Yasur-Lau Assaf. Household Archaeology in Ancient Israel and Beyond
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
112 itzhaq shai et al.
e second aspect we will discuss is the human behavior that can
shed light on the function of a built space. e tendency to oer a
monolithic denition for building or room function is a reection of
our own modern approach to space (see Parker Pearson and Richards
1994a for an analysis of the concept of space in contemporary Eng-
land). e “specialization” of space has been shown to be typical of
a specialized society (e.g., Rapoport 1982; Hillier and Hanson 1984;
Parker Pearson and Richards 1994b: 63–64; Portugali 1999: 49–52),
with spatial segmentation reecting social complexity (Kent 1990b).
Banning and Byrd (1989; see also Byrd 1994) have convincingly
argued that the birth of the more complex and specialized societies of
the Neolithic period is partially reected in the division of built space
into subunits. However, in ancient and traditional societies, buildings,
rooms, and courts functioned in a variety of activities, and a simplis-
tic division into domestic, industrial, cult, etc. does not always reect
reality (see, e.g., Janes 1983: 105–109; Horne 1994: 176–184; David
and Kramer 2001: 296). Multifunctional use of dened spaces has been
noted in archaeological case studies, such as in a courtyard house at
Megiddo, where the inner rooms of the house served primarily as liv-
ing quarters, but also had evidence for food preparation and weaving
activities, while the open spaces around the house were used for activ-
ities associated with domestic economy (i.e., household production;
Gadot and Yasur-Landau 2006; for a slightly dierent interpretation
of the various functions in and around this house, see now Shahack-
Gross et al. in press).
In the present analysis we shall relate to the question of the func-
tion of the dierent rooms and the building as a whole. Our goal is
to identify the variety of activities that took place in the building and
avoid dening the building vis-à-vis one functional title. Combined
with the architectural analysis mentioned above, we will attempt to
dene a comprehensive image of the building’s nature and function,
based on a close analysis of the nds from the building that hint to the
various activities that were carried out within.
Building 66323: Architecture (Fig. 4 and 5)
As mentioned above, Building 66323 is a large building (at least 20 m ×
12 m) dating to the LBIIB (Stratum E4b; ca. late thirteenth century
bce). For the most part, only the stone foundations of the walls have
a case study from late bronze age ii 113
been uncovered. However, traces of brick walls were also identied,
as well as brick collapse, which points to an original mudbrick super-
structure above the stone foundation. Some of the walls, particularly
the outer walls, were made entirely of stone, as attested by the remains
of some walls still standing to a height of over 1 meter. e emerging
pattern seems to suggest that the outer walls were made of stone while
the inner walls had had a mudbrick superstructure.
Two subphases were identied in this building. In its original plan,
the building was composed of a central courtyard (66009) covering
approximately 80 m
2
with a line of at least six pillar bases. On the
western side was a plastered oor (84404). A tabun (49022) was found
along the courtyard’s southern wall on a beaten-earth oor (66009);
around the tabun was a stone hearth (66013).
e threshold (84006), which was constructed of eldstones, proba-
bly served as the entrance to the courtyard from the west, where Room
84011 is located. Only a small part of this room was uncovered; it
seems that it continues to the west. A comparison with Building 475
at Tel Batash Stratum VIII (Mazar 1997b: 52, Fig. 1.5) suggests that
this was the main entrance to the building, and this room should be
reconstructed as a narrow corridor.
Room 66325 is a small (3.5 m × 2 m), paved room located south of
the courtyard. It seems that this room could only have been entered
from the courtyard through its northern wall. Another room, Room
66308, is located south of the main entrance to the courtyard. An
installation (84007) made of small eldstones was discovered in the
southeast corner of this room; its function is unclear. A dagger was
found at the base of the northern wall (W56018) of this room. Room
66308 was also only partially excavated, and it seems that it also con-
tinued to the west. Most of the area that was exposed included the
installation, while the northern portion of the room was used for
access to the installation.
In the second phase of the building, Wall 84404 was constructed,
dividing the large courtyard into two spaces: Room 68023 and Court-
yard 66009 (Figs. 4, 5). Room 68023 (6.5 m × 3 m) was divided into
two spaces by a row of three pillar bases, reusing pillars from the pre-
vious phase. It seems signicant to note that, when these architectural
changes were made, a lamp and bowl deposit (see more below on the
foundation deposits) was placed adjacent to the new wall. A complete
storage jar (844029) was also sunk into the oor next to the pillar
bases.
114 itzhaq shai et al.
Figure 4. Plan of Building 66323.
a case study from late bronze age ii 115
Figure 5. Aerial view (north to right of picture) of Building 66323.
Before dealing with the function of the building, we should empha-
size that the two subphases of the building plan were identied based
solely on architectural and stratigraphic analysis. ere were no nds
that could help determine the dating of these two subphases. e pot-
tery from Stratum E4b suggests that this building was used over a
long period of time (Figs. 6–8); it seems that the building was in use
throughout the thirteenth century bce. is is indicated by the pres-
ence of pottery types typical of the early thirteenth century bce, such
as bowls with vestigial carination, ledge-rim bowls, plain-rim bowls
with sides curved halfway up the body, bichrome decoration, and gut-
ter-rim jars, alongside pottery that would better t a late thirteenth-
century-bce context (bowls with an inner-thickened everted rim,
cyma-shaped bowls, cup-and-saucer vessels, and button-shaped bases
on jars (for a complete discussion, see Gadot et al. forthcoming).
One of the most interesting aspects of Building 66323 is the numer-
ous foundation deposits that were uncovered in the context of the
building. Most of these deposits are typical lamp-and-bowl deposits
that are well known in LB Canaan (e.g., Bunimovitz and Zimhoni
1993: 2004). While these are found in various contexts (see Gadot and
Tepper forthcoming, for their appearance even in funerary contexts),
116 itzhaq shai et al.
Figure 6. Pottery from Building 66323.
a case study from late bronze age ii 117
Figure 7. Pottery from Building 66323.
118 itzhaq shai et al.
Figure 8. Imported wares, Hieratic inscription, unique pottery sherds, and
bronze dagger from Building 66323.
a case study from late bronze age ii 119
their presence in Building 66323 needs to be addressed, as they were
found in almost every room (Figs. 9–10). is is certainly not the case
in other domestic structures where such deposits were found; usually
only a single deposit was discovered in each structure (e.g., Lachish,
Gezer, Beth-Shemesh, Tell Miqne/Ekron; see Bunimovitz and Zimhoni
1993: 2004). Other deposits that are unique to this building include a
bovine skull, which was placed under a plaster oor on the western
side of the courtyard (84026; Fig. 10),
3
and the deposit of a MB dag-
ger in Room 84011 (Fig. 8: 11). In addition, a dog burial was placed
under the oor in Room 58036. Finally, under the western wall of the
courtyard, a donkey jaw was placed as an additional deposit. ese are
certainly not the norm, and seem to indicate that this building had a
special signicance.
Comparing Building 66323 to other Late Bronze Age Architecture
In Table 1, we compare the architectural layout of Building 66323 at
Tell eṣ-Ṣa/Gath with other houses, specically the “patrician houses”
and “governors’ residences” from LB and Iron Age contexts in the
Southern Levant that seemed comparable in some way (e.g., size,
building quality, plan of structure) to Building 66323.
Size of building: e data in Table 1 indicate that Building 66323
at Tell eṣ-Ṣa/Gath, which is at least 240 m
2
in area, is comparable to
other contemporaneous structures dened as “patrician houses” and
slightly smaller than “governors’ residences.” It is larger than the aver-
age urban domestic building, such as the courtyard houses at Ashdod.
It is also larger than the pillared house found at the nearby rural settle-
ment at Tel Harassim (see Table 1).
4
Energy expenditure: e construction methods used in the building
do not indicate any unique expenditure of energy or extraordinary use
of building techniques and materials. e width of the walls is quite
3
Bovine skull deposits are known from cultic contexts in Cyprus, such as at Late
Cypriot Enkomi, Kition, and Myrtou-Pigadhes. See, e.g., Karageorghis 1974: 2002:
100.
4
It is dicult to determine how much of the building uncovered thus far was
roofed and how much was open space. For example, Stone Pavement 66325 may suggest
an unroofed area; however, nothing in this room—including its size—would support
such a theory. e size of Room 66009 does seem to be quite large, and therefore may
have been an open courtyard of about 60 m
2
, leaving ¾ of the building for roofed areas.
120 itzhaq shai et al.
Figure 9. Lamp and bowl deposits from Building 66323.
a case study from late bronze age ii 121
Figure 10. Isometric reconstruction of Building 66323 (vertical view) with
location of the various deposits in Building 66323.
similar to that of private dwellings (e.g., Daviau 1993: 213), and the
materials used are quite rudimentary. at said, it should be noted
that architectural ornamentation is rare in the LB southern Levant,
as is the use of ashlar masonry, which is generally reserved for pal-
aces (e.g., Oren 1992: 105). All of the buildings in Table 1 were built
of eldstones and mudbricks. It is interesting to note, however, that
various examples of planning (and therefore more energy expenditure
in terms of the time and eort made in planning) did go into the con-
struction of Building 66323. For example, its outer southern wall was
built as a stepped structure that followed the natural topography of
the slope in this part of the site, rather than on an articial platform.
e planning and eorts that went into the construction of this large
building on a steep slope may be an indication that it was a public
(rather than private) endeavor, since such a large structure might have
necessitated conscription.
e syntax of the building plan: Analyses of usage and movement pat-
terns within a built environment may shed light on social values, social
restrictions, and boundaries (e.g., Hillier and Handon 1984: Parker
Pearson and Richards 1994a: 24; Bunimovitz and Faust 2003a; 2003b).
Since we do not have the complete plan of Building 66323, it is impos-
sible to conduct a full syntax analysis. We suggest that the entrance to
the building was from the west, since in the intact southern wall there is