Judea and Research Studies Volume 29, No.2, 2020, pp. *99-*133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26351/JSRS/29-2/6 ISSN: 0792-8416 (print); 2617-8737 (online)

Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and ol, Area A׳Protohistoric Site of Eshta

Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Abstract

This paper contains the final report of the salvage excavation conducted in Area A near ol Junction in 2006. Finds dated to the Pottery Neolithic, Early Bronze I, and׳the Eshta Late Roman/Byzantine periods were found in situ in this area. This report presents the stratigraphy, architectural remains found at the site, and material culture: ceramic objects, flint implements and faunal remains found in the process of excavation. ol, Early Bronze I, Pottery Neolithic, Yarmukian׳Keywords: Eshta

Dr. Michael Freikman – Department of Land of Studies and Archaeology, Ariel University; [email protected] Dr. Nimrod Marom – Department of Maritime Civilizations and Leon Recanati Institute for Maritime Studies, University of Haifa; [email protected]

*99 *100 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Introduction

ol,1 following trial׳Archaeological rescue excavations were conducted at the site of Eshta investigations carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority (Solimany 2009). These were the first to identify remains ,(״Area A״ excavations of squares 1 and 2 (designated ol Junction׳from the Early Bronze Age in situ, approximately 100 m northeast of the Eshta (Fig. 1). Archaeological remains dated to the Early Bronze and Pottery Neolithic periods s excavation area. Therefore, the present׳were later found 20 m southwest of Solimany excavation concentrated on the same area, expanding the earlier efforts towards the southwest (squares 3–5) and retaining the same area designation. ol is situated on a moderate slope׳The prehistoric and protohistoric site of Eshta ol and Nahal Kesalon, at׳facing southeast, adjacent to the junction of Nahal Eshta the base of the hill on which the modern settlement is located (see Fig. 1; cf. Golani and Storchan 2008; 2014). The present excavation area is located on the southeastern fringes of the site, where numerous excavations have been undertaken, most of them due to the widening of Route 38 (Golani 2008; Golani and Storchan 2009; Freikman ,eri and Vardi 2016; Golani and Ben-Ari׳Storchan 2012; Golani, Storchan, Be ;2010 forthcoming). These excavations have revealed the presence of settlement remains from the beginning of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (Stratum VI), the Pottery Neolithic ( IX phase, Lodian culture; Stratum V), the Late Chalcolithic (; Stratum IV), the Early Bronze IB ('Erani C phase; Stratum III) and the Intermediate Bronze Age (Stratum II).

1 The excavations (Permit 311/06, coordinates 2012/6317 NIG) were carried out during August and September 2006 by M. Freikman on behalf of Hebrew Union College at the request of and with funding from Y. Govrin. For a preliminary report, see Freikman 2009. Map prepared by S. Pirsky and J. Rosenberg; drawings: O. Dubovskaya; 3D scan of the pottery: O. Harush and L. Grossman; faunal remains: N. Marom. Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *101

Stratigraphy and Architecture

Our expedition fully excavated a total area of 75 m² in Area A from the topsoil down to the virgin soil during two short field seasons in August and October 2006 (Fig. 1). The four anthropogenic phases identified are numbered from 1 to 4, with Phase 4 lying directly on the virgin soil. The stratigraphy of the site is disturbed due to the topographic position of the dig area and modern building intrusions. The uppermost phases (Phases 1 and 2) represent topsoil and Roman/Byzantine activity, respectively, while Phase 3 included building remains from the EB period and Phase 4 constituted an anthropogenic layer from the Pottery Neolithic period (Fig. 2). Most of the sediment of Phases 3 and 4, excluding the eroded areas, was fully sifted.

Figure 1: Map of location of the site and Area A (after Golani and Storchan 2009; courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority) *102 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 2: Top plan and section of Area A

Phase 4 This phase was well preserved throughout the excavation area. It was found almost undisturbed except in the southern part of the area (square 5), where it had been severely damaged by a modern intrusion. Phase 4 resides directly on top of the sterile sediment and was overlaid by Building A of Phase 3 and a clearly defined layer of fill (L239) between Phases 3 and 4 (Fig. 3). Below Building A and to its east, a total of 9 m2 of this phase was dug down to the sterile alluvial soil, on which the remains of Phase 4 were found. Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *103

Figure 3: Superposition of Strata 3 and 4; a thin layer of sediment L239 is visible between them

Phase 4 is relatively homogeneous. It consists of a dense layer of intentionally placed natural pebbles (Fig. 4), 30 to 40 cm thick. No remains of walls or other architectural features related to this phase were found within this layer. However, the proportion of stones in the sediment is not the same in the upper and lower portions of the layer. In its upper part, stones make up 35%–45% of the overall volume of extracted sediment, creating what appears to have been relatively well-defined stone paving. In the lower part the stones constitute no more than 10%–12% and do not appear to have been arranged. Similar features were excavated at Abu Ghosh nearby (Farrand 1978; Barzilay 2003), in ol itself׳Areas B9 and B15 at Motsa (Khalaily and Vardi 2019) and in Area H at Eshta (Golani et al. 2016). *104 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 4: Phase 4 after removal of Phase 3 (northeast is up)

An intentionally built feature (L250) was found in the southern part of square 5 under W213 of Phase 3 (Figs. 5–6). This is a shallow, roughly circular depression (15–20 cm deep, diameter of 120 cm) within the upper stone layer that was paved with small, flat stones. A dark substance, which appears to be bitumen, was found coating the stones of this installation (Fig. 7). Another lump of bitumen was found in the fill west of Building A, in a mixed context of Phases 3 and 4. Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *105

Figure 5: Pebble layer L247 and installation L250 superimposed by the southern wall of building W213 (north is up)

Figure 6: Installation L250 after removal of Phase 3 (northeast is up) *106 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 7: Asphalt coating of installation L250

The small stone layer found covering most of Area A probably extended beyond the excavation limits. It is comparable in size and composition to a similar feature at Abu Ghosh. Geomorphologic analysis carried out in the field showed that it is likely man-made (Ackermann, pers. comm.). The circular, stone-built feature at L250 was integrated into the pavement and both are anthropogenic. Few diagnostic objects were found in Phase 4. The Phase 3 floor within Building A was cut into the Phase 4 layer; it contains a few decorated sherds that are clearly from the Pottery Neolithic (Yarmukian) period and some flint tools which can also be ascribed to this period (Fig. 16). In addition, a complete Pottery Neolithic vessel in a very poor state of preservation was found on top of the L247 surface, directly under wall W249, thus reinforcing its dating (Figs. 8; 16: 3). Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *107

Figure 8: A pottery vessel on the floor (L247)

Phase 3 This phase was relatively well preserved in the eastern part of Area A (squares 3 and 5). Most of this phase was heavily eroded, however, in the western part of the area, where only a short fragment of a wall associated with small amount of Early Bronze I pottery (W223), superimposed on a thin layer of debris atop Phase 4, survived (Fig. 9).

Figure 9: Fragment of wall W223 (south is up) *108 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 10: Building A – remains of wall W203 (Stratum II) are in the lower right corner (west is up)

Figure 11: Building A – layer of pebbles of Stratum IV reused by the builders of Building 239 is visible to the right of the building and inside it (northeast is up) Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *109

The main architectural feature associated with Phase 3 is a roughly rectangular building in the eastern part of the area (hereinafter Building A), most of which – with the exception of its southwestern wall – was exposed during the excavation (Figs. 2, 10–11). The extant remains appear to suggest a room measuring 2.5x5–6 m, with an inner area of approximately 12–15 m2. The general alignment of Building A is southwest-northeast. The foundations of the walls (average width 0.5 m) were built of medium-sized fieldstones arranged in two rows (walls W229, W249 and W213); the stones in the outer line of the wall are larger than the inner ones. A significant portion of the outer row is missing, probably stolen during later periods, while most of the smaller inner stones were preserved in situ. In one place close to the northern corner, all the stones are missing to a width of about 60 cm. This gap near the northeastern corner may suggest the location of an entrance to the building. However, as this suggested opening faces upslope with a gradient reaching around 20˚–25˚, this interpretation is problematic: during periods of rainfall, water and dirt would have washed down. This problem may have been solved with the construction of W252, which partially screened off the space immediately in front of the opening. The floor within Building A is slightly lower than the ground level outside; the Phase 3 builders apparently dug and penetrated the stone pavement of the previous Phase 4 (L247), dated to the Pottery Neolithic period (see below), and reused it as their own floor (Fig. 3). An area of indeterminate size was enclosed by a stone wall (W244) abutting W213 from the south. Wall W244 appears to continue the line of the eastern wall of Building A (W249), and apparently indicates another, similar space to the south, possibly a courtyard or an additional room in Building A. However, the limitations of the excavated area prevent us from reaching any further conclusions regarding the exact area or nature of this space. Two installations related to Phase 3 were found in the western part of the building: Pit L243 and installation L238. Pit L243, 1.2 m in diameter, was found dug into the floor. Except for a few non-indicative sherds, the pit was empty. Installation L238,a stone installation composed of three large stones delineating a small space, was found immediately north of Pit L243 (Figs. 12–13). A few flat pebbles were used to pave this installation. L238 was not built on the floor of Building A, but was installed inside the shallow pit dug into the already-existing floor of the building. As the stones at the bottom of this installation are some 20 cm lower than the level of the pavement (L247), they *110 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

cannot be regarded as part of the latter in secondary use; rather they must be a feature placed there specially as an integral part of installation L238.

Figure 12: Installations found inside the building – Pit L243 and installation L238 (south is up)

Figure 13: Reconstructed installation L238 (west is up) Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *111

Indicative pottery retrieved from Phase 3 is attributed exclusively to the latter part of EB I. Most of the debris between the walls and above the floors was disturbed by later contaminations during Phase 1 or 2. However, the latest ceramic material found immediately under the walls of the building is dated to the late Early Bronze I period (EB IB).

Phase 2 This phase was identified only in the northern part of square 3. The architectural remains include an irregular structure (L202) located in the eastern corner of this square, built of boulders weighing between several dozen and several hundred kilograms (Fig. 14; not on plan). The preservation of this phase east of the structure is very poor. A roughly built layer of cobbles (L205) abuts the structure from the north and partially from the east. A fragment of a wall (W203) in the northeastern corner of the area also belongs to this phase (Figs. 3, 15). No sign of this layer of pebbles was found in other parts of Area A. This fact can be explained by alluvial activities, which caused massive erosion in this area. Small amounts of indicative Roman-Byzantine pottery dated to the 5th–6th centuries CE were found beneath and around the stones of L202. Therefore, this phase can be roughly dated to the Byzantine period, although the function of the architectural remains cannot be determined due to the limited excavation area and poor state of preservation. *112 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 14: Remains of structure L202, Phase 2; a layer of cobbles (L205) abuts L202 from the northeast (south is up)

Figure 15: A fragment of wall W203 in the northeastern corner of Area A; a layer of cobbles (L205) is to the right (south is up) Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *113

Phase 1 This phase covered the entire excavation area with a thick layer (0.5 m) of dark alluvial soil and included a few ceramic non-in situ finds from the Byzantine period and Middle Bronze Age II. The local stratigraphy of Area A compared to the general stratigraphy at the site is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of the stratigraphy in Area A ol׳Local phase General stratum in Eshta Unstratified 1 Byzantine 2 Early Bronze Ib 3 Stratum III Pottery Neolithic 4 Stratum V

Material Culture

1. Pottery Phase 4 Pavement 247 was reused by the inhabitants in Phase 3 and only a small number of indicative sherds were found in the context of Phase 4. These include several shallow bowls, one with a handle under the rim (Fig. 16: 1) and another bearing a herringbone decoration typical of the Pottery Neolithic period (Fig. 16: 2). Especially noteworthy is a complete storage jar in a very poor state of preservation, found under a wall of a Phase 3 building (Figs. 8; 16: 3). In addition, a few sherds were found bearing a herringbone decoration enclosed on both sides by two parallel incised lines, some – including the bowl described above (Figs. 17; 16: 2) – covered with red slip. This decoration is typical of the of the Pottery Neolithic period (Garfinkel 1999: 16–68). It should be noted that no decorations typical of the Jericho IX culture were found in Area A, although some have been reported ol (Golani et al. 2016). Jericho IX pottery has also׳from other excavation areas at Eshta .(ol (Perrot 1952: 140–141׳been reported at Abu Ghosh, located less than 8 km from Eshta *114 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 16: Pottery of Stratum IV – bowls and jars

Table 2: Pottery of Stratum IV – bowls and jars (Fig. 16) Number Locus Basket Name Notes

1 219 23 Bowl, handle White clay, gray grits 2 231 80 Bowl Brown clay, incised herringbone decoration 3 256 93 Jar White clay, gray grits Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *115

Figure 17: Examples of Yarmukian decorations

Phase 3 This phase produced only a handful of indicative sherds and no complete vessels. All forms were handmade and poorly fired and contained mineral grits varying in color from whitish to brown.

Open Vessels 1. Bowls with simple rim (Fig. 18: 1–6): The depth of these bowls varies considerably, from very shallow (Fig. 18: 1–2) to deep (Fig. 18: 3–6). A few of them are covered with red slip from the inside and/or outside. One bowl with remains of a ledge handle was found (Fig. 18: 5). Such bowls have also been found at Hartuv (Mazar and Miroschedji :Alon and Yekutieli 1995) ״Silo Site״ Fig. 17: 9–10, 19), the Tel Halif Terrace :1996 -a (Golani, Storchan and Eirikh-Rose 2018: Fig. 25.1–3) and Azor (Ben׳Fig. 20: 14), Beqo Tor 1975: Fig. 5: 11–12). 2. Straight-sided (V-shaped) bowls (Fig. 18: 7): Bowls of this type have simple rims. Virtually all of the vessels belonging to this type are decorated. Red slip was applied either only inside or only outside. Similar bowls have been found at Hartuv (Mazar and Alon and Yekutieli) ״Silo Site״ Miroschedji 1996: Fig. 17: 4, 22) and the Tel Halif Terrace ״Type IIB״ Fig. 23: 19). In northern Israel, they appear at Tel Qashish as ,175–174 :1995 bowls (Zuckerman 2003: 35, Fig. 17: 4). *116 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

3. Everted bowls (Fig. 18: 8): Vessels of this type are made of fine clay. No decorated bowls of this type were found in Area A. Similar bowls are attested at Hartuv (Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: Figs. 11–17).

Figure 18: Pottery of Stratum III – bowls

Table 3: Pottery of Stratum III – bowls (Fig. 18) Number Locus Basket Name Notes 1 209 11 Bowl Beige clay, red slip, black grits 2 231 72 Bowl Red clay, numerous large white grits 3 253 94 Bowl Buff clay, gray grits, red slip inside and outside 4 253 88 Bowl Beige clay 5 221 25 Bowl, ledge handle Buff clay, numerous white grits, ledge handle 6 239 66 Bowl White clay, red slip inside and outside 7 225 29 V-shaped bowl Buff clay, gray grits, red slip 8 200 4 Everted rim Buff clay, black grits Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *117

Storage Vessels 4. Hole-mouth jars (Fig. 19): Only a few indicative fragments of hole-mouth jars were recovered, none of them decorated with red slip. The rims are rounded or slightly pinched. Hole-mouth jars with a simple rim are found at most Early Bronze IB sites, such as Tel Halif (Alon and Yekutieli 1995: Fig. 19: 8–10). Similar pinched rims were found in the ,a (Golani et al. 2018: 39, Fig. 26). In one case׳roughly contemporary Stratum II at Beqo a rope decoration was applied to the body just under the rim of the vessel (Fig. 19: 3). a (Golani et׳Similar decorations are attested at Tel 'Erani (Yekutieli 2002: Fig. 2: 1), Beqo al. 2018: Fig. 26: 12) and Hartuv (Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: Fig. 19: 16).

Figure 19: Pottery of Stratum III – hole-mouth jars

Table 4: Pottery of Stratum III – Hole-mouth jars (Fig. 19) Number Locus Basket Name Notes 1 238 59 Hole-mouth jar Gray clay, white grits 2 249 87 Hole-mouth jar White clay, gray grits 3 226 30 Hole-mouth jar Buff clay, gray grits, rope decoration *118 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

5. Straight-necked storage jars: A single indicative sherd of this type has a very short neck (Fig. 20: 1). This type is well attested at various late EB I sites in northern Israel, such as Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: 38, Fig. 22: 1, 4), Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: 15, Figs. 2.15: 14; 2.16: 14) and Tel Shalem (Eisenberg 1996: 11–12, Figs. 16: 7; 17: 4), but also in southern Israel, such as at nearby Hartuv (Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: Fig. 19: 1). 6. Flaring-rim storage jars (Fig. 20: 2–4): Several rims of various thicknesses were found in Area A. Some of them were decorated with whitewash and red slip, but no vessels of this type decorated with applied rope patterns were attested. Flaring-rim storage jars were common during the EB IB period. They are found at Hartuv (Mazar a (Golani et al. 2018: Fig. 27: 2–3), Tel׳and Miroschedji 1996: Fig. 18: 14–23), Beqo Halif (Alon and Yekutieli 1995: Fig. 18: 1–8), Khirbet Hani (Lass 2003: Fig. 21: 13–14) at Qesem (Sklar-Parnes and Eisenberg 2007: Fig. 5: 14–17). At Tel Halif, Hartuv׳and Giv ol, some of them are decorated with red-painted vertical stripes on white lime׳and Eshta wash (Alon and Yekutieli 1995: Fig. 18: 15–20; Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: Fig. 18: 15–23; Yekutieli 2002: 63). -bow״ Swollen-rim jars: Three examples have convex necks, forming a variation of a .7 rim (Fig. 20: 5–7). More examples of such bow-shaped rims were found later ״shaped ol, one of them decorated with red slip (Freikman, forthcoming). In׳in Area B at Eshta general, swollen-rim/bow-rim storage jars are characteristic of northern Israel during the (el (Braun 1997: 62, Fig. 9.24׳later EB I period – for instance, they are known from Yiftah and Tel Qashish (Zuckerman 2003: 46, Fig. 22: 2–3) – although they are not unknown in the south. One such jar was found in the cave of Arqub el-Dhahr in Jordan (Parr 1956: 66, Fig. 14: 127). Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *119

Figure 20: Pottery of Stratum III – jars

Table 5: Pottery of Stratum III – jars (Fig. 20) Number Locus Basket Name Notes 1 239 78 Straight-necked jar Beige clay, gray grits 2 240 65 Jar Buff clay 3 239 66 Flaring rim jar Buff clay, white lime 4 232 35 Flaring rim jar Buff clay, white grits, white lime 5 239 60 Bow rim jar Buff clay, white grits 6 251 86 Bow rim jar Buff clay, gray grits 7 232 57 Bow rim jar Gray clay, black grits *120 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

8. Reshaped sherds (Fig. 21): Five of the reshaped body sherds are circular or oval- shaped (Fig. 20: 1–5); others are semicircular (Fig. 20: 5–7). Similar sherds were also found in Area B (Freikman, forthcoming). These objects are usually interpreted as jar used as mnemonic devices (Freikman ״tokens״ stoppers, but they can be also explained as and Garfinkel 2017; Freikman 2019).

Figure 21: Pottery of Stratum III – reshaped sherds

Table 6: Pottery of Stratum III – reshaped sherds (Fig. 21) Number Locus Basket Name Notes 1 219 52 Reshaped sherd Buff clay, white grits 2 231 35 Reshaped sherd Beige clay, gray grits 3 231 12 Reshaped sherd Beige clay, gray grits 4 231 35 Reshaped sherd Buff clay, gray grits 5 231 35 Reshaped sherd Buff clay, gray grits 6 253 94 Reshaped sherd Beige clay, gray grits, red slip 7 237 58 Reshaped sherd Buff clay, white grits 8 233 55 Reshaped sherd Buff clay, gray grits Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *121

9. Bases, handles and decorations: The bases of all the vessels are flat. Handles are mostly represented by loop variants (see parallels at nearby Hartuv [Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: 23]). Two fragments of ledge handles typical of the EB period were found (Fig. 18: 5). Several body sherds of closed vessels bearing a continuous or non-continuous rope pattern were attested (Fig. 19: 3). The pattern was made by applying a clay coil onto the vessel, and then impressing a finger or by cutting the applied clay stripe with a sharpened tool. Similar rope patterns have been attested at Tel Halif (Alon and Yekutieli 1995: Fig. 16: 11–12) and Hartuv (Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: 23). The most common decoration is red slip, but in a few cases black slip, the result of a reducing atmosphere during the firing process, was found. Such black slip obtained by means of reducing atmospheres is already known in our region from earlier periods (Garfinkel 1999: 109). Red slip upon lime wash is also present. Such decoration became common in the late EB I and is found at sites such as Hartuv (Mazar and Miroschedji 1996: Fig. 18: 18–20, 23) and Beth Yerah (Getzov 2006: Fig. 2.14: 4–6, 13). In general, the ceramic assemblage from Phase 3 in Area A resembles that collected in Area B (Freikman, forthcoming), as well as in Areas D and F, which are clearly datable to pottery ״Egyptian״ ,the 'Erani C phase of the late EB I (EBIb1; see Yekutieli 2000). Notably is virtually absent from the EBIb sites in this area, including nearby Hartuv (Braun, van Brink, Gophna and Goren 2001). However, some forms generally typical of northern sites, such as straight-necked and swollen-rim storage jars, appear at the site.

Phase 2 The ceramic finds associated with this phase were recovered from disturbed contexts. Only two indicative sherds, fragments of a bowl and a krater, were found between the stones of L202. The former is a rouletted bowl with a ridge under the rolled rim and incised decoration (Fig. 22: 1; see Magness 1993: 185–187). The latter is a fragment of a krater with rilled rim (Fig. 22: 2; see Magness 1993: 203–304). Both can be dated to the 5th–6th centuries CE. Phase 2 also includes a few additional sherds bearing applied decoration with a herringbone design typical of the Middle Bronze Age II; these were deposited by erosion from the upper part of the site and may attest to occupation of the site in this period. *122 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 22: Pottery of Stratum II – bowls and kraters

Table 7: Pottery of Stratum II – bowls and kraters (Fig. 22) Locus Basket Name Notes 1 224 38 Bowl Red clay, small white grits 2 232 36 Krater Buff clay, small white grits

2. Flint Implements Flint finds were generally scarce; most were found in the context of the Pottery Neolithic :type arrowhead (Fig. 23-״Amuq״ Phase 4.2 The finds include a possible fragment of an 1) and a denticulated sickle blade fragment typical of the Pottery Neolithic period (Fig. 23: 2).

.ol will be published by A. Eirich׳A full report on flint implements from Eshta 2 Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *123

Figure 23: Flint implements – (1) arrowhead; (2) sickle blade

3. Stone Rings Small fragments of six different stone rings were recovered (Fig. 24). All of them are made of limestone, roughly circular to triangular in section. One ring fragment, flat in cross-section, is made of polished, hard, reddish, non-local limestone (Fig. 24: 2), but the other fragments are not exceptional. Similar stone rings have been found at other sites throughout Israel and Jordan dating from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B to the Pottery Neolithic periods. The stone rings mostly appear at sites dated to the PPNB period, such as Basta and Baja (Stark 1988), or the late PPNB stratum at Motsa (Khalaily and Vardi 2019). However, they are also found at later PPNC period sites such as Ashqelon (Dag and ar Hagolan (Rosenberg׳Garfinkel 2008: 190–193) and Pottery Neolithic sites such as Sha 2014: 192, 194). They disappear during the Chalcolithic period, when they were probably replaced by metal bracelets (Starck 1988: 150). *124 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Figure 24: Neolithic stone rings

Table 8: Neolithic stone rings (Fig. 24) Locus Basket Type 1 Surface find – Stone ring Limestone 2 Surface find – Stone ring Red limestone

4. Bead (Fig. 25) bead made of black stone, possibly hematite, was recovered ״doughnut-shaped״ One (Golani 2013: Type II.22). It has a diameter of 8 mm and is 5 mm thick. This bead was found in the debris of Phase 3 west of Building A.

Figure 25: A hematite bead Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *125

Fauna (by Nimrod Marom)

The faunal remains were collected by dry-sieving the entire excavated sediment through a 2 mm aperture mesh.

Method All collected bone fragments were identified with the closest taxonomic group possible – including long bone diaphysis fragments. Bones that could not be ascribed to biological taxa were assigned to a size class (small, medium or large mammal). Bone identification was carried out using the comparative collection of the Laboratory of Archaeozoology at the University of Haifa. The bone recording protocol used here is based on the diagnostic zone system published by Dobney and Rielly (1988), with the exception that a percentage value was attributed to each zone instead of less than or greater than the 50% completeness mark. These percentage values can be summed up to yield a minimum number of elements (MNE) for each zone. All bone fragments were scanned for bone surface modifications under an oblique light source. Such modifications include cut-mark location (Binford 1981), carnivore gnawing marks (Binford 1981; Lyman 1994), weathering (Behrensmeyer 1978) and burning. Fracture morphology was described whenever possible, following Villa and Mahieu (1991). Measurements were taken on bone specimens that were sufficiently complete, using a digital caliper. Measurements follow von den Driesch (1976). Data were recorded on a Microsoft Excel™ worksheet.

Results ol consists of 42 bones identified by genus and 24 bones׳The faunal assemblage from Eshta identified by size class. The assemblage is very fragmented, and 53 of the 66 bones (80%) were encrusted by a calcite coating, which inhibited surface modification observations. Virtually all of these bones were found in the context of Phase 3 and will therefore be treated as a single assemblage. *126 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Species Composition Caprine bones make up the majority of the assemblage (57%; n=24). Of these, one astragalus could be identified as belonging to a goat (Boessneck 1969). Cattle are the second most common taxon (21%; n=9), whereas pig (12%; n=5) and gazelle (10%; n=4) are rare. The minimum number of individuals (MNI) for all taxonomic groups is one. Taxon frequencies per excavation area are displayed in Table 9. A graphic representation of species composition appears in Fig. 26. Regrettably, the meager sample size does not allow a meaningful statistical comparison of taxon frequencies between different loci.

Table 9: Frequency distribution of taxa across excavation units in NISP (number of identified specimens)

Figure 26: Frequency of appearance of the main mammalian taxa in the assemblage Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *127

Figure 26: Frequency of appearance of the main mammalian taxa in the assemblage

Taphonomy The skeletal element abundance profile is probably biased by the small sample size. The data for the caprovine group (n=25) suggest that all parts of the carcass (head, limbs and axial skeleton) are represented. Burning damage was observed on five bones (from loci 253, 212, 247, 238). Four bones bore marks of carnivore gnawing. A single cut mark was detected on a medium-sized mammal tibia, interpreted as the result of meat removal (such as filleting; Binford 1981). A sample of ten bone shaft fragments longer than 4 cm were checked for weathering. All exhibited Stage 2 weathering, meaning that the surface of the bone was cracked and exfoliated. This seems to indicate a rather long subaerial phase between deposition and burial.

Measurements The dimensions of the few specimens that could be measured are shown in Table 10. *128 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Table 10: Measurements (in mm; the numbers preceded by # are indices marked on the bones themselves)

Conclusions

Although limited in area, the two main phases 3 and 4 in the present excavations of Area A ol add new data to our knowledge of the Early Bronze I and the Pottery Neolithic׳at Eshta periods in Israel. The architectural data and material culture related to Phase 3 show a settlement dated to the latter part of the Early Bronze I period, parallel to the 'Erani C stage. The settlement in Phase 4 is so far the southernmost site in central Israel with lithic material typical of the Pottery Neolithic period and ceramics typical of the Yarmukian at in the Judean׳culture. Together with some Yarmukian pottery found in Wadi Murabba ol indicate that this culture extended to׳Desert (Garfinkel 1999: 19), the finds from Eshta this area, or had trade or cultural relations with settlements in this region. This evidence, along with the Jericho IX pottery found by the expedition of A. Golani, suggests that these two variants of the Pottery Neolithic cultures coexisted at one site, thus resolving the dispute regarding the relationship between the Yarmukian and Jericho IX cultures. Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *129

References

and Its Implications ״Silo Site״ Alon, D. and Yekutieli, Y. 1995. The Tel Halif Terrace for Early Bronze Age I. 'Atiqot 27: 149–189.

Barzilay, E. 2003. The Geological Setting. In H. Khalaily and O. Marder (eds.), The Neolithic Site of Abu Ghosh: The 1995 Excavations. : Israel Antiquities Authority, pp. 13–22.

Behrensmeyer, A. 1978. Taphonomic and Ecologic Information from Bone Weathering. Paleobiology 4: 150–162.

.ol 2017 – Area K. HA-ESI׳Ben-Ari, N. and Golani, A., Forthcoming. Eshta

Ben-Tor, A. 1975. Two Burial Caves of the Proto-Urban Period at Azor (Qedem, 1). Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Binford, L. R. 1981. Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. New York: Academic Press.

Boessneck, J. 1969. Osteological Differences between Sheep (Ovis aries) and Goat (Capra hircus). In D. R. Brothewell and E. Higgs (eds.), Science in Archaeology. London: Thames and Hudson, pp. 331–358.

el: Salvage and Rescue Excavations at a Prehistoric Village in׳Braun, E. 1997. Yiftah Lower , Israel (IAA Reports, 2). Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.

Braun, E., van den Brink, E. C. M., Gophna, R. and Goren, Y. 2001. New Evidence for Egyptian Connections during a Late Phase of Early Bronze Age I from the Soreq Basin in South-Central Israel. In S. Wolff (ed.), Studies in the and Neighboring Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse (SAOC, 59). Chicago: Oriental Institute, pp. 59–92.

Dag, D. and Garfinkel, Y. 2008. Ground Stone Tools, Chipped Stone, White Ware, a Clay Installation and Various Minerals. In Y. Garfinkel and D. Dag (eds.),Neolithic (Qedem, 47). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, pp. 203–208. *130 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Dobney, K. and Rielly, K. 1988. A Method for Recording Archaeological Animal Bones: The Use of Diagnostic Zones. Circaea 5: 79–96.

Driesch, A. von den 1976. A Guide to the Measurements of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology.

Eisenberg, E. 1996. Tel Shalem: Soundings in a Fortified Site of the Early Bronze Age IB. 'Atiqot 30: 1–24.

Farrand, W. R. 1978. Sedimentological Observations at Abou Gosh. In M. Lechevallier ère׳ed.), Abou Gosh et Beisamoun: deux gisements du VIIe millénaire avant l) chrétienne en Israël. Paris: Association Paléorient, pp. 91–93.

ol: 2006 Final Report. Nelson Glueck׳Freikman, M. 2009. Salvage Excavations at Eshta School of Biblical Archaeology (NGSBA) Excavation Reports Volume (2009). http://ngsba.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Contract_archeology_Eshtaol_ EshtaolEng.pdf

.(ol: Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 122 (July 23׳Freikman, M. 2010. Eshta http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1421&mag_id=117

Freikman, M. 2019. The Ceramic Objects. In Y. Garfinkel (ed.),Sha'ar Hagolan 5: Early Pyrotechnology – Ceramics and White Ware (Qedem Reports, 14). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, pp. 169–245.

.ol: Areas B and C׳Freikman, M., Forthcoming. Salvage Excavations at Eshta

Freikman, M. and Garfinkel, Y. 2017. Sealings before Cities: New Evidence on the Beginnings of Administration in the . Levant 49: 1–22.

Garfinkel, Y. 1999. Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant (Qedem, 39). Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Getzov, N. 2006. The Tel Bet Yeraḥ Excavations, 1994–1995 (IAA Reports, 28). Jerusalem.

.(ol. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 120 (November 27׳Golani, A. 2008. Eshta http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=955&mag_id=114 Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *131

Golani, A. 2013. Jewelry from the Iron Age II Levant. Fribourg: Academic Press.

Golani, A. and Storchan, D. 2008. Early Bronze Age I and Intermediate Bronze Age ol. In D. Amit and G. Stiebel (eds.), New Studies in the׳Settlements at Eshta Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Region, Vol. 2. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority, pp. 5*–14*.

ol: Preliminary Report. Hadashot׳Golani, A. and Storchan, B. 2009. Eshta Arkheologiyot 121 (January 1). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng. aspx?id=993&mag_id=115

:ol – A Proto-Historic Site in Transition׳Golani, A. and Storchan, D. 2014. Eshta Preliminary Inter/Intra Site Observations. New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Region 8: *18–*31.

ol, Areas H and׳eri, R. and Vardi, Y. 2016. Eshta׳Golani, A., Storchan, B., Be J – 2013: Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 128 (February 12). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=24911&mag_id=124

Golani, A., Storchan, B. and Eirikh-Rose, A. 2018. The Chalcolithic and Early Bronze .a. 'Atiqot 90: 9–54׳IB Site of Beqo

Gophna, R. and Paz, Y. 2014. From Village to Town to Village Again: Settlement Dynamics in the Central Coastal Plain and Adjacent Shephelah from the Late Early Bronze I to Early Bronze III. Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society 32: 13–35.

Khalaily, H. and Marder, O. 2003. The Stratigraphy and Architecture. In H. Khalaily and O. Marder (eds.), The Neolithic Site of Abu Ghosh: The 1995 Excavations. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority, pp. 13–22.

Khalaily, H. and Vardi, J. 2019. Motsa: Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 131 (June 10). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail.aspx?id=25538&mag_id=127 [Hebrew].

Lass, E. 2003. An Early Bronze IB Cave and a Byzantine Farm at Ḥorbat Ḥani (West). 'Atiqot 44: 1–51. *132 Michael Freikman and Nimrod Marom

Lyman, R. L. 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Magness, J. 1993. Jerusalem Ceramic Technology, circa 200–800 CE. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

Mazar, A. and Miroschedji, P. 1996. Hartuv: An Aspect of the Early Bronze I Culture of Southern Israel. BASOR 302: 1–40.

Parr, P. 1956. A Cave at Arqub el-Dhahr. ADAJ 3: 61–73.

.Abou-Gosh. 29: 119–145׳Perrot, J. 1952. Le Néolithique d

Rosenberg, D. 2014. Various Types, Varia and Unidentified Tool Fragments. In D. Rosenberg and Y. Garfinkel (eds.),Sha'ar Hagolan 4: The Ground-Stone Industry – Stone Working at the Dawn of Pottery Production in the Southern Levant. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, pp. 183–200.

Sklar-Parnes, A. and Eisenberg, E. 2007. Subterranean Storage Chambers of the Early .at Qesem. 'Atiqot 56: 1–12׳Bronze Age Ib at Giv

.(ol Junction: Final Report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 121 (March 11׳Solimany, G. 2009. Eshta http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1060&mag_id=115

Starck, J. 1988. Stone Rings from Baja and Basta: Geographic and Chronological Implications. In A. Garrard and H. Gebel (eds.), The Prehistory of Jordan: The State of Research in 1986. Oxford: BAR, pp. 137–174.

.(ol: Preliminary Report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 124 (November 22׳Storchan, B. 2012. Eshta http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=2105&mag_id=119

Villa, P. and Mahieu, E. 1991. Breakage Patterns of Human Long Bones. Journal of Human Evolution 21: 27–48.

Yekutieli, Y. 2000. Early Bronze Age I Pottery in Southwestern . In G. Philip and D. Baird (eds.), Ceramics and Change in the Early Bronze Age of the Southern Levant. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, pp. 129–153.

Yekutieli, Y. 2002. The Ceramic Assemblage of Level C of the Early Bronze IB1 in Area DII in Tel Erani. In E. Orden and S. Ahituv (eds.), Aharon Kempinski Memorial Rescue Excavations at the Prehistoric and Protohistoric Site of Eshta'ol, Area A *133

Volume: Studies in Archaeology and Related Disciplines (Beer Sheva, 15). Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University Press, pp. 59*–79* [Hebrew].

Zuckerman, S. 2003. The Early Bronze Age Levels. In A. Ben-Tor, R. Bonfil and S. Zuckerman (eds.), Tel Qashish, A Village in the Jezreel Valley: Final Report of the Archaeological Excavations, 1978–1987 (Qedem Reports, 5). Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.