Redundancy is also shown in the repeated occurrence of puppy and corvid remains in small pits in all areas of the enclosed area with the exception of the vicinity around Structure 8630 (see Chapter 4). 9."The symbols used will often relate iconographically to the deities worshipped and to their associated myth. In particular specific animal symbolism ( of real or mythical animals) may be employed, particular animals relating to specific deities or powers." This correlate is discussed further in Chapter 5. I will argue that three lines of evidence from the enclosed area: snake figurines adhered to ceramic vessels (Figure 2.8); small pits containingpuppy remains; and the head of a gazelle on a ceramic sherd (Figure 2.9)-are associated with healing deities and rituals. These deities are Horon, Gula, and Resheph, respectively. 10. "The association with the omnipresentpower(s) may be reflected in the use of a cult image or that power, or its aniconic representation." Discussed below is the fact that most Middle Bronze temple structures, which are very similar to Structure 8630, contain a niche or pedestal at the rear of the main cella (opposite the entrance) on which the image of the deity is placed. Unfortunately, Tel Haror's Late Bronze inhabitants excavated a large refuse pit which completely destroyed the inner rear wall of Structure 8630. However, the excavators were somewhat fortunate. Near the entrance of Structure 8630, in backfill left by the Turks from their excavation of trenches during the World War, we retrieved part of the open hand and arm of a statuette (Figure 2.10). This fragment may represent the image of a deityperhaps the deity displayed in the rear of Structure 8630. 11."Worship will involve prayer and special movements-

gestures of adoration-and these may be reflected in the iconography of decorations or images."

Although no depictions survived in the archaeological record of the enclosed area, fragments of plaster were found in the interior walls of Structure 8630, and on the exterior of Locus 8705. These plaster walls might have at one point featured depictions ofreligious rituals. 12. "The sacrifice of humans or animals may be practiced. Food and drink [and other material objects] may be brought, and possibly consumed as offerings, or burnt/ poured away. The act of offering may entail breakage." Hence, the materials associated with sacrificial rituals and offerings might include 1) human, animal, or vegital remains; 2) knives, hearths, or other artifacts to prepare the sacred meals; 3) and "special receptacles" such as cups and bowls to contain the offerings. Sacrificial victims and the 'necessary equipment' are suggested by the large numbers of butchered animal bones within the enclosed area as well as a complete repertoire of lithic artifacts including scrapers and knives found in this local. From Locus 8206 (adjacent to Feature 8269), we retrieved a bowl with bone fragments inside the vessel (Plate 2.5). This bowls was associated with a plate, two dipper juglets, and a stone chopper. The faunal remains inside the bowl comprised a caprovine thoracic vertebrae (a) and metacarpus (b), the scapula of a puppy (c), and two unidentified 'medium mammal' fragments (Plate 2.6). Several ornately decorated funneled bowls with charred organic residue at their centers have been found in the enclosed area. These vessels were placed on decorated tubular stands that stood c. 60 cm (Figure 2.11 ). These vessels might be interpreted as representing stands for the burning of incense. In the Levant, "votive vessels" are usually defined as miniature clay bowls and dishes which are alluded to in Mesopotamian texts as holding grain offerings (Postgate 1992). Miniature vessels have been found in several cult sites in the Levant including Nahariyah, Megiddo, Hazor, and Byblos (Dothan 1977b: 911; Epstein 1965: 210-211, Yadin 1972: 102-103; Dunand 1950: Pl. LXXX). In the enclosed area many miniature ceramic bowls were retrieved-35 of which were found concentrated in a single locus (Locus 8714) near Structure 8094 (Figure 2.12). The dipper juglet was the principal libation vessel excavated from the enclosed area in Area K. Dozens of these vessels were found in various states of preservation (Figure 2.13). In addition, tabun fragments (some charred) were retrieved from the enclosed area. These might have been used in the baking of bread. 13. "Special portable equipment may be employed in the cult practice, e.g. special receptacles, lamps etc." Several lamps with a single pinched corner were found in the enclosed area (Figure 2.14). 14. A greater "investment of wealth" may be reflected in the structure(s), facilities, equipment, and material assemblages that comprise cult sites compared to nonsacred areas.

Tho

This is difficult to verify at Tel Haror since the well and Structure 8624 are the only features excavated outside the enclosed area. The remains from the well, however, are far different from those inside the enclosed area. The pottery from the well is represented by thicker utilitarian ware such as fragments of storage jars, tabuns, and large bowls. Conspicuously absent from these ceramics are the decorations and ornate designs found on vessels from the enclosed area. Also absent from the well are the special finds such as beads, zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figurines, dipper juglets, miniature bowls, and lithic tools retrieved in Area K. In conclusion, the structures and artifacts in the enclosed area in Area K correspond well with the criteria for a cultic site provided by Renfrew (1985). Of the 14 criteria, 12 are arguably present within the enclosed area. One correlate is impossible to verify due to the nature of the archaeological record. And the other correlate cannot be supported due to the religious beliefs of the culture being examined. To reiterate, although plaster coated the interior of Structure 8630, it is unknown if the plaster was painted, much less portrayed depictions of worship. Furthermore, identifying structures and artifacts used in purification cannot be accomplished since Mesopotamian and Ugaritic religious texts neither describe purification as a motive for worship nor the artifacts/structures associated with this desire. Listed below are the correlates provided by A. Mazar (1992: 164-169) which characterize Middle Bronze Age temples. Figure 2.15 provides a comparison of architectural plans from MB temples from Canaan, the Phoenician Coast, and Syria with Structure 8630 from the enclosed area in Area K. The first ten features are characteristic of all Middle Bronze Age temple structures throughout the Levant. Criteria 11 through 13 are found in some Canaanite temples. Although noted by Mazar they are not listed as crucial elements in the identification of a MB temple complex. 1. These structures are "constructed on raised ground high above their surroundings." Structure 8630 was built on an area that has the highest elevation of any MB stratum. Also in Area K, Structure 8630 was originally built on an elevated kurkar shelf which looked over other MB structure located on lower loess foundations.

Cultic Milieu

Structure 8630 has one entrance placed along its central axis. 5. These structures "contain no more than two architectural units": the main one (the cella) comprises a large "long-room or broad-room." Structure 8630 comprises only one architectural unit-a large long-room. 6. "The holy-of-holies is usually a clearly defined element represented by a niche or a raised platform attached to the back wall, directly opposite the entrance." As mentioned previously, the temple at Tel Haror could have had a niche and/or a raised platform attached to the back wall. Unfortunately, an LB pit (Locus 8154) destroyed both the back wall and any niche or raised platform that could have existed. 7. The entrance to the temple is either plain or comprises a porch flanked by two towers. Structure 8630 is of the latter type-the foundation of the edifice indicates that the entrance featured a shallow porch flanked by two towers. 8. The temple is "freestanding." In Stratum V, the edifice was constructed as a freestanding building and was attached to no other structures. In Stratum IVB, the rear of Structure 8630 was sheared by a wall (8659) which separated the edifice and its immediate surroundings from the rest of the tel. 9. Structure is "situated in the centre of a temenos" [usually defined by a perimeter wall]. In Stratum IVB, a perimeter wall was constructed around Structure 8630, the 230 sq meter 'open area' (Locus 8061) to the east of the edifice, and a series of smaller rooms (e.g., Structure 8094) in the north and east of the 'enclosed area.' This association-a large monumental structure, open area, and smaller rooms surrounded by a perimeter wall is similar to architectural planning in temple complexes at Hazor (Area H), where the cult area had a temple and courtyard, and Megiddo (Temple 2048), where the temenos comprised a temple, courtyard, and service rooms (Dunayevsky & Kempinski 1973; Yadin 1972: 78).

2. "Their walls are thick (more than 2 m wide)." 10. The architectural plan is "symmetrical." The walls of Structure 8630 are at least 2.5 m thick. Structure 8630's plan is symmetrical. 3. The temples are built on stone foundations and have mud-brick superstructures.

11. Walls of the structure are "plastered and displayed traces of painting."

Structure 8630 comprises a mud-brick superstructure that was built on a kurkar foundation. Although not built on a stone foundation, the kurkar shelf in Area K would provide much more stability than the loess strata to the east of the edifice.

Like the temples at Hazor and Tel el-Dab'a, the interior walls of Structure 8630 were also plastered (Yadin 1972: 102-103; Bietak 1979: 249-251 ).

4. "The entrances are placed along a longitudinal central axis."

12. The temple complex contained altars-defined by a rectangular or square, solid, mud-brick structure.

Jool D. Klonck

As mentioned previously, the enclosed area contains two potential altars-Loci 8269 and 8705.

When contrasting features and artifacts from Area Kand other MB temple complexes, the enclosed area comprises more types of cult artifacts and features than do most MB temple complexes (Table 2.1 ). Not only do structures and artifacts from the 'enclosed area' share many traits with well-known temple complexes like Megiddo and Hazor (e.g., see Figure 2.15), but the artifactual assemblages are similar to those at the open air cult sites ofNahariyah and Byblos. Furthermore, dipper juglets which are found in the enclosed area are present in most MB IIA and IIB burials-and were used as receptacles for libation offerings (Kenyon 1960: 567, Pl. XXV.2).

13. The courtyard of the temenos contains stelae. These artifacts were not retrieved from the enclosed area at Tel Haror. Comparisons between Structure 8630 and the architectural require-ments for MB temples provided by A. Mazar (1992) support the notion that Structure 8630 is another 'Monumental Symmetrical' or 'Syrian' Temple (Table 2.1 ). The first requirement, that the edifice in Area K does not fulfill, is that the mud-brick superstructure of the edifice was not built on a stone foundation but on a kurkar shelf. Of the 12 temples recorded in Table 2.1, only five were built directly on stone foundations. Furthermore, the enclosed area at Tel Haror does not contain stelae. However, these features are generally lacking in most Middle Bronze Age temple complexes. Lastly, we are unable to determine whether or not Structure 8630 contained a niche on its back wall or if the plaster walls inside this structure revealed paintings. The rear of Structure 8630 and its plaster walls were both destroyed before Area K was excavated. Hence, the enclosed area at Haror fulfills 9 of the 13 criteria provided by A. Mazar (1992) to determine the presence of a Canaanite 'Migdal' temple complex.

In conclusion, the structures and artifacts from the enclosed area fulfill 12 of the 14 broad requirements for the presence of a cultic locale determined by Renfrew (1985: 19-20) and 9 of the 13 narrow criteria used by A. Mazar (1992: 166167) to define a Migdal temple complex. Hence, the architectural evidence and archaeological remains from the 'enclosed area' suggests that this locus represents a Middle Bronze Age temenos replete with a 'Migdal' or Syrian Temple, a courtyard, two altars, and other smaller structures and features; the functions of which will be discussed in the following chapter. And based on comparisons with other MB temple sites and philological sources (see Chapter 5), many of the artifacts (e.g., iconography, animal bones, etc.) from Tel Haror's temenos can be used to elucidate aspects of Canaanite ritual activities and ideologies.

38

Tho

Cultic Milieu

Chapter 3 ANALYSIS OF THE FAUNA AT TEL HAROR

3.1. INTRODUCTION

3.2. RETRIEVAL METHODS

The principal focus of this thesis is the analysis of the faunal remains from three major groups of contexts that date to the Middle Bronze IIB and C periods at Tel Haror. These, presented in the previous chapter, are the enclosed area ("temple complex"), Structure 8624 ("donkey burial"), and the well. The agents responsible for the deposition of skeletal remains in these contexts are attributed to a range of natural and human activities. The faunal remains from the enclosed area were recovered from two types ofloci: middens and what appear to be ritual deposits. The material from the middens, which comprise mainly ungulate species, is interpreted as representing the discarded remains of sacrificed animals that were dispatched, butchered, consumed by the inhabitants of Tel Haror in the precincts of the temple. The bones and tooth fragments that were retrieved from small pits containing miniature ceramic vessels and other "votive" objects are from taxa, mostly dogs and birds, that are only rarely represented in the midden deposits. These skeletons appear to have been intentionally deposited by Tel Haror's inhabitants through sacrificial rites that were different than those that produced the bones found in the middens. These animals probably had their necks broken and then were immediately interred in the pits. The corvid and canid remains are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4.

The strategies that the Tel Haror crews employed to retrieve archaeological remains varied considerably from the 1986 to the 1992 seasons. Two retrieval methods were used: trench picking and dry screening. Trench picking, a term used to denote the retrieval of bones from an excavation unit without screening, was by far the most commonly used retrieval method, especially from 1986 to 1990.

The skeletal remains from the "donkey burial" were interred by both human and natural agents. A majority of the donkey remains were deposited as part of a burial ritual. Other remains, primarily from ungulates, were introduced into the burial when the roof of the domed edifice collapsed or was destroyed to provide a foundation for a later structure. Lastly, the faunal material from the MB well represents refuse from a wide range oftaxa that was dropped into the well for waste removal purposes. The area that surrounded the well is of an unknown function; features have not been identified in this area.

Dry screening or sieving usually occurred when square supervisors thought their crews were excavating debris on floors. After the artifacts were trench-picked from archaeological deposits, the earth was screened through 5 mm wire mesh sieves to ensure better recovery of archaeological materials. Dry screening was rarely done in 1986 and at the beginning of the 1988 season. Toward the end of the 1988 season, dry screening was more regularly used. The method was consistently practiced only in a limited area in 1990 but in 1992 became the dominant retrieval strategy. It is important to note that not only did dry screening become increasingly used from the 1986 to the 1992 season, but also that both trench picking and dry screening for faunal remains were used with greater intensity and focus as the seasons progressed. The only difference between retrieval methods in the 1990 and 1992 seasons is that the crews dry sieved more loci in 1992. In 1990 the area that was primarily dry screened was a balk in squares EL 23 and EL 24. Except for the surface layer, all archaeological loci from this balk were dry-sieved. As far as other loci are concerned, although the crew occasionally screened sediment from them, especially that from near midden floors, the bags containing artifacts from these sieved loci were unfortunately never marked as such. Therefore, it was impossible in the lab to differentiate between artifacts from screened and trench-picked loci. In 1992, all sediment from the floors was dry screened.

Jool D. Klonck

3.4. EXCAVATED CONTEXTS: THE ENCLOSED AREA, STRUCTURE 8624, AND THE WELL.

As soon as bones were found they were put in plastic 'bone bags' or cardboard boxes lined with gauze and were given tags that listed the locus, the basket number of the area excavated, and the date. When the bone bags were brought back to the project's base in Eshel Hanessi (an agricultural school) the bones were washed, sun dried in shallow cardboard lids, and then redeposited in their respective bags or boxes later that night. There were two methods of washing. If the bones were from large to medium animals and covered with dirt, brushes were used to wash the bones. If the bones were from the pit deposits of puppy or crow, the bones were placed in fine mesh strainers and lightly swirled about in water to remove the silt that covered them.

The smallest units of excavation at Tel Haror were given 'basket numbers'. These excavation units represent attempts to define depositional units during excavation. In addition, 'locus numbers' were allocated to several basket numbers to denote larger context and units that in same cases may continue through more then are construction phase. To date, excavators have not assigned building phases to basket numbers, but for a provisional analysis, a construction phase or phases (i.e., from latest to earliest-IVA, IVB, and V) have been allocated to locus numbers. Although the locusphase correlations are helpful in differentiating between major periods such as the Middle Bronze IIB and Late Bronze Ill, these allocations are too broad to permit an in depth analysis of assemblages from the smaller units of excavation (i.e., those designated by basket numbers).

After the season finished, the bags and boxes containing faunal remains were taken to the Archaeology Lab at BenGurion University. Most of the faunal material was analyzed at Ben-Gurion or at the Peabody Museum, Harvard University.

3.4.1. The Enclosed Area

3.3. ANALYTICAL METHODS

The World War I trenches in Area K and Middle Bronze walls within the temple complex effectively divide the temenos into five areas: 1) the Migdal Temple and its entrance; 2) the courtyard; 3) the altar area; 4) Structure 8094; and 5) the storage rooms east of the altar area. Although the functional description given these areas is supported by comparisons with other MB temple complexes and by philological sources describing the geography and artifacts within temple sites (see Ottosson 1988; Postgate 1992), I have been cautious in using these functional terms in my analysis of the faunal remains. First, some of the faunal remains analyzed from the temenos came from loci that could have been deposited after the temple area was abandoned and its structures had collapsed. More problematic is that in Stratum IVA, the altar (Locus 8296) was completely covered. Hence, to call the sector around Locus 8269, the altar area, is misleading since there was no altar in the 'altar area' in Stratum IVA. Lastly, there is evidence that at some point, probably toward the end of the occupation of the temenos, the entrance to the Migdal Temple was blocked. While the effect this had on worship at the temenos is unclear, it may have had a radical impact on ritual activities and might indicate the cessation of ritual activities at the site. In light of the above evidence I refrain from using value laden terms like 'altar area' and instead refer to each sector by a Roman numeral (Figure 3 .1). Hence, the five areas within the temple complex are called the following:

The method used to record the bones from Tel Haror employed a combination of strategies developed by Paul Halstead from the University of Sheffield and Richard Meadow from Harvard University (Paul Halstead, personal communication; Meadow 1978-see Appendix A). Every bone or tooth fragment was given a numerical code. First, the area, locus, and basket to which the bones belonged was recorded together with the excavation date. The numerical code then listed the skeletal element (e.g., femur, tibia, etc.) and part of the element (e.g., epiphyseal end, shaft, etc.). Next, the species or taxonomic group was noted as well as the side of the body the bone originated from. In addition, the code indicates if the fragment was butchered, gnawed, weathered, smoothed by running water, or worked into a tool. Also recorded is the extent that fragments were burned or covered with accretions. Where possible, usually when horn cores or pelvis were identified, an attempt was made to determine the sex of the animal from which the bone came. In addition to those recorded with the numerical code, three other types of data were recorded. Whenever possible, bone measurements were taken using von den Driesch (1976) and, for equid remains, Eisenmann ( 1986). These measurements are recorded in Appendices D and E. I also took additional measurements of my own definition (Appendix B). If cattle and caprovine mandibular teeth were relatively complete, their eruption and wear stages were recorded using techniques developed by Payne (1973) and Grant (1982). Lastly, if bones showed evidence of having been butchered or had signs of pathology, a sketch was drawn of the element showing the evidence for butchery or pathology. Drawing the bones was much more efficient than describing the marks in long hand or by using a cumbersome numerical code.

1. Area I-The 'altar area' which comprises Pits 8253 and 8462 and the proposed altar (Locus 8269). 2. Area II-Includes the smaller structures extending east of Walls 8155/8213 to the eastern perimeter wall of the temenos (Wall 8340/8547). 3. AreaIII-The 'courtyard' oropenareaeastoftheMigdal Temple. 40

Tho

4. Area IV-The interior of Structure 8094 and the remains found in Wall 8022, the perimeter wall of the temenos adjacent to the edifice.

Cultic Milieu

kurkar bedrock. The bottom of Locus 8253 (112.82 m a.s.l.) rested again on a kurkar foundation. It is unclear if the kurkar depression that contains Locus 8253 is natural and part of the kurkar slope that extends east from squares EJ-M 23 or if the kurkar recess was excavated by the Middle Bronze Age inhabitants ofTel Haror. At the bottom of Locus 8253 (112.82 m a.s.l.), the small pits, subsequently filled with animal bones, miniature ceramic vessels, figurines, dipper juglets, and other remains, were excavated into the kurkar bedrock. At the top of Locus 8253 (113.51 m a.s.l.) the outlines of small cavities were also discernible. Here, the earth that surrounded the topmost hollows was lighter than the earth inside the small pits. Despite the clear delineation of the small pits near the top and bottom of Locus 8253, any small cavities that may have existed inside the locus were not discernible due to the uniform color and consistency of the soil. Locus 8253 extended under the balk, at the south side of squares EL 23 and 24. Here, the pit was given the Locus number of 8494. The pit on the south side of balk EL 23/4 was visible at an elevation of 113. 50 m and was excavated to an elevation of 113.31 m (i.e., a depth of 19 cm) when the 1992 season ended.

5. Area V-The vicinity of the 'Migdal Temple'. This area includes all loci on or near the main entrance to the structure. The intent of Prof. Oren was for me to look at the stratigraphy in each of the five areas and to correlate basket numbers with architectural features and changes in stratigraphy found in each area. In this manner, I could observe changes in assemblages between different stratigraphic levels, that locusphase correlations would tend to obscure. Hence, stratigraphic 'levels' were assigned to each of the six areas of the temple. These levels correspond to the stratigraphy and architectural features in each area. This chapter defines the stratigraphy of each level and assesses the faunal material from each level. After the faunal material from each area has been analyzed, stratigraphic correlations are made between the levels from each area, using Prof. Oren's construction phases, to elucidate site formation processes.

3.4.1.1. Area I-The "Altar Area"

On the eastern side of the balk that runs north to south in the middle of Square EM 24, is Locus 8606 which is probably part of Locus 8253. However, delineation of the horizontal limits of this context was difficult due to the uniformity of the loess soil. As mentioned in Chapter 2, Locus 8253 is located on the kurkar-loess divide that bisects Area K, beginning east of Squares EJ-EN 24. Hence, the delineation of the eastern perimeter of Locus 8253 is difficult due to the uniformity of the sediment.

Area I contained more faunal remains than the other four areas. This area is located in Grid Squares EK 23 to 25 and EL 23 to 25 (Figure 3.1 ). The area is delineated on the east by a one brick thick wall which comprises the segments designated 8155, 8213, and 8242. As was mentioned in Chapter 2, part of the segment (8213 and 8242) was constructed in Stratum IVB while segment 8155 was built in Stratum IVA. To the west, the area extends to a Turkish Trench (Locus 8177). The northern boundary is located where the Turkish trench cuts through Wall 8242 (Figure 2.4). The southern limit of the Area I is defined by the balks at the southern end of Squares EM 23 and EM 24.

To the south of 8253 was another pit, Locus 8462. The earth from this pit consisted of a sandier loam and possessed a lighter tan/brown color than the sediment in 8253. In addition, Locus 8462 contained more ceramic artifacts and fewer faunal remains than were found in Locus 8253. The smaller pit was first identified at an elevation of 113.63 m a.s.1.-the level of the kurkar floor. The pit was excavated by Haror's Middle Bronze Age inhabitants to an elevation of 113.05 m.

The major archaeological features in Area I included (from north to south) a square mud-brick feature identified as an altar (Locus 8269), a large pit (Locus 8253), and a smaller pit (8462). In terms of the depth of the features, excepting the large pit which extended to 112.82 m above sea level (from here on denoted as a.s.l.), the original floor of the altar area was the kurkar bedrock which varied from 113.61 m a.s.l. north of Locus 8269 to 113.50 m a.s.l. south of Locus 8269 near Locus 8253.

There are five stratigraphic levels in Area I. The locus and basket numbers that comprise these levels are recorded in Appendix C along with the following data: dates of excavation, provisional phase allocations, page number of the daily site plans where the basket number can be found, location of the context by Grid Square and Quadrant, and the provisional description of the locus number.

Locus 8269, or the proposed altar, was a square structure, composed of mud-bricks, that measured 1.2 m on a side. The first mud-bricks of the feature were identified at an altitude of 113.68 m. The object was built on the kurkar bedrock (at an elevation of c. 113. 47 m). After Locus 8269 was excavated in its entirety, the height of the altar was found to be 27 cm or two bricks. The sides of the mud-brick feature were burned although most of the animal bones that surrounded Locus 8269 were not.

The levels from all areas, except for Area II, are described in order of their deposition: the earliest are discussed first, and the latest, last (Figures 3.2a,b,c ). Level IV: Comprises the deposits containing the miniature ceramic vessels, figurines, and dog and corvid bones. This level includes Locus 8253 and the small cavities excavated therein (113.51-112.82 m a.s.l.), Locus 8462 and all its contents (113.63-113.05 m a.s.l.), and other small pits scattered around Locus 8269 (the proposed altar). This level roughly corresponds to Strata IVB and V.

The large pit (Locus 8253) contained numerous skeletons of crows, ravens, and dogs. The earth in Locus 8253 was darker and contained a more silty loam than the fill on top of the 4i

Jool D. Klonck

Level III: The perimeter of Level III extended from the kurkar bedrock to the top of Locus 8269. Due to the kurkar bedrock which sloped slightly from the north to the south of Area I, Level III extends from 113.61 to 113.77 m a.s.l. in Grid Squares EK 23 and EK 24; from ca. 113.51 to 113.68 min Square EK 23 and EK 24 near Locus 8269; and from 113.47 to 113.64 min EL 23 and EL 24 near Pit 8253. Level III is characterized by a dark ashy fill replete with complete ceramic vessels (i.e., dipper juglets and open bowls with a low ring base) and many disarticulated but complete skeletons of corvids and canids. The elevation at the top of the Locus 8269 is c. 113.68 m a.s.l. Level III generally corresponds to Strata IVB and V

layer was from 113.75 m to 113.20 m and was built on a stone foundation that extended from ll3.20 m to ll2.28 m a.s.l. The northern and eastern perimeter walls could have served as revetment walls to prevent the erosion of the loess soil on the eastern side of the enclosed area. The stone composition, depth, and width (1.20 m for 8547) of these walls lends support to this notion. The stone foundation of 8547 was not built on kurkar bedrock but on a loess and limestone base. Although the foundation of the eastern perimeter wall was uncovered, excavators were unable to reach the kurkar bedrock.

Level II: This level extends from the top of the Locus 8269 (i.e., over the altar) to the fill above the uppermost MB floors. The elevations for this level are ca. 113.68 to 114.02 m a.s.l. This level comprises the loci from the last floors of the enclosed area before it was abandoned. Level II generally corresponds to Stratum IVA although intrusive artifacts from IVB may be included in this level. Level II also comprised a dark ashy fill similar to Level III. However, unlike Level III, most of the ceramic remains were broken and scattered throughout the midden.

Only in Square EJ 24 did a probe uncover the kurkar bedrock east of Area I. Haror volunteers excavated at the bottom of a large LB refuse pit (Locus 8439) and sunk a probe to an elevation of 110. 77 m a.s.l. before they uncovered the culturally sterile kurkar formation. This finding indicates that the kurkar slope in the enclosed area was steep and descended from an elevation of ll3.61 m on the eastern side of Square EK 24 to a depth of 110.77 m on the western side of this square. To reiterate, the elevation of the kurkar bedrock dropped 2.84 m within a span of five meters.

Level I: Comprises artifacts associated with the mud-brick debris from the collapse of the enclosed area. This layer represents Stratum IVA and extends from ca. 114.02 and 114.63 m a.s.l.

The steep drop of the kurkar sub-stratum makes correlations between loci on the east and west of Wall 815 5/8213 difficult. The uppermost levels to the east and west of Wall 8155 roughly correspond to Stratum IVA in terms of the elevations and types of loci. Both areas are characterized by scatters of ceramic sherds representing whole vessels beneath mud-brick debris from the collapsed structure in the enclosed area. However, below this phase it is difficult to delineate phases due to the uniformity of the loess soil.

3.4.1.2. Area II-The Eastern Rooms The rooms east of Area I have presented the most problems in terms of elucidating stratigraphy (Figures 3.3a,b). The principle problem is that structures in the enclosed area were built on a kurkar shelf that slopes steeply downward east of Squares EJ 24 thru EM 24 (Figure 3. I). Whereas west of Squares EJ 24 thru EO 24 all structures were built on the kurkar bedrock, east of Squares EJ 24 thru EM 24 installations were constructed on loess. Furthermore, many refuse pits from Late Bronze and Iron Age periods cut into the Middle Bronze strata. The walls built east of Area I were made of either mudbricks, or stones, or of both.

Although probes in EJ 24 and along Wall 854 7 indicated that loess sediment extended to elevations of 110.77 m and 111.50 m, respectively, most areas on the eastern side of the enclosed area were excavated to an elevation of ca. ll3.00 m a.s.l.

East of Squares EJ 24 thru EM 24, the greatest elevation of the top of the northern perimeter wall (8207) was 114.07 m a.s.l. Wall 8207 was constructed of mud-brick and built on a stone foundation (Wall 8168) which extends downward at least to an elevation of 113.03 m-the level at which crews stopped digging when the 1992 season ended (Figure 2.4). Both walls may extend as far down as the eastern perimeter wall (Wall 8340/8547).

In the absence of further excavations of the eastern side of the enclosed area or refined archaeological analysis of present contexts, only rough divisions between strata are possible. Because the nature of the loess sediment makes the delineation of strata difficult, contexts from Area II are allocated to levels. These levels correspond to the elevations of three tiers of mud-brick walls that bisect Area IL Although, the following level designations are provisional, they do permit an analysis of the faunal remains associated with construction phases on the eastern side of the enclosed area. For Area II, the latest levels are described first and the earliest, last (Figures 3.3a,b).

During the 1992 season, a probe was excavated in Square EL 26 to ascertain the depth of the eastern perimeter wall and to find the level of the kurkar bedrock. While the portion of the eastern perimeter wall in Squares EJ 25 and EK 25 (Locus 8340) was entirely made of stones and measured from 114.70 m to ll3.06 m a.s.l. at the end of the 1992 season, the southern part of the wall (8547) in Squares EK-M 26 was composed of mud-brick and stone layers. The elevation of the mud-brick

Level I: This level corresponds to the elevations for the uppermost tier of mud-brick walls found in Area II. These include Wall 8155 (ca. 114.06-ll3.59 m a.s.l.); Walls 8454 and 8376, whicharejoinedandextendfrom ll3.94to 113.54 m a.s.l.; and Locus 8214 which comprised a stone lining in a trench that was dug into lower strata. This line of stones probably served as a revetment to an older adjacent wall (8213) which Prof. Oren allocates to Stratum IVB. Therefore, 42

Tho

the base of Level I is defined as 113.54 m a.s.l., the elevation that correlates with the lower elevations of Walls 8155, 8454, and 8376 (Figure 3.3a). Level I corresponds to Stratum IVA, the phase assigned to all structures in this stratum by Prof. Oren, although some intrusive material from Stratum IVB might be present.

remains were found beneath the floor at a depth of 113.68 m in Locus 8315. This was the lowest point at which artifactual assemblages were discovered. Below this horizon, no cultural deposits were found. Two levels from Area III are delineated (Figures 3.4a,b ): Level II (the earlier): Archaeological assemblages from the kurkar bedrock, which ranged in elevation from 113.74 m and 113.95 m a.s.l., to an elevation of 114.20 m a.s.l. This level is further divided into components (A and B) based on provisional strata attributed to loci. Component A includes all loci attributed to Strata IVA or IVB. Component B comprises loci attributed to Stratum IVB alone or contexts that may have had artifacts from Stratum V.

Level II: Walls 8155 and 8454/8376 from Level I were built over Walls 8262 and 8751, which have similar elevations (i.e., 113.59 to 113.22 m a.s.l. for Wall 8262 and 113.54 to 113.26 m a.s.l. for Wall 8751). These elevations for the second tier of walls from the eastern room define the vertical limits for Level II: from 113.54 to 113.20 m a.s.l. (Figure 3.3a). Level II also contains the foundations of other structures: Structure

Foundation Level

Stratum

8213 (EL 24)

113.47

IVB

8214 (EL 24)

113.37

IVA

8635 (EM 25)

Not excavated

IVA

8547 (EK 26)

113.20

IVA/B

Level I (the later): Represents the remains from a series of Middle Bronze IIB floors that extended from 114.20 m to 114.37 m a.s.l. These midden layers were identified during the 1986 season and represent the MB II floors with the highest elevation in Area K. 3.4.1.4. Area IV-Structure 8094

Hence, contexts from Level II correspond to Strata IVA and IVB.

To the northeast of Area I, the Tel Haror crew excavated Structure 8094 (Figure 3.1). Structure 8094 is adjacent to the northern perimeter wall of the enclosed area (Locus 8022) and is surrounded by one-brick thick walls, 8062 and 8069, and a World War I trench (Locus 8177). The structure was built in Stratum IVB. The structure's foundation exists on sterile kurkar bedrock that slopes gradually upward from Area I. The elevations of the kurkar floor from west to east across the structure range from 113.92 m to 113.87 m a.s.l. Inside 8094 were two rows of bricks which traversed the center of the room. As mentioned previously, additional remodeling to the structure was completed in Stratum IVA, as revealed by an additional row of bricks attached to the northern side of Wall 8069 (Figure 2.4). This new row of mud-bricks served either as a revetment wall, to support Wall 8069, or was a bench. Within Wall 8069 was a niche (Locus 8321) where excavators found faunal remains and unbaked clay cylinders.

Level III: Walls 8262, 8547, and 8751 from Level II, were built over a third tier of walls: Structure

High Elev.

Low Elev.

Stratum

8264 (EK 24)

113.22

n/a

V

8729 (EL 25)

113.14

n/a

IVB

8634 (EK 26)

113.20

112.28

IVB

Cultic Milieu

Wall 8634 was the foundation of Wall 8547. The elevations of these structures define the vertical limits of Level III: from 113.20 to 112.28 m a.s.l. (Figure 3.3b). Based on phases allocated to the walls in this stratum by Prof. Oren, Level III is associated with Strata IVB and V. To summarize, corresponding with structural foundations on the eastern side of the enclosed area, three levels were defined!, II, and III. Excavation units from all three levels are recorded in Appendix C and the analysis of the faunal material from these levels is featured below.

Animal bones were found on the floors (c. 113.90 m) of Structure 8094 and in the fill which extended upward to an elevation of 114.37 m. These remains comprised mostly disarticulated skeletons unlike many of the skeletons from Area I which were more complete. Room 8094 contains two levels and one independent locus (Figure 3.5):

3.4.1.3. Area Ill-The Courtyard Most of Area III is located in Square EL 22 (Figure 3.1 ). The boundaries of Area III include the northern perimeter wall of the enclosed area, Locus 8022, and Room 8094 to the north. To the east, south, and west the limits of Area III are defined by Turkish trenches (Locus 8177). The elevations of the kurkar bedrock in this area range between 113.72 m a.s.l. in Square EL 23 and 113.95 m a.s.l. in Square EL 22 (Figures 3.4a,b).

Wall 8022: Faunal material was excavated from the perimeter wall of the enclosed area built in Stratum IVB. These assemblages were found in Wall 8022 or adjacent to the edifice, in squares EK 22 and 23, and may represent artifacts from Strata IVA or IVB. These loci extend from 114.09 m to 114.37 m a.s.l. Level II (the earlier): Comprises the fill slightly below and above the kurkar bedrock floor which extends to the top of the mud-brick 'stands'. The stands were small mudbrick features that were built to a height of no more than 35 cm. The kurkar floor in Room 8094 measured c. 113.87 m a.s.l. at its deepest level. Excavators dug below this floor to 113.70

It was difficult to assign deposits above the kurkar floor of

Area III to strata. The sediment surrounding the deposits was uniform and comprised a light brown loess or darker brown mud-brick debris. The depths at which artifacts were found varied. In the northwest comer of Square EL 22, faunal 43

Jool D. Klonck

m and retrieved artifacts. Below 113.70 m a.s.l., the kurkar was culturally sterile. Above the floor, we retrieved archaeological material. The elevations for these deposits extend from the kurkar floor (ca. 113.87 m a.s.l.) to 114.08 m a.s.l.: the level at which the mud-brick stands, which run along the center of the room, were covered. These assemblages probably correspond to Stratum IVB, the phase in which Room 8094 was built.

A-Remains from Locus 8705-identified as an altar. Elevations for these deposits extend from 113.23 to 113.13ma.s.l. B-Debris on the steps and from the portico floor of Structure 8630. The elevation of these contexts range from 113.90 to 113.33 m a.s.l. C-Faunal remains on the entrance floor in front of the steps. The elevation for the floor of the entrance measures approximately 113 .11 m. a.s.l. Archaeological deposits from the entrance floor extend from 112.99 m to 113.38 m a.s.l. D-Fauna from the kurkar floor to the east of the entrance. The kurkar floor slopes down from an elevation of 113.73 m a.s.l. in the northeast quadrant of Square EN 23 to ca. 113.44 m a.s.l. an the north of Square EO 23. Hence, the elevations for the loci from this area of Level II vary from 113.86 to 113.41 m a.s.l.

Level I (the later): The vertical elevations of this level range from the top of the mud-brick stands and revetment wall or bench adjacent to Wall 8069 (ca. 114.08 m a.s.l.) to scatters of Middle Bronze II ceramic and faunal material (at ca. 114.51 m a.s.l.). Level I tentatively corresponds to Stratum IVA. One notable context in Area IV is a niche (Locus 8321) which was probably excavated in Stratum IVA and cuts through the revetment wall and Wall 8069. The faunal remains from Niche 8321 were associated with unbaked clay cylinders (Figure 3.7), the function of which is unknown, and ceramic vessels. The elevations ofNiche 8321 extend into the kurkar floor at 113.79 m a.s.l. and continue to a height of 114.01 m a.s.l. Since this feature was allocated to Stratum IVA, its remains are attributed to Level I.

Level I (the later): Faunal remains from the fill above the ceramic scatter in Level II. This level extends from 114.09 to 113.38 m a.s.l. and is located in Squares EN 23 and EO 23.

3.4.2. The Well

Similar to Levels III and II in Area I, the earth in Area IV comprised a dark ashy fill replete with ceramic vessels and faunal remains. Both Levels I and II comprised the same dark ashy fill. Furthermore, the stratigraphy of the fill did not indicate surfaces that might represent floors. Hence, the definition of two levels in Area IV was done primarily for research purposes-to facilitate the identification of any artifactual changes in the fill layer over time.

That the well was used as a venue for waste removal is revealed by its dark organic fill which contained mostly utilitarian pottery (i.e., kraters and storage jars) and animal bones from a wide range of species. Since the well was not excavated stratigraphically, all faunal remains from this deposit are analyzed together as part of a single unit.

3.4.3. Structure 8624 3.4.1.5. Area V-Entrance and Interior of Structure

8630

I am hesitant to call Structure 8624 a 'Donkey Burial'. Although, the structure itself represents the remains of a tomb containing an intact donkey skeleton, my analysis does not include the intact equid carcass at the foundation of this structure, but the faunal remains above the burial. These remains either represent equid remains placed on shelves in the tomb or comprise faunal material that was contained in the fill above the intact skeleton. Of import is that the fill above the burial was a mixture of remains from the tomb and from the collapse of the structure. Since, the delineation between these two contexts was not clear, I prefer not to use the term 'burial'. The term 'burial' denotes a condition that might not be attributable to a majority of the remains from Structure 8624. The bones from Structure 8624 are analyzed as a single unit, although distinctions are made between equid and non-equid remains.

The interior of Structure 8630 contained few fauna! remains. Assemblages originated from the structure's kurkar floor which lay between 113.73 and 113.75 m a.s.l. The deposits probably correspond to Stratum IVA, the period at which the structures in the enclosed area were abandoned. Deposits found at the entrance to Structure 8630 include those assemblages found in Squares EN 23, EO 22, and EO 23-the steps leading to the portico of Structure 8630 (Figures 2.4 & 3.1). Structures for this area range between 113.73 m a.s.l., the elevation of the top step, to 113.12 m a.s.l., the level of the floor in front of the steps. Most of the fauna! remains originate either from the floor in front of the edifice or on the steps. Also, remains were found on top of Locus 8705: the rectangular, plaster-lined structure that was identified as an altar. The base of this feature, found near the steps leading to Structure 8630, was 113.13 m a.s.l. The lowest elevation at which artifacts were retrieved was 113.02 m a.s.l. Below this elevation, the sediment was void of cultural debris.

3.5. IDENTIFICATION OF TAXA The principal problem that archaeozoologists face is that many bone fragments can not be identified to a particular species. These skeletal elements include cranial fragments, ribs, vertebrae, and limb bone shaft fragments. Below are descriptions of the taxa that were identified including

Level II (the earlier): Represents the faunal material from pottery scatters in front of the Structure 8630 and is divided into four contextual components: 44

Tho

zoological, historical, and archaeological discussions for each taxon.

Cultic Milieu

wide range of foodstuffs including sausages, peas, coffee, cigarettes, and paper (Harrison 1959: 356). Although Haror's inhabitants probably brought gazelle to the city after killing them in hunts, it is possible that some gazelles, especially young animals, may have been kept in captivity until they were slaughtered.

3.5.1. Bovid species: (Gazelle, Sheep, Goat, and Cattle)

3.5.1.2. Caprovine: Ovis aries (Domestic Sheep) and Capra hircus (Domestic Goat)

The remains of gazelle, sheep, and cattle were retrieved from the enclosed area, Stucture 8624, and the well. The enclosed area and the well also contained bones from goat; this species was not indentified in Structure 8624.

For this study, the identification of sheep and goat remains was a matter of dealing with a sample of caprovine ( Ovis and Capra) skeletal elements for which it was possible to distinguish between sheep and goat. Throughout the study morphological criteria from Prummel and Frisch (1986), Payne ( 1985), Boessneck ( 1969), and Boessneck, Muller and Teichert (1964) were used to differentiate between sheep and goat. It should be noted that the term 'caprovine' refers both to the entirety of all sheep and goat bones and also to a specific category. If a bone could not be identified as either from a sheep or a goat, the bone was recorded as caprovine (sheep or goat).

3.5.1.1. Gazella (Gazelle) Two species of gazelle are found today in Israel: the Mountain Gazelle, Gazella gazella; and the Dorcas Gazelle, Gazella dorcas (Harrison & Bates 1991: 196, 202). G. gazella was formerly divided into three subspecies: G. g. arabica, G. g. muscatensis, and G. g. gazella. These divisions were based on their differing color, pelage, flank stripes, and horn shapes. Harrison states, "Individual variation in coloration, markings and details of horn development, as well as in cranial and dental characters is so marked in Gazella that this genus presents one of the most difficult systematic problems in the region; there are few absolute characters by means of which the various forms can be reliably distinguished" (Harrison 1968: 356). Gazella gazella occur in the hills of Israel near Jerusalem, around Mt. Carmel, in Galilee, and south of the Dead Sea. They are very agile creatures maneuvering easily through broken terrain. According to Bodenheimer (1935), they usually give birth in the Spring but in years of drought may not reproduce.

Sheep were most likely domesticated ca. 7000 B.C. from the Asiatic mouflon ( Ovis orientalis ). Although there are six wild species of sheep in the Middle East, Asia, and North America, only Ovis orientalis has the same number of chromosomes, 2n = 54, as Ovis aries (Davis 1987: 130). Davis (1976: 155) mentions that paucity of sheep horn cores in Arad is probably related to the presence of hornless sheep which have been identified as early as the Neolithic at in Nea Nikomedea.

The only other gazelle in Israel, Gazella dorcas, is smaller than G. gazella and has long straight horns in contrast to the curved, lyrate horns of G. gazella. This species inhabits the Sinai and Southern Negev and its range correlates with the location of Acacia trees (Harrison & Bates 1991: 202).

Cuneiform documents from the Ur Ill period (2060-1950 B.C.), make reference to the existence of 'mountain-sheep seed' which suggests the breeding of 0. aries and 0. orientalis hybrids (Steinkeller 1989: 4,5).

The differences between the two gazelles are their sizes, cranial features, and the shape of their horn cores. G. gazella has groove(s) along the anterior edge of the horn core while in G. dorcas the groove( s) are on the posterior edge (Tchernov, Dayan, & Yom-Tov 1986/7: 52). Davis (1980) has recorded tooth eruption and wear rates and epiphyseal fusion stages for both species of gazelle. By 20 months of age, both gazelles have fully erupted molars and complete fusion on most of their epiphyses (Davis 1980: 130-133).

Early Dynastic (2850-2360 B.C.) texts from Mesopotamia show that flock sizes for sheep varied between 22 and 140 adults with an average of 68 sheep. Records from other periods also mention flock sizes: from Old Akkadian texts (23602180 B.C.)-between 200 and 500 animals; at Lagash during the Early Dynastic period-an average of20 animals; from Ur Ill (2060-1950 B.C.) accounts-25 to 60 sheep; and from Old Babylonian contracts (1830-1530 B.C. )-flocks range from 4 to 185 animals with an average of37 (Green 1980: 11).

The gazelle bones from Tel Haror are more similar to corresponding skeletal elements of Gazella gazella than they are to the bones of G. dorcas, based on what I observed in Jerusalem's Zoology Lab. That remains of Gazella gazella were found in Middle Bronze contexts at Tel Haror is not surprising given the wide range of the species which extends from Jerusalem to south of the Dead Sea. The Haror remains indicate that both young and old gazelle were killed and butchered by Haror's inhabitants. Although it is usually assumed that gazelles were hunted, Harrison has reported that gazelles kept in captivity were docile and very playful (Harrison 1959). He also noted that the captive gazelles ate a

Mesopotamian texts indicate that reproduction rates in flocks of sheep varied considerably and were poorer than birth rates for goat herds. Early Dynastic tablets indicate an average reproduction rate of 40 percent while Ur III (2060-1950 B.C.) accounts mention percentages of 25 and 48 percent. Old Babylonian texts contain the highest average reproduction rate-68 percent. Furthermore, the production of dairy products among sheep comprised only 16 percent of the milk production of goats (Green 1980: 14). Furthermore, Early Dynastic texts mention 10: 1 and 7 :2 female to male ratios although equal numbers of males and 45

Jool D. Klonck

females are often reported. Many of these male sheep may represent castrates as suggested by several mentions of 'woolsheep' (Green 1980: 11). The 10:1 proportion most likely represents a female to breeding male ratio.

with C. hircus. Their most common produce was a fermented product probably like buttermilk or yogurt, and dairy production in female goats was "six times that per ewe" (Green 1980: 9, 14). From Lagash, Early Dynastic tablets mentioned that goat herds delivered butter and cheese, and Ur III (20601950 B.C.) documents note a transaction involving the delivery of cheese, butter, and goat hair (Green 1980: 14). Goat herds were smaller than flocks of sheep and varied between 10 to 50 adults-an average of 26 animals. Old Babylonian herding contracts range from 1 to 85 animals with an average of 19 goats. Reproductive rates for goat herds are listed as ca. 50 percent.

Goats were domesticated ca. 7000 B.C.-most likely from one of the two species that exist in the Middle East today: Capra ibex (ibex) and Capra aegagrus (bezoar goat). Capra ibex or the ibex is found in arid climates such as the Sinai, Negev, and Southwestern Arabia. The ibex and the domesticated goat, Capra hircus, have the same number of chromosomes. Furthermore, research conducted by D. Ratner from Kibbutz Lahav, showed that the ibex and domestic goat are able to breed and produce fertile offspring (D. Ratner; personal communication).The second wild goat is today found in Turkey and Persia. Capra aegagrus or the bezoar goat has horns with a developed anterior keel that is similar to the domesticated goat and is therefore thought to be the most likely ancestor of Capra hircus although either species may have been interbred with Capra ibex at a later period (Davis 1987: 127, 132).

3.5.1.3. Bos taurus (Cattle) Analysis of the morphometric data of Bos remains suggest that cattle (Bos taurus) were first domesticated from their wild ancestor, the auroch (B. primigenius) during the sixth millenium B.C. This domestication process occurred in the Near East (i.e., Western Anatolia, Syria, and the LevantGrigson 1989: 98).

From Early Bronze II contexts (c. 2950-2650 B.C.) at Arad, Davis (1976: 155) identified 51 goat horn cores: 44 featured twisted horns with anterior keels, seven were scimitar shaped, and four were similar to C. ibex cores and possessed a flat anterior surface. He suggests that the differing morphology in the Capra horn cores indicates that either ibex was hunted by the inhabitants of Arad or were crossbred with goats at that time (Davis 1976: 155).

Early Dynastic texts (2850-2360 B.C.) mention cattle accounts with 'herds' of two to four cows. Furthermore, two tablets mention that cattle were bred with bulls from outside the herd (Green 1980: 11). Furthermore, phrases in Ur III (2060-1950) tablets mention domesticated cattle and "wild-cattle seed" which seems to indicate the presence of wild cattle hybrids (Steinkeller 1989: 5).

Additional evidence for crossbreeding come from philological sources. Steinkeller (1989) notes that Ur III (2060-1950 B.C.) tablets have words which represent domesticated goat, wild goat, and "the term a-dara4/darah, to be translated "wild-goat seed," [which] designates a hybrid resulting from the interbreeding of the domestic goat with its wild counterpart (Steinkeller 1989: 4)."

During Egypt's Twelfth Dynasty (1991-1798 B.C.) cattle herds were transported from Canaan to Egypt, as the result of war or commerce. The tomb of Thuthotpe, built during the reign ofSesostris III (1878-1843 B.C.), contains several references to 'cattle from Retenu' that reached Egypt after they 'wandered across the sand' (Posener 1985: 542). Since textual sources note that Thuthotpe had a residence at Megiddo and Sesostris III conducted a military campaign against Shechem, it is possible that these files of cattle represent booty from conflict. Also at Megiddo, was found an MB Ila seal of an Egyptian 'steward, accountant of cattle' (Posener 1985: 543). Exploitation of Canaan for its cattle is documented in the later periods. When Tuthmosis III conquered Megiddo ca. 1430 B.C. Egyptian spoils from the battle included 2000 head of cattle (Posener 1985: 543).

Amschler (1937: 228) mentioned another breed of goat, referred to as Capra girgentana, which he stated "now inhabits Sicily." He identified the breed by the goat's shapely twisted horn cores which extend diagonally upward from the cranium. Amschler further identified the breed in antiquity with three types of evidence: a statuette of a 'ram' from the grave of Queen Shubad at Ur (ca. 3000 B.C.); murals from the Beni Hassan period (ca. 2000 B.C.) in Egypt; and zoological remains from an Early Dynastic (3000-2530 B.C.) context at Kish (Amschler 1937: 226-228).

3.5.2. Cervidae: Roe Deer, Red Deer, and Fallow Deer.

This breed of goat is also known as the 'Mamber Goat' and is found throughout the Near East since the Neolithic period. Gaillard (1934: 78-81) notes that Mamber goat horn cores were excavated in a Neolithic period context at Tukh in Upper Egypt. Furthermore, Mamber horn cores were excavated in Egyptian tombs and are documented in pictorial art (Lortet & Gaillard 1903: 107-110; 1907: 77-79). Also, Bate (1938: 210) identified a Mamber goat horn core from a Chalcolithic Tomb (910) at Megiddo.

Remains from Roe Deer ( Capreolus capreolus) and Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) or Fallow Deer (Dama dama or Dama mesopotamica) were found in the enclosed area, Structure 8624, and the well. 3.5.2.1. Capreolus capreolus (Roe Deer) The Roe Deer or Capreolus capreolus , was the smallest species of deer in the Southern Levant. The other two deer, Fallow Deer (Dama dama or Dama mesopotamica) and Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) are much larger than Capreolus and

From Mesopotamia, Early Dynastic (2850-2360 B.C.) tablets mention goat herding strategies and the produce associated 46

Tho

Cultic Milieu

The paucity of published reports for pig bones from sites in Israel and the overlap in osteological measurements between wild and domesticated pig (Sus scrofa domesticus) make it difficult for zooarchaeologists to differentiate between the two. Generally, smaller forms of Sus are considered domesticates while larger animals may indicate the presence of wild species (Flannery 1983). Pigs were first domesticated in the Near East around 6000 B.C. Domestic pigs have 38 chromosomes which is similar to the count from wild pigs in Israel, Europe, and the Far East (Davis 1987: 127,130).

are discussed below. This small gray colored deer occupies a wide range: from Britain to Eastern Siberia including Arabia and the Levant (Harrison & Bates 1991: 207). C. capreolus was sighted in Israel at the turn of the century in the northern Jordan Valley, between Tyre and the Lake of Galilee, and around Mt. Carmel (Tristam 1876). Capreolus prefers hilly forested regions and thin woodland and feeds on leaves, grass, berries, and forest fruits (Harrison & Bates 1991: 209). Today it is found only in captive herds in the Middle East. Harrison notes that its recent disappearance from Israel and the Near East was due to deforestation and increased hunting and that "Roe will surely disappear from the region altogether unless conservation measures are adopted urgently to save both the species and its habitat from extirpation" (Harrison 1968: 371).

Grigson (1987: 231) suggests that the distribution of Sus during the Chalcolithic (ca. 4300-3300 B.C.) correlates with the ancient boundary of the 300 mm isohyet. This limit separates the agricultural land, where sedentary farming is possible, from the lower Negev, where ancient populations could only exist by raising sheep and goat herds and by practicing seasonal agriculture. Grigson (1987) also suggests that domestic pigs were scarce below the 300 mm isoyhet because they subsist primarily on agricultural byproducts and need more water than caprovines and cattle.

The location of Capreolus bones in Middle Bronze deposits at Tel Haror probably indicates that either Roe Deer ranged as far south as the Northern Negev or that it was killed farther north and then transported south to Tel Haror. 3.5.2.2. Larger Cervidae (Deer)

Tel Jemmeh is located below the 300 mm isoyhet but along a wadi; 12% of the Middle Bronze IIB faunal material (N=2500) at this site is from Sus. Water control around Jemmeh, and possibly the presence of a wetter environment as suggested by the avian remains, might help account for the relative high percentage of domestic pig at J emmeh. The site with the largest frequency of pig bones (34 %), Tell el Hayyat, is located on the eastern bank of the Jordan River (Hesse 1990: 211-212). Although Tell el Hayyat's proximity to water is more suitable for pig, few Sus remains were found in the temple complex of this city. This factor might indicate the avoidance of this animal in temple rituals.

In ancient times three other species of large cervid were present in Israel: Red Deer, Cervus elaphus; Persian Fallow Deer, Dama mesopotamica; and Dama dama, Fallow Deer. Red Deer exists today only in Europe and in Northern Syria. D. mesopotamica can be differentiated from D. dama by its larger size and antlers which are flattened on their basal side and possess a smaller brow tine. The antlers on D. dama have a larger brow tine and are flattened on their palmate side (Harrison 1968: 365). Tristam (1888) reports that Dama species inhabited northern Palestine and southern Lebanon at the turn of the century. Today, D. mesopotamica survives only in the remote woodlands of Kurdistan and in captive herds (Harrison & Bates 1991: 207).

Hesse (1990) suggests that an increase in the size of Middle Bronze II cities corresponds to a decrease in the amount pig bones:

Hilzheimer (1941) identified D. mesopotamica bones from Mesopotamian archaeological loci at Uruk, Tell Halaf, and Tel Asmar; these contexts dated from 3000 to 2400 B.C. In addition, Dama (spc.) antler fragments and postcranial remains were identified from Iron Age contexts at Tel Beit Shemesh, Israel (Klenck 1991). Other remains, either Dama or C. elaphus, include those retrieved from Tell Aphek and Tell Dalit in Early Bronze I/II (3300-2700 B.C.) and Middle Bronze II (2000-1650 B.C.) contexts (Hellwing & Gophna 1984: 50-51 ).

Site

Size (acres)

Aphek

25

Jemmeh

%Pig 8%

12

12%

Ifshar

5

23%

Hayyat

1

34%

In light of these correlations, Hesse suggests that pig production was a rural subsistence strategy in the Middle Bronze Age (Hesse 1990: 211, 212).

3.5.3. Suidae (Pig) 3.5.4. Canidae: Dog Harrison & Bates notes that there are two sub-species of wild pig (Sus scrofa) in Asia today. Sus scrofa attila is found in Iraq, Iran, and to the north of the Black and Caspian seas. Sus scrofa libycus is indigenous to the Levant (Harrison & Bates 1991: 211 ). From modern studies it is understood that wild pigs can adapt to most environments and in Iraq are considered agricultural pests (Harrison 1968: 375). In Israel, they are found in almost all habitats except the Sinai and are present in the northern Negev (Harrison 1968: 375).

The earliest evidence for the domestic dog, Canisfamiliaris, comes from Natufian sites at Ein Mallaha (Eynan) and Hayonim terrace. A puppy at Mallaha was buried complete with a human whose hand covered the thorax of the little dog's body. Davis and Valla (1978) measured the mesio-distal lengths of the mandibular teeth of these fossil dogs, specifically the last milk molar and first molar (dp4 and M 1), and compared the measurements with those of modern domestic dogs, wolves, and jackals. The comparisons 47

Jool D. Klonck

suggested that the puppy "was either a dog or a wolf, but not a jackal, being outside the size range of the latter" (Davis and Valla 1978: 1). The Ml measurements, based on statistical analysis, suggested that the fossil species were domestic dogs, not small wolves (Davis and Valla 1978: 2).

extremities such as the metacarpus and first phalanx (Bokonyi 1972: 16). The search for new osteometric differences is ongoing based primarily on measurement definitions such as those provided by von den Driesch (1976) and Eisenmann (1986).

Other early Canis.familiar is remains include those excavated at Starr Carr in England, carbon dated to 7538+350 b.c.; C,::ayonii, Turkey (ca. 7500 b.c. ); Mugharet el 'Aliya, Morocco, and Haditha, Iraq (ca. 7000 b.c.); and deposits at Jericho (7500-6000 b.c.-Lawrence 1967: 56, 57; Zeuner 1958: 53).

In terms of osteometric analyses, Eisenmann and Beckouche ( 1986) provide a detailed analysis of metacarpus and metatarsus measurements taken from modem and fossil donkeys, horses, hemiones, and their hybrids. Their study provides osteometric data by which zoologists might differentiate between these three equid species and, in some respect, mules and hinnies. In addition, Dive and Eisenmann ( 1991) illustrate that the anteroposterior dimorphism of the first phalanx in equids can also be used to help differentiate between equid species and their hybrids. These are osteometric signatures for horses, hemiones, and donkeys although there is overlap and the limited sample size of some of the hybrid groups and fossil equids make interpretations tentative.

Clutton-Brock reported the retrieval from Tell Brak of a C. familiaris skeleton which she claims is comparable to the Saluki or Persian Greyhound, "traditionally held to be one of the oldest breeds of dog in the world" (Clutton-Brock 1989: 219). The dog skeleton was found in a courtyard associated with artifacts of the Akkadian period and uncalibrated carbon dates between 2580-2455 b.c. The canid at Brak is 4 cm shorter at the shoulder than the modem Saluki, slightly more robust, and possesses a shorter jaw and slightly larger teeth which Clutton-Brock (1989: 219) states is expected "in an ancient, less highly bred dog."

Two species of equids were found at Tel Haror. All equid bones from Structure 8624 represented donkey (E. asinus) remains. Furthermore, 62 of 72 equid remains from the well (86.1 %) were from donkey. These identifications were based on 1) V-shaped linguflexids on the molars; 2) visual comparisons with other E. asinus remains at the zooarchaeology labs at U. of Jerusalem and Harvard; and 3) osteometric comparisons between the equid data from Tel Haror and other studies by Eisenmann & Beckouche (1986) and Dive & Eisenmann (1991-see Appendix D3).

3.5.5. Equidae (Horse, Donkey, and Half-Asses) The genus Equus divided into three species with the advent of the Pleistocene: the donkey (Equus (Asinus) africanus) resided in northern Africa; the asiatic ass or onager (Equus hemionus) occupied areas in Middle East and East Asia, especially Mongolia; and the horse (Equus ferus) inhabited regions generally to the north of the the onager from Western Europe into Central Asia (Bokonyi 1972: 12). Equus ferus was the first equid to be domesticated-ca. 4000 B.C. possibly in southern Russia or the Ukraine. Around 3500 B.C., populations in North Africa may have domesticated the donkey (Davis 1987: 127). Soon thereafter, the horse and donkey were introduced to the Near East through Anatolia and the Levant and then throughout the centuries were crossbred with each other and hemiones for hybrid vigour. The intermingling of three species, producing hybrids such as the mule and hinny, and specialized breeding programs which created giant and dwarf breeds in the horse and donkey grossly complicates the differentiation between ancient equids using osteometric methods. Even if a skeleton is identified to one of the subgenera, it is still possible that the remains represent a hybrid (Bokonyi 1972: 13).

Ten equid bones from the well did not belong to E. asinus. These were difficult to assign to a particular species. The linguflexids did not possess a rounded U-shape exhibited in horse (E. caballus) molars or a clear V-shape similar to other donkey (E. asinus) molars excavated at Tel Haror. In addition, osteometric data, from first phalanx and metapodial measurements, suggest that these bones belonged to either a large onager (E. hemionus), small horse (E. caballus), or hybrid (see Appendix D3.4 & D3.5). The earliest representations of an equid pulling a wheeled vehicle, which M.A. Littauer and J. Crouwel (1973) call a straddle car, occurs on the 'Vulture Stela' and other illustrations from the Early Dynastic period (2850-2350 B.C.). The straddle car was a chariot-like vehicle. A single human rider would straddle a pole that acted as an axle to which the wheels were attached. The rider could sit on the pole or stand on treads to absorb the shock of fast motion (Littauer & Crouwel 1973: 325).

The earliest mention of equids in written documents comes from a tablet from Uruk dating to the Jemdet Nasr period (ca. 3100-2850 B.C.). Throughout the Early Dynastic period (ca. 2850-2350 B.C.), manuscripts make mention of the horse, donkey, hemione, and hybrids such as the mule, hinny, and perhaps hemione/donkey offspring (Zarins 1978).

From Old Babylonian terrracotta reliefs dating to the early second millennium B.C., two representations of small equids appear (Littauer 1971: 24, Plt. IV). These pictorials, from Warka (Uruk) show equids pulling a chariot and a human riding bareback. It is unclear, however, which species of equid these plates represent. The three possibilities include a small form of Equus caballus or horse like that found today in Iran (the "Caspian pony"), donkey (E. asinus), or hemione (E. hemionus). Larger horses were excavated at Bogazkoy,

The three species are differentiated using three methods: 1) the shapes oftheforamina supraorbitalia or the perforations on the cranium; 2) the form of the protocone and other characteristics on the grinding surfaces of molars and premolars; and 3) osteometric analysis of the bones of the 48

Tho

Turkey in deposits that date between the 17th and 15th centuries B.C. According to Littauer (1971), these larger horses had an impact on warfare in the 13th century B. C. On Hittite reliefs commemorating the Battle of Kadesh, equids are shown pulling a chariot with three warriors and are portrayed as a larger species compared to equids in Egyptian murals which are smaller and carry only two men (Littauer 1971: 26).

Cultic Milieu

B.C. (Clutton-Brock 1992: 56). Clutton-Brock (1992: 56) states that these horse remains "are very unlikely, on biogeographical grounds, to be from wild horses, the indications are that all the horse remains of this period from Anatolia are also from very early domestic animals." At Arad, a collection of equid bones was analyzed from contexts dating to the Early Bronze II (c. 2950-2650 B.C.Davis 1976: 153). Davis (1976) focused his study on the mandibular and maxillary teeth and metacarpals of these equids. The mandibular teeth resembled those of E. asinus and possessed a V-shaped lingual sulcus, not U-shaped-typical of E. cabal/us or the horse (Davis 1976: 158, 160). For the metacarpals he measured the diameter of the intercondyle and the distal width and plotted the measurements on a scatter diagram with osteometric data from modern and ancient horses, donkeys, and hemiones. Two of the metacarpal measurements resembled those of fossil and modern horses which led Davis to conclude that the two metacarpals originated from "a small horse or mule" (Davis 1976: 159, 161).

Posener (1985: 552) notes that the Middle Bronze Ila inhabitants of Canaan " ...used the ass not only as a beast of burden, but as a mount, even for princes ...the Egyptians on several occasions in the mines of Sinai depicted a ...noble riding an ass, the animal being led by a servant holding a rope or halter fixed by a ring to its nose." 3.5.5.1. Equus asinus (Donkey) Clutton-Brock (1989) identified a donkey skeleton, Equus asinus, from a courtyard at Tell Brak built during the Akkadian period, the deposit being carbon dated to 2580-2455 b.c. Although the skull of the animal was crushed, its mandibles showed a visible female characteristic-rudimentary canine teeth. Based on tooth wear, the author determined the age of the donkey at death was "approximately ten years old" (Clutton-Brock 1989: 217).

Clutton-Brock identified a horse from the fortress of Buhen, dating to c. 1965 B.C. The 19 year-old equid displayed wear on the second premolars which was probably caused by a metal bit (Clutton-Brock 1974). Other horse remains of E. cabal/us found in Egypt include those retrieved at Soleb dating to the Eighteenth Dynasty (1580-1350 B.C.-Ducos 1971) and in the tomb ofSen-Mut at Thebes (1430-1400 B.C.-Boessneck 1970).

The equid was identified as a donkey based on three characteristics. First, the flat interstylar faces, narrow mesostyle, and short protocone, on the upper molars and premolars, and the strongly V-shaped linguflexid, shallow ectaflexid with rudimentary pli, and long postflexid, on the mandibular teeth, were used to support the identification of Equus asinus. Second, the ratio between the lengths of the radius and metacarpus was used to identify the presence of E. asinus as opposed to an onager (E. hemionus). CluttonBrock states, "If the lengths of the [radius and metacarpus] are expressed as a ratio it is found that in hemiones the length of the metacarpal bone is always more than 70% of the radius length, while in the true asses it is always less than 70%. In the donkey from Tell Brak the ratio of metacarpal length to radius length is 67%" (Clutton-Brock 1989: 218). Furthermore, the proportion of mid-shaft breadth to metacarpal length in asses is greater or equal to 12.4%, while in hemiones the proportion is between 11% and 12.7% (Clutton-Brock 1989: 218). At Tell Brak, the shaft width is 12.9% of the metacarpal length. The Tell Brak metacarpals are compared to equid metapodials from Sumerian contexts at Abu-Salabikh and Tell Madhhur. The metacarpals from the latter two sites possess thicker shafts and are slightly longer. Although hemiones were never domesticated, CluttonBrock suggests that based on the evidence from Abu-Salabikh and Tell Madhhur, the Sumerians probably crossbred their imported domestic donkeys with wild onagers to produce sterile crossbreeds with hybrid vigour (Clutton-Brock 1989: 218).

In Canaan , the only horse remains that have been identified come from Tell el-Ajjul and are radiocarbon dated to 3400 + 120 BP (Clutton-Brock 1992: 83). We excavated the remains of at least two species of equids at Tel Haror. The remains of E. asinus were identified by the Vshaped lingual sulcus on their mandibular teeth, post-cranial morphological distinctions, and osteometric comparisons. Donkey remains were found in the temenos, well, and Structure 8624. The other equid species, retrieved only from the well, was more difficult to identify. The lingual sulcus, on the mandibular teeth, was a cross between V-shaped and Ushaped. Furthermore, osteometric measurements are between the ranges of E. hemionus and E. cabal/us (see Appendices D5 &D6). For this study, I term this species 'Horse/Hemione' indicating the species could be either or a crossbreed.

3.5.6. Avian Remains: Crow, Raven, and Stork.

Raven bones were found only in the enclosed area and comprise the majority of the bird remains found in this area. Crow bones are also prominent in the enclosed area and one crow element was identified from the well fauna. Stork bones were found in both the enclosed area and the well. Structure 8624 did not contain any avian remains.

3.5.5.2. Equus cabal/us (Horse)

3.5.6.1. Corvidae (Raven and Crow)

C. Grigson has identified horse bones from the Chalcolithic sites at Shiqmim and Grar dating to the fourth millennium

We excavated the remains of at least two species of the avian family to which ravens and crows belong (Corvidae). The 49

Jool D. Klonck

species were determined by first identifying the bones to the Corvidae family by using morphological characteristics illustrated in Avian Osteology by RM. Gilbert (1981) and then comparing the corvid bones to the skeletons of different corvid species found in Israel today. These specimens are located in the Zoology Lab of the Givat Ram Campus at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The five species that are most comparable morphologically to the bones from Tel Haror are those of Corvus ruficollis, C. corone, C. corax, C. rhipidurus, and C. monedula. Of these, two are most similar to the corvid remains from Haror. At Haror we have a larger species whose bones best match those of C. ruficollis and a smaller bird with skeletal characteristics like those of C. corone. To support these identifications I recorded bone dimensions for the five aforementioned corvid species in Israel (following von den Driesch 1976). These dimensions were then compared to the specimens from Tel Haror (see Appendices El & E2).

nesting season begins at the end of January or early February. The nests are built on steep cliffs and in trees, especially Atlantic pistachia in the Negev's high ground or in acacias in the eastern Negev. Females usually lay a clutch of 4-5 eggs at the end of February or in March. Chicks inhabit the nest for ca. five weeks. In oases or near food sources, there is occasionally evidence of second broods (Paz 1987: 235-236). Tchernov (1980) identified three species ofCorvidae: Corvus corax, C. cornix, and C. monedula, at 'Ubeidiya, c. 900 kya. The first two forms are found in mountain landscapes, and woodlands, respectively. C. monedula is a winter visitor in Israel and breeds there. Tchernov states that all three species "were found to be identical with the living forms, suggesting an evolutionary conservation in this group" (Tchernov 1980: 61). Not much is known about the use of Corvidae in the ancient Near East. In the New World, the retrieval of partial skeletons, articulated wings, and bone caches ofCorvidae indicates that the skins and feathers of these birds were used in Pueblo ceremonies and costumes (Emslie 1981: 323-325, 327). More applicable to Near Eastern sites are the factors that facilitated the capture of crow and raven by Pueblo populations. First, expansion of agriculture land and irrigation fostered an increase in the wild and cultivated seeds and grains that were deposited in the fields. Second, the Pueblos existed in a border zone between the open grasslands on the flood plains and marsh and riparian areas along rivers (Emslie 1981: 319-321). Seeds and grains from the fields and food from trash dumps and irrigationditches attracteda variety ofbirds to this ecological border zone. Raptors and scavengers especially were drawn to this area because of the increasing populations of insects, small mammals, and other birds (Emslie 1981: 321 ).

Corvus corone or the Hooded Crow is divided by ornithologists into six subspecies with ranges extending throughout Eurasia. The Hooded Crow's body length is 4349 cm and weight is c. 460 g (Paz 1987: 233). C. corone is omnivorous and is known to eat carrion, chicks, eggs, birds, rodents, and seeds. This species usually gathers in flocks of 10-100 around piles of domestic refuse. Although mated pairs sometime live together throughout the year in territories, they usually only leave the flock during the nesting season. Tristam considered this species the most common crow in Israel. The range of Corvus corone extends all over Israel but is especially prevalent in the Jericho Region (Paz 1987: 233). The nesting season for C. corone begins in December. Nests are usually built in the forks of tall trees, especially eucalyptus. Nests are also located in cypress, oak, sycamore, and mulberry. Four to six eggs are usually laid in February or March. The chicks leave the nest after one month but often return in intervals to live near the nest for two weeks to several months. At the end of the summer, the entire family usually joins the flock (Paz 1987: 233).

The corvids at Haror were probably trapped with nets. According to Gerleman (1946) the Hebrew words for trap: moqes and pah signify bird traps. Furthermore, the Sumerian word for hunting-nigin, corresponds to an ideogram of a net. Furthermore, birds are frequently portrayed as being netted in Egyptian and Mesopotamian art (Firmage 1992: 1113).

Corvus ruficollis or the 'Brown-necked Raven' is a large pas serine with a body length of 51-55 cm and weight of 550830g. This raven was considered a subspecies of the Common Raven, but is regarded today as an independent species by a majority of ornithologists. C. ruficollis is a desert bird, whose range extends from the western Sahara to northeast India. In northern Israel the Brown-necked Raven's range borders that of the Common Raven, with little overlap (Paz 1987: 234).

3.5.6.2. Cinconia cinconia {White Stork)

Remains of Cinconia cinconia from the enclosed area and well were identified using comparative material from the Zoology Lab at Hebrew University of Jerusalem.The White Stork is a large bird with a weight of 2.3 to 3.7 kg, a wing span of 180 cm, and a body length of 99 to 112 cm (Paz 1987: 32). The White Stork breeds in the Western Palaeartic and winters in Africa. On their flight to wintering areas in Africa, C. cinconia migrates through Israel from late July to early October. On their flight to nesting sites in Northeastern Europe, these storks are again visible in Israel from February to mid-May (Paz 1987: 32-33). During migration storks travel in groups of hundreds and thousands of individuals and conserve energy by gliding over thermals, or "currents of warm air rising from land during the day (Firmage 1992: 1144)." In 1972 and 1984, 340,000 and 310,000 individuals of C. cinconia were recorded in Israel (Paz 1987: 33). Although many storks migrate through Israel, very few pairs

Corvus ruficollis pairs stake out territories while unpaired individuals, especially juveniles, live in flocks. Like C. corone, Brown-necked Ravens usually inhabit refuse-dumps, settlements, and army camps. Flocking ravens roost communally in groups of dozens to hundreds of birds (Paz 1987: 235). Brown-necked Ravens eat insects, reptiles, birds, mammals (just killed or carrion), vegetables, and fruit. C. ruficollis is commonly found in Israel in the Negev and Judean Desert and its range extends as far north as Samaria. The bird's 50

Tho

Cultic Milieu

3.6.1. The Enclosed Area

nest in the region. In the absence of good flying conditions, these birds usually congregate close to water, especially the shores of the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea (Paz 1987: 33). This species does not migrate from their breeding grounds in Africa until they are sexually mature at ca. four year of age. The diet of C. cinconia primarily comprises frogs, snakes, and mice (Paz 1987: 33). In ancient times, the White Stork may have bred in Israel. Psalm 54: 17 mentions, "The stork makes its home in cypresses."

The non-burial faunal assemblages from Area I or the 'altar area' are dominated by caprovine (sheep and goat) and cattle bones (Table 3 .1 ). Many of the elements such as ribs, vertebrae, and mandible fragments were not specifically identified to caprovines and there is a chance that these remains originated from gazelle or deer. These bones were assigned to the "medium ungulate" category. Fragmentary specimens that might have come from any medium sized mammal were allocated to the medium mammal category. It is highly probable that these remains are actually from sheep or goat; no mature dog remains were found in the temenos at Tel Haror and puppy bones were distinguishable from caprovine bones by their small size and rough, porous texture. Pig (Sus scrofa) bones have greater robusticity than ungulate remains, and there is a greater probability that Sus remains were allocated to the 'medium/large' mammal category.

3.6. TAXON ABUNDANCE The methods used to document the number of animals from an archaeological site depend on the contexts in which the remains were found. The two types of contexts that are differentiated in this thesis are burials and non-burials. Burials are represented at Tel Haror by skeletons that Haror's inhabitants purposefully deposited in small pits (favissot) or in the large depression-Locus 8253. Due to the relative completeness of these skeletons, the remains from burials will be discussed separately from 'non-burial' faunal material. The latter comprise the faunal remains from midden floors and fill layers and represent refuse material. These faunal remains were affected to a greater extent by taphonomic processes (e.g., butchery practices, aeolian and colluvial processes) than were the skeletons from the burials. The 'burial fauna' from the enclosed area is discussed in Chapter 4.

Several trends are apparent in the faunal remains between the levels in Area I. In Level IV, canid and corvid remains belonged to burial clusters and are treated in the following section on burials. However, in Levels I, II, and III, some corvid and canid bones could not be attributed to specific burials although they most likely originated in burials. As they could not be allocated to any specific cluster, they are presented as non-burial faunal remains. From Area I, corvid and dog remains are more prevalent in Levels III and II than in Level I. Twenty-five of 1,624 skeletal fragments (1.5%) in Level III comprise bird and canid remains. Level II has a similar proportion of bird and puppy bones. [The terms "proportion" and "percentage" are used interchangeably below.] Of 692 remains from Level II, ten or 1.4% are corvid or canids. Only three raven bones (0.8%) were retrieved from Level I.

Two procedures are used to quantify faunal remains from fill layers in the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. These are the NISP and MNI. The Number ofldentified Specimens or NISP is the number of bone and tooth fragments identified to a taxon or animal group. The NISP is problematic in sites with poorly recovered samples where larger animals might be over-represented and smaller animals under-represented (e.g., the fauna from Sitagroi, Greece-Payne 1972: 10,11). In addition, the NISP may exaggerate the presence of an animal that has more bones in its skeleton than do other species (e.g., pigs have more foot bones than cattle which have more than equids). Also, fragmentary assemblages may increase NISP values if fragmented parts of the same bone are counted several times (Chase and Hagaman 1987: 79).

Fish bones were only retrieved from Level III where they comprise 0.1 % of the total number of specimens. Two domestic pig (Sus scrofa) bones were identified from each of Levels IV and II. Three gazelle bones were retrieved in Levels IV. However, one adult and one juvenile (unfused and much smaller) first phalanx indicate the presence of at least two gazelles in Level IV-the same MNI value (2) was also derived from the goat remains from this level, but from 17 specimens (Table 3.6).

The Minimum Number of Individuals or MNI at Tel Haror was determined by recording the most prevalent side of the most common skeletal part per taxon. Criticisms leveled against the MNI include arguments that the MNI overestimates scarce animals. For example, a species represented by one bone might receive the same MNI value as a species represented by 100 elements (Grayson 1984). More problematic are Chase and Hagaman's (1987) assertion that the MNI is not an estimate of (n) or the original number of individuals but an estimate of (n) affected by the recovery rate (r) (Chase and Hagaman 1987: 77, 78). Hence, retrieval methods might serve to decrease MNI values for certain taxa.

Proportionally, there is a decrease in the ratio of sheep to goat remains from Levels IV to I. The percentage of goat compared to sheep remains increases from 16.3%, to 23.9%, to 36.8%, and 44.4% in Levels IV, III, II, and I, respectively (Table 3.3, Figure 3.6). Like NISP values, MNI amounts for sheep and goat bones from Area I show increasing proportions of goats compared to sheep from Levels IV thru I (Table 3.6). Also increasing from Levels IV to I are the proportion of cattle and large mammal faunal material compared to caprovine, medium ungulate, and medium mammal remains (Table 3.4, Figure 3.8). The proportion of large mammal remains increases from 4.4%, to 4.8%, to 7.5%, and 8.2% in

NISP and MNI indices for non-burial fauna from the enclosed area, and all taxa in Structure 8624 and the well, are discussed below. 5i

Jool D. Klonck

Levels IV, Ill, II, and I, respectively. MNI counts (Table 3 .6) show an MNI of one animal from Levels I, II, and III, and two from IV. The faunal remains from Area II or the 'eastern rooms' are mostly similar in relative taxanomic abundance to those from Area I except in two respects. A greater proportion of corvid and canid remains from non-burial contexts were identified from contexts in Level I than from Levels II and III (Table 3.1). These remains may indicate that the canid and corvid remains from Level I come from disturbed burials of Level II. More canid and corvid burials were found in Levels Ill and II than in Level I (see Chapter 4). As in Area I, the remains of fish and gazelle are found in the earlier level (Ill). Also, the ratio of sheep to goat bone decreases from Levels Ill to I. Proportions of goat bone, compared to sheep, increase from 30.8% and 28.6% in Levels III and II to 40.0% in Level I (Table 3.3). Although the numbers are small, MNI values indicate equal sheep to goat ratios in Levels I and Ill (Table 3.6). Only in Level II, do MNI values indicate a decrease in goats as compared to sheep. Furthermore, proportions of large mammal remains do not show a steady increase from Levels Ill to I compared to medium mammal bones as they do in Area I (Table 3 .4). From Levels Ill to II, the proportion oflarge mammal compared to medium mammal bones decreases from 11.1% to 7.9%. The proportion increases, however, from Levels II to I where the percentage of large mammals rises from 7 .9% to 11.6%. In addition, Level I comprised the only context where remains of Stork (Cinconia alba) and Roe Deer (Capreolus capreolus) were retrieved from the enclosed area. MNI value are similar to NISP amounts and show an increase (from 9.1 % to 10.7%) in the proportion of cattle compared to medium-sized ungulates (i.e., sheep and goat) from Levels III to II (Table 3 .6). From Levels II to I, MNI proportions of cattle remains compared to medium-sized ungulates drops from 10.7% to 4.8%. In Area III or the 'courtyard,' the earliest level, Level II, is divided into two components: A and B (Table 3.1). The components were divided because they might derive from different phases (IVA and IVB) of the enclosed area. Both components A and B have like proportions of canid and corvid remains: 0.6% for IIA and 0.5% for IIB. Also, similar proportions of goat bones compared to sheep-30.0% and 33.3% are exhibited from IIB and IIA, respectively (Table 3.3). In addition, the proportion of cattle and large mammal remains compared to medium mammal faunal material decreases from 11.5% to 5.6% from IIB to IIA. The uppermost Middle Bronze level in Area III (Level I) is characterized by an absence of corvid, canid, sheep, and goat remains and a higher proportion oflarge mammal bones (15.6%) than found in IIA (5.6%-Table 3.4). MNI values (Table 3.6) show sheep to goat ratios from Levels I, IIA, and IIB that are similar to the data from NISP amounts; they also indicate a stable MNI value for cattle (l) from Level I, IIA, and IIB.

In Area IV or Structure 8094, the earliest level (II) contained fish bones and displayed similar proportions of canid and avian remains (0.6%) compared to the the later level (1)-0.2%. Unlike Areas I, II, and III, the proportion of goat bones compared to sheep decreases from 26.5% to 17.3% from earlier to later levels (Table 3.3). Also in Area IV, two cervid bones were retrieved. One bone, a first phalanx, was from Cervus elaphus (Red Deer). The proportion oflarge mammal bones is approximately equal (3.5% and 3.3%) in Levels I and II (Table 3.4). MNI values show uniform numbers of sheep, goat, and cattle bones in Levels I and II (Table 3.7). Faunal remains from adjacent to and inside Wall 8022 comprised mostly medium ungulate remains (Table 3.2). No corvid, canid, or large mammal fragments were retrieved from this feature. The remains from the entrance to Structure 8630 were retrieved from two levels (I and II). Level II contained no canid or corvid remains or the bones of any taxa other than sheep, goat, and cattle (Table 3.2). From Level II large mammal faunal material comprises 34 of646 remains or 5.3% of the large and medium mammal remains (Table 3.4). Goat bones from Level II comprised 25.9% of the total sheep and goat remains (Table 3.3). The faunal assemblage from Level I is similar to that from Level II and may originate from this earlier level. The faunal material from Level I is characterized by a slightly higher proportion of large mammal faunal material (7.7%) and goat remains (33.3%), as compared to sheep bones (Tables 3.3 & 3.4). Also, a fragment ofa corvid sized bird was identified from this level. Although small, MNI values correlate with NISP amounts and show a proportional increase in goat ( as compared to sheep) and cattle ( as compared to medium-sized ungulate) remains from Levels II to I (Figures 3.6 & 3.8). The earliest level (11)of the area in front of Structure 8630 can be divided into four components-A, B, C, and D representing the altar, steps, portico floor in front of the entrance, and the slope just to the east of the entrance (Table 3.5). Differing proportions of cattle and large mammal bones compared to caprovine, medium ungulate, and medium mammal faunal remains are evident between the different contexts. The kurkar slope east of the entrance to Structure 8630 (D) contains the highest proportion of large mammal bones (7. 7%), followed by the floor in front of the entrance (C-5.2%), the steps and portico (B-2.6%), and the altar (A), which contained no large mammal bones. Taken as a whole, the non-burial assemblages from the enclosed area are dominated by ungulates, specifically caprovine remains. Although wild species such as roe deer, a larger species of cervid, and gazelle are present in the lower levels of the enclose area, their proportion is small (12 bones or 0.06%-Table 3.2). Specimens identified as caprovines, sheep, and goat form the majority of the faunal remains and represent 483 5 or 23 .4% of the total specimens within the enclosed area. Both MNI (69.7% or 62 of 89) and NISP values (73.9% or 431 of 583), from all deposits in the enclosed area, indicate higher proportions of sheep compared to goat (Tables 3.3 & 3. 7). The absence of equid

Tho

remains from this area is especially notable since they comprise 6.0% and 22.3% of the faunal material from the well and Structure 8624, respectively. The only identified large mammal remains from the enclosed area are from cattle (Bos taurus). Of the 20,683 total remains from this area, cattle represent 247 or 1.2% of the faunal remains (Table 3.2). MNI values, for all levels from the enclosed area, show that the proportion of cattle ( 10.5% or 19 of 181) compared to medium-sized ungulates is similar to the proportion, based on NISP counts, of large-sized mammal bones (6.5%) compared to medium-sized mammal faunal remains (Tables 3.4 & 3.7). Fish and small mammal fragments and noncorvid (i.e., medium bird and stork) bones comprise only 0.25% (53 of 20683) of the total remains. That pig bones were not introduced to the assemblage during the collapse of structures in the enclosed area is evidenced by presence of pig (Sus scrofa) remains in Pit 8253 (Level IV) and Level II in Area I. Pig bones, however, account for 0.02% of the total remains. Canid and corvid bones, probably originated from burial clusters and comprise 150 specimens or 0.7% of the total faunal remains. By far the largest number of bones were allocated to the Medium Mammal and Large Mammal category (Table 3.2). These most likely represent the remains of caprovines and cattle, respectively. These groups comprised skeletal elements such as fragments of crania, ribs and vertebrae, and shaft fragments from long bones, that were not identified to a genus or species. Medium mammal and large mammal faunal remains accounted for 55.0% and 5.1% (11374 and 1061 bones), respectively, of the total remains from the enclosed area (Table 3.2). When comparing the different levels in Areas I-V, within the enclosed area, several trends emerge. Excepting Area II, deposits from Areas I, Ill, IV, V show that there is a decrease in the proportion of canid and corvid remains from the lower to higher levels. Area II conversely displays an increase in both canid and corvid remains from its middle level (II) to its highest level. This factor is potentially significant and might indicate that toward the end of the occupation of the enclosed area, the emphasis on the manipulation of corvid and canid remains may have shifted from Area I to Area II. Coinciding with this change is the fact that during the later period of the enclosed area's occupation, the altar (Locus 8269) was covered with earth. This transition is discussed further in the analysis of corvid and canid burials in the following chapter. Furthermore, with the exception of Area IV, Areas I, II, III, and V show an increase in the proportion of goat bones compared to sheep fragments, from lower to higher levels (Figure 3.6 & Table 3.3). In Area IV, there is a decrease in the proportion of goat remains from the earliest level (II) to the later level (I). The explanation for this discrepency might relate to the nature of the deposit in Structure 8094. The earth inside Structure 8094 was unlike floors from the other areas but contained a uniform ashy layer, approximately 40 cm thick, with ceramic and faunal remains. Excavated on the interior wall of 8069 were niches which contained faunal remains and unique objects-unbaked clay cylinders with small apertures at one end (Figure 3.7). During the 1990 and 1992 seasons, Prof.

Cultic Milieu

Oren referred to the ashy layer in Structure 8094 as a 'ritual fill' since there appeared to be no floors in this context but a purposefully deposited uniform layer that extended upward from the kurkar floor to the mud-brick debris from the collapse of the temenos. Because of the potentially unique deposit in Structure 8094, sheep and goat remains from Level I and II may comprise a single unit that was deposited either during IVA (before the collapse of the structures within the enclosed area) or IVB. Based on the faunal remains, I suggest that the ashy layer in Structure 8094 was deposited in IVB since higher proportions of sheep compared to goat are characteristic of assemblages from lower levels, especially in Areas I, II, and III, which correspond to Strata IVB and V. Furthermore, the faunal material from Structure 8094 (Area IV) shows another unique trend. From earlier to later levels, all deposits within the enclosed area displayed an increase in the proportion oflarge mammal fauna compared to medium mammal remains (Figure 3.8 & Table 3.4). Not only did Structure 8094 contain the proportionally fewest large mammal remains (3.4%), it also comprised relatively stable proportions oflarge mammal fragments-3.5% to 3.3%-from Level I and II, respectively. This uniformity in the amount of large mammal remains lends credence to notion that the ashy fill in Structure 8094 represents a single deposit. Furthermore, the low proportion oflarge mammal remains from this deposit might also indicate that this layer belongs to Stratum IVB. In Areas I, II, and IV, the earliest levels, corresponding to Strata IVB and V, have proportionally the fewest remains of cattle and large mammals compared to later levels-the deposits of which are assigned to Stratum IVA.

3.6.2. Structure 8624

The faunal assemblage from Structure 8624 ("equid burial") did not contain avian remains or the bones of canids, goats, cervids, or small mammals (Table 3.2). Although two gazelle bones were identified from the interior of this edifice, the ungulate assemblage was dominated by sheep bones. Also identified from Structure 8269, was the fibula of a pig (Sus scrofa ). It should be noted that pig remains were found in all MB contexts in Area K. Only one Bos fragment was identified as compared to 70 donkey (Equus asinus) bones which comprised 22.3% of the total assemblage. Of the total sum (or NISP) of292 medium and large mammal fragments from Structure 8624, bones characterized as "large mammal" comprised 137 or 46.9% of these remains (Table 3.4). MNI values from Structure 8624 indicate an MNI (based on identified specimens only) often medium mammals and three large mammals (Table 3.7). Hence, 23 .1% of the individuals from Structure 8624 comprise large mammal species compared to 76.9% for medium-sized taxa. The proportion of large mammal individuals is much lower than the percentage of large mammal bones derived from NISP amounts (Tables 3.4 &3.7). These differing percentages indicate that although many large mammal fragments originated from Structure 8624, their remains may represent

Jool D. Klonck

proportionally fewer individuals than do the remains from medium-sized mammals.

charring covered 1-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, or 76-100% of the exterior of the bone. Although this method was not precise, it did allow me to differentiate between the bones that were completely charred and those that were only partially burnt. Consistent amounts of partially burned bone from the enclosed area could support evidence for roasting activities in Area K. In roasting activities, only the exposed areas of the bone, not covered by meat, would be burnt while the rest of the bone would remain uncharred.

3.6.3. The Well

The faunal material from the Middle Bronze IIB well is characterized by a greater diversity oftaxa than that found in the faunal remains from the enclosed area (Table 3.2). There are greater proportions of pig (2.2%) and stork (6.2%) than from the enclosed area where these species combined represent 0.03%. Of the 76 bird bones only one fragment of a crow (Corvus corone) was retrieved, compared to 75 stork (Cinconia sp.) bones, many of which bear cut marks. From MNI counts, storks comprise 10.9 percent of the individuals from the well (Table 3.7). Also notable from the well is the presence of turtle (Chelonia sp.) and the absence of any specimen characterized as small mammal or small/medium mammal. The bones of domestic dog ( Canisfamiliaris) were also found in the well. However, these nine fragments, which represented 0.7% of the total well remains, were all from mature animals: all canid limb bones possessed fused epiphyseal ends.

Bones that are entirely burned were either accidentally or purposefully introduced to hearths. Accidentally burned bones are those that were placed made their way inadavertantly into fires. Since these remains were not conciously selected for burning, the amount of accidentally burned bones might be low and comprise a small proportion of the assemblage. It is with the purposefully burned bones that the question of motive must be considered. High percentages of burned bones from the enclosed area could signify that Haror 's inhabitants burned animal bones for waste removal purposes, to fufill a ritual activity, or both. Both Ugaritic and Biblical texts mention holocaust offerings where sacrificed animals were completely burned by the altar fires (Wapnish & Hesse 1992: 24; Day 1992: 834).

The well yielded a higher proportion of goat bones compared to sheep remains than found in the enclosed area (Table 3.3; Figure 3.6). Of77 bone fragments identified to sheep or goat (excluding caprovines), 24 fragments or 31.2% belonged to goat. MNI values from the well indicate a lower proportion of goat bones (21.4 %-Table 3.7) compared to sheep remains, than do NISP values (31.2%-Table 3.3). Furthermore, a lower ratio oflarge mammal to medium mammal bones was found in the well compared to the enclosed area (Table 3 .4 & Figure 3 .8). From the well, large mammal remains comprised 38.4% of all medium and large mammal fragments, as compared to the lower proportion of large mammal fragments from the enclosed area (6.5%). In terms ofMNI values, the proportion of large mammals from the well, compared to medium-size mammals, is lower than indicated by NISP values-20.7% or 6 of 29 individuals (Table 3. 7). The primary reason for the proportionally greater amount oflarge mammal bones in the well is due to the presence of both cattle and equid remains. No equid remains were retrieved from the enclosed area.

An additional problem with completely burned bones is that many of these organic remains turn to ash and might not be retrieved from the archaeological record. Bedouin, at the nearby tomb of Sheikh Abu Hurreira, burned sacrificial remains so thoroughly that only the crania, phalanges, and metapodials survived intact since these bones were left with skin on them during the butchery process (Klenck 1995: 61). The rest of the remains could not be retrieved because these bones had turned to ash. During the excavation in Area K, soil samples were taken for micromorphological analysis. When completed, this study might reveal whether or not the ashy layers in Structure 8094 or the darker, more silty earth in Pit 8253 contains ashes from animal bones. Without this data, this dissertation can only account for the intact carbonized remains. Of the 20,683 total bones from the enclosed area, 2,059 or 10.0% were burned to some degree (Table 3.9). Assemblages from Area I, II, IV, and V show increasing proportions of burned remains from lower to higher levels. In the uppermost levels, which correspond to Stratum VIA, burned bones comprised 17.9%, 18.6%, 7.6%, and 60.4% (!) of the faunal remains from Areas I, II, IV, and V, respectively (Tables 3.8 & 3.9). The opposite was true of Area III. Faunal material from Area III showed a decrease in the proportion of burned bones from lower to higher levels. From the uppermost level (i.e., Level I) in Area III , burned bones comprise only 4.2% of the total number of specimens.

3.7. TAPHONOMIC PROCESSES Eight types of bone modification were defined at Tel-Haror. For each fragment I recorded whether or not a bone was butchered, gnawed, weathered, worked into a tool, smoothed, or corroded by acid. I also documented the degree to which a fragment was burned or covered with accretions.

3.7.1. Burned Bones

Less divergent proportions of burned remains are found in middle levels from the different areas of the temenos corresponding to Strata IVA and IVB. Similar proportions of burned bones: 10.4%, 14.5%, 12.4% are found in Level II in Areas I, II, and V, respectively (Tables 3.8 & 3.9). Again, the

Throughout the analysis of the fauna! material from Area K at Tel Haror, the degree of burning was recorded for each fragment. This was accomplished by estimating the extent of burning on the exterior of the bone and recording if the 54

Tho

exception, is found in Area III or the courtyard. From Level IIA, only 2.3% of the faunal material was charred. From the levels which correspond with Strata IVB and V (i.e., Levels III and IV in Area I; Level III in Area II; and Level IIb in Area III; and Level II in Area IV), the proportions of burned remains vary (Tables 3.8 & 3.9). In Area I, bones from Level III, which correspond to assemblages on or above the kurkar floor, show a higher percentage of burning ( 11.6%) than do assemblages in Level IV, (primarily from the large Pit 8253). From Level IV, 5.8% of the faunal remains are burned. Low proportions of burned remains also characterize the assemblages from Area II (Level III) and Area IV (Level II). In these levels, 5.7% and 2.9% of the faunal remains are charred, respectively. The highest proportion ofburned bones originated from Area III: burned bones from Level IIB comprise 16.0% of the assemblage. Of a total of 2,059 burned fragments from the enclosed area, 169 or 8.2% were partially burned (Table 3.12). 'Partially burned' is defined as bones that were burned on 75% or less of their surface. In Areas I, II, IV, and V, the proportions of partially burned bones, compared to fully burned bones, decrease from lower to higher levels (Tables 3.10, 3.11, & 3 .12). The proportions of partially burned faunal remains from Area III do not uniformly decrease from level to level like other areas; however, this might be due to the small sample size. Partially burned bones comprise 6.2%, 2.3%, 0%, 0%, and 0.5% of total burned remains from the uppermost level (Level I) in Areas I, II, III, IV (Wall 8022), and V, respectively. Middle levels, which correspond to Strata IVA and IVB in the enclosed area, show higher proportions of partially burned bones than do assemblages from higher levels. Proportions of13.8%,4.9%, 11.1%, 13.9%, and 7.3% for partially burned bones from Areas I, II, III, IV (Wall 8022), and V, respectively, might indicate that roasting played a bigger role in food perpetration processes in these earlier levels. The highest proportions of partially burned remains originate from levels of the enclosed area that correspond with Strata IVB and V (Tables 3.10, 3.11, & 3.12). From Strata IVB and V, the highest proportions of partially burned bones, compared to other levels, originated from Area I (Levels III and IV) and Area IV (Level II). For these levels, partially burned bones comprised 16.5%, 14.8%, and 21.9%, respectively, of the total burned faunal remains. The earliest level (III) in Area II, also displayed the highest proportion of partially burned bones (9. 7%) compared to the burned faunal skeletal remains from its later levels (II and I). Again, Area III was the exceptiononly 2.9% of charred bone from Level IIB was partially burned (Table 3.11 ). Most of the burned remains were allocated to either medium mammal or large mammal categories which comprised 51.9% or and 21.3%, respectively, of the burned fauna! material from the enclosed area (Table 3.12). The fact that most of these remains derived from these size classes might indicate that burning contributed to the lack of specificity in the identifications. The most inclusive size class in my analysis was 'medium/large mammals.' Table 3.9 indicates that of the 296 generally unidentified fragments allocated to the medium/ large mammal category, 146 or 49.3% were burned. And of

Cultic Milieu

these 146 burned fragments, 140 or 95.9% were completely charred (Table 3.12). This correlation between unidentifiable fragments and taphonomic processes is replicated in the following sections and may provide an explanation for the high proportion of fragments allocated to these mammalian size classes. To reiterate, the reason why higher proportions of faunal remains from the enclosed area were not identified to taxon but allocated to size classes (e.g., medium mammal) might be due to the fact that these remains were exposed to a greater range of taphonomic processes than were assemblages from the well and Structure 8624. Of the 2,059 total burned fragments from the enclosed area, 1,419 or 68.9% of the burned faunal remains were from medium-sized mammal groups, including sheep, goat, dog, 'medium ungulate,' and 'medium mammal', as compared to the 484 or 23.5% charred remains from the cattle and large mammal classes (Table 3 .9). From medium-sized mammals, all taxa except Roe Deer have proportions of burned bones ofless than 10% (Table 3.9). Conversely, for bone fragments from cattle or 'large mammal' classes, 18.6% and 41.3% of their remains, respectively, were charred. Ofl ,201 total bone fragments from the well, 68 or 5. 7% were burned. Compared to the faunal material from the enclosed area, the bone remains from the well exhibited a lower proportion of burned fragments (44.1 % or 30 of 68 total) from medium-sized mammals (Table 3.9). Excepting Roe Deer and gazelle, burned bones comprised between 7 .5% and 16.7% of the fauna! material from medium sized ungulates (Table 3.9). These proportions are higher compared to the proportions of charred remains for cattle and large mammal taxa-3.6% and 2.9%, respectively. Furthermore, although equid bones comprised 17.3% or 72 of the 415 large mammal bones, their taxa exhibited no burned remains (Table 3.9). Also not charred, were the remains of pig and dog. The faunal material from Structure 8624 exhibited the lowest proportion of burned remains. Of the 314 total bones from this edifice, 8 or 2.5% were burned (Table 3.9). Of these eight remains, three bones were large mammal fragments. None of the equid bones, which comprise 22.3 percent of the faunal assemblage, were burned. That no equid remains were charred might indicate that these remains were treated differently than the cattle from the enclosed area and not subjected to food preparation processes such as burning. Equid remains in Structure 8624 probably came from animals that died naturally or that were killed but not butchered. These animals were probably placed in the domed chamber as part of a burial ritual.

3.7.2. Accreted Bones Accretion occurs when calcium carbonate adheres to the surface of bones forming a concrete-like sheath that is often difficult to remove without destroying the bone. Of the 20,683 total bone fragments from the enclosed area, 500 or 2.4% were accreted (Tables 3.13 & 3.14). The well assemblage

Jool D. Klonck

also contained a similar proportion of accreted remains-2.1 %. No accreted bones were retrieved from Structure 8624.

gnaw on skeletal remains to obtain the bits of meat and gristle on the bone or the marrow inside the bone. Rodents, however, chew on skeletal remains because the phosphates from bones strengthen their teeth. Rodents also gnaw on bones to keep their incisor teeth worn to the proper length and angle.

Most levels from the enclosed area, especially the earlier levels, contained few (i.e., 3 1/2 years old), although a mandible of a 2 1/2 year old donkey was also retrieved. It is unknown how equids from Structure 8624 were dispatched or if they died naturally.

In the temple complex, a majority of the remains from the aforementioned taxa comprise cranial fragments, pieces of

76

Tho

5.2.3. The Well

The skeletal remains from the well contained the greatest variety of species and proportionally more bones from pig and stork. The well assemblage also had the most remains with gnawing and cut marks (Table 5.1). Caprovines from the well were primarily killed after two years of age, especially between 3 and 6 years of age (Figure 3 .13). Cattle were also dispatched at roughly similar ages-after four years of age (Figure 3.15 & Table 3.26). Unlike Structure 8624, some of the equid remains from the well represent animals dispatched before 15 months of age. Some of the equid remains also possessed cut marks, which again is different from Structure 8624.

5.3. ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS In Chapter 2, evidence was presented to support the notion that the enclosed area at Haror was a temple complex. In Chapters 3 and 4, archaeological data were discussed that revealed two types of sacrificial rituals in the temenos and different patterns of data in the well and Structure 8624. What now follows is a discussion of the economic forces which facilitated the establishment and growth of Near Eastern temples.

5.3.1 Temple Economics in the Ancient Near East and Mesopotamia

Although few Canaanite texts exist that can reveal aspects of the management of Tel Haror's temenos, philological sources from other cultures (e.g., Mesopotamian, U garitic, ancient Israelite) describe in detail the economic and ideological workings of their temples. In the ancient Near East and Mesopotamia, temples granted the populace a service that no other sector of the community could provide: access to the spiritual world. By approaching this divine realm through the temple, a supplicant could petition a deity to fulfill a variety of requests as well as forecast the future, ward off evil (i.e., curses, the disfavor of a deity, etc.), and heal the sick (Postgate 1992; Lambert 1993; Leichty 1993; Tanret & Van Lerberghe 1993; Stager 1991). The services that temples provided were not free and required either a specific payment or some sort of' donation.' In many instances the supplicant provided both the sacrificial victim and the payment necessary for the priests to enact the requested ritual. Furthermore, temples accumulated profits indirectly, usually because of their close relationship with the state. With regard to direct payment, priests were usually allotted a portion of the meat and the skins of the sacrificial victims from the temple (Wapnish & Hesse 1992: 24-26; Day 1992). Direct payments are also recorded in Mesopotamian texts. Postgate (1992: 135) notes that Mesopotamian temples were

Cultic Milieu

remunerated for divination and other rituals by arua or dedication offerings. These offerings were not consumed by the priests but were made temple property. Arua offerings comprised not only living cattle and caprovines, as opposed to the dispatched sacrificial victims, but a wide range of goods: silver rings, grindstones, wool products, bitumen, boats, furniture, prisoners of war, and the wives and children of private citizens (Postgate 1992: 135). An additional source of income for Mesopotamian priests occurred when they presided over divination, purification, and lamentation rituals at the request of private citizens (Postgate 1992: 127, 265). Old Babylonian (ca. 2000-1600 B.C.) texts from Tell ed-Der mention the economic transactions of a galamah priest named Ur-Utu who was in charge of the gala or lamentation-priests of the deity Ann unitum (Tanret & Van Lerberghe 1993: 435). These holy men were present at funerals and major feasts. They performed liturgies, played various instruments, sang religious chorales, and performed rituals that involved beer, bread, flour, and aromatic substances (Tanret & Van Lerberghe 1993: 4 36-444). According to the contracts, private citizens hired these priests by paying silver. Two-thirds of this silver payment went to pay for the ritual's 'ingredients' such as the beer, bread, and flour. The remaining third was 'given' by the galamah to the palace administrative center or nakakamtum-house. This latter payment was returned to the Annunitum-temple during major feast days although the palace may have kept some of the funds for its own use (Tanret & Van Lergerghe 1993: 448). In conclusion, temple personnel in the ancient Near East could practice a variety of rituals that would provide direct payments for the temenos. These payments comprised either actual currency (i.e., silver and gold pieces) or were payments in kind, such as portions of meat or skins.

Cult centers also acquired payments indirectly. Temples acquired indirect profits primarily in three ways: 1) by controlling the access to specialized services; 2) by investing in land and flocks of domesticates; and 3) through their close association with the state. For the Sumerians, the temple comprised the communal identity of a city. Here, the wealth of the city was consolidated as services were rendered to the community (Postgate 1992: 109-110). The range of specialized services that Mesopotamian temples were involved in included the growing of cereals and fruit, control of irrigation waters, management of caprovines, cattle, and equids, and salt and freshwater fishing. Mesopotamian temples manufactured textiles and leather items and engaged in metallurgy, stone tool production, and wood working (Postgate 1992: 110). These activities needed storerooms, workshops, and granaries-working spaces that were either located within the walls of the temple or on land owned by the temple. For example, texts indicate that the Sin Temple at Khafaja, issued grain from its fields which were located in several storage sites in the surrounding countryside (Postgate 1992: 115). Furthermore, Sumerian temples owned many flocks. Numerous Akkadian texts were found inside temple grounds at Uruk which list numbers of caprovines and cattle. Other

Jool D. Klonck

tablets note that these livestock were designated sacrificial purposes (Green 1980: 8, 15).

for

parties that were assigned tasks such as the hewing of wood for a defined period of time. Villagers reported to work stations with their oxen and donkeys, which were used as beasts of burden, and sheep, which were presumably killed for food. Additional provisions for these corvee labor groups were supplied by the gt . Also, many of the craft manufacturers worked at the gt and depended on provisions from this center (Heltzer 1976: 24-30; 1979: 467, 496). Of the 37 villages that possessed agt, two or 5.4% of these locales were owned by the temple (Heltzer 197 6: 8-15). It is likely that the temple profited from the administrative control of these revenue collection centers. Also a wine tax was paid by villages to the temple, via the state treasury, to prepare for the annual 'royal sacrifice' (Helzter 1976: 34, 40). In addition, Ugaritic texts note that royal work groups were used to construct and repair sanctuaries (Heltzer 1976: 26).

Temple ownership of the surrounding countryside was also practiced at Ugarit. Of the 195 villages ofUgarit texts, 12 or 16.2% of these villages had territories that were owned by the temple ( Helzter 1976: 7-14; 1979: 459). Since these lands belonged to the temples, temple administrations received not only the agricultural and horticultural produce from these lands but also pasture tax from families whose flocks grazed on temple lands. The welfare of a temple usually depended on its relationship with the city or state. In Mesopotamia and the Levant, royalty were either partly or wholly responsible for the construction and maintenance of temple grounds, their supply, and provisioning with regular offerings (Postgate 1992: 264; Heltzer 1976: 26). In addition, numerous texts mention kings contributing booty to temples after successful military campaigns. Also, private citizens were expected to contribute to the temple during the year (Lambert 1993: 194; Heltzer 1976: 73-74).

The study of the economy of Ugarit might be applicable to that known only archaeologically at Tel Haror. Since U garit's language, material culture, ideology, and ethnic origins was similar to the peoples of Canaan, it is not unlikely that some aspects of their economic systems were similar as well. Of particular interest is that after Canaan's demise, the Israelite economy may have also used gt as administrative centers. Although the word sometimes denotes a wine or oil press, Joel 4 : 13 indicates that agricultural produce was stored in the gt. Furthermore, Judges 6 : 11 notes that Gideon threshed wheat at the gt (Heltzer 1979: 460).

That U garit's cult centers profited by their close relationship to the state is evidenced in the revenue collection policies of the city. At U garit, the tithe was one means to acquire capital for the state. The tithe, a primary means of revenue collection at U garit cities, usually comprised livestock, grain, olive oil, beer, and wine (Anderson 1987: 78, 80). The tithe usually comprised ten percent of the 'earnings' and was given in addition to taxes. The tithe was sought after by kings or their servants. Unlike the Israelites who considered the tithe as an individual effort, the Ugarit society considered a tithe as representing the corporate effort of a village: "There is never a mention of an individual villager paying a tithe (Anderson 1987: 79)." Farmers and herders contributed to the tithe which was given to the king. The ruler in tum distributed the tithe to the bns mlk or 'men of the king.' This latter group comprised priests, traders, architects, chariot makers, warriors, and administrators.

In conclusion, given the background of temple economies in the Near East, it is plausible that Haror 's temple 1) practiced a variety of rituals to acquire a greater amount of direct profits and 2) possessed a wide range of investments. The latter might have included the purchase of sheep and goat flocks and land in the surrounding countryside, part ownership or management of specialized labor facilitates and revenue collection centers (gt), and the management of state sponsored religious festivals.

5.3.2 Herding Strategies and Market Demands The method in which the tithe was acquired at U garit reveals much about the city's revenue collection policies. Helzter's study of the economy at Ugarit shows that villages paid taxes and tithes together as a corporate entity and single body-not as individuals within a smaller community (Heltzer 1976: 21, 32, 35). Also, professional groups such as bowmen, seafarers, smiths, millers, and shepherds were regarded as a single unit (Helzter 1976: 32). Furthennore, villages paid their taxes by contributing material goods or by rendering services.

The caprovine and cattle demographic data from the temple complex, Structure 8624, and the well might suggest that Haror's inhabitants practiced different types of herding strategies for different types of markets. From the temenos and donkey burial, the large numbers of sheep and goat remains from animals two years of age and under suggest a caprovine herding strategy with an emphasis on milk and meat production.

The material goods were usually accepted at an administrative center that contained granaries and perhaps presses for the production of wine and olive oil-these centers were called a gt. Ugaritic texts note that of the 195 villages of the kingdom, 37 (or 20%) possessed a gt (Heltzer 1979: 459-460). The material taxes comprised silver shekels, grain including barley, spelt, millet, and emmer wheat, processed grain or flour, beer made from barley, wine, olive oil, oxen, sheep, geese, wool, bronze vessels, spears (lances), and timber (Heltzer 1976: 30-47; 1979: 466-475). The services comprised village work

Sheep and goats are usually kept with economic objectives in mind: the herds might be raised for their meat, dairy products, hair, or a combination thereof. Although females are usually kept as long as their breeding and milking abilities are adequate, the treatment of the males depends upon the economic objective (Hirsch 1933: 24). For example, very few males are kept with sheep and goat herds and their breeding life is short: beginning at two to three years and lasting until the fifth or sixth year. Only one

78

Tho

in fifty males is chosen to breed because males are usually fast growing and aggressive and too many of them can be detrimental to the herd. One solution to this aggressiveness for goats is castration. With a goat hair production objective, males are typically castrated so as to not wreak havoc on the predominately female herds. Capra castrates are not aggressive like entire males and produce excellent hair yields up to five years of age (Deniz & Payne 1982: 157, 187). In a milk economy, both sheep and goat males are dispatched almost immediately due to the consumption of their mother's milk which is intended for the markets. With an objective of meat production, herders will hypothetically cull males at the point when feed has been translated into the greatest meat yields (Payne 1973: 281-285). To reiterate males that are not kept as breeders are killed when they have reached their optimum point of weight gain, usually around two or three years. But this age varies considerably based on factors such as the amount and quality of feed available, climatic factors, and storage technology. In addition, market demand can greatly affect the ages at which these young animals are slaughtered (Hirsch 1933: 8, 2426). If there is a desire for lamb or kid meat, herders will slaughter their animals in accordance with the market (Payne 1973: 281). For example, Tucker (1990: 5) states that the main income from Bedouin caprovine herds occurs when male lambs are sold a month before Muslim high festivals (i.e., 'Id al 'Adha). The rest of the marketed lambs are sold to local butchers in urban communities in the Negev. These animals will be sold and dispatched for later religious festivals or family celebrations (i.e., marriages-Tucker 1990: 6). Since females begin bearing their young in the fall or spring, their lambs are usually less than one year of age (Tucker 1990: 15-16).

Cultic Milieu

Many Mesopotamian texts were written during the Seleucid period (300-100 B.C.). These texts, however, do not originate from this period but were copied from texts written many centuries earlier. For example, a text translated by F. ThureauDangin (1921) that details the "Daily Sacrifices to the Gods of the City or Uruk" includes an interesting colophon. This colophon states that the text was copied by Kidinanu, a citizen and priest in Uruk during the Seleucid period. According to Kidinanu, the texts were carried off as plunder by King Nabuaplausur (626-605 B.C.) of Assyria when the king raided Uruk. Kidinanu found and copied the texts in Elam and brought the copies back to Uruk. The texts detail "the rituals of the divinities of the Resh Temple, the Irigal temple, the Eanna Temple, and the (other) temples of the city ofUruk" (Sachs 1955: 344-345). The manuscript states that during every day of the year various animals were to be slaughtered at the Resh, Irigal and Esharra temples (the Esharra Temple is mentioned as being on "the topmost stage of the templetower of the god Anu") in Uruk (Sachs 1955: 344). These animals were slaughtered in preparation for two morning meals and two evening meals. According to the text the list of animals that were sacrificed per day to the gods in the Resh, Irigal, and Esharra temples included: " ...twenty-one first-class, fat, clean rams which have been fed barley for two years; two large bulls; one milk-fed bullock; [and] eight lambs' [sex unspecified] (Sachs 1955: 344). These animals were considered only the daily or 'regular' offerings. An additional ten rams were to be sacrificed to the planets, moon, and the deities Anu and Antu every night. Although the texts do not mention how the regular offerings were butchered or prepared, the texts do state that priests were to boil the ten rams sacrificed to the planets, moon, Anu, and Antu. Also, other unspecified sacrifices were to be conducted during nine festivals and ceremonies which occurred throughout the year. These events included the divine marriage ritual and opening of the gate ceremony (Sachs 1955: 335-338).

To reiterate, Bedouin raise flocks of sheep with meat and milk production objectives in mind. Much of the dairy products will be consumed by the herders. The meat will be sold at markets where demand can vary. In the ancient world, sacrificial victims in Ugaritic, Israelite, Mesopotamian, Greek, and Canaanite rituals usually included young sheep, goats, and cattle that were male (Gaster 1962: 155-156; Sachs 1955:344; and Kadletz 1976).

A fragment of an ivory plaque was excavated at Mari in the temple ofShamash. The fragment is dated to the seventeenth century B.C. and shows two humans on either end of a ram, pinning the animal down. The better preserved figure at the animal's head is depicted as holding the ram's forelegs and pinning its head back with his knee (Pritchard 1969: 355, 380).

Gaster (1962: 156) notes that Ugaritic texts mention the following sacrificial victims: large cattle, small cattle, oxen, sheep, rams, and perhaps doves. U garitic texts however, seldom mention the age of sacrificial victims although the 'Poem ofBaal' notes that one-year-old calves were sacrificed to the gods (Gaster 1962: 156).

The presence of more male ungulates than female ungulates is a common phenomenon. Kadletz (1976) examined the literature on animal sacrifice in Greek and Roman religion. In these religions, male animals were primarily sacrificed to male deities and female animals to female deities. Furthermore, manuscripts indicate that there are more references to the sacrifice of male bovines to gods and goddesses than females (Kadletz 1976: 310).

During Israelite sacrificial rituals, priests slaughtered the following animals: cattle including oxen, bulls, cows, and heifers; young sheep including rams and suckling lambs; goats, especially kids; and doves (Gaster 1962: 155). The required ages for these sacrificial victims vary. Most of the victims whose ages are reported were not more than a year old (Exod. 12: 5; 29: 38; Lev. 9: 3; 12: 6; 14: 10; 23: 18-19; Num. 6: 12, 14; 7: 15, 17, 21, etc.). There are also several references to three-year-old victims (Gen. 15: 9; Isa. 15: 5; Jer. 48: 34-Gaster 1962: 156).

Lastly, the association between young or male caprovines and sacrificial rituals is supported by a clay tablet from the Canaanite Hebron (Anbar & Na'aman 1986/7). The tablet

79

Jool D. Klonck

was written in Akkadian and found in a context dating to the fifteenth century RC. The texts comprises a list of caprovines which are to be presented as offerings to an unnamed deity. Of the 49 goats that are mentioned, all comprise he-goats. And of the 77 sheep that are recorded, 13 or 16.7% are termed rams; for the remaining sheep, their sex is not specified. 'Hegoat' might also be translated as 'kid' (Anbar & Na'aman 1986/7: 5).

working). With a milk production objective, cows are kept until mature ages while males are slaughtered or kept for purposes ofreproduction or traction. With a meat objective, more cattle, usually males, will be killed at young ages, when the meat is most tender or according to the demands of the market (Turkowski 1969: 30). The advanced wear stages of Bos mandibular teeth from the well and early levels of the temenos suggest that these cattle were used for traction, dairy production, or both. However, the juvenile cattle from the later levels in the temenos indicate that these specimens were killed for their meat.

The ritual demand for juvenile sheep and goats from a cult center would be helpful to herding strategies designed to facilitate milk production. Excess males, that would consume much of their mother's milk, could be sold by herders to temples as potential sacrificial victims. Hence, sheep and goat herders could subsist on their dairy goods while making a profit selling their unwanted males to a cult center.

The presence of young animals in the later strata of the temple might also suggest that there were market facilities that encouraged beef procurement. To reiterate, while traction and dairy cattle can be products of small independent farms, the presence of beef cattle suggests the existence oflarger herds and a market environment where the slaughter, of these multipurpose and important animals, for meat, would be profitable.

Although the large number of juvenile sheep and goats remains at Haror largely prevented determinations of sex, the large proportion of young sheep and goat bones suggest that herding strategies were employed to accommodate meat, and possibly milk, production objectives.

Although rural families probably brought their own sheep or goats to be sacrificed, Haror's urbanized population most likely received their sacrificial animals from flocks provisioned by the temenos. Because Canaan possessed complex urban bureaucracies makes it doubtful that politically independent nomads provided the secular market and temples with caprovines (Dever 1987). A more likely possibility is that caprovines were contracted out to herders by temple administrations. Who these pastoralists were and the mechanisms that controlled these herders is a matter of debate.

From the well, however, the caprovine survivorship curve was different. According to tooth eruption and wear data, most of the taxa were dispatched between three and six years of age. Since many of the caprovine postcranial bones from the well were butchered and presumably represent consumption, a combination of wool/hair and meat production objectives is suggested. To reiterate, herders kept older caprovines until their wool/hair production decreased-at which point they were slaughtered and sold as meat products. However, the caprovine survivorship curve from the well might also reflect a milk/meat production herding strategy. Ewes (female sheep) can reproduce from two to seven years of age, while does (female goats) can bear young from two to eight years of age (Firmage 1992: 1126-1127). Hence, the survivorship data from the well might suggest that older females were killed outside the temenos possibly due to declining reproductive capabilities.

Mesopotamian Early Dynastic tablets studied by Green (1980) mention the names of only three individuals who authorized economic transactions between contracted herders and the person(s) that actually owned the flocks. The contract was most likely for one year. At the end of the year, the herder was to account for all animals and deliver the herd back to the administrative source (Green 1980: 15). Green (1980: 16) suggests that the persons who authorized the herding transactions were 1) professional herders functioning as agents of the administration; 2) officials supervising the contract; or 3) private contractors who subcontracted to other herders. She states:

That the well contained the remains of animals dispatched in secular environments (i.e., not in a temple or cemetery) is supported by the lack of votive objects such as figurines and miniature vessels and the presence of utilitarian ceramics like storage jars and jugs associated with these remains. To reiterate, the presence of older caprovines in the well and younger animals in the temenos suggests two possibilities. First, the discrepant demographic patterns might indicate two market demands: demands for wool/hair for the secular markets and meat for the temple markets. Conversely, this data might suggest a milk and meat production economy where primarily young males were brought to the temple, while females, whose reproductive or dairy production capabilities were in doubt, were slaughtered for secular markets.

"In favor of an administrative official is the fact that only one person is named. He bears the responsibility for the transaction and must be someone who can be held accountable for it, thus someone accessible and subject to the authority of the administration, probably as an official within its ranks. If the cultic references are livestock allocations it would further indicate that the person involved here has access to a wider administrative network and probably functions as an official within that network" (Green 1980: 16).

There are three main uses for cattle-traction (i.e., as beasts of burden), dairy production, and their meat. As animals for traction, cattle are kept alive until they die of natural causes or are no longer productive (i.e., injuries prevent them from

Heltzer (1976: 32) mentions a position in Ugaritic society very much like the one mentioned above. The hazannu or mayors of 'daughter cities' had officials working for them who were given the title rb. The rb were appointed officials 80

Tho

that were to help the hazannu maintain the city and district which surrounded the city. Crucial to the authority of the rb was that the populace considered the rb as the person in charge of a specialized field such as herding, sea-faring, metallurgy, etc. Hence, the rb acted as a labor boss: an administrative official who was ultimately responsible for the organization and production of commodities in a given field. Working under the rb were both free citizens, 'm, and slaves, bd, who belonged to these free individuals. Heltzer (1976: 32-34) mentions that the title, rb nqdm, which in U garitic translates into "boss of the shepherds," is recorded several times in texts from Ugarit.

Cultic Milieu

and peddlers. It was presumably during these times that many of the public sacrificial rituals took place (Postgate 1992: 123-124). In Western Semitic religions, both royalty and commoners worshipped in the main temples and were expected to offer sacrifices according to their economic status (Ottosson 1988: 136). Offerings and animal sacrificial victims were viewed in Sumero-Babylonian religion as of vital importance since these food stuffs were 'fed' to the deities (Hallo 1987: 9,10). Offerings of meat, water, beer, wine, milk, honey, emmerflour, fish cakes, and lard-cakes were piled on trays and were prepared and placed before the divine statues by priests every morning and evening. The liquids were either served in cups or poured in sacred channels for liquid offerings within the temenos (Postgate 1992: 119-120; Lambert 1993: 194-195). Later, this food was consumed by priests, temple staff, and other citizens (Lambert 1993: 200). In Western Semitic religions, sacrifices were generally not consumed per se by a deity but acknowledged by the god or goddess as a request to act in the earthly realm (Day 1992; Gaster 1962).

In conclusion, caprovines that were to be sold as sacrificial victims, were probably kept by local herders whose services were contracted by the temple. This contract in turn was verified by the 'rb' or an analogous bureaucratic official who supervised the local herders.

5.5 IDEOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Divination is mentioned more frequently in Mesopotamian accounts than in West Semitic rituals. During the Old Babylonian period (ca. 1900-1740 B.C.), much cultic literature was devoted to divination or the search for omens before, during, and after sacrificial rituals (Leichty 1993: 23 7; Postgate 1992: 132). These omens were derived from the observation of: 1) the physical characteristics and behavior of the sacrificial victim before and during the ritual slaughter; 2) the behavior of the butcher/diviner who conducted the sacrifice; 3) the location and composition of the victim's remains, especially the intestines and major organs; and 4) the often clumsy and perhaps drunken behavior of the supplicant (Leichty 1993: 238-241 ). Hence, there are texts listing specific explanations for a wide range of events such as when the sheep shakes its tail when its throat is cut; the sheeps left ear points to the area of slaughter after the sacrifice; the diviner curls his lip during the slaughter; or the supplicant knocks over the table and tips over his beer (Leichty 1993: 240-241 ). These extispicy rituals were either performed within or outside the sanctuary-diviners often accompanied armies and would seek the approval of the gods for a campaign plan (Postgate 1992: 133). Divination rituals are so well documented that Leichty inquires, "Could a supplicant offer a victim to the gods without taking omens? I would argue no. Since the ancient Mesopotamian knew that the gods wrote omens in every victim, it would be foolhardy to ignore them and risk the wrath of the gods when it was easy to propitiate the angry god with an apotropaic ritual (Leichty 1993: 241242)."

What follows is a discussion of the ideological motives which might explain 1) the temporal changes in the sacred geography of the temenos and donkey burial; 2) the presence of the small pits in Area I and II; and 3) why aforementioned taxa (i.e., cattle, caprovines, dogs, corvids) were deposited in the temple complex and Structure 8624.

5.4.1 Sacrificial Motives in the Ancient Near East and Mesopotamia Administrative records dating to the second and first millennia B.C. have revealed much about Sumero-Babylonian and West Semitic (e.g., U garitic, Israelite, Canaanite, and Phoenician) religious beliefs and practices, specifically sacrificial rituals. In both areas, rituals served to propitiate or commemorate the actions of a deity (Lambert 1993: 192). Gaster (1962) states that the motives for sacrifice as recorded in Ugaritic (Ras Shamra ), Mesopotamian, and Israelite texts, were similar. Sacrifices were conducted to provide tribute (i.e., first fruits or tithe offerings), show thanksgiving, to sustain the gods through periodic, continual, and scheduled offerings, for communion, to expiate sin, and to purify (Gaster 1962: 148153). However, several major differences exist between Mesopotamian and Western Semitic religious practices. Although, in Mesopotamia, the public supported the construction and maintenance of temples, only the priests, royal family, and highest officials were allowed to worship on the grounds of the main temple in a city. Most textual evidence from Mesopotamia provides detailed descriptions of this exclusive worship while the worship of commoners is barely known (Lambert 1993: 193). In Mesopotamia, there are records of gods being taken out of their sanctuaries and traveling around the countryside. These occasions coincided with religious festivals or the consecration of new sanctuaries and were associated with huge gatherings, musicians, dancers,

That divination was important in Canaan is evidenced by two clay liver models found at Hazor (Landsberger & Tadmor 1964). The models from Hazor were found adjacent to a 'bammah' in pottery dating to the fifteenth century B.C. Also, with this assemblage was a cult stand (Yadin 1958: CCLX3). The Akkadian script on the models was from the Old Babylonian Period dating to the seventeenth century B.C. The clay models from Hazor illustrate different conditions (i.e., a fold or perforation) and their corresponding significance (e.g., Bi

Jool D. Klonck

"an enemy will attack my country" or "a servant will rebel against his lord"-Landsberger & Tadmor 1964: 206). The models served "as a handbook for the interpretation of...perforations ...that might be found on various sections of a sheep's liver (Landsberger & Tadmor 1964: 202)."Clay liver models were also found at Mari (17th cent. B.C.), Boghazkoi (13th cent. B.C.), Megiddo (12th cent. B.C.), and at Alalakh (14th cent. B.C.). The latter models were also associated with other replicas oflungs and intestines (Landsberger & Tadmor 1964: 203-205; Woolley 1955: 255; Loud 1948: Plate 255).

Of interest is that a philological study by Del Olmo Lete (1993) seems to correspond with Bietak's (1979) differentiation between the funerary temple at Tel el Dab'a and other non-funerary temples in Canaan. Del Olmo Lete (1993: 58) states that there were three spaces within the cultic structures of the royal palace at Ugarit that were used for ritual. The first, called the hnm or chapel, was a raised structure or area where royalty and other gods "went up" to present bloodless offerings and the remains of sacrificed victims to various deities. With the hnm was a similarly described edifice called the mgdl or 'tower.' In the U garitic 'Legend ofKirta,' the king is invited by an oracle to ascend the mgdl and present sacrifices of a lamb, birds, bread, and wine. The mgdl area comprised a space where royalty performed both sacrificial and oracular rituals (Del Olmo Lete 1993: 59). The third ritual space comprised the gn or 'garden.' This area comprised the royal burial place where evocation and sacrificial rites were associated with the cult of the dead (Del Olmo Lete 1993: 60). Furthermore, Del Olmo Lete (1993: 58) suggests that the hnm was built on the summit of the mgdl structure.

Healing was also a theme in Western Semitic and Mesopotamian religious rituals. Healing rituals were either practiced as a part of a large ritual repertoire or occurred in a shrine specifically devoted to this motive (Gibson 1990; Livingstone 1988; Gray 1949). To reiterate, populations in the Levant and Mesopotamia conducted sacrificial rituals for four principal reasons: to propitiate a deity, to commemorate the actions of a deity, to forecast the future, and to heal the sick.

If Del Olmo Lete is correct, it is unfortunate. To date, mgdl temples have been identified only by their architectural foundations. If hnm installations were located on the summit of mgdl structures in Canaan, Syria, and along the Phoenician Coast, they were destroyed when the latter features collapsed.

5.4.2 Changes in the Geography of the Cult at Tel Haror

Throughout this thesis faunal assemblages were identified from three types of contexts: the temenos, equid burial, and well. Renfrew (1985: 22) has proposed the use of material assemblages from cemeteries to identify non-funerary cultic sites such as temples, open-air worship areas, etc. Since both contexts involve the use of rituals and ideology, their material assemblages might be similar. The distinction between burial and non-burial cultic loci was also made by the inhabitants of Tel Haror. In the earliest stratum (V), Haror's inhabitants built the Migdal structure, Locus 8630, and the equid burial (Locus 8624). In the later stratum-IVE, they separated the temple complex from the equid burial via Wall 8659.

The distinction between hmn/mgdl and gn cult spaces in U garitic texts raises questions as to what deities were worshipped and rituals performed at each cult locales. Presumably, chthonic deities such as Resheph, Horon, and Nergal were evoked in gn locals since these deities controlled access to and lorded over the world of the dead. Although difficult to prove, that Haror's mgdl structure (Locus 8630) was first associated in Stratum V with an equid burial (Locus 8624), might indicate that the structure was initially associated with funerary rites and possibly with chthonic deities. In succeeding strata (IVB and IVA), the inhabitants of Haror separated the two features with a wall (8022). Still, this association with funerary rites and chthonic deities might have persisted in Strata IVB and IVA.

Although the temple complex and equid burial were separated from each other by the mudbrick wall (Locus 8659) in Strata IVB and IVA, their proximity to each other requires discussion. First, other equid burials have been excavated at Tel el-Dab'a, Tel el Maskhuta, Tell el-Ajjul, and Jericho (Bietak 1979: 245-246; Boessneck 1976; Petrie 1931; Ellis 1960). Second, at Tel el-Dab'a the equid burials were associated with symmetrical monumental structure which Bietak termed 'funerary temples' (Bietak 1979: 250-256Figure 1.13).

5.4.3 Ideological Explanations for the Small Pits in Area K

The excavation of a pit to contain sacrifical remains was recorded on two Mesopotamian tablets copied and translated by F. Thureau-Dangin (1921: 127-154) which elucidate the "Temple Program for the New Year's Festivals at Babylon." According to Sachs, the tablets date to the Seleucid period but the "program described may go back to a much earlier time" (Sachs 1955: 331 ). The tablets state that the priest was to enter the temple of Esagil and for three days distribute the pieces of slaughtered sheep to artisans responsible for the construction of deity images during the festival. In addition, the text states that a white bull was to be burnt in a hole dug in the temple courtyard during the New Year's festivals (Sachs 1955: 334).

The differences between the funerary temples found at Tel el-Dab' a and others such as at Megiddo, Shechem, and Hazor, which were not associated either human or equid burials might indicate two different genres in Canaanite cult space. To reiterate, Canaanite temples were either associated with cemeteries, and presumably incorporated funerary rites into their ritual repertoire or stood apart from cemetery sites and practiced the genera of rituals associated with most nonfunerary temples: evocation of deities, divination, healing, etc. 82

Tho

The use of pits in Hittite rituals are described in a "Ritual to Counteract Sorcery" where a priestess digs pits in the ground, rubs clay from these pits on the supplicant and returns the clay to the hole to aid their recovery (Goetze 1955: 347). This association between pits and healing is noteworthy and is discussed further below.

Cultic Milieu

If there be bone,

I'll weep and inter it, Lay't in the hollows of the earth-ghosts." His speech left his lips, Hargab's wings Baal doth break, Baal doth break the pinions of him.

A U garitic text, the Tale of Aqhat, might also provide suggestions as to why the inhabitants of Tel Haror deposited carcasses, especially corvid skeletons, in small pits and why some of these taxa were found in contorted positions.

He doth fall down at his feet. So he splits his belly and gazes: No fat is there, No bone.

Below is a section from the Tale of Aqhat. The four tablets that bone this myth were excavated at U garit during archaeological seasons in 1930 and 1932. These tablets date to the "second quarter of the fourteenth century B.C." (Ginsberg 1969: 149). The verses below are from AQHT C, the third of four tablets. AQHT C was the most complete tablet of the four columns (Ginsberg 1969: 149). These verses follow a section where the goddess Anath flies with vultures to kill "Aqhat the Youth" so that she can obtain his bow and darts. When Daniel, the father of Aqhat, discovers that his son is dead he relates a curse to which Baal, the Canaanite god, quickly responds:

He lifts up his voice and cries: "The wings ofHargab may Baal mend, May Baal mend the pinions of him. Hargab, may'st flutter and fly."Lifting his eyes he sees, Behold Samal, the vultures' mother. He lifts up his voice and cries: "The wings of Samal may Baal break, May Baal break the pinions of her. Let her fall down at my feet.

He lifts up his voice and cries:

I'll split her belly and gaze.

"The vultures' wings may Baal break,

Ifthere be fat,

May Baal break the pinions of them.

If there be bone,

Let them fall down at my feet.

I'll weep and inter it,

I'll split their bellies and gaze.

Lay't in the hollows of the earth-ghosts."

lfthere be fat,

Scarce hath the word left his mouth,

If there be bone,

His speech left his lips,

I'll weep and inter it,

Samal's wings Baal doth break,

Lay't in the hollows of the earth ghosts."

Baal doth break the pinions of her.

Scarce hath the word left his mouth,

She doth fall down at his feet.

His speech left his lips,

So he splits her belly and gazes.

The vultures' wings Baal doth break,

There is fat,

Baal doth break the pinions of them. They do fall down at his feet,

There is bone.

He splits their bellies and gazes:

Taking them for Aqhat he weeps,

No fat is there,

Weeps and inters him.

No bone.

He inters him in ..., in ..., Then lifts up his voice and cries:

He lifts up his voice and cries:

"The wings of the vultures may Baal break,

"The vultures' wings by Baal mend,

May Baal break the pinions of them,

May (Baal) mend the pinions of them.

And they fly over the grave of my son,

Vultures, flutter and fly."-

Rousing him from his sleep."-

Lifting his eyes, he sees

(from Ginsberg 1969: 154).

Behold Hargab, the vultures' father. He lifts up his voice and cries:

'Vultures' in this poem comes from the Ugaritic word nsr, which also has been translated as 'eagle'. That these birds represent eagles is suggested earlier in the poem-the birds are placed in pouches and hoods are put over their heads. That nsr refers to vultures is supported by passages which state that groups of these birds hover over the corpse of Aqhat and devour him (Walls 1992: 194).

"The wings of Hargab may Baal break, May Baal break the pinions of him. And let him fall down at my feet. I'll split his belly and gaze. Ifthere be fat. 83

Jool D. Klonck

Several interesting points must be made about the poem. Baal's act of splitting the belly and gazing at the entrails of the vultures to look for his son draws comparisons with descriptions of divination (Leichty 1993 :240-241 ). With divination rituals, the abdomen of an animal was split open and its organs, especially the intestines, inspected to forecast the future.

Also, considered unclean by Israelite priests were all birds of prey including the eagle (Lev. 11: 13-14, 16-18); the vulture (Lev. 11: 18); and the stork (Lev. 11: 19). Besides for ritual, crows and ravens may have been dispatched for other reasons. First, Corvidae competed with farmers and took much of their fruit. Representations of crows and ravens in Egypt during the Ramesside Period (1307-1112 B.C.) show them feeding on fruit, especially figs and dates (Houlihan 1986: 133). Second, these birds were probably despised since they fed on carrion. For example, the Battlefield Palette, dating to the Late Predynastic Period (3100-3000 B.C.), exhibits a flock of vultures and crows, preying on the bodies of fallen soldiers (Houlihan 1986: 132).

In the phrase "hollows of the earth-ghosts", the Ugaritic term for 'hollow' -hr, can be translated as hole or nostril (Gordon 1967: 404). This word is different than the Ugaritic term for grave, qbr, yet both terms are associated with the internment of the dead (Gordon 1967: 476). It is tempting to suggest that the numerous small pits containing skeletal remains in temple complexes at Haror might be what the term-hr refers to.

5.4.4.2. Canis familiaris (Dog) Baal's differential treatment of the remains of Aqhat and the birds is also noteworthy. For the remains Aqhat, Baal inters them and they are 'Lay't' in the hollows. For the birds, after Baal breaks their wings he lets "them fall down" at his feet. The dichotomy between 'laying' and 'interring' human remains and 'dropping' avian fauna might correspond to actual ritual activities. The contorted positions of the canid and corvid remains in the small pits in the temenos at Tel Haror suggest that these animals were dropped haphazardly in these loci. Conversely, the donkey burial in Structure 8624 was placed on its side resembling equid burials from Gaza (Tel el Ajjul), Jericho, and Tel ed-Dab'a (Bietak 1979; Petrie 1931; and Ellis 1960).

That dogs were sacrificed at Tel Haror probably indicates that healing rituals occurred at the site. Dogs are associated with healing rituals in ancient texts from Mesopotamia and Anatolia. In addition two other lines of evidence -snake figurines and the design of a gazelle head on a ceramic sherd, support the notion that healing was a ritual motive at Haror. Excavations at Ashkelon, located along the coast in Israel, have revealed that during the Persian Period (ca. 538-332 B.C.), over 1000 dog were interred on the tel. Stager (1991) has offered a compelling hypothesis as to why these animals were buried. Associated with the stratum that comprises the dog burials were religious signs of the goddess ofhealing, Tanit, who Stager (1991: 37) suggests was often identified with the mother goddess Asherah. These dogs were usually buried on their sides and represent all ages, from newborn to mature dogs. Furthermore, Stager ( 1991: 39) remarks that in the Near East, "the dog became associated with healing because of the curative powers evident from licking its own wounds or sores. One neo-Assyrian text in cuneiform suggests that even touching the sacred dog was sufficient to heal: 'If a man goes to the temple of his god, and if he touches ... (?), he is clean (again?); likewise if he touches the dog of Gula [the goddess of healing], he is clean (again?)."'

Hence. the two types of animal interments in Canaanite cemeteries and cult centers- 1) equids laid on their sides occasionally in prepared structures and 2) corvids and canids dropped into pits-imitates U garitic cult literature. The latter also differentiates between 'holes' and 'graves' and between carcasses that are laid and those that are dropped into deposits for the dead.

5.4.4 Possible Ideological Motives for the Sacrifice of Taxa at Tel Haror Below are discussions of the philological and archaeological data which might elucidate why certain taxa were sacrificed at Tel Haror.

Dogs are associated with several healing deities in the first millennium B.C.-Gula/Ninisina in Mesopotamia, Asklepios in Greece, Eshmun in Phoenicia, and Resheph-Mukol in Phoenician Cyprus. Also, at the Phoenician temple at Kition, a plaque (ca. 450 B.C.) mentions that attendants were to pay for healing rituals performed by "dogs and puppies" (Stager 1991: 40-42). Early evidence for the worship of ReshephMukol was found in the LB stratum at the temple complex of Beth-Shean. From the temenos, a stele depicts a homed deity, which Stager (1991: 40) remarks is similar to representations ofResheph in Egypt, but who is identified by a hieroglyphic inscription as Mukal, the god of Beth-Shean. Also from the temple, a basalt relief depicts a dog fighting and overcoming a lion. Stager (1991: 40) suggests, "It is tempting to link the victorious dog with the god Mukal."

5.4.4.1 Corvidae (Crows and Ravens) Other than the possible reference to carrion birds in the Tale of Aqhat, not much is written in the ancient world on rituals involving other carrion birds such as corvids. Corvids are found on Egyptian reliefs during the Ramesside Period ( 13071112 B.C.). A scene from the Twelfth Dynastic (1991-1783 B.C.) tomb at El-Riqqa pictures two crows on either side of a symbol for the god Horus. What is noteworthy, in light of the Tale of Aqhat, is that birds of prey are usually associated with this symbol (Houlihan 1986: 133). In Israelite literature, the entire family of Corvidae was considered unclean. Israelites were prevented from eating these birds or touching their dead bodies (Leviticus 11: 15).

The worship of the healing goddess Gula/Ninisina is discussed above in Chapter 4. The aforementioned philological sources, 84

Tho

however, do not mention how or if these canids were killed during healing rituals.

Cultic Milieu

a woman the (it is) female ... Afterwards she lifts the piglet over him/her, and she pronounces the charm of the piglet. Afterwards she lifts the puppy over him/her, and she pronounces the charm of the puppy ... [And] they carry [the pupp ]y (and) the piglet to another place [and] they bum [them with fire]" (Collins 1990: 217-218).

Israelite literature might represent another informative source in analyzing Canaanite ritual activities since the Israelites immediately followed the Canaanites and because Biblical authors do describe their predecessors' rituals albeit negatively. A possible reference to Canaanite puppy sacrifice is found in Isaiah 66:3-4 and concerns unclean worship:

Collins (1990: 218) notes that the sheep and lamb in this text were sacrificed to the Sun god. In addition, Hittite texts state that puppies were severed, usually with other animals and sometimes with a human, to purify humans and animals. On a table describing a ritual for a routed army it states:

"He who slaughtered an ox (would now) slay a man, who sacrificed a lamb (would now) break a dog's neck, who presented cereal offering (would now present) the blood of swine."

"If the troops are defeated by the enemy, then they prepare the offerings behind the river as follows: Behind the river they sever a human, a billy-goat, a puppy (and) a piglet. On one side they set halves and on the other side they set the (other) halves. But in front (of these) they make a gate ofhawthom and stretch a tiyamar up over it. Then on one side they bum a fire before the gate (and) on the other side they bum a fire. The troops go through, but when they come alongside the river, they sprinkle water over them(selves)" (Collins 1990: 219-220).

Like Corvidae, the dog was also considered as an unclean animal by the Israelites (Leviticus 11: 2-3; 27). However, it is from Anatolia that the most texts are found discussing the role of juvenile canids in rituals. In Hittite rituals, puppies are used to ward off evil omens, to purify, and to heal. Collins (1990) documents several Hittite texts which mention the use of puppies in rituals. First, for the prevention of bad omens:

Another text states that horses could be purified:

"If you are marching on campaign, and (someone) sees an evil bird (i.e., a bird of ill omen) then you will drive outside a billy-goat and a puppy, and they will sever the puppy. He will set half on either side. He will do likewise (with) the billy-goat. The cooked and raw fat he will mix up, and h[e] will throw it away" (Collins 1990: 213).

"The[y] sever a puppy [ ... ] the horses [they drive] throu[gh, ... and they place] half on one sid[ e] and half on the other side, [...th ]en [they] rein them in. Then [on either] side [they] bum a fire. [The hors]es [they] drive through" (Collins 1990: 220-221 ).

Second, puppies were slaughtered for purposes of purification:

In the "Ritual of Anniwiyanni" a goat was sacrificed to the "Protective Deity" and the puppy fulfilled the purification rite:

"[ ...t]hen [they] cut [up] a puppy[ ...] the barbarians devour [...]but[ ...] to the right side of the gate they bury (it).[ ...] the old woman (says) of this man let the[ ...] likewise be buried (Collins 1990: 213)!"

"We pick everything up and drive the puppy and [the goat] before us. [We go] to another location on a mountain-(a place) [w ]here a plow does not reach ...We go [out]side to the gate of hawthorn. They sever [the puppy] and in front of the gate on one side they set half and [on the other si]de they set half. But behind [the gat]e, on either side they set greenery" (Collins 1990: 221).

This text, however, is the only Hittite text that mentions the consumption of sacrificed puppies and only 'barbarians' are associated with this act. Sacrificed puppies could also be used to appease a deity. For example, one manuscript mentions that a Hittite army was ravaged by an epidemic. In order to appease a deity and have it ward off the disease, the priests performed the following ritual:

Other descriptions which are similar to purification rituals where puppies are associated with young caprovines include the Ritual of Pupuwanni:

"Then afterward he takes for himself one kid, one piglet and one puppy, and over in another place they sever them for the Heptad, and afterward a bit of beer (and) wine he libates three times for the Heptad" (Collins 1990: 214).

"[When] the gods are magically incited against someone, [and in addition] a clo[ ak] is pippa -ed upon that man, for him I [perform] a ritual in the following ma[nner]: He takes one kid, one puppy, six offering loaves (weighing) a tarna (each), [one j]ug of beer, one handful of grain, (and) ..." (Collins 1990: 222).

Tablets also mention that individuals were purified by having puppies waved over them: "They take the live puppy [...] and wa[ ve] it over the king and queen ... [They wave] the puppy [over] the king and queen and [they] se[ ver] that one" (Collins 1990: 217).

Another text reads: "At dawn, when the sun has not yet risen, they prepare the [of]ferings as follows: Five offering loaves (weighing) a tarna (each) and [N j]ugs of beer, one black puppy, one black lamb, one black kid, [N hand]fuls (of) wheat. They sprinkle the figurine with water. [Then] a little ..." (Collins 1990: 223).

Another text mentioning waving is in the Ritual ofTunnawi: "If (it is) a man, then take a black ram, but if it is a woman then they take a black ewe, one black piglet (and) one black puppy. If (it is) a man then it is a male piglet, but if 85

Jool D. Klonck

Finally, several Hittite texts mention that puppies were used to heal afflicted persons. The translations state the human disease was transferred to a puppy after it licked the afflicted body part of the individual. These texts, however, are incomplete, and do not state that the puppies were sacrificed after they were associated with the sick human, although this is possible (Collins 1990: 214-215).

Horon appears on a papyrus and on foundation deposits near the Sphinx at Gizeh-both dating to the reign of Amenhotep II (1448-1420 B.C.). Furthermore, Ramesses II (1279-1212 B.C.) introduced several Semitic deities into the Egyptian pantheon including Anat, Astarte, Resheph, and Horon. In a papyrus from the Nineteenth Dynasty (1307-1196 B.C.), Horon is mentioned four times: twice he is mentioned as the valiant shepherd, he is named with Horus as the protector of crops from wild animals, lastly the deity is associated with Resheph andAnat in a story about the killing ofa wolf(Gray 1949: 28).

Although the Hittite's use of puppies in sacrificial rituals is intriguing in light of the canid remains from Tel Haror, there are obvious differences between the treatment of puppies in Anatolia and Canaan. First, Collins (1990) states that although puppies played a vital role in Hittite rituals, they were neither eaten nor used as offering animals, nor were they associated with temple food and equipment (Collins 1990: 225). Goetze (1969) has translated a Hittite text supporting this notion. The translation reads: " .. .if a pig or a dog ever comes near [the implements], and the "lord of the pot" does not throw them away, but gives (them) to the gods (so that they) eat from a polluted (implement), then the gods will give that one dung (and) urine to eat and drink (Goetze 1969: 207)."

Statements about Horon indicate that he is both the god of healing and disease-a normal condition for chthonic deities. Horon is associated in Egyptian texts with the Anat and Resheph: the former being the goddess of war and destruction, the latter being the god of pestilence, disease, and death. Gaster (194 7: 187) noted that the epithet for Horon "true of mouth (speech?)" was the same epithet given to the Babylonian god Nergal-the god of pestilence and death. Gray's suggestion that there might be a correlation between healing rituals and snake figurines is based on the relatedness of healing deities across the Mediterranean. In the Keret Epic (14th cent. B.C.), Horon is associated with the goddess Astarte when he is told by a king to deliver a mortal illness to the king's son that Horon had presumably healed. During the first millennium B.C., close associations with Astarte are made with other healing deities: a coin retrieved from excavations in Sidon associates Astarte with Asclepius; from Carthage the joint name of Eshmun-Astarte is mentioned in several inscriptions (Gray 1949: 31, 33). During the second century B.C., the deities Auronas (Horon) and Asclepius were worshipped together with Heracles at the Philistine cities of Ashkelon and Jamnia. Lastly, a trilingual inscription from Sardinia, dating to the second century B.C., equated the following healing deities: Iolaos from Carthage, Eshmun from Phoenicia, and Asclepius from Greece (Gray 1949: 30, 33).

Two other lines of evidence might also support the notion that healing was an ideological motive at Tel Haror. First, several vessels from the temenos have ceramic attachments in the shape of serpents (Figure 2.8). These snakes are usually coiled around the handles or on the rim of ceramic bowls and Jars. The snake was known in the ancient world as a symbol for healing. In Greece, the healing god, Asclepius, was represented by two serpents coiled around a staff. This symbol has continued in modern times to represent the medical profession. In the Torah, Moses was told to form a bronze snake and that any Israelite who looked upon it would be healed (Numbers 21: 8-9). Biblical tradition states that Israelites continued to burn incense to the bronze snake until the reign of King Hezekiah of Judah who had the figure destroyed (II Kings 18: 4). In addition, I Kings 1: 8 mentions that Adonijah in his quest to become the king oflsrael, held a celebration near the Stone of Zoheleth or the 'Serpent Stone' near the Well of Rogel.

To summarize, Gray (1949: 32) associates serpent iconography with a Horon-Eshmun healing cult based on two factors: 1) the relatedness and interchangeability of healing deities (Horon, Eshmun, Asclepius, and Iolaos) across the Mediterranean during the first millennium B.C.; and 2) associations of serpent iconography with an Israelite healing cult and the Greek god ofhealing-Asclepius.

The connection between snakes and healing continued into Islamic traditions. R. Smith (1894: 168) noted that Arab tribes in Palestine and Jordan believed that medicinal springs were inhabited by ginn in the form of serpents.

In addition to serpentine iconography, the engraving of a bovid head on a ceramic sherd from the temenos needs to be addressed. The portrait in question was retrieved during the 1992 season and illustrates the head of an ungulate and two unknown symbols (Figure 2.9).

In 1949, John Gray suggested a link between serpent iconography and the Canaanite god, Horon. Gray (1949: 27) noted that Horon was an ancient deity-the earliest inscriptions of this deity are inscribed on three figurines dating to the Twelfth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.). Thepropernames of these three individuals showed that Horon was held to be their 'father' or 'patron.' These figurines represented individuals who were enemies of the Pharaoh.

The drawing was initially thought to represent an ibex. Presently, Prof. Oren (Pers. Comm. 9/15/96) believes that the graffito is Minoan-a stylized Cretan bull. However, the lyrate shaped horns of the bovid from Tel Haror suggest another possibility. Among ungulate species in the Near East, only gazelles possess horn cores which are lyrate. And it is the gazelle, specifically the head of a gazelle, that is commonly associated with the god Resheph.

Other mentions ofHoron are in the Ugaritic 'Epic ofKeret' which dates to the fourteenth century B.C. Also, the name of

86

Tho

Cultic Milieu

5.4.4.4. Deer and Gazelle

The worship of Resheph originated in Syria where the chthonic deity of pestilence and disease is associated with pestilence, death, but also healing (Ringgren 1973: 137). Fulco (1976: 70) explains: "Near Eastern gods enjoy a certain polarity in their personalities, whereby they exhibit paradoxical characteristics: a god of disease and death such as Resheph would logically be invoked to withhold the sending of disease and death."

Both gazelle and deer are mentioned as sacrificial animals in Mesopotamian texts. And although these taxa were considered clean by Israelite society, they were forbidden as sacrificial animals (Leviticus 17). 5.4.4.5. Bovids (Sheep, Goat, and Cattle)

Although Resheph originated from Syria, his iconographic representations are exclusively from Egypt (Albright 1968: 139). Interestingly, one of the features most commonly attributed to the deity of disease and healing is the head of a gazelle (Ringgren 1973: 137; Albright 1968: 139). Of the fifty iconographic representations of Resheph recorded by Fulco (1976: 29), eleven or 22% portray the deity with a gazelle-head on the front of his Upper Egyptian crown (Figure 5.1). Although the earliest iconographic representation of Resheph with a gazelle's head is dated to the Eighteenth Dynasty (1550-1307 B.C.-Fulco 1976: 5), the deity was worshipped much earlier. The Mari texts, which cite the deity, are dated to the seventeenth century B.C. (Handy 1994: 109).

As mentioned previously, caprovines and cattle were used in ancient sacrifical rituals to propitiate or commemorate a deity. In addition, caprovines were slaughtered for divinatory purposes. The two rituals would not yield different cut marks on the bone since the only difference between the two is that with divination the entrails of animals are inspected after the abdomen, which is boneless, is split open. For example, F oxvog (1989) has translated an Old Babylonian (B. C.) bilingual text which records a divination ritual written in Sumerian and Akkadian. The tablet allegedly originated from Abou Gawan and was obtained by Alfred Kohlberg in 1930 (Foxvog 1989: 167). "Fell the sheep!

In conclusion, four lines of evidence-1) the presence of small pits; 2) numerous puppy remains; 3) serpentine iconography; 4) and the engraving of a gazelle's head on a ceramic sherd, suggest that healing was a motive in some of the rituals at Tel Haror. It is also suggested that puppies were sacrificed in Area K to facilitate the healing process.

Cut off the head of the sheep! Let the blood vessels (of the neck) drip! (Sum.) The sheep-the leg blood should be done. (Sum.) The sheep-the blood vessels should be done. Roast the hooves(!) and the tail!

5.4.4.3. Pig

Pull out the shoulder and rib cuts!

As noted above, pigs played a considerable role in Hittite rituals. To restate, pigs are featured in rites for purification, family discord, and the elimination of plagues (Collins 1990). In the Hittite "Ritual for the Elimination of Family Discord" the pig is swung between quarreling parties, killed, and buried with wine and bread (Rost 1953). Firmage (1992: 1131-1132) states, "The ritual was clearly a composite of two different types of action. It was first a rite of elimination by which an evil was transferred to something else, in this case an animal, and then destroyed or banished. Burial was one means of returning the animal to the underworld, whence impurity, disease, and magical spells were thought to arise. But it was also a propitiatory offering to the numinous powers of that world, hence the bread and wine."

Roast (Akk. boil) and shoulder cut!

In the rituals for the elimination of plagues, a pig, goat, and ram are all sacrificed to a deity who presumably caused the plague. Hence, the offering were propitiatory. Firmage ( 1992: 1132) notes, "On the basis of the Hittite material, it would seem that the pig as sacrificial victim was closely associated with rituals of a chthonic character." He also suggests that pigs were popular in purification rituals, where they were killed and completely buried, because they were less expensive to raise and more readily available than were caprovines (Firmage 1992: 1132).

Cut up the flesh!

Place (it/them) on the table! Wash the large omentum in water! Arrange it on the table! Inspect the intestines! Pull out the intestines! Separate out the intestines! Pull out the connective tissue(?)! Clear the feces from the colon (Akk. rumen) and wash it in water! Inspect the liver(?)! Pull out the ligament(s) of the heart(?)! Cut up the flesh" (Foxvog 1989: 169)! Although the aforementioned sacrifice was for divination, the animal was dispatched, beheaded, and butchered much the same way caprovines were sacrificed in Israelite culture, where exticpicy was forbidden (Ottosson 1988: 134; Wapnish & Hesse 1992: 24). To reiterate, sacrifices for divination and propitiation were similar except for the inspections of the entrails in the former. Hence, the butchery marks on skeletons in both types of sacrifices were also probably similar.

Like dogs and Corvidae, the pig was also considered an unclean animal in Israelite culture and was prohibited as a sacrificial victim (Leviticus 11: 7).

Lastly, the fact that many of the large and medium ungulate bones were completely burned, especially near the two altars 87

Jool D. Klonck

(Loci 8269 and 8705) is noteworthy. Although Ugaritic texts mention an olah ' sacrifice, there is no description of the ritual or the motive behind the sacrifice in U garitic texts. In Biblical literature, however, the sacrifice was used to purify an individual of sin (Wapnish & Hesse 1992: 24). The high proportion of completely burned fragments from the temenos might reflect an olah 'type sacrifice although there is no way of verifying the ideological reasoning behind these rituals.

of gum resin, onyx (made from shell fish), galbanum, and frankincense were to be salted and used only at the cult site. Incense served a religious and hygienic role as well as acting as a perfume. In Mesopotamian myths, sacrifices were offered to the gods so they could smell the aroma of the offering (Hallo 1987: 9, 10). The function of incense as a perfume is described by Maimonides in the twelfth century A.D.: "Since many animals were slaughtered daily in the holy place ...there is no doubt that the smell of the place would have been like the smell of slaughter-houses, if nothing had been done to counteract it. Therefore, (the Torah) commanded to bum incense ...to give a pleasant odor to the place and to the garments of those who officiate there" (Moreh Nebukim III, Chapter 45: 321).

In conclusion, it is difficult to determine exactly why ungulates were sacrificed at Tel Haror. However, the high proportion of burned bones in the temenos (compared to the well and Structure 8624) and the popularity of divination and propitiation type sacrifices supports the suggestion that ungulates were sacrificed for a variety of ideological reasons.

Neufeld (1971: 60) states that incense also served an hygienic purpose. Smoke from the incense and other aromatics affected the breathing organs of mosquitoes, flies, and other flying insects. Although aromatics did not destroy insects, they served the function of keeping pests away from the remains of sacred meals in a temple complex (Neufeld 1971: 60).

5.4.4.6. Donkey

The donkey is sparsely mentioned as a sacrificial animal in Ugaritic texts. However, texts from Mari, which date to the seventeenth century B.C., note that the donkey was killed during covenant making rituals (Noth 1957). In fact, the idiom "to kill an ass" meant to make a treaty (Firmage 1992: 1137).

Cleaning methods are mentioned in the Biblical and Mesopotamian texts. However, it is unclear if these same methods were used by Canaanites.

5.5. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Utensils and cooking vessels were cleaned with sand. Ancient populations used fuller's clays or active clays to absorb impurities from oils and fats on cooking vessels (Neufeld 1971: 54). For body hygiene, chemical compounds were used which were made of natural products such as olive oil, potash, kernel oil, salts, and fatty acids. A cleaning compound called neter is mentioned in Jer. 2: 22 as a cleaning agent and probably comprised a mixture of natron, alkalies, and fats. Also, borith is noted in several Biblical passages (Jer. 2: 22, Mal. 3: 2; and Job 9: 30) and consisted of fruits made from as yet undocumented herbs, trees, and shrubs that contained a soapy substance. These terms, borith and neter, may refer to "hard" and "soft" soaps.

As mentioned previously, the temenos contained flint tools and 'funneled' bowls that attach to ceramic stands. Some of these bowls contained carbonized material. It was suggested that this charred residue was incense and that the ceramic vessels represented 'cult' (incense) stands. The lithic tools, ceramic vessels, and organic debris might elucidate 1) hygienic precautions in the temenos and 2) the tools used during the butchery processes at Haror.

5.5.1. Hygiene in the Temple Complex

A discussion of hygiene is warranted especially as to how Canaanites prepared the sacrificial meal, discarded the carcass, and masked any unpleasant odors associated with these remains. That the inhabitants conducted their sacrificial rituals and butchery practices in the open air in the temple courtyard at Tel Haror facilitated the desiccation of remains that were not collected during waste removal. In contemporary times, Bedouin, after conducting sacrificial rituals at Sheikh's tombs, leave the remains near the tomb. Although, as many as a dozen caprovines may be sacrificed at a holy tomb, by the end of the day only a slight odor remains since the sun usually dries the remains. The main problem is usually not the odor, but the insects that swarm around the newly discarded remains (Klenck 1995: 64).

Another problem which may have caused hygienic problems is table manners. Although Biblical texts mention that the cleanliness of cooking vessels were observed, there is no mention of cooking utensils. 'Flesh hooks' are mentioned in the Bible (Exod. 27: 3, 38: 3; I Sam. 2: 13-14) as being used to extract the boiled flesh of the sacrificial animal from cooking pots in the Tabernacle. Although two and three pronged forks have been excavated in Late Bronze contexts at Gezer, these objects are not found in Canaanite MB loci (Neufeld 1971: 53,54). The use of knives as table utensils occurs much later and is mentioned in Proverbs 23: 4; hence, Haror's population probably used their hands to take food out of a common plate during the sacrificial meals.

From nearly every MB temple complex, archaeologists have excavated cult stands which are interpreted as platforms for incense. Incense was made from herbs, balsams, and spices. In Exod. 30: 34-38, the passage describes the composition of the incense the Israelites made for their tabernacle: equal parts

5.5.2. Butchery Tools It is tempting to view animal sacrifice as a special activity that will yield unique assemblage readily distinguishable by the archaeologist from ordinary slaughters. The reality of this

88

Tho

phenomenon is that animal sacrifice rituals are similar to nonritual slaughter and butchery processes. Butchery activities, especially those involving larger quadrupeds (i.e., dog to cattle), are influenced by the available technology, physiological attributes of the animal, and the cultural norms of food preparation.

Cultic Milieu

characterize the faunal remains from the Iron Age cult site (bammah) at Tel Dan (Wapnish & Hesse 1992: 8, Tables 79). Wapnish and Hesse (1992: 20, 26) suggest that high proportions of foot bones were found near Tel Dan's bammah occur because priests kept skins as payments for sacrificial rituals. Since foot bones were attached to the skins, these remains were deposited in the archaeological record after the cult site was abandoned and covered. However, there are more straightforward reasons for the large amounts of foot bones at sacrificial sites. Klenck (1995: 65-72) demonstrates that large amounts of foot bones at Bedouin sacrificial sites are due to I) the proportionally greater numbers of foot bones in a bovine's body compared to upper limb bones; 2) the skin which surrounded the phalanges and metapodials protected these bones from burning and possibly gnawing; 3) these remains were immediately separated from the carcass and discarded, hence they did not endure the butchery processes or boiling that meat bones did; and 4) since the foot bones were considered as refuse they were seldom taken from the site like other "meat bones " such as the femur, humerus, or tibia.

At Tel Haror, the absence of metal objects, especially knives, and the presence of flint blades, scrapers, and debitage lend credence to the notion that butchery processes in the temple complex were conducted using flint and not metal blades. Most butchery marks from Middle Bronze deposits at Tel Haror comprise incisions at the epiphyseal ends of bones. The butchered remains at Tel Haror are unlike the butchered bones found at modern-day butcher shops or sacrificial contexts where metal blades, cleavers, or saws are used. At Bedouin cult sites, the members participating in the sacrifice usually butchered sheep and goats by cleaving through the shaft oflong bones with a steel machete (Klenck 1995: 6364). After the Bedouin concluded their sacrificial meals, many bisected bones were found littered on the floor of the sacred area. There is a paucity ofbisected bones from contexts at Tel Haror. Of the 715 cut remains from the temenos, 117 or 16.4% of the bones exhibited cleaving marks or cuts that sliced off part of the bone. The proportions of cleaved remains from the well and donkey burial were even lower-9.9% and 8.7%, respectively. These proportions are low compared to percentages of cleaved bones from Iron Age (1200-700 B.C.) strata at Tel Beit Shemesh and the contemporary Bedouin cult sites (Table 5 .2-Klenck 1991, 1995). Both Iron Age and Bedouin populations used metal tools. The averaged proportions of cleaved bones from these locales was 49 .1% and 48.0 %, respectively.

Although, large proportions of foot bones cannot be used as the sole determinant of 'sacrificial' remains, in conjunction with other types of archaeological data, especially contextual evidence, foot bones may help future archaeologists locate areas where ritual slaughter was performed.

5.6. CONCLUSIONS That Middle Bronze IIB strata at Tel Haror contained the remains of a temple complex is supported by the architecture, features, ceramic vessels and votive objects from Area K (Chapter 2). The main structure in the temenos, Structure 8630, resembles other mgdl or 'tower' temples in the Levant and Syria (Chapters 1 & 2).

Since the mean percentage of cleaved bones from contexts at Tel Haror is 11.6%, it is suggested that Haror's inhabitants used flint tools. These instruments were sharper but more fragile than metal tools, and were mostly used to cut tendons and muscles rather than bone during the butchery process. The faunal remains from the temenos exhibiting cleaving marks (16.4%) might indicate that sturdier lithic tools such as the chopper in Locus 8206 (Plate 2.5) were also used to dismember animals. In addition, the lack of partially burned bones from the temenos (Table 5.1) tends to discount the notion that widespread roasting activities were practiced by Haror's inhabitants in this locale and conversely suggests that most of the butchered remains were placed in pots and boiled.

In all periods of the temple, Haror's inhabitant practiced two types of sacrifice. The first sacrifice involved the slaughter of ungulates: sheep, goat, gazelle, cattle, and deer (Chapter 3). During these sacrificial rituals, the veins in the animal's throat were cut and the animal bled to death. These species were usually butchered, most likely with flint tools, and consumed. Large proportions of burned bones near the two altars of the temenos (Loci 8269 and 8705) suggest that some of the carcasses were burned. The second sacrifice entailed the sacrifice of crows, ravens, and dogs (Chapter 4). In the early periods of the temple, these animals were killed, probably by neck-breaking, and deposited in small pits.

5.5.3. Foot Bones

A noteworthy difference between ungulate remains from the temenos , Structure 8624, and the well is the disparate proportions of foot bones (see Section 3.9). The faunal assemblage from the temenos has the largest percentage of caprovine and cattle foot bones, compared to skeletal material from the well and Structure 8624. Higher proportions of foot bones from cultic contexts, as opposed to secular loci, also

Changes occurred, however, in the development of the cult (Chapters 3 & 5). With regard to ungulate sacrifices, greater proportions of goat and younger cattle and caprovines all characterize the faunal assemblage from later strata of the temenos. With regard to corvid and canid sacrifices, skeletons

89

Jool D. Klonck

from later strata were exposed and redeposited showing higher proportions of modification such as burning and gnawing. Higher percentages of corvid and canid bones with cut marks might indicate that these animals were affected by different processes than were skeletons from earlier strata (Chapters 4 and 5).

temenos: 1) when they provisioned supplicants with sacrificial victims and 2) when they received payments-in coin or in kind-for conducting these rituals (Chapter 5). Lastly, different types of sacrifice: corvids, canids, burned ungulates and butchered and boiled bovines, suggests that there were several ideological motives behind the rituals at Tel Haror. These motives included purification, healing, the petitioning of a deity, and possibly divination (Chapter 5).

The temple administration at Haror most likely profited in two ways from the diversity of sacrificial rituals in the

90

Tho

Cultic Milieu

BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, R.M. 1965. Land Behind Baghdad: A History of Settlement on the Diyala Plains. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Artzy, M., Asaro, F. and I. Perlman. 1975. "The Tel Nagila Bichrome Krater as a Cypriote Product." Israel Exploration Journal 25: 129-134.

Adams, R.M. 1966. The Evolution of Urban Society. Chicago: Aldine.

Assaf, A.A. 1967. "Der Friedhof von Yabrud." Annales Archeologiques de Syrie 17: 55-68.

Aharoni, Y. 1954. "The Land ofGerar." Eretz Israel 3: 108111 (Hebrew).

Attridge, H.W. and Oden, R.A. Jr. 1981. Philo of Byblos, The Phoenician History: Introduction, Critical Text, Translation,Notes. Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 9. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association.

Albright, W.F. 1923. "Egypt and the Early History of the Negeb." Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society 3: 131161.

Avalos, H. 1995. Illness and Health Care In the Ancient Near East: The Role of the Temple in Greece, Mesopotamia, and Israel. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

Albright, W.F. 1933. The Excavation of TellBeit Mirsim. Vol. Ia. The Bronze Age Pottery of the Fourth Campaign. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research.

Barrett, J.C. 1991. "Towards an Anthropology of Ritual." In Sacred and Profane: Proceedings of a Conference on Archaeology, Ritual, Religion. Oxford, 1989, edited by P. Garwood, D. Jennings, R. Skeates, and J. Toms, pp. 1-9. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology.

Albright, W.F. 1938. TheExcavationofTellBeitMirsim. Vol. 11.The Bronze Age Pottery of the Fourth Campaign. New Haven: American Schools of Oriental Research. Albright W.F. 1957. "Further Observations on the Chronology of Alalakh." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 146: 26-34.

Bate, D.M.A. 1938. "Animal Remains." In Megiddo Tombs, edited by P.L.O. Loud. pp. 209-213. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Albright, W.F. 1968. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan. New York: Doubleday.

Beck, P. 1975. "The Pottery of the Middle Bronze Age IIA at Tel Aphek." Tel Aviv 2 (2): 45-85.

Alon, D. and Levy, T.E. 1989. "The Archaeology of Cult and the Chalcolithic Sanctuary at Gilat." Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 2: 163-221.

Beck, P. 1985. "The Middle Bronze Age IIA Pottery from Aphek, 1972-1984: First Summary." Te/Aviv 12: 181-203.

Amiran, R. 1970. Ancient Pottery of the Holy Land. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

Ben-Dor, I. 1950. "A Bronze Age Temple at Nahariyah." Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 14:1-41.

Amiran, R. and A Eitan. 1977. "Nagila, Tel." In Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, edited by M. Avi-Yonah and E. Stem, pp. 894-898. London: Oxford University Press.

Ben-Tor, A. 1980. "Yoqneam Regional Project Looks Beyond the Tell." Biblical Archaeology Review 6/2: 31-48. Ben-Tor, A. (ed.) 1989. Sefer Yigael Yadin. Yerushalayim: ha-oHevrah la-ohaokirat Erets-Yisrael ove-Atiokoteha.

Amschler, W. 1937. "Goats from Ur and Kish." Antiquity XI: 226-228.

Anderson, G.A. 1987. "Sacrifices and Offerings in Ancient Israel." Harvard Semitic Monographs 41.

Bergquist, B. 1993. "Bronze Age Sacrificial Kaine in the Eastern Mediterranean? A Study of Animal Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East." In Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, edited by J. Quaegebeur, pp. 11-44. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Orientalistiek.

Arensberg, B. 1973. The People in the Land of Israel from the Epipaleolithic to Present Times. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Tel Aviv University.

Bietak, M. 1979. "Avaris and Piramese, Archaeological Explorations in the Eastern Nile Delta." Proceedings of the British Academy 65: 225-290.

Anbar, M. and N. Na'aman. 1986/7. An Account Tablet of Sheep from Ancient Hebron. Tel-Aviv 13/14 (1): 3-12.

9i

Jool D. Klonck

Bietak, M. 1984. "Problems of Middle Bronze Age Chronological: New Evidence from Egypt." American Journal of Archaeology 88: 471-487. Bietak, M. 1991. "Egypt and Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age." Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research 281: 27-72. Binford, L. 1962. "Archaeology as Anthropology." American Antiquity 28: 217-225. Binford, L. 1964. "A Consideration of Archaeological Research Design." American Antiquity 29: 425-441. Binford, L. 1965. "Archaeological Systematics and the Study of Cultural Process." American Antiquity 31: 203-210. Biran, A. (ed.) 1981. Templesand High Places in Biblical Times. Jerusalem: Nelson Glueck School ofBiblical Archaeology.

Bright, J. 1981. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Wesminster Press. Broshi, M. and R. Gophna 1986. "Middle Bronze Age II Palestine: Its Settlements and Population." Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research 261: 73-90. Brunni, A. C. and U. Zimmer 1. 1951. Anatomia degli Animali Domestici, Vol.I. Milano: Casa Editrice Dottor Francesco Vallardi Bull, G. and S. Payne. 1982. "Tooth Eruption and Epiphyseal Fusion in Pigs and Wild Boar. In Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites," edited by B. Wilson, C. Grigson, and S. Payne, pp. 55-71. (BAR BS 109). Oxford: B.A.R. Busink, T.A. 1970. Der Tempel von Jerusalem. Leiden: Brill.

Blackman, A.M. 1915. The Rock Tombs of Meir. London: Egyptain Exploration Fund.

Burkert, W. 1988. "First General Discussion." In Early Greek Cult Practice: Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens 1986, edited by R. Hagg, N. Marinatos, and G.C. Nordquist, pp. 32-59. Stockholm: Svenska Institutet i Athen.

Bodenheimer, F.S. 1935. Animal Life in Palestine. Jerusalem: L. Mayer.

Caquot, A. and M. Sznycer. 1980. "Ugaritic Religion." Iconography of Religions 15/8. Leiden: Brill.

Bodenheimer, F.S. 1962. "Fauna." In The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, 4: 246-256. Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Carneiro, R.l. 1970. "A Theory of the Origin of the State." Science 169: 733-738.

Biran, A. 1984. 'The Triple-Arched Gate ofLiash at Tel Dan." Israel Exploration Journal 34 (1): 1-19.

Boessneck, J. 1969. "Osteological Differences Between Sheep (Ovis aries L.) and Goat (Capra hircus L.). In Science in Archaeology, edited by D. Brothwell and E. Higgs, pp. 331-358. New York: Praeger Publisher. Boessneck, J. 1970. "Ein altagyptisches Pferdeskelett." Mitteilungen der Deutschen Archaologischen Jnstituts Abteilung Kairo 26: 43-47. Boessneck, J. 1976. Tell el-Dab 'a 111:Die Tierknockenfunde 1966-1969. Vienna: Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Boessneck, J. 1977. "Die Hundeskellete von Isan Bahriyat (Isin) aus der Zeit um 1000 v. Chr." In Isin-Isan Bahriyat I: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1973-1974, edited by B. Hrouda, pp. 97-109. Munich: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Boessneck, J., Muller, H.-H. & Teichert, M. 1964. "Osteologische Unterscheidungsmerkemale zwischen Schaf (Ovis aries Linne) und Ziege ( Capra hircus Linne)." Kuhn-Archiv 78: 1-129. Bokonyi, S. 1972. "Appendix A. Once More on the Osteological Differences of the Horse, the Half-Ass and the Ass." In The Caspian Miniature Horse of Iran, edited by L. Firouz, pp. 12-23. Coconut Grove: Field Research Projects. Bottero, J., Cassin, E., andJ. Vercoutter(eds). 1967. The Near East: The Early Civilizations. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson. Brain, C.K. 1967. "HottentotFoodRemains and Their Bearing on the Interpretation of Fossil Bone Assemblages." Scientific Papers of the Namib Desert Research Station 32: 1-11. Brain, C.K. 1986. "Some Principles in the Interpretation of Bone Accumulations Associated with Man." In Human Origins: Louis Leakey and the East African Evidence, pp. 97-116.

Chase, P.G. and R.M. Hagaman 1987. "Minimum Number oflndividuals and its Alternatives: A Probability Theory Perspective." Ossa 13: 75-86. Chehab, M. 1939. Tambe Phenicienne de Sin el Fil, Melanges Syriens R. Dussaud JI. Paris: P. Geuthner. Clutton-Brock, J. 1974. "The Buhen horse." Journal of Archaeological Science T: 89-100. Clutton-Brock, J. 1989. "A Dog and a Donkey Excavated at Tell Brak." Iraq 51: 217-224. Clutton-Brock, J. 1992. Horse Power: A History of the Horse and the Donkey in Human Societies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Cole, D. 1984. Shechem I: The Middle Bronze Age JJB Pottery, (ASOR Excavations Reports). Winnona Lake: Eisenbrauns. Collins, B.J. 1990. "The Puppy in Hittite Ritual." Journal of Cuneifrom Studies 42 (2): 211-227. Collon, D. 1975. The Seal Impressions from Tell Atchana/ Alalakh. Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker. Collon, D. 1981. "The Aleppo Workshop: A Seal-Cutters' Workshop in Syria in the Second Half of the 18th Century B.C." Ugarit Forschungen 13: 33-43. Collon, D. 1988. First Impressions: Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East. London: British Museum Publications. Cowgill, G.L. 1975. "Population Pressure as a NonExplanation." In Population Studies in Archaeology and Biological Anthropology: A Symposium, edited by A.C. Swedlund, pp. 127-131. Society for Archaeology Memoirs, 30. Danin, A. 1983. Desert Vegetation of Israel and Sinai. Jerusalem: Cana Publishing House. Davis, S.J.M. 1976. "Mammal bones from the Early Bronze Age city of Arad, northern Negev, Israel." Journal of Archaeological Science 3: 154-164.

Tho

Davis, S.J.M. 1980. "A Note on the Dental and Skeletal Ontogeny of Gazella." Israel Journal of Zoology 29: 129134.

Cultic Milieu

Dive, J. and V. Eisenmann 1991. "Identification and Discrimination of First Phalanges from Pleistocene and Modem Equus, Wild and Domestic." In Equids in the Ancient World (Vol. II), edited by R.H. Meadow and H.P. Uerpmann, pp. 278-331. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.

Davis, S.J.M. 1987. The Archaeology of Animals. London: B.T. Batsford Ltd. Davis, S.J.M. and F.R. Valla. 1978. "Evidence for domestication of the dog 12,000 years ago in the Natufian oflsrael." Nature 276: 608-610.

Dossin, G. 1973. "Une mention de Canaaneens dans une lettre de Mari." Syria 50: 277-282.

Day, J. 1992. "Canaan, Religion Of." In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. I, edited by D. N. Freedman, pp. 831837. New York: Doubleday.

Dothan, M. 1956. "The Excavations at Nahariyah, Preliminary Report (Seasons 1954/55)." Israel Exploration Journal 6: 14-25.

Del Olmo Lete, G. 1993. "Royal Aspects of the U garitic Cult." In Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, edited by J. Quaegebeur, pp. 51-66. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Orientalistiek.

Dothan, M. 1965. "The Cult at Nahariyah and Canaanite High Places." In Western Galilee and the Coast of Galilee, pp. 63-75. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society (Hebrew).

Deniz, E. and S. Payne. 1982. "Eruption and Wear in the Mandibular Dentition as a Guide to Ageing Turkish Angora Goats." In Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones From Archaeological Sites, edited by B. Wilson, C. Grigson, and S. Payne, pp. 155-205. Oxford: BAR British Series 109.

Dothan, M. 1973. "The Foundation of Tel More and of Ashdod." Israel Exploration Journal 23: 1-17. Dothan, M. 1976. "Akko: Interim Excavation Report First Season, 1973/4." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 224: 1-48. Dothan, M. 1977a. "Mor, Tel." In Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, edited by M. Avi-Yonah and E. Stem, pp. 889-890. London: Oxford University Press.

de Vaux, R. 1978. Early History of Israel. London: Darton, Longman, and Todd. Dever, W.G. 1971. "Further Excavations at Gezer, 19671971." Biblical Archaeologist 34 (4): 94-132.

Dothan, M. 1977b. "Nahariya." In Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, edited by M. Avi-YonahandE. Stem, pp. 908-912. London: Oxford University Press.

Dever, W.G. 1973. "The Gezer Fortifications and the 'High Place', Illustration of Stratigraphic Methods and Problems." Palestine Exploration Quarterly 105: 61-70.

Dothan, M. 1981. "Sanctuaries along the Coast of Canaan in the MB Period: Nahariyah." In Temples and High Places in Biblical Times, edited by A. Biran. Jerusalem: Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology.

Dever, W.G. 1974. "The MB IIC Stratification In the Northwest Gate Area At Shechem." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 216: 30-52. Dever, W.G. 1975. "MB IIA Cemeteries At 'Ain es-Samiyeh and Sinjil." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 217: 23-36.

Dothan, M. and A. Raban. 1980. "The Sea Gate of Ancient Akko." The Biblical Archaeologist 43: 35-39. Doughty, C. 1936. Travels in Arabia Deserta. London: Jonathan Cape.

Dever, W.G. 1976. "The beginning of the Middle Bronze Age in Syria-Palestine." In Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God. Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G.E. Wright, edited by F.M. Cross, W.E. Lemke and P.D. Miller, Jr., pp. 4-29. Garden City: Doubleday.

Drower, M.S. 1978. "Syriac. 1550-1400 B.C." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.II, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, andN.G.L. Hammond,pp. 417-525. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dever, W.G. (ed.) 1986. Gezer IV the 1969-71 seasons in field VI, the "acropolis. Jerusalem: Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology.

du Buisson, D.M. 1948. Baghouz, L 'ancienne Corsote. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Ducos, P. 1971. "Le cheval de Soleb." In Soleb II Les Necropoles, edited by M.S. Giogini, pp. 260-265. Firenze: Sansone

Dever, W.G. 1987. "The Contribution of Archaeology to the Study of Canaanite and Early Israelite Religon." In Ancient Israelite Religon. Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross, edited by P.D. Miller, Jr., P.D. Hanson and S.D. McBride. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Dunayevsky, I. and A. Kempinski. 1973. The Megiddo Temples. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 89: 161-187.

Dever, W.G., H. D. Lance, and G.E. Wright. 1970. Gezer I: Preliminary Report of the I 964-66 Seasons. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College.

Dunand, M. 1937. Fouilles de Byblos, I. Paris: P. Geuthner. Dunand, M. 1950. Fouilles de Byblos, II. Paris: P. Geuthner.

Diakonoff, l.M. 1969. "The Rise of the Despotic State in Ancient Mesopotamia." In Ancient Mesopotamia, edited by I.M. Diakonoff, pp. 173-203. Moscow: Nauka.

Eisenberg, E. 1977. "The Temples at Tell Kitan." The Biblical Archaeologist 40: 77-81. Eisenmann, V. 1986. "Comparative Osteology of Meodem and Fossil Horses, Half-Asses, and Asses." In Equids in the Ancient World, ed. R.H. Meadow and H.P. U erpmann, 67-116. Weisbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.

Diakonoff, I.M. 1982. "The Structure ofNear Eastern Society before the Middle of the 2nd Millennium B.C." Oikumene 3: 7-100. 93

Jool D. Klonck

Eisenmann, V. and S. Beckouche. 1986. "Identification and Discrimination of Metapodials from Pleistocene and Modern Equus, Wild and Domestic." In Equids in the Ancient World (Vol. I), edited by R.H. Meadow and H.P. Uerpmann, pp. 117-163. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag.

Flannery, K.V. 1972. "The Cultural Evolution of Civilizations." Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 3:399-426.

Eliade, M. 1978-1985. A History of Religious Ideas, Volumes I, II, & III. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Flannery, K.V. 1983. "Early Pig Domestication in the Fertile Crescent: A Retrospective Look." In The Hilly Flanks and Beyond, edited by T.C. Young, pp. 163-188. Chicago: SAOC 36. F oxvog, D .A. 1989. "A Manuel of Sacrificial Procedure." In DUMU-E2-DUB-BA-A: studies in honor of Aka W Sjoberg, edited by H. Behrens, D.M. Loding, M.T. Roth, pp. 167-175. Philadelphia: Samuel Noah Kramer Fund.

Ellis, G. 1960. "Appendix C: Report onequids in Tomb J.3." In Excavations atJericho, VolumeOne, edited by K.M. Kenyon. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.

Frayne, D. 1990. Old Babylonian Period (2003-1595 B.C.); Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia, Early Periods. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Ellis, G. andB. Westley. 1965. "Appendix]: Preliminary Report On the Animal Remains in the Jericho Tombs" In Excavations at Jericho, VolumeTwo, edited by K.M. Kenyon. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.

Freedman,D.N.1987. "YahwehofSamariaandHisAsherah." Biblical Archaeologists 50: 241-149.

Eitan, A. 1972. "Tel Beit Mirsim G-F-The Middle Bronze IIA Settlement." Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research 208: 19-24.

Emslie, S.D. 1981. "Birds and Prehistoric Agriculture: The New Mexican Pueblos." Human Ecology 9 (3): 305-329.

Fritz, V. and A. Kempinski. 1976. "Vorbericht uber die Ausgrabungen auf der Hirbet el-Msas (Tel Masos), 3. Kampagne 1975." Zeitschrift des Deutschen PalastinaVereins 92: 83-104.

Engberg, R.M. 1938. "Some Characteristics of the Successive Periods." In Megiddo Tomb, edited by P.L.O. Loud, pp. 143-191. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Fugmann, E. 1958. Hama, Fouilles et Recherches 1931-1938: L 'architecture des Periods pre-Hellenistiques IV. Copenhagen: N ationalmuseet.

Epstein, C. 1965. "An Interpretation of the Megiddo Sacred Area During Middle Bronze II." Israel Exploration Journal 15 (4): 204-221.

Fuhr, I. 1977. "Der Hund als Begleiter der Gottin Gula und anderer Heilgottheiten." In Isin-Isan Bahriyat I: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1973-1974, edited by B. Hrouda (et al.), pp. 135-145). Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenshaften.

Epstein, C. 1974. "Middle Bronze Age Tombs at Kfar Szold and Ginosar." 'Atiqot 7: 13-19 (Hebrew Series).

Fulco, W.J. 1976. "The Canaanite God Resep." New Haven: American Oriental Society.

Evenari, M., L. Shanan, L. and N. Tadmor. 1971. The Negev: The Challenge of a Desert. Cambridge: Harvard University Press

Gadd, C.J. 1978. "Hammurabi and the End of his Dynasty." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.II, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammond, pp. 176-227. Cambridge: Cambridge Unversity Press.

Falconer, S.E. andB. Magness-Gardiner. 1984. "Preliminary Report of the First Season of the Tell el-Hayyat Project." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255: 49-74.

Gadd, C.J. 1985. "Babylonia c. 2120-1800 B.C." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.I, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammond, pp. 595-643. Cambridge: Cambridge Unversity Press.

Falconer, S.E. and B. Magness-Gardiner. 1989. "Bronze Age village life in the Jordan Valley: archaeological investigations at Tell el-Hayyat and Tell Abu en-Ni'aj." National Geographic Research 5: 335-347.

Gaillard, C. 1934. "Contibution a l'etude de la Faune prehistorique de l'Egypte." Archives du Museum d'histoire nature/le de Lyon XIV: 78-81.

Farber, W. 1989. Schlaf, Kindchen, Schlaf!: Mesopotamische Baby-Beschworungen und Rituale. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns

Gaster, T.H. 1947. "Magical Inscription of Arslan Tash." Journal of Near Easter Studies 6-7: 186-188.

Faust, D.E. (ed.) 1983. Contracts from Larsa. New York: AMS Press.

Gaster, T.H. 1962. "Sacrifices and offerings, OT." In The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, 4: 147-159.Nashville: Abingdon Press.

Ferguson, W.W., Y. Porath, and S. Paley. 1985. "Late Bronze Period yields first osteological evidence of Dama dama (Artiodactyla: Cervidae) from Israel and Arabia." Mammalia 49 (2): 209-214.

Gautier, J.E. 1895. "Note sur les Fouilles entreprises dans la haute Vallee de l'Oronte." Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres 23: 46-92.

Finkelstein, I. 1988/89. "The Land ofEphraim Survey 19801987: Preliminary Report." Te/Aviv 15/16: 117-183.

Gerleman, G. 1946. Contributions to the Old Testament Terminology of the Chase. Lund: Gleerup.

Firmage, E. 1992. "Zoology (Fauna)." In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, edited by D.N. Freedman, pp. 1109-1167. New York: Doubleday.

Gerstenblith, P. 1980. "A Reassessment of the Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age in Syria-Palestine." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 237: 65-84.

Flannery, K.V. 1968. "Archaeological Systems Theory and Early Mesoamerica." In Anthropological Archaeology in the Americas, edited by B.J. Meggers. Washington, D.C.: Anthropological Society of Washington.

Gerstenblith, P. 1983. The Levant at the Beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. ASOR Dissertation Series No. 5. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns. 94

Tho

Gibson, M. 1990. "Nippur, 1990: The Temple of Gula and a Glimpse of Things to Come." Oriental Institute Annual Reportpp. 17-26.

Cultic Milieu

Grigson, C. 1987. "Shiqmim: Pastoralism and Other Aspects of Animal Management in the Chalcolithic of the Northern Negev." In Shiqmim I: Studies Concerning Cha/eolithic Societies in the Northern Negev Desert, Israel (19821984), edited by T.E. Levy, pp. 219-241. Oxford: BAR International Series 356(i).

Gilbert, A.S. 1988. "Zooarchaeological Observations on the Slaughterhouse of Meketre." The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 74: 69-89.

Grigson, C. 1987. "Size and Sex: Evidence for the Domestication of Cattle in the Near East." In Beginnings of Agriculture, edited by A. Mills, D. Williams, and N. Gardner, pp. 77-109. Oxford: BAR International Series 49.

Gilbert, B.M. 1981. Avian Osteology. Laramie: B.M. Gilbert. Ginsberg, H.L. 1969. "U garitic Myths, Epics, and Legends." In Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (3d. ed.), edited by J.B. Pritchard, pp. 129-155. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Guigues, P.E. 1937. "Lebea, Garra, Qraye, necropoles de la region Sidonienne." Bulletin du Musee de Beyrouth I: 3576.

Glueck, N. 1938. "Syria: Early Historic Archaeology." American Journal of Archaeology 42: 170-175. Goetze, A. 1955. Hittite Rituals, Incantations, and Description ofFestival. InAncient Near Eastern Texts (2d. ed.), edited by J.B. Pritchard, pp. 346-364. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Guigues, P.E. 1938. "Lebea, Garra, Qraye, necropoles de la region Sidonienne." Bulletin du Musee de Beyrouth II: 2772. Gurney, O.R. 1952. The Hittites. London: Penguin Books.

Goetze, A. 1969. "Hittite Instructions." In Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (3d. ed.), edited by J.B. Pritchard, pp. 207-211. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Gurney, O.R. 1978. "Anatolia c. 1750-1600 B.C." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.II, edited by l.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammond, pp. 228-255. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goldberg, P. 1986. "Late Quaternary Environmental History of the Southern Levant." Geoarchaeology 3: 225-244.

Gurney, O.R. 1978. "Anatolia c. 1600-1380 B.C." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.II, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammond, pp. 659-682. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gonen, R. 1992. "The Late Bronze Age." In The Archaeology of Ancient Israel, edited by A. Ben-Tor, pp. 211-250. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Guy, P.L.O. 1938. Megiddo Tombs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gophna, R. 1984. "The Settlement Landscape of Palestine in the Early Bronze Age II-III and Middle Bronze Age II." Israel Exploration Journal 34 (1): 24-31.

Habermehl, K.H. 1961. Die Alterbestimmung bei Haustieren, Pelztieren, und beim jagdbaren Wildtieren. Berlin: Paul Parey.

Gophna, R. and E. Ayalon. 1980. "Survey of the Central Coastal Plain, 1978-1979: Settlement Pattern of the Middle Bronze Age IIA." Tel Aviv 7 (3-4): 147-151.

Haldar, A. 1971. Who Were the Amo rites? Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Gophna, R. and P. Beck. 1981. The Rural Aspect of the Settlement Pattern of the Coastal Plain in the Middle Bronze Age IL" Tel Aviv 8 (1): 45-80.

Hallo, W.W. 1987. "The Origins of the Sacrificial Cult: New Evidence from Mesopotamia and Israel." In Ancient Israelite Religion, edited by P.D. Miller, Jr., P.D. Hanson, and S.D. McBride. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Gophna, R. and Portugali, Y. 1988. "Settlement and demographic processes in Israel's coastal plain from the Chalcolithic to the Middle Bronze Age." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 269: 11-28.

Handy, L.K. 1994. Among the Host of Heaven: The SyroPalestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.

Gordon, C.R. 1967. Ugaritic Textbook. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.

Harris, M. 1977. Cannibals and Kings: The Origins of Cultures. New York: Random House.

Goring-Morris, N. 1987. "Landscapes and Environment: Present and Past." In At the Edge-Terminal Pleistocene Hunter Gatherers in the Negev and Sinai, ed. N. GoringMorris, 29-44. Oxford: BAR International Series 36l(i).

Harris, M. 1979. Cultural Materialism: The Struggle for the Science of Culture. New York: Random House. Harrison, D. L. 1959. Footsteps in the Sand. London: Ernest Benn.

Grant, A. 1982. "The Use of Tooth Wear as a Guide to the Age of Domestic Ungulates." In Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones From Archaeological Sites, edited by B. Wilson, C. Grigson, and S. Payne, 91-108. Oxford: BAR British Series 109.

Harrison, D. L. 1968. The Mammals of Arabia. Vol. 2, Carnivora, Artiodactyla, Hyracoidea. London: Ernest Benn. Harrison, D. L. and J. J. Bates 1991. The Mammals of Arabia (2nd ed.). Kent: Harrison Zoological Museum.

Gray, J. 1949. "The Canaanite God Horon." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 8: 27-34.

Haussperger, M., B. Hrouda, and E. Strommenger. 1981. "Die Grabung im Gula Tempel 1975-1978." In Isin-Isan Bahriyat II: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 19 75-19 78, edited by B. Hrouda (et al.), pp. 135-145. Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenshaften.

Grayson, D.K. 1984. Quantitative Zooarchaeology. Orlando: Academic Press. Green, M.W. 1980. "Animal Husbandry at Uruk in the Archaic Period." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 39 (1): 1-35. 95

Jool D. Klonck

Hoffner, H.A. 1973. "The Hittites." In Peoples of Old Testament Times, edited by D.J. Wiseman pp. 197-228. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Hayes, W.C. 1978a. "Egypt: From the Death of Ammenemes III to Seqenenre II." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d. ed.), Vol.II, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G. Hammond, pp. 42-76. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Holladay, J.S. 1987. "Religion In Israel and Judah Under the Monarchy: An Explicitly Archaeological Approach." In Ancient Israelite Religion, edited by P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson, and S.D. McBride. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Hayes, W.C. 1978b. "Egypt: Internal Affairs from Tuthmosis I to the Death of Amenophis III." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d. ed.), Vol.II, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G. Hammond, pp. 313-416. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Horowitz, A. 1976. "Late Quaternary Paleoenvironments of Prehistoric Settlements in the Avdat/ Aqev Area." In Prehistory and Paleoenvironments in the Central Negev, edited by A.E. Marks, pp. 57-67. Dallas: Southern Methodist University.

Hayes, W.C. 1985. "The Middle Kingdom in Egypt." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d. ed.), Vol.I, edited by l.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G. Hammond, pp. 464-531. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Horowitz, A. 1979. The Quaternary of Israel. New York: Academic Press.

Healey, J.F. 1986. "The Ugarit Dead: Some Live Issues." Ugarit Forschungen 18: 27-32.

Horwitz, L. K. 1987. "Animal Offerings from Two Middle Bronze Age Tombs." Israel Exploration Journal 3 7: 251255.

Hellwing, S. 1984. "Human exploitation of animal resources in the early Iron Age strata at Tel Beer-Sheba." In Beersheba II. The Early Iron Age Settlement, edited by Z. Herzog, pp. 105-115. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press.

Houlihan, P.F. 1986. The Birds of Ancient Egypt. Warminster: Aris & Phillips Ltd. Hrouda, B. (ed.) 1981. lsin-lsan Bahriyat II: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 1975-1978. Munchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenshaften.

Hellwing, S. and Y. Adjeman 1986. "Animal Bones. In lzbet Sartah, An Early Iron Age Site Near Rosh Ha 'ayin, Israel", edited by I. Finkelstein, pp. 141-152. (BARS 299). Oxford: B.A.R.

Ilan, D. 1995. "The Dawn of Internationalism-The Middle Bronze Age." In The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, edited by T.E. Levy, pp. 297-319. New York: Facts on File.

Hellwing, S. and N. Feig 1989. "Animal Bones." In Excavations at Tel Michal, edited by Z. Herzog, G. Rapp, and 0. Negbi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Ingholt, H. 1940. Rapport Preliminaire sur Sept Campagnes de Fouilles a Hama en Syrie (1932-1938). Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard. James, T.G.H. 1978. "Egypt: From the Expulsion of the Hyksos to Amenophis I." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d. ed.), Vol. 11, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G. Hammond, pp. 289-312. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hellwing, S. and R. Gophna 1984. "The Animal Remains from the Early and Middle Bronze Ages at Tel Aphek and Tel Dalit: A Comparative Study." Tel Aviv 11:48-59. Hellwing, S. and M. Sadeh 1985. "Animal Remains: Preliminary Report [Shiloh]." Te/Aviv 11:177-180.

Johnson, G.A. 1978. "Information Sources and the Development of Decision-Making Organizations." In Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating, edited by C.L. Redman, M.J. Berman, et al., pp. 87-112. New York: Academic Press.

Heltzer, M. 1976. The Rural Community in Ancient Ugarit. Wiesbaden: Reichert. Heltzer, M. 1979. "Royal Economy in Ancient Ugarit." In State and Temple Economy in the Ancient Near East, Volume 11,edited by E. Lipinski, pp. 459-496, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 6. Louvain: Department Orientalistiek.

Joines, K.R. 1974. Serpent Symbolism in the Old Testament: A Linguistic, Archaeological, and Literary Study. Haddonfield: Haddonfield House.

Henson, S. 1988. "Report of faunal remains, Tell el-Ifshar, 1979-1985 seasons." Manuscript.

Josien, T. 1955. "La fauna chalcolithique des gisements palestiniens de Bir es-Safadi and Bir abou Matar." Israel Exploration Journal 5: 246-256.

Herzog, Z. 1986. Das Stadttor in Israel und in den Nach barlandern. Mainz am Rhein: P. von Sabern.

Kadletz, E. 1976. Animal Sacrifice in Greek and Roman Religion. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Seattle, Wash., University Microfilms International.

Hesse, B. 1990. "Pig Lovers and Pig Haters: Patterns of Palestinian Pork Production." Journal of Ethnobiology 10(2): 195-225. Hill, J.N. (ed.) 1977. Explanation of Prehistoric Change. Albuquerque: University ofNew Mexico Press.

Kaplan, J. 1971. "Mesopotamian Elements in the Middle Bronze II Culture of Palestine." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 30: 293-307.

Hilzheimer, M. 1941. Animal Remains from Tell AsmarStudies in Ancient Oriental Civilisation. No. 2. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago.

Kaplan, J. 1975. "Further Aspects of the Middle Bronze Age II Fortifications in Palestine." Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 91: 1-17.

Hirsch, S. 1933. Sheep and Goats in Palestine. Tel Aviv.

Keller, W. 1956. The Bible as History: A Confirmation of the Book of Books. New York: W. Morrow.

Hodder, I. 1991. Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kempinski, A. 1974. "Tel el-' Ajjul-Beth-Aglayim or Sharuhen?" Israel ExplorationJourna/24 (3-4): 145-152. 96

Tho

Kempinski, A. 1977. "Masos, Tel." In Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, edited by M. Avi-Yonahand E. Stern,pp. 816-819. London: Oxford University Press.

Cultic Milieu

Landsberger, B. and H. Tadmor. 1964. "Fragments of Clay Liver Models from Razor." Israel Exploration Journal 14/ 4: 201-218. Lawrence, B. 1967. "Early domestic dogs." Sonderdruck aus Z.f Saugertierkunde 32 (1): 44-59.

Kempinski, A. 1983. Syrien und Palastina (Kanaan) in der Letzten Phase der Mittelbronze IIB Zeit. Wiesbaden: Kommission bei 0. Harrassowitz.

Leichty, E. 1993. "Ritual, 'Sacrifice', and Divination in Mesopotamia." In Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, edited by J. Quaegebeur, pp. 237-242. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Orientalistiek.

Kempinski, A. 1992. "The Middle Bronze Age." In The Archaeology of Ancient Israel, edited by A. Ben-Tor, pp. 159-210. New Haven: Yale University Press. Kenyon, K.M. 1960. Excavations at Jericho, Volume I. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.

Lewy, H. 1985. "Anatolia in the Old Assyrian Period." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.I, edited by l.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G. Hammond, pp. 707728. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kenyon, K.M. 1965. Excavations at Jericho, Volume 2. London: British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.

L'Heureux, C. 1979. Rank Among the Canaanite Gods: El, Ba' al, and the Rep ha 'im. Missoula: Scholars Press.

Kenyon, K.M. 1966. Amorites and Canaanites. London: Oxford University Press.

Lichtheim, M. 1976. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. II: The New Kingdom. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kenyon, K.M. 1957. Digging Up Jericho. New York: Praeger.

Kenyon, K.M. 1969. 'The Middle and Late Bronze Age Strata at Megiddo." Levant l: 25-60.

Littauer, M.K. 1971. "The Figured Evidence for a Small Pony in the Ancient Near East." Iraq 33: 24-34).

Kenyon, K.M. 1979. Archaeology in the Holy Land. London: E. Benn.

Littauer, M.K. and J. Crouwel. 1973. "The Vulture Stela and an Early Type of Two-Wheeled Vehicle." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 32 (3): 324-329.

Klenck, J.D. 1991. "Faunal Remains from Tel Beit Shemesh." Unpublished data of the author.

Liverani, M. 1973. "The Amorites" in Peoples of Old Testament Times, edited by D. J. Wiseman, pp. 100-134. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Klenck, J.D. 1995. "Bedouin Animal Sacrifice Practices: Case Study in Israel." In The Symbolic Role of Animals In Archaeology, edited by K. Ryan and P.J. Crabtree, pp. 5772. Philadelphia: Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology (MASCA). Kluckhohn, C. 1942. "Myths and Rituals: A General Theory." Harvard Theological Review 35: 45-79.

Livingstone, A. 1988. "The Isin 'Dog House' Revisted." Journal of Cuneiform Studies 40: 54-60. Longacre, W.A. (ed.) 1970. Reconstructing Prehistoric Pueblo Societies. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Knapp, A.B. 1989. "Complexity and collapse in the north Jordan Valley: archaeometry and society in the MiddleLate Bronze Ages." Israel Exploration Journal 39: 129148.

Lortet, L.C. and C. Gaillard. 1903. La Faune Momifiee de l'ancienne Egypte, Tome Huitieme. Lyon: Archives du Museum d'histoire Naturelle.

Kochavi, M. 1967. 'Tel Malhata." Israel Exploration Journal 17: 272-273.

Lortet, L.C. and C. Gaillard. 1907. La Faune Momifiee de l'ancienne Egypte, Tome Neuvieme. Lyon: Archives du Museum d'histoire Naturelle.

Kochavi, M. 1977. "Malhata, Tel." In Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, edited by M. Avi-Yonahand E. Stern,pp. 771-775. London: Oxford University Press.

Loud, G. 1948. Megiddo IL Seasons of 1935-39. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lyman, L. R. 1978. "Prehistoric Butchering Techniques In The Lower Granite Reservoir, Southeastern Washington." Miscellaneous Papers of the Idaho State University Museum of Natural History. No. 13: 1-25.

Kochavi, M., P. Beck, and R. Gophna. 1979. "AphekAntipatris, Tel Poleg, Tel Zeror and Tel Burga: Four Fortified Sites of the Middle Bronze Age IIA in the Sharon Plain." Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 95: 121-165.

Macalister, R.A.S. 1912. The Excavations ofGezer, Vols. 13. London: J. Murray.

Kotter, W. 1986. "Spatial Aspects of the Urban Development of Palestine During the Middle Bronze Age." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Arizona.

Malinowski, B. 1925. "Magic, Science and Religion." In Science, Religion and Reality, edited by J. Needham, pp. 19-84. New York: Macmillan.

Kupper, J.R. 1978. "Northern Mesopotamia and Syria." In The Cambridge Ancient History (2d. ed.) Vol. II, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammond, pp. 1-41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marfoe, I. 1979. "The Integrative Transformation: Patterns of Sociopolitical Organization in Southern Syria." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 234: 1-42.

Lambert, W.G. 1993. "Donations of Food and Drink to the Gods in Ancient Mesopotamia." In Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, edited by J. Quaegebeur, pp. 191-202. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Orientalistiek.

Matthiae, P. 1981. Ebla: An Empire Rediscovered. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Mazar, A. 1990. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible. New York: Doubleday. 97

Jool D. Klonck

Mazar, A. 1992. "Temples of the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze Ages and the Iron Age." In The Architecture of Ancient Israel, edited by H. Katzenstein, I. Dunayevsky, A. Kempinski, R. Reich, and J. Aviram, pp. 161-187. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society.

Oren, E.D. 1991. "Tel Haror." American Journal of Archaeology 95: 507-511.

Mazar, B. 1968. "The Middle Bronze Age In Palestine." Israel Exploration Journal 18 (2): 65-97. Mazar, B. 1974. Canaan and Israel, Historical Essays. Jerusalem: Byalik Institute (Hebrew).

Oren, E.D. and M.A. Morrison. 1986. "Land of Gerar: Preliminary Report for the Seasons 1982-1983." Bulletin of the American School or Oriental Research Supplementary Edition 24: 57-87.

Mazar, B. 1975. Cities and Districts in Eretz Israel. Jerusalem: Byalik Institute (Hebrew).

Ory, J. 1937. "Excavations at Ras el 'Ain II." Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities in Palestine 6: 99-120.

Meadow, R.H. 1978. "'Bonecode'-A System of Numerical Coding for Faunal Data from Middle Eastern Sites." Peabody Museum Bulletin 2: 169-186.

Ottosson, M. 1988. "Sacrifice and Sacred Meals in Ancient Israel." Boreas 15: 133-136.

Oren, E.D. 1992. "Gerar." In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, edited by D.N. Freedman, pp. 989-991. New York: Doubleday.

Parr, P.J. 1968. "The Origin of the Rampart Fortifications of Middle Bronze Age Palestine and Syria." Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 84: 18-45.

Mellaart, J. 1985. "Anatolia c. 2300-1750 B.C." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol.I, edited by l.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G. Hammond, pp. 681-703. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Parrot, A. 1938. "Les Fouilles de Mari: Quatrieme Campagne (River 1936-37)." Syria 19: 1-29.

Metzger, M.C. 1984. "Faunal and Floral Remains At Tell elHayyat: Preliminary Results." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255: 68-74.

Parrot, A. 1939. "Les F ouilles de Mari: Cinquieme Campagne (Automne 1937)." Syria 20: 1-22. Parrot, A. 1956. Mission Archeologique de Mari, Volume I: Le Temple d 'Ishtar. Paris: Geuthner.

Montet, P. 1928. Byblos et l 'Egypte. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste. Moortgat, A. 1962. 'Tell Chuera in Nordost-Syrien." Bericht uber die dritte Grabungskampagne 1960. Cologne: Westdeutscher Verlag.

Payne, S. 1972. "Partial Recovery and Sample Bias: the Results of Some Sieving Experiments." In Papers in Economic Prehistory, ed. E.S. Higgs, 49-64. Cambridge: University Press.

Moortgat, A. 1965. 'Tell Chuera in Nordost-Syrien." Bericht uber die vierte Grabungskampagne 1963. Cologne: Westdeutscher Verlag.

Payne, S. 1973. "Kill-off Patterns in Sheep and Goats: The Mandibles fromAsvanKale." Anatolian Studies 23: 281304.

Moortgat, A. 1967. 'Tell Chuera in Nordost-Syrien." Bericht uber die 5. Grabungskampagne 1964. Cologne: Harrassowitz.

Payne, S. 1985. "Morphological Distinctions between the Mandibular Teeth of Young Sheep, Ovis, and Goats, Capra." Journal of Archaeological Science 12: 139-147.

Morenz, S. 1973. Egyptian Religion. University Press.

Paz, U. 1987. The Birds of Israel. Tel-Aviv: The Ministry of Defense Publishing House.

Ithaca: Cornell

Morgan, L.H. 1878. Ancient Society. New York: Henry Holt.

Petrie, W.M.F. 1931. Ancient Gaza I. London: British School of Archaeology.

Mullen, E.T. Jr. 1980. The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature. Harvard Semitic Monographs 24. Chico: Scholars Press.

Petrie, W.M.F. 1932. Ancient Gaza 11.London: British School of Archaeology.

Negbi, 0. 1976. Canaanite Gods in Metal. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, Institute of Archaeology.

Petrie, W.M.F. 1933.Ancient Gaza III. London: British School of Archaeology.

Negbi, 0. and S. Moskovitz. 1966. "The Foundation Deposits or Offering Deposits ofByblos." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 184:

Pettinato, G. 1981. The Archives of Elba: An Empire Inscribed in Clay. Garden City: Doubleday. Posener, G. 1985. "Syria and Palestine c. 2160-1780 B.C." In The Cambridge Ancient History (3d ed.), Vol. I, edited by I.E.S. Edwards, C.J. Gadd, and N.G.L. Hammond, pp. 532-594. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Neufeld, E. 1971. "Hygiene Conditions in Ancient Israel (Iron Age)." Biblical Archaeologist XXXIV (2): 42-66. Noddle, B. 1974. "Ages of Epiphyseal Closure in Feral and Domestic Goats and Ages of Dental Eruption." Journal Archaeological Science 1: 195-204.

Postgate, J.N. 1992. Early Mesopotamia: Society and Economy at the Dawn of History. New York: Routledge.

Noth, M. 1957. "Das alttestamentliche Bundschliessen im Lichte eines Mari-Textes" in Gesammelte Studiern sum a/ten Testament, pp. 142-154. Munich.

Pritchard, J.B. 1943. Palestinian Figurines in Relation to Certain Goddesses Known through Literature. American Oriental Series 24. New Haven: American Oriental Society.

Oren, E.D. 1971. "A Middle Bronze Age I Warrior Tomb at Beth-Shan." Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 87: 109-139.

Pritchard, J.B. (ed.) 1950. Ancient Near East Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Oren, E.D. 1973. The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shan. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

Pritchard, J.B. 1963. The Bronze Age Cemetery at Gibeon. Philadelphia: University Museum. 98

Tho

Pritchard, J.B. (ed.) 1969. The Ancient Near East: Supplementary Texts and Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Cultic Milieu

Schmid, E.F. 1972.Atlas of Animal Bones. New York: Elsevier Publishing Company. Schmitz, P.C. 1992. "Canaan." In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. I, edited by D. N. Freedman, pp. 828831. New York: Doubleday.

Prummel, W. and H. J. Frisch 1986. "A Guide for the Distinction of Species, Sex and Body Side in Bones of Sheep and Goat." Journal of Archaeological Science 13: 567-577.

Seger, J.D. 1976. "Reflections on the Gold Hoard from Gezer." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 221: 133-140.

Raban, A. 1985. "The ancient harbours oflsrael in biblical times." In Harbour Archaeology: Proceedings of the First International Workshop of Ancient Meditteranean Harbours, Ceasarea Maritima 24-28.6.83, edited by A. Raban, pp. 11-44. Oxford: BAR International Series 257.

Seger, J.D. 1975. "The MB II Fortifications at Shechem and Gezer - A Hyksos Retrospective." Eretz Israel 12: 34-45. Shanks, M. and C. Tilley. 1988. Social Theory and Archaeology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Rappaport, R. 1971. "Nature, culture and ecological anthropology. In Man, Culture and Society, edited by L. Shapiro, pp. 237-267. New York: Oxford University Press.

Silver, I.A. 1969. "The Aging of Domestic Animals." In Science in Archaeology (2nd ed.), edited by D. Brothwell and E. Higgs, pp. 250-268. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Rathje, W.L.1971. 'TheOriginandDevelopmentofLowland Classic Maya Civilization." American Antiquity 36: 275285.

Sisson, S. and J.D. Grossman. 1966. The Anatomy of Domestic Animals. London: W.B. Saunders Company.

Rathje, W.L. 1975. "The Last Tango inMayapan: A Tentative Trajectory of Production-Distribution Systems." In Ancient Civilization and Trade, edited by J.A. Sabloff & C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky, pp. 409-488. Albaquerque: University ofNew Mexico Press.

Smith, R.N. 1966. Observations on the Ossification of the Appendicular Skeleton of Sheep. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Bristol. Smith, W.R. 1894. Religion of the Semites. New York: Macmillan.

Redman, C.L. 1978. The Rise of Civilization. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.

Spiro, M.E. 1952. "Ghosts, Ifaluk, and Teleological Functionalism." American Anthropologist 54: 497-503.

Renfrew, C. 1972. The Emergence of Civilisation: The Cyclades and the Aegean in the Third Millennium B. C. London: Methuen.

Stager, L.E. 1991. "Why Were Hundreds Of Dogs Buried At Ashkelon?" Biblical Archaeology Review 3: 27-42. Steinkeller, P. 1989. "Studies in Third Millennium Paleography- 3: Sign Dara4 ." Studi Linguistici E Epigrafici 6: 3-7.

Renfrew, C. 1985. The Archaeology of Cult. London: Thames and Hudson. Ringgren, H. 1973. Religions of the Ancient Near East. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

Stern, E. 1984. Tel Mevorakh, Part Two. Qedem 18. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Rooney, J.R. 1963. In Equine Medicine and Surgery, edited by J.F. Bone, E.J. Catcott, A.A. Gabel, L.E. Johnson, and W.F. Riley, pp. 407-409. Wheaton: American Veterinary Publication, Inc.

Stem, E. 1986. "Twofavissae from Tel Dor, Israel." Religio Phoenicia IV: 277-287. Steward, J.H. 1949. "Cultural Causality and Law: A Trial Formulation of the Development of Early Civilizations. American Anthropologists 51: 1-27.

Rost, L. 1953. "Ein hethitisches Ritual gegen Familienzwist. Mitteilungen des Institutsfur Orientforschung l: 345-3 79. Rowe, A. 1930. The Topography and History of Beth Shan. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Rowe, A. 1940. The Four Canaanite Temples of Beth Shan. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Sachs, A. 1955. "Akkadian Rituals." In Ancient Near Eastern Texts, ed. J.B. Pritchard, pp. 331-345. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Steward, J.H. 1955. Theory of Cultural Change: The Methodology ofMultilinear Evolution. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Stewart, J.R. 1974. Tell elAjjul: TheMiddleBronzeRemains. Gotenborg: P. Astrom. Tambiah, S.J. 1985. "A Performative Approach to Ritual." In Culture, Thought, and Social Action: An Anthropological Perspective, pp. 123-166. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Schaeffer, C.F.A. 1931. "Les fouilles de Minet-el-Beida et de Ras Shamra: Deuxieme Campagne (Printemps 1930)." Syria 12: 1-14. Schaeffer, C.F.A. 1933. "Les fouilles de Minet-el-Beida et de Ras Shamra: Quatrieme Campagne (Printemps 1932)." Syria 14: 93-127.

Tanret, M. and K. Van Lerberghe. 1993. "Rituals and Profits in the Ur-Utu Archive." In Ritual and Sacrifice in the Ancient Near East, edited by J. Quaegebeur, pp. 435-450. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Orientalistiek.

Schaeffer, C.F.A. 1935. "Les fouilles de Ras Shamra-Ugarit: Ugarit: Sixieme Campagne (Printemps 1934)." Syria 16: 141-176.

Taylor, W.W. 1948. A Study in Archaeology. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Tchernov, E. 1980. The Pleistocene Birds of 'Ubeidiya, Jordan Valley.Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.

Schaeffer, C.F.A. 1948. Stratigraphie Compareea et Chronologie de L 'Asie Occidentale. London: Oxford University Press. 99

Jool D. Klonck

Tchernov, E., T. Dayan, and Y. Yom-Tov. 1986/1987. "The Paleography of Gazella gazella and Gazella dorcas During the Holocene of the Southern Levant." Israel Journal of Zoology 34: 51-59.

Wapnish, P. and B. Hesse 1988. "Urbanization and the organization of animal production at Tell Jemmeh in the Middle Bronze Age Levant." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 47(2): 81-94.

Thomas, D. H. 1971. "On distinguishing natural from cultural bone in archaeological sites." American Antiquity 36: 366371.

Wapnish, P. and B. Hesse. 1992. "Faunal remains from Tel Dan: Perspectives on animal production at a village, urban and ritual center." ArchaeoZoologia 4 (2): 9-86.

Thompson, J.B. 1984. The Theory ofStructuration. In Studies in the Theory of Ideology, pp. 148-172. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Watson, R.J.N. 1978. "The Interpretation of Epiphyseal Fusion Data." In Research Problems in Zooarchaeology, edited by D.R. Brothwell, K.D. Thomas, J. Clutton-Brock. London: Institute of Archaeology, Occassional Publications, No. 3.

Thureau-Dangin, F. 1921. "Rituel et amulettes Labartu." Revue d'Assyriologie 18: 161-198.

contre

Tigay, J.H. 1986. You Shall Have No Other Gods: Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions. Harvard Semitic Studies 31. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

Weinstein, J.M. 1981. "The Egyptian Empire in Palestine: A Reassessment." Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research 241: 1-28.

Trigger, B.G. 1989. A History of Archaeology Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

White, L.A. 1959. The Evolution of Culture: The Development of Civilization to the Fall of Rome. New York: McGrawHill.

Tristram, H.B. 1876. "Note on the discovery of the Roebuck (Cervus capreolus) in Palestine." Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London I: 420. Tristram, H.B. 1888. The Survey of Western Palestine: The Fauna and Flora of Palestine. London: Palestine Exploration Fund.

Willey, G.R. and P. Phillips. 1958. Method and Theory in American Archaeology. Chicago: Univerity of Chicago Press. Wittfogel, K.A. 1957. Oriental Despotism. New Haven: Yale University Press. Woolley, L. 1955. Alalakh. London: Society of Antiquaries.

Tucker, R.I. 1990. "Management, Investment & Risk In Bedouin Sheep Husbandry Patterns in the Semi-Arid Negev." Yahar Lahav: Colonel Joe Alon Museum Report.

Wright, G.E. (ed.) 1961. The Bible and the Ancient Near East. New York: Doubleday.

Tufnell, 0. 1953. Lachishlll: The Iron Age. London: Oxford University Press.

Wright, G.R.H. 1968. "Temples at Shechem." Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft 80: 2-9.

Tufnell, 0. 1958. Lachish IV- The Bronze Age. London: Oxford University Press.

Yadin, Y. 1958. Hazor, Vols.Ill and IV. Jerusalem: Magness Press.

Tufnell, 0. 1962. "The Courtyard Cemetery at Tell El-' Ajjul, Palestine." Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology, University of London 3: 1-37.

Yadin, Y. 1959. "Excavations at Razor, 1958: Preliminary Communique." Israel Exploration Society 9: 74-88.

Turkowski, L. 1969. "Peasant Agriculture in the Judean Hills." Palestine Exploration Quarterly 101: 21-33. Turner, V. 1974. Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors: Symbolic Action in Human Society. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Ussishkin, D. 1983. "Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983." Tel Aviv 10: 97-175. van Dijk, J., A. Goetze, and M.I. Hussey (eds.) 1985. Early Mesopotamian Incantations and Rituals. New Haven: Yale University Press. von den Driesch, A. 1976. The Measurement of Animal Bones From Archaeological Sites. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1. Cambridge: Peabody Museum. Walls, N.H. 1992. The Goddess Anat in Ugaritic Myths. Atlanta: Scholars Press.

Wright, G.E. 1965. Shechem: The Biography of a Biblical City. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Yadin, Y. 1972. Hazor: with a chapter on Israelite Megiddo. London: Oxford University Press. Yadin, Y. 1978. "The Tell Beit Mirsim G-F Alleged Fortifications." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 212: 23-25. Young, T.C. 1972. "Population Densities and Early Mesopotamian Urbanism." In Man, Settlement and Urbanism, edited by P.J. Ucko, R. Tringham, and G.W. Dimbleby, pp. 827-842. Cambridge: Shenkman. Zarins, J. 1978. "The Domesticated Equidae of Third Millennium B.C. Mesopotamia." Journal of Cuneiform Studies 30 (1): 3-17. Zeuner, F.E. 1958. "Dog and Cat in the Neolithic of Jericho." Palestine Exploration Quarterly I: 52-55. Zohary, M. 1962. Plant Life of Palestine: Israel and Jordan. New York: Ronald Press.

iOO

The Canaanite Cultic Milieu 100

280

120

160

A

160

•toRIT

AYDOH

e

c~--•-·-kJ.,~~~

TEL AKHtTYr....

... 20

•

ACCHO

...

krn

280

•

KA ■ N

•Tl'L

A• ... •

TEL 81RAH TEL OtSHYON

• 11\.'t. KUAOAN£11

240 TEL

.. DOU IRONZE II.A A .. DDU:

■ RONI£

111

'.l.MAR

e

220

220

200

200

180

SHECHEM

SHILOH

...

e

160

180

IETiiEL e

• Y\NE•YAM c:;..•• 140

CIIEON

TEL MOR • ASHOOD

....

~

JERUSALEM

SHEMESH e

IETH

\

140

e

e&

TEL POR~

~

e

TEU. ES-SAFI

120

Ne.k◄t.;s, 100

120

~

•ASHKELO

El. HE$1e TEL NAGILA

e

~

e

"

&ET\'\

e

t.Uf\

HEBRON 100

TEL i\.AJJUl TELL

TIELL JEMMEH

e

LACHISH \

• ...

SEIT

MIASIM

,-t

•

II

»

Figure 1.13: Plan of MB IIB temple complex of Strata E3-2 at Tell ed Dab'a (from Bietak 1979: 248 - Fig. 8).

iii

Cultic Milieu

Jool D, Klonck

RAS

SHAMRA 1935

'--

--------------').'\WJ,Jt1 , ____

_

___

_

Figure 1.14: Plan of Temples 1 and 2 ('Dagan and Baal') at Ras Shamra/ Ugarit (from Schaeffer 1935: Pl. XXXVI).

LA

ZIQQURAT

DE

MARI •O

20

Figure 1.15: Plan of the Dagan Temple at Mari (from Parrot 1938: 22 - Fig. 13; and Parrot 1939: Pl. I).

ii

Tho

TELL

N

Cultic Milieu

MARDIKH

EB V1

ON

1

:J

~

v,

4

IV10

IV,

Figure 1.16b: Plan of Temple B 1 at Ebia or Tell Mardikh (from Matthiae 1981: 128-Fig. 28).

Figure 1.16a: Plan of Temple N at Ebia or Tell Mardikh (from Matthiae 1981: 127-Fig. 27).

N

TELL

MARDIKH

_L l,'

Via

v,,

V

Vo

H----Er---l---Ei~--~

Figure 1.16c: Plan of Temple D at Ebia or Tell Mardikh (from Matthiae 1981: 131 - Fig. 30).

i i3

Jool D. Klonck

TEL ATCHANA

1939-46

PLAN OF THE PALACE OF KING YARIM-LIM

qj

------------

8

----------

-------I

-f ~. I

J

p

0

\/ f'-;/ffi --........,_

/y

I(

I

Figure 1.17: Plan of MB IIC temple in Level VII at Alalakh (from Woolley 1955: Fig. 35).

Jericho&

■

Jerusalem

Tell l;ies:.._

...,Lachish

.._Tell Nagila

En Gedi

Figure 2.1: Map of the Northern Negev showing the location of Tel Haror. i i4

The Canaani·te Cultic Milieu

LAND OF GERAR E2(PEOITtON TEL HAROR 198 a

,,,n ',n

.,.

+

A

..

·r.i

O

II

Figure 2.2: Map of Tel Haror.

115

R

1

~

Jool D. Klonck

..,. a .

1

• l1,.1...1ulio.oo M.1 ...11!.i,o. l,u ... 0

.l

.. ,,,.,

....

,,"

,\S:..L.,

7

I

9

HlCIV

I

11:!o,. ,.k,oo Iii.loo. ..lia.ou h~~~:·:· . .

:

• b. u,. ! .. •

•

I~ •

'

II

10

12

1.Loo ••l.ou,. 0.000rnl,o,o, ,ilou.n,

~

..,,s-.., ..... ,1,&

JL

;• ,{~~: .Ji:.oo ..If .on j .il~.Jo u :

T,

18

19

SINAI

.Jili,.un ,!lio.o, 1~1~~000 1101&11

Geomorphological districts and phytogeographical analysis of the districts in the Negev and Sinai deserts. Abbreviation of the chorotypes: M - Mediterranean; IT - Irano-Turanian; SA - Saharo-Arabian; S - Sudanian (after Danin, 1984)

Figure 2.3: Phytogeographical map of Israel showing location of Tel Haror.

ii

The Canaanite Cultic Milieu

21

20

22

26

5 Meters

EJ

\ ,.,,

e ro 0 cu

91

Ql

C

u

%

9

Cl. Ql Ql

cu

0I-

500 523 53,4

Ql

">

cu

">

3

C

Cl. Ql Ql

u

Cl. Ql Ql

46 12 125 183 18,7

Ql

C

Cl.

CJ

15,4

0

">

e ro 0 cu 3

4

Area I-Lev. II

..c

(/)

C

">

20

1

Enclosed Area Area I-Lev. I

Ql

C

">

3

45 54

40 10

35 11 337 383

Ql

">

e ro 0 cu

161 180

1

Cl. Ql Ql

Total

..c

(/)

eCl. iii ro 0 cu 0 CJ u I-

Cl. Ql Ql

0

Ql

Skeletal Element Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

%

Ql

C

">

1

C

Table C

Cl. Ql Ql

0

Cl. Ql Ql

Total

3

Ql

C

">

Area II-Lev. I

Area I-Lev. IV

Ql

C

">

Ql

Skeletal Element Cranium RibNertebrae Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

Area I-Lev. Ill

Ql

24,5

..c

(/)

C

">

e ro 0 cu Cl.

CJ

u

Cl. Ql Ql

cu

0I-

%

..c

(/)

13

1

110 124 31,2

5

8

1

82

">

eCl. cu ro 0 cu u 0I-

CJ

0

33

%

38 34,9

22,9

3

1

27

31 28,4

46 12 125 183 46,0

9

4

27

40

67 14 317 398

17

5

87 109

91

36,7

Joel D< Klonck Table 3

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

e

%

13 4 408 425 50,6 0 0 35 35 4,2 4 2 99 105 12,5

0 4

16 4 90 110 13,1 42 20 103 165 19,6 75 30 735 840

6 3 59 68 14,5 21 12 66 99 21,1 36 16 417 469

Area II-Lev. II

Area II-Lev. Ill

5

0 227 232 49,5 0 4 4 0,9 1 61 66 14,1

0

Q)

C

"> 0. C\l

Area Ill-Lev. 11B

Q)

0.

Q) Q)

%

.c

C

">

e 5 ro 0 0

Cl)

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

0.

Q) Q)

%

.c

Cl)

">

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

%

8 2 0

72,7

4

3

79

86 49,4

5

18,2

0 1

0 0

7 31

7

4,0

32

18,4

0 0

3 73 81 75,7 0 2 2 1,9 0 10 10 9,3

1 0 11

9,1

0 2

0 0

0,0

0,0

0 0 12 12 6,9 11 5 21 37 21,3 16 8 150 174

7

6 6 5,6 6 8 7,5 3 97 107

Table C Q)

C

0. Q) Q)

Skeletal Element .c Cl)

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones Total

4

e 5 ro 0 0 2

0. C\l

0

Q)

C

">

CJ

Area Ill-Lev. I Area Ill-Lev. IIA

Q)

I-

0. Q) Q)

%

99 105 27,6 16 4 90 110 28,9 42 20 103 165 43,4 62 26 292 380

.c

C

">

e 5 ro 0 0

Cl)

CJ

4

1

0. C\l

0

I-

61

66

e

0. C\l

0

0. Q) Q)

%

28,3

0

0,0

6 3 59 68 29,2 21 12 66 99 42,5 31 16 186 233

1 0 1

100,0

476

Q)

C

"> %

Area Ill-Lev. 11B

Q)

0,0

.c

C

">

e 5 ro 0 0

Cl)

CJ

1

0. C\l

0. Q) Q)

%

0

I-

0

31

32

0 0 11 5 12 5

12 21 64

12

37 45,7 81

.c

">

e 5 ro 0 0

Cl)

CJ

39,5

0

0

14,8

0 2 2

0. C\l

0

I-

%

10 10 41,7 0 6 6 25,0 0 6 8 33,3 0 22 24

Tho Canaanite Cultic Milieu Table 3.32c: Cont. Table A Area IV-W8022

Area IV-Lev. I

Q)

C

e

Skeletal Element

0. C\l

0

Q)

C

-s;:

0. Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

e 5 ro 0 0 0. C\l

0

I-

23

Q) Q)

e 5 ro 0 0

%

.r: Cl)

CJ

Q)

C

-s;:

0.

Area V-Lev. II

Q)

C

-s;:

CJ

Area V-Lev. I

Area IV-Lev. II

Q)

0. C\l

0

I-

29

0. Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

C

-s;:

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

0. Q) Q)

e 5 ro 0 0 0. C\l

%

.r: Cl)

CJ

1

1

2

1,0

Cranium

0

0,0

0

0

23

5,0

1

1

27

4,0

0

0

0

0,0

0

289 302 65,1

0

-s;: 0

I-

%

Dentition

8

53,3

11

2

14

3

260 277 38,2

0

0

14 14 37,8

0

1

64

65

32,5

Vertebrae

1

6,7

2

0

8

10

2,2

0

0

28

28

3,9

0

0

4

4

10,8

0

0

15

15

7,5

Rib

0

0,0

0

0

2

2

0,4

0

0

9

9

1,2

0

0

0

0

0,0

0

0

16

16

8,0

Upper Forelimb

2

13,3

3

0

34

37

8,0

9

1

121 131 18, 1

0

0

4

4

10,8

1

0

16

17

8,5

Upper Hindlimb

1

6,7

1

0

13

14

3,0

1

1

42

44

6,1

0

0

6

6

16,2

8

2

18

28

14,0

Innominate

0

0,0

2

1

11

14

3,0

2

0

19

21

2,9

0

0

0

0

0,0

1

0

1

2

1,0

Forefoot

0

0,0

1

1

5

7

1,5

1

1

32

34

4,7

0

0

2

2

5,4

1

0

6

7

3,5

Foot Bones

2

13,3

23

5

15

43

9,3

Hindfoot

1

6,7

0

0

12

12

Unidentified

0

0,0

0

0

0

0

Total

15

43

9 412 464

47 20

71 138 19,0

2

1

3

6

16,2

9

3

28

40

20,0

2,6

0

0

14

14

1,9

0

0

1

1

2,7

0

0

5

5

2,5

0,0

0

0

0

0

0,0

0

0

0

0

0,0

0

0

3

3

1,5

2

1

34 37

20

7

75 27 623 725

173 200

Table B Area IV-W8022

Area IV-Lev. I

Q)

C

e

Skeletal Element

0. C\l

0

Q)

C

'>

0.

Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

e 5 ro 0 0 0. C\l

0

I-

Cranium

8

53,3

11

2

RibNertebrae

1

6,7

2

0

10

12

Upper Forelimb

2

13,3

3

0

34

Upper Hindlimb

1

6,7

3

1

24

Foot Bones

3

20,0

24

6

32

Total

15

43

9 412 464

Q) Q)

%

312 325 70,0

.r: Cl)

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

Q)

C

'>

0.

Area V-Lev. II

Q)

C

'>

CJ

Area V-Lev. I

Area IV-Lev. II

Q)

I-

0.

Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

C

'>

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

0.

Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

'>

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

%

15

4

287 306 42,2

0

0

14 14 37,8

0

2

65

67

34,0

2,6

0

0

37

0

0

4

4

10,8

0

0

31

31

15,7

37

8,0

9

1

121 131 18, 1

0

0

4

4

10,8

1

0

16

17

8,6

28

6,0

3

1

61

9,0

0

0

6

6

16,2

9

2

19

30

15,2

62

13,4

48 21 117 186 25,7

2

1

6

9

24,3

10

3

39

52

26,4

75 27 623 725

2

1

34 37

20

7

170 197

37

65

5,1

Table C Area IV-W8022

Area IV-Lev. I

Q)

C

e

Skeletal Element

0. C\l

0

Q)

C

'>

0. Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

e 5 ro 0 0 0. C\l

0

I-

Q) Q)

%

.r:

e 5 ro 0 0

Cl)

CJ

0. C\l

0

Q)

C

'>

0.

Area V-Lev. II

Q)

C

'>

CJ

Area V-Lev. I

Area IV-Lev. II

Q)

I-

0. Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

C

'>

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

0. Q) Q)

%

.r: Cl)

'>

e 5 ro 0 0

CJ

0. C\l

0

I-

%

Upper Forelimb

2

33,3

3

0

34

37

29,1

9

1

121 131 34,3

0

0

4

4

21, 1

1

0

16

17

17,2

Upper Hindlimb

1

16,7

3

1

24

28

22,0

3

1

61

17,0

0

0

6

6

31,6

9

2

19

30

30,3

Foot Bones

3

50,0

24

6

32

62 48,8

48 21 117 186 48,7

2

1

6

9

47,4

10

3

39

52

52,5

Total

6

30

7

90

127

60 23 299 382

2

1

16 19

20

5

74

99

477

65

Joel D< Klonck

Table 3

ci

ci

Skeletal

(I)

C

">

60 23,6 7 2,8 0,0 0 54 21,3

0,0

0

0,0

12

254

Well

43 Structure

5 7 1

9, 1 12,7 1,8

0

0,0

55 8624

Interior (I)

(I)

C

e

(I) (I)

"'

%

Cranium RibNertebrae

1 0

12,5 0,0

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb

0 2

Foot Bones

5

0,0 25,0 62,5

Total

8

Element

l)

e

£: Cf)

cii %

0

l'J

ni

"'

%

l)

98 22,7 2 0,5 43 10,0 54 12,5 234 54,3

33 21,7 2335 0 0,0 216 5 3,3 609 18 11,8 446 96 63,2 642

431

152

Table C

I-

(I) (I)

%

55,0 5, 1

2466 51,0 218 4,5

14,3 10,5 15,1

657 13,6 518 10,7 972 20,1

4248 Enclosed

0

4831

£: Cf)

C

">

e

ci

ci

%

(I)

C

">

ci

ci

Skeletal

(I)

C

">

cii %

0

ni

ci

"'

l'J

%

19 35,8 2 3,8 10 18,9 20 37,7 2 3,8

8 0

33,3 0,0

53

l)

">

e

ci

%

0 I-

(I) (I)

%

£: Cf)

ni

ci

%

"'

l)

0 I-

%

91 35,8 7 2,8

3 0

7 29,2 8 33,3 1 4,2

64 36,2 5 2,8 37 20,9 35 19,8 36 20,3

54 21,3 63 24,8 39 15,4

1 8,3 14 32,6 15 27,3 1 8,3 7 16,3 8 14,5 7 58,3 6 14,0 13 23,6

24

177

254

12

Area

Well

25,0 0,0

9 7

%

20,9 12 21,8 16,3 7 12,7

43 Structure

55 8624

Interior (I)

(I)

C

e

(I) (I)

Element

"'

l)

%

£: Cf)

e

cii 0

%

l'J

13,0

5

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0

43

Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

2 5

28,6 71,4

54 16,3 234 70,7

Total

7

331

ni

"'

l)

%

0I-

(I) (I)

%

609

35,9

657 30,6

18 15, 1 96 80,7

446 642

26,3 37,8

518 24,1 972 45,3

119

1697

4,2

2147

178

£: Cf)

C

">

e

ci

ci

%

(I)

C

">

ci

ci

Skeletal

(I)

C

">

cii %

0

l'J

ni

ci

%

"'

l)

">

e

ci

%

0I-

(I) (I)

%

£: Cf)

ni

ci

%

"'

l)

%

0I-

%

10 31,3 20 62,5 2 6,3

7 43,8 8 50,0 1 6,3

37 34,3 35 32,4 36 33,3

54 34,6 63 40,4 39 25,0

1 11, 1 14 51,9 15 41,7 1 11, 1 7 25,9 8 22,2 7 77,8 6 22,2 13 36,1

32

16

108

156

9

27

36

The Canaanite Cullie fvliliou

Table 3.33: Skeletal part distributions for gazelle ( Gazella gaze/la) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. Tabele A

Enclosed

Well

Structure

8624

Area

Skeletal Element

~

~

~

ai

ai

ai

N Ill

(!)

Cranium Dentition Vertebrae Rib Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified

0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0

Total

9

Tabele B

% 0,0 44,4 0,0 0,0 0,0 11, 1 0,0 0,0 44,4 0,0 0,0

N Ill

Skeletal Element

(!)

Cranium Dentition Vertebrae Rib Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified

0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total

2

Enclosed

% 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 100,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

Skeletal Element

Cranium Dentition Vertebrae Rib Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0

Total

2

Well

8624

~

~

~

ai

ai

ai

N Ill

(!)

Cranium RibNertebrae Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

4

Total

9

Tabele C

0 0 1 4

% 44,4 0,0 0,0 11, 1 44,4

N Ill

Skeletal Element

(!)

Cranium RibNertebrae Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

0 0 2 0 0

Total

2

Enclosed

% 0,0 0,0 100,0 0,0 0,0

Skeletal Element

Skeletal Element

N Ill

(!)

Cranium RibNertebrae Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

0 0 0 1 1

Total

2

Well

8624

~

~

~

ai

ai

ai

(!)

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

0 1 4

Total

5

% 0,0 0,0 0,0 50,0 50,0

Structure

Area N Ill

% 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 50,0 0,0 0,0 50,0 0,0 0,0

Structure

Area

Skeletal Element

N Ill

(!)

% 0,0 20,0 80,0

Skeletal Element

N Ill

(!)

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

2 0 0

Total

2

i79

% 100,0 0,0 0,0

Skeletal Element

N Ill

(!)

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

0 1 1

Total

2

% 0,0 50,0 50,0

Jool D. Klonck Table 3.34: Skeletal part distributions for roe deer and Persian Fallow Deer (Capreolus capreolus and Dama species) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. Tabele A

Enclosed Area

Well

L. L.

Q) Q)

0 Q)

Skeletal Element

Cranium Dentition

0

Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot

Unidentified

0 0 0 0 0 0

Total

2

Foot Bones Hindfoot

Tabele B

1

33,3

0 0 0

0,0 0,0 0,0

Vertebrae

1

33,3

Upper Forelimb

0 0 0

0,0 0,0 0,0

Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot

1

1

33,3

Foot Bones

0 0

0 0

0,0 0,0

Hindfoot

1

Unidentified

1

3

Total

L.

Cll

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1

Q) Q)

%

O"l

1

Upper Forelimb

L.

-

Q)

...J

Rib

Vertebrae

0

0:::

0 0 0

L.

Q) Q)

0

I-

0

%

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

1

33,3

1

1

33,3

0 0

0,0 0,0

1

33,3

0

0 0 0 0

0

0,0

2

1

3

0

iii

Q)

Skeletal Element

Cranium Dentition Rib

Enclosed Area

0

Q) Q)

0 Q)

Skeletal Element

0

0:::

Cranium

1

RibNertebrae

0

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

0 0

Total

2

Tabele C

1

Q)

2'

Cll ...J

0 0 0 0

1

0 0 0

-

%

0

1

2'

iii

Cll ...J

0 I-

%

33,3

Cranium

0

0,0

RibNertebrae Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

0 0 0

0 0 0

0 0 0

0,0 0,0 0,0

1 1

1

2

66,7

0

1

33,3

2

1

3

0,0

1

1

33,3

1

3

Total

Skeletal Element

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb

0

Cll ...J

0:::

1

Foot Bones

0 0

Total

1

L.

0 0

Q)

Well L.

Q) Q)

O"l

Q) Q)

0

0

33,3

Q)

I-

0:::

0 I-

Q)

1

Q)

iii

Skeletal Element

0

iii

0

0

Cll

L.

Q) Q)

L.

Q) Q)

L.

0 0 0 0 0

L.

Enclosed Area L.

O"l ...J

Well

Q) Q)

0

Q)

0:::

L. L.

Q) Q)

0

L.

-

Q) Q)

0

%

1

50,0 0,0 50,0

I-

1

0 1

1

2

-

%

1

0 2

66,7

1

0

1

33,3

2

1

3

0

iii

Q) Q)

0 Q)

O"l

iii

Skeletal Element

0:::

Cll ...J

I-

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb

0

0

1

Foot Bones Total

480

Q)

0

L.

0

0,0

The Canaanite Cultic Milieu Table 3.35: Skeletal part distributions for pig (Sus scrota) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. Tabele A Skeletal Element Cranium Dentition Vertebrae Rib Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlim b lg nominate Forefoot Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified Total Tabele B Skeletal Element

Enclosed Area

Pig 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

2 2 0 0 1

Total

5

Skeletal Element Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlim b Foot Bones Total

5 7 4 0 8 0 0 1 0 1 0

0 0 1

12 4 8 0 2

% 46,2 15,4 30,8 0,0 7,7

26

8 0 2 10

481

0 0 0 1 0

% 0,0 0,0 0,0 100,0 0,0

Structure

Pig

1

8624 Pig

1

Well

% 0,0 0,0 100,0

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

% 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 100,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

Structure

Pig

% 40,0 40,0 0,0 0,0 20,0

8624 Pig

1

Well

Enclosed Area

Pig

% 19,2 26,9 15,4 0,0 30,8 0,0 0,0 3,8 0,0 3,8 0,0

26

Enclosed Area

Pig

Structure

Pig

% 0,0 40,0 20,0 20,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 20,0 0,0 0,0

5

Cranium RibNertebrae Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlim b Foot Bones

Tabele C

Well

% 80,0 0,0 20,0

8624 Pig 0 1 0 1

% 0,0 100,0 0,0

Joel D. Klcnck Table 3.36: Skeletal part distributions for dog (Canis familiaris) fauna from the well. Tabele A

Well Dog

%

0

0,0

Dentition

3

33,3

Vertebrae Rib

0 0

0,0 0,0

Upper Forelimb

2

22,2

Upper Hindlimb

0

0,0

lg nominate

1

11, 1

Forefoot Foot Bones

0 0

0,0 0,0

Hindfoot

3

33,3

Unidentified

0

0,0

Total

9

Skeletal Element Cranium

Tabele B Skeletal Element Cranium

Well Dog

3

% 33,3

RibNertebrae

0

0,0

Upper Forelimb

2

22,2

Upper Hindlimb

1

11, 1

Foot Bones

3

33,3

Total

9

Tabele C

Well

2

% 33,3

Upper Hindlimb

1

16,7

Foot Bones

3

50,0

Total

6

Skeletal Element Upper Forelimb

Dog

Canaanite Cultic Milieu Table 3.37: Skeletal part distributions for cattle (Bos taurus) fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624.

Table A

Enclosed

Well

Structure

8624

Area Total

%

Skeletal Element

Total

%

Cranium

3

1,2

Cranium

26

18,8

Dentition

174

70,4

Dentition

41

29,7

Vertebrae

7

2,8

Vertebrae

13

9,4

Rib

0

0,0

Rib

0

0,0

Upper Forelimb

14

5,7

Upper Forelimb

15

10,9

Upper Hindlimb

5

2,0

Upper Hindlimb

13

lg nominate

0

0,0

lg nominate

4

Skeletal Element

Total

%

0

0,0

Dentition

1

100,0

Vertebrae

0

0,0

Rib

0

0,0

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0

9,4

Upper Hindlimb

0

0,0

2,9

lg nominate

0

0,0

Skeletal Element Cranium

Forefoot

11

4,5

Forefoot

7

5,1

Forefoot

0

0,0

Foot Bones

27

10,9

Foot Bones

13

9,4

Foot Bones

0

0,0

Hindfoot

6

2,4

Hindfoot

6

4,3

Hindfoot

0

0,0

Unidentified

0

0,0

Unidentified

0

0,0

Unidentified

0

0,0

Total

1

Total Table B Skeletal Element Cranium

247

138

Total

Enclosed Area

Well

Structure

8624

Total

%

Skeletal Element

Total

%

Skeletal Element

Total

%

177

71,7

Cranium

67

48,6

Cranium

1

100,0

RibNertebrae

7

2,8

RibNertebrae

13

9,4

RibNertebrae

0

0,0

Upper Forelimb

14

5,7

Upper Forelimb

15

10,9

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0

Upper Hindlimb

5

2,0

Upper Hindlimb

17

12,3

Upper Hindlimb

0

0,0

44

17,8

Foot Bones

26

18,8

Foot Bones

0

0,0

Total

1

Foot Bones

Total Table C

247

138

Total

Enclosed

Well

Structure

8624

Area Total

%

Upper Forelimb

14

22,2

Upper Hindlimb

5

7,9

Foot Bones

44

69,8

Total

63

Skeletal Element

Total

%

Upper Forelimb

15

25,9

Upper Hindlimb

17

29,3

Foot Bones

26

44,8

Total

58

Skeletal Element

483

Total

%

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0

Upper Hindlimb

0

0,0

Foot Bones

0

0,0

Total

0

Skeletal Element

Joel D. Klonck Table 3.38: Skeletal part distributions for equid fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. Table A

Well

Structure 8624

Q)

C:

.Q

E Q)

-I

Q)

~

Skeletal Element Cranium

0

>,

>,

Q)

Q)

::,:_

::,:_

C:

C:

0

Total

0

0

0

Dentition

1

15

16

Vertebrae

0

1

1

Rib

0

0

0

% 0,0 22,2 1,4 0,0

Upper Forelimb

2

11

13

Upper Hindlimb

0

8

8

lg nominate

1

1

Forefoot

0

10

Foot Bones

3

8

Hindfoot

3

Unidentified

0

Total

10

I

0

0

Skeletal Element Cranium

0

Total

%

1

1

1,4

Dentition

11

11

15,7

Vertebrae

16

16

22,9

Rib

20

20

28,6

18,1

Upper Forelimb

8

8

11,4

11, 1

Upper Hindlimb

2

2

2,9

2

2,8

lg nominate

0

0

0,0

10

13,9

Forefoot

5

5

7,1

11

15,3

Foot Bones

5

5

7,1

8

11

15,3

Hindfoot

2

2

2,9

0

0

0,0

Unidentified

0

0

0,0

62

72

Total

70

70

Table B

Well

Structure 8624

Q)

C:

.Q

E Q)

-I

Q)

Skeletal Element Cranium

~ 0

>,

>,

Q)

Q)

::,:_

::,:_

C:

0

C:

Total

1

15

16

RibNertebrae

0

1

1

Upper Forelimb

2

11

13

% 22,2 1,4 18,1

Upper Hindlimb

1

9

10

13,9

Foot Bones

6

26

32

44,4

Total

10

62

72

I

0

Table C

0

Skeletal Element Cranium

0

Total

%

12

12

17,1

RibNertebrae

36

36

51,4

Upper Forelimb

8

8

11,4

Upper Hindlimb

2

2

2,9 17,1

Foot Bones

12

12

Total

70

70

Well

Structure 8624

Q)

C:

.Q

E Q)

I

Skeletal Element Upper Forelimb

ci3 (/) 0 I

2

>,

>,

Q)

Q)

::,:_

::,:_

C:

0

0

C:

Total

11

13 10

Upper Hindlimb

1

9

Foot Bones

6

26

32

Total

9

46

55

% 23,6 18,2 58,2

0

Total

%

8

8

36,4

Upper Hindlimb

2

2

9,1

Foot Bones

12

12

54,5

Total

22

22

Skeletal Element Upper Forelimb

i84

0

Table 3.39a: Skeletal part distributions for medium mammal fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. Table A

Area I Level I

Skeletal Part Cranium Dentition Vertebrae Rib Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified Total

N

%

13

4,0%

37 11,5% 18

5,6%

59 18,3%

Level II N

%

55 15

%

77

5,1%

248 16,4% 50

3,3%

% 7,4%

554 14,4% 131

3,4%

%

N

%

N

8,4%

296

8,1%

180 10,5%

0

415 11,3%

230 13,4%

9 23,7%

103 10,9% 37

3,9%

4,1%

%

3,8%

1

315 18,3%

66

0,0%

Level 11B

N

N

%

44

6,1%

101 14,0%

%

24

Wall 8022 N

4,4%

98 18,1%

2,6%

20

2,8%

17

3,1%

2

40

7,4%

% 4

Level I N

%

5,5%

149 11,6%

10 13,7%

318 24,9%

5

6,8%

4,5%

5,3%

4,2%

169

4,4%

50

5,3%

144

3,9%

81

4,7%

0

0,0%

40

5,5%

13

2,4%

2

2,7%

44

3,4%

1

0,3%

11

1,8%

44

2,9%

67

1,7%

27

2,8%

79

2,2%

53

3,1%

2

5,3%

14

1,9%

8

1,5%

1

1,4%

14

1,1%

4

1,2%

5

0,8%

9

0,6%

34

0,9%

11

1,2%

45

1,2%

26

1,5%

0

0,0%

6

0,8%

1

0,2%

0

0,0%

14

1,1%

4

1,2%

7

1,1%

32

2,1%

38

1,0%

14

1,5%

29

0,8%

20

1,2%

0

0,0%

6

0,8%

2

0,4%

0

0,0%

7

0,5%

6

1,9%

10

1,6%

40

2,7%

116

3,0%

19

2,0%

101

2,8%

56

3,3%

0

0,0%

26

3,6%

5

0,9%

2

2,7%

43

3,4%

5

1,5%

6

1,0%

15

1,0%

36

0,9%

7

0,7%

41

1,1%

25

1,5%

0

0,0%

6

0,8%

3

0,6%

1

1,4%

12

0,9%

620

1509

1662 43,2%

495 52,2%

1787 48,7%

3847

948

3667

Area I N

%

Level II N

%

670 38,9% 1722

24 63,2%

375 52,0%

329 60,9%

28 38,4%

38

721

540

73

Level I

Level IIA

Level 11B

N

N

Area II

Level Ill

Level IV

N

N

%

%

Level I N

%

Area Ill

Level II

Level Ill

N

N

%

20 27,4%

57

63

323

581 15,8%

N

Area IV

Level IIA

6,5%

737 48,8%

105 11,1 %

149

%

Level I

40

256 41,3%

755 19,6%

80

Level Ill

2,8%

167 51,7%

194 12,9%

285

N

Area Ill

Level II

9

%

N

%

%

219 17,1%

402 31,4% 1279

Area IV %

Wall 8022 N

%

Level I N

%

50 32,1%

178 48,9%

325 42,1%

839 38,4%

183 40,4%

711 37,8%

410 39,0%

9 64,3%

145 41,9%

122 57,8%

14 31,1%

467 53,2%

77 49,4%

107 29,4%

244 31,6%

886 40,5%

142 31,3%

730 38,8%

381 36,2%

3 21,4%

103 29,8%

57 27,0%

25 55,6%

276 31,5%

9

5,8%

40 11,0%

63

8,2%

169

7,7%

50 11,0%

144

7,7%

81

7,7%

0

5

3,2%

16

4,4%

53

6,9%

101

4,6%

38

8,4%

124

6,6%

79

7,5%

2 14,3%

15

9,6%

23

6,3%

190

8,7%

40

8,8%

171

9,1%

101

9,6%

156

364

Table C

87 11,3% 772

2185

453

1880

Area I Level I

Skeletal Part

N

Level I

83 11,5%

Level I Cranium Vertebral Column Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones Total

N

2,4%

92 14,8%

Table B Skeletal Part

Level IV

8,9%

123 19,8%

Area II

Level Ill

N

%

Level II N

%

1052

0

0,0% 0,0%

Level IV

N

N

%

%

Level I N

%

6,2%

2

4,4%

44

5,0%

9

4,3%

1

2,2%

28

3,2%

10

4,7%

3

6,7%

62

7,1%

5,8%

38 11,0% 346

211

45

Level I

Level IIA

Level 11B

N

N

Area Ill

Level II

Level Ill

N

N

%

20

13

14

Area II

Level Ill

40 11,6%

%

N

%

%

877

Area IV %

Wall 8022 N

%

Level I N

%

~

:s

Q

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones Total

9 31,0%

40 50,6%

63 31,0%

169 36,7%

50 39,1%

144 32,8%

81 31,0%

0

0,0%

40 40,8%

13 40,6%

2 33,3%

44 32,8%

5 17,2%

16 20,3%

53 26,1%

101 22,0%

38 29,7%

124 28,2%

79 30,3%

2

100%

20 20,4%

9 28,1%

1 16,7%

28 20,9%

15 51,7%

23 29,1%

87 42,9%

190 41,3%

40 31,3%

171 39,0%

101 38,7%

0

0,0%

38 38,8%

10 31,3%

3 50,0%

29

79

439

261

2

98

32

6

203

460

128

62 46,3% 134

Table 3.39b: Cont. Table A

Area IV Level II

Area V Level I

Skeletal Part

N

Cranium

304 11,3%

22

24 10,0%

%

N

%

Level II

N

9,1%

%

0

Interior N

Enclosed Area %

N

%

1574

9,0%

143 22,7%

15

9,7%

68 11,1%

0

0,0%

2678

15,3%

63 10,0%

14

9,1%

42

0

0,0%

805

4,6%

5 20,0%

182

Rib

615 22,9%

3223

Upper Forelimb

137

5,1%

7

2,9%

19

3,1%

0

0,0%

809

Upper Hindlimb

46

1,7%

6

2,5%

28

4,6%

2

8,0%

lgnominate

21

0,8%

0

0,0%

2

0,3%

0

Forefoot

34

1,3%

2

0,8%

7

1,1%

0

138

5,1%

6

2,5%

41

14

0,5%

1

0,4%

5

Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified Total Table B

869 32,4% 2680

38 15,8%

Level II

5,7%

18 11,7%

18,4%

87 13,8%

25 16,2%

4,6%

68 10,8%

24 15,6%

403

2,3%

42

6,7%

0,0%

174

1,0%

31

0,0%

202

1,2%

12

6,7%

5 20,0%

612

3,5%

0,8%

0

0,0%

177

1,0%

6848

39,1%

6,9%

100 16,3%

126 52,3%

241 39,4%

11 44,0%

241

612

25

Area IV

%

8,0%

320 11,9%

3,7%

N

2

Dentition

9

Struct. 8624 %

9,6%

59

Vertebrae

6,8%

Well N

17505

36

9

5,8%

4,9%

1

0,6%

1,9%

5

3,2%

2

0,3%

8

5,2%

26

4,1%

1

0,6%

120 19,0%

34 22,1% 154

630

Area V Level I

Level II

Enclosed Area

Interior

Well

Struct. 8624

Skeletal Part

N

Cranium

624 34,5%

46 40,0%

127 34,2%

2 14,3%

4252

39,9%

206 40,4%

29 24,2%

Vertebral Column

797 44,0%

47 40,9%

142 38,3%

5 35,7%

4028

37,8%

123 24,1%

43 35,8%

Upper Forelimb

137

7,6%

7

6,1%

19

5,1%

0

0,0%

809

7,6%

68 13,3%

24 20,0%

Upper Hindlimb

67

3,7%

6

5,2%

30

8,1%

2 14,3%

577

5,4%

73 14,3%

10

186 10,3%

9

7,8%

53 14,3%

5 35,7%

991

9,3%

40

14 11,7%

Foot Bones Total Table C

%

1811

N

%

115

N

%

N

371

Area IV

%

14

N

%

10657

N

7,8%

510

Level I

Level II

Level II

Enclosed Area

Skeletal Part

N

Upper Forelimb

137 35,1%

7 31,8%

19 18,6%

0

0,0%

809

34,0%

Upper Hindlimb

%

%

8,3%

120

AreaV

Level II %

N

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

Well N

Struct. 8624 %

N

%

68 37,6%

24 50,0%

67 17,2%

6 27,3%

30 29,4%

2 28,6%

577

24,3%

73 40,3%

10 20,8%

Foot Bones

186 47,7%

9 40,9%

53 52,0%

5 71,4%

991

41,7%

40 22,1%

14 29,2%

Total

390

22

102

7

2377

181

48

The

Cultic Milieu

Table 3.40a: Skeletal part distributions for large mammal fauna from the enclosed area, well, and Structure 8624. Table A Level I

Level II

Area I Level Ill

Level IV

Area II Level II

Level I

Level Ill

Level I

Area Ill Level IIA Level 11B

Skeletal Part

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

N

%

N

%

Cranium

1

3,4%

5

9,8%

2

2,6%

11

6,1%

2

1,6%

29

9,2%

34

15,7% 0 0,0%

3

7,0%

1

1,4%

%

N

%

Dentition

7 24,1% 8 15,7% 18 23,4% 27

15,1%

13 10,2% 68 21,5% 34

15,7% 4 57,1%

3

7,0%

3

4,3%

Vertebrae

0

1

2,0%

1

1,3%

5

2,8%

7

5,5%

3

0,9%

4,6%

1

2,3%

3

4,3%

Rib

11 37,9% 4

7,8%

3

3,9%

28

15,6%

10

7,8%

52

16,5% 22

10,1% 0 0,0%

13 30,2% 0

0,0%

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0%

1

2,0%

0

0,0%

2

1,1%

7

5,5%

12

3,8%

32

14,7% 0 0,0%

5 11,6% 0

0,0%

Upper Hindlim b

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

2

2,6%

1

0,6%

0

0,0%

1

0,3%

0

0,0%

0 0,0%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

lg nominate

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

2

2,6%

0

0,0%

1

0,8%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

0 0,0%

0

0,0%

1

1,4%

Forefoot

2

6,9%

0

0,0%

2

2,6%

2

1,1%

1

0,8%

0

0,0%

2

0,9%

0 0,0%

0

0,0%

1

1,4%

Foot Bones

0

0,0%

1

2,0%

7

9,1%

5

2,8%

1

0,8%

9

2,8%

2

0,9%

0 0,0%

1

2,3%

0

0,0%

Hindfoot

1

3,4%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

1

0,6%

1

0,8%

0

0,0%

3

1,4%

0 0,0%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

0,0%

10

0 0,0%

Unidentified

7 24,1% 31 60,8% 40 51,9% 97 54,2%

85 66,4% 142 44,9%

78 35,9% 3 42,9% 17 39,5% 61 87,1%

Total

29

51

179

128

316

217

7

43

Level I

Level II

Level IV

Level I

Area II Level II

Level Ill

Level I

Area Ill Level IIA Level 11B

77

Table B Skeletal Part

N

%

N

Area I Level Ill

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

70

%

N

%

Cranium

8 36,4% 13 65,0% 20 54,1% 38 46,3%

15 34,9% 97 55,7% 68 48,9% 4 100%

6 23,1% 4 44,4%

Vertebral Column

11 50,0% 5 25,0% 4

10,8% 33 40,2%

17 39,5% 55 31,6% 32 23,0% 0 0,0%

14 53,8% 3 33,3%

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0%

1

5,0%

0

0,0%

2

2,4%

7

16,3% 12

6,9%

32 23,0% 0 0,0%

5 19,2% 0

Upper Hindlim b

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

4

10,8%

1

1,2%

1

2,3%

1

0,6%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

1 11,1%

Foot Bones

3

13,6% 1

5,0%

9 24,3%

8

9,8%

3

7,0%

9

5,2%

7

5,0%

1

3,8%

1 11,1%

Total

22

20

37

82

Level I

Level II

Table C

Area I Level Ill

43

Level IV

Level I

0 0,0% 0 0,0%

174

139

4

26

Area II Level II

Level Ill

Level I

Area Ill Level IIA Level 11B

9

Skeletal Part

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

Upper Forelimb

0

0,0%

1 50,0%

0

0,0%

2

18,2%

7

63,6%

12 54,5% 32 82,1% 0 0,0%

5 83,3% 0

Upper Hindlim b

0

0,0%

0

4 30,8%

1

9,1%

1

9,1%

1

4,5%

0

Foot Bones

3

100%

72,7%

3

27,3%

9

40,9%

Total

3

N

% 0,0%

1 50,0%

9 69,2%

8

2

13

11

11

487

0,0%

N

22

%

N

%

N

%

0

0,0%

0 0,0%

7

17,9% 0 0,0%

39

0

N

% 0,0%

N

% 0,0%

1 50,0%

1 16,7% 1 50,0% 6

2

Joel D< Klonck

Table 3A0b: Cont Table A Level I Skeletal Part

N

Cranium Dentition Vertebrae Rib Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb lgnominate Forefoot Foot Bones Hindfoot Unidentified Total

47

N

%

2

4,3%

26

28,6%

6

12,8%

19

20,9%

1

2,1%

6

6,6%

0

11 23,4%

12

13,2%

1

2,1%

1

1,1%

0

0,0%

1

1,1%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

0

2

4,3%

1

0

0,0%

24

51,1%

Total

Enclosed Area Well

N

1

5,0%

2

5,9%

119

9,1%

2

10,0%

9

26,5%

221

16,9%

0,0%

3

8,8%

41

1

5,0%

6

17,6%

3

15,0%

1

2,9%

0

0,0%

0

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

1

1,1%

0

0,0%

0

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

0

25

27,5%

13 65,0% 20

Area IV Level II

N

AreaV Level II %

91

Level I

Cranium Vertebral Column Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

Level I

%

Table B Skeletal Part

Area IV Level II

Level I

%

106 25,5%

17

12,4%

61

14,7%

12

8,8%

3,1%

43

10,4%

29

21,2%

173

13,2%

30

7,2%

28

20,4%

65

5,0%

29

7,0%

9

6,6%

0,0%

5

0,4%

21

5,1%

2

1,5%

0,0%

4

0,3%

12

2,9%

0

0,0%

2,9%

11

0,8%

17

4,1%

5

3,6%

0,0%

27

2,1%

24

5,8%

5

3,6%

0,0%

6

0,5%

17

4,1%

2

1,5%

12 35,3%

636

48,6%

55

13,3%

28

20,4%

34

1308

AreaV Level II

N

%

N

%

N

%

8

N

%

N

%

N

Structure 8624 N

%

%

415

137

Enclosed Area Well N

%

N

Structure 8624 %

N

%

34,8%

45

68,2%

3

42,9%

11 50,0%

340

50,6%

167 46,4%

29

26,6%

12 52,2%

18

27,3%

1

14,3%

9

40,9%

214

31,8%

73 20,3%

57

52,3%

1

4,3%

1

1,5%

3

42,9%

1

4,5%

65

9,7%

29

8,1%

9

8,3%

0

0,0%

1

1,5%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

9

1,3%

33

9,2%

2

1,8%

2

8,7%

1

1,5%

0

0,0%

1

4,5%

44

6,5%

58

16,1%

12

11,0%

23

7

66

Table C Level I

Area IV Level II

22

Level I

672

AreaV Level II

360

109

Enclosed Area Well

Structure 8624

Skeletal Part

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

Upper Forelimb Upper Hindlimb Foot Bones

1

33,3%

1

33,3%

3

100%

1

50,0%

65

55,1%

29 24,2%

0

0,0%

1

33,3%

0

0,0%

0

0,0%

9

7,6%

33 27,5%

2

8,7%

2

66,7%

1

33,3%

0

0,0%

1

50,0%

44

37,3%

58 48,3%

12

52,2%

Total

3

120

23

3

3

2

488

118

N

%

N

%

9

39,1%

The

Cultic Milieu

Table 4.1 a: Corvid and can id skeletal elements (burial fauna) from Levels 1-111 in Areas I, II, Ill, and IV. Recorded are the number of bones attributed to skeletal elements from each locus and basket number. Area 1-'Altar Area'

Area 1-'Altar Area'

Level I Level II I'-

I'-

0, 0,

0, 0,

0

0

C,

C,

N

N

co

co

co Skeletal

Element

Cranial Frag. Occiptal Temporal Parietal Fronlal Palatine ltlter rietal

co

0,

0,

"'

Level Ill 0, 0,

"'

0

0

0

0,

0,

0,

0,

N

N

0

0

co """ 0 co

N

co

"' co """ co co

0

co

0

co

0

r'-'

~ N

~ N

~ N

I'-

"'

I'-

co 0 0

co 0

0

0

0

0

r'-'

N

N

N

co

0

0

N

co

co

0,

"' co

0

co

" "

0 0

co

0,

0,

co

Level I N

0,

0

N

N

co

"'

00

"' ;;;

0,

co

""" co

co

N

00

.;;

;::

co co co Raven Dog Raven Crow Dog Raven 1 2 0

Dog Raven Dog Raven Crow

0 0

Area 11-'EasternRooms'

Level Ill

co

Raven

Petroos Bullae Zygomatic Lacrimal Maxilla

Premaxilla Ouadrate Mandible Maxillary Tooth Mandibular Tooth Tooth Fra ment Vertebrae Fragment Atlas Axis Cervical Thoracic

Lumbar Caudal Trachea Column Sacrum Rib Clavicula Sterrum Sterral Cartila Coracoid Scapula Humerus Radius

Dina Ulnar Carpal lntermedioradial Carpal Accessory Carpal Pollex Wing/Digit II Win '"o("it'III Femur Patella

Tibia Fibula Calcaneum Austra alus Pelvis Frag. Acetabulum nTium lschium

Pubis Carpal Frag. Secord & Thi rd Carpal Secord Carpal Thi rd Carpal Fourth Carpal Metacarpus

'fVfetacar usI Metacarpus II Metacarpus Ill M etacar_E~S _IV Metacar us V Metapodial Carpal or Tarsal Frag. Proximal Sesamoid Distal Sesamoid Sesamoid First'Phalanx Secorx{Phal anx Thi rd Phalanx Fourth ~Phalanx Central Tarsal F our1h Tarsal Secord & Thi rd Tarsal Secord Tarsal Thi rd Tarsal First Tarsal Metatarsus Metatarsus I Metatarsus II Metatarsus Ill Metatarsus IV Metatarsus V T arscrn etatarsus S i ke Shaft Frag. UnlD Fra . Total

0 25

0 4

0 21

0 6

0 8

0 33

0 7

0 55

0 5

0 6

0 7

489

0 4

0 12

0 8

0 7

0 39

2 12

0 47

0 25

2 0 12

Jool D. Klonck Table 4.1 b: Cont. Area 11-'EasternRooms' Level II

,_

,_

0 00

0 00