Ramat Razim, near Zefat: A Middle Bronze Age Rural Site in the Tel Hazor Polity (original) (raw)

Ramat Razim, near Zefat: A Middle Bronze Age Rural Site in the Tel Haẓor Polity

Karen Covello-Paran, Anat Cohen-Weinberger, Barak Tzin and Shlomit Bechar 1{ }^{1}

Abstract

An archaeological excavation carried out at Ramat Razim, near Zefat, exposed a Middle Bronze Age rural settlement, dated by the ceramic assemblage within Middle Bronze Age II-III. Spatial analysis identified communal workspaces and possible domestic cult practices in specific rooms, and the distribution of the ground stone tools and ceramic storage vessels reflected food-processing activities and a decentralized grain-storage approach. In addition to agriculture, pastoralism-specifically sheep rearing—played a significant role in the settlement’s economy, probably engendering economic exchanges under the influence of Haẓor, the major city in the region. Petrographic analysis linking the pithoi to the Hula Valley raised questions about regional economic ties, highlighting a complex, interconnected network during the Middle Bronze Age. These findings illuminate the rural settlement’s role in the hinterland of Haẓor, and within the Haẓor polity’s hierarchical structure, providing valuable insights into regional dynamics and control.

Keywords: Middle Bronze Age, rural settlement, Ramat Razim, Hazaror polity, pithoi, petrography, economy

INTRODUCTION

A Middle Bronze Age rural site was uncovered in an excavation carried out at Ramat Razim (map ref. 24858/76188), on the southern slopes of Mount Canaan, c. 2.5 km southeast of Zefat (Safed), and c. 9 km south-southwest of Tel Haẓor, the largest Middle Bronze Age city in the Southern Levant (Fig. 1).

The Ramat Razim hillslopes are predominantly hard limestone of the Eocene era, forming a rough landscape of exposed rocks (Fig. 2; see Petrography, below). The rugged landscape of Mount Canaan and the lower southeastern-facing Ramat Razim slopes form a

[1]

1. 1{ }^{1} Dr. Karen Covello-Paran, Dr. Anat Cohen-Weinberger and Barak Tzin, Israel Antiquities Authority; Dr. Shlomit Bechar, School of Archaeology and Maritime Cultures, University of Haifa. ↩︎

Fig. 1. Location map.

Fig. 2. Rocky terrain of the Ramat Razim hillslopes, looking north.

sort of border between Lower and Upper Galilee in this area, overlooking the Sea of Galilee. The 'En Razim spring is fairly accessible across the rocky terrain, emerging c. 1 km to the west beyond Nahal Razim.

The site was first discovered in a survey conducted in 2009 by Stepansky and Bron (2011: Site 27), who documented building remains visible above the modern ground surface (Figs. 3, 4) and collected potsherds and flint from the Chalcolithic period, many sherds from the Middle Bronze Age, and a few sherds from the Roman-Byzantine and Ottoman periods. The relatively good preservation of the architectural remains was to some extent due to the low density of resettlement in the area following the site’s abandonment. Excavations carried out in the vicinity in 2017 by Berger uncovered dolmens and identified the use of this area in the British Mandate period for outposts and communication routes (Fig. 1: A-7999; Berger and Gottschalk 2019).

Fig. 3. Well-preserved architectural features recorded in the survey, looking northwest (photography: Y. Stepansky).

Fig. 4. The site before excavation, looking northwest (photography: Y. Stepansky).

The ExcAvation

The trial excavation (total area 325 sq m ) comprised the main excavation area (Areas A-C; Plan 1; Fig. 5), and a small area (Area D) located 650 m to the northwest (Fig. 1). 2{ }^{2} In Area A, well-preserved remains belonging to a single architectural unit of a Middle Bronze Age settlement were revealed, extending into Area C, 10 m to the north. Limited building remains were discovered in a square in Area B, whilst the absence of architectural remains

[1]

1. 2{ }^{2} The excavation was conducted in June-July 2010 (Permit No. A-5922/2010), following the discovery of ancient remains in an archaeological survey (S-148/2009), prior to the construction of a new road to Zefat. The excavation, on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, was directed by Karen Covello-Paran, with the assistance of Hendrik (Enno) Bron, Ya‘aqov Har’el, Oren Zingboym (area supervision), Yosef Ya‘aqobi (administration), Rivka Mishayev, Mendel Kahan and Mark Kunin (field plans), Assaf Peretz (photography), Skyview Photography Ltd. (aerial photography), Shlomit Bechar (pottery processing), Leea Porat (pottery restoration), Anat CohenWeinberger (petrographic analysis), Hagit Tahan-Rosen (pottery drawing and figures), Barak Tzin (stone implement analysis), Ilya Raznisky (metal laboratory), Carmen Hersch (finds drawing), Dov Porotsky (final plans), Anastasia Shapiro (location map), Polina Spivak (flint analysis), Michael Smilansky (flint drawing), Noa Ranzer (scarab analysis), Nimrod Marom and Lee Perry-Gal (zooarchaeology), Sariel Shalev (metallurgical analysis); Clara Amit (finds photography). We are grateful to Yardenna Alexandre for her careful editing and helpful comments. For the preliminary report, see Covello-Paran 2011. ↩︎

Plan 1. General plan of the excavation: Areas A-C.

Fig. 5. Aerial view of Areas A-C, looking northwest.
in a probe located c. 12 m northeast of Area B, probably indicated that this area lay beyond the settlement’s eastern limits. The associated pottery attested that the settlement was established in MB II and abandoned at the end of MB III; no earlier or later occupation layers or architectural features were discovered. A single wall exposed in Area D was of unclear date.

Fig. 6. Area A, Unit I, showing its extension beyond the excavation boundaries, looking east.

Area A(Plans 2-4) 3{ }^{3}

A large architectural unit, designated Unit I, was revealed in Area A (Plan 2). The exposed remains indicated that it was a single-stratum occupation, although the unit may not all have been constructed at a single point in time; specific features, such as sealed entrances, provided evidence for some changes, but distinct building phases were not observed.

The large, multi-room unit was not exposed in its entirety, as additional walls visible above ground indicated that the structure extended beyond the excavation boundaries (Fig. 6). 4{ }^{4} The building was constructed on the slope, resulting in terraced or stepped architecture comprising upper, middle and lower levels, or terraces (Figs. 7, 8). The main north-south walls served as retaining walls (W417-W403-W311-W320 and W385-W407-W314), accommodating the different elevations of the terraces. All the walls were dry-constructed of local limestones, including huge boulders. The massive stone collapse found in all the rooms provided evidence for the stone superstructure of the walls. The rooms, designated

[1]

1. 3{ }^{3} Plan 2 shows the entire building and includes the long east-west Sections 1-1, 2-2, 3-3; Plan 3 shows the upper terrace (with north-south Section 1-1), and Plan 4, the middle and lower terraces (with north-south Sections 1−1,2−21-1,2-2 ) in more detail.
   4{ }^{4} The excavation area was limited by the proposed development plans, precluding the excavation of the entire unit. ↩︎

Plan 2. Area A, general plan and sections.

Fig. 7. Unit I, general view of the stepped architecture, looking west.

Fig. 8. Unit I, general view of western edge of excavation, looking northwest.

here by the main locus number in the room, are described according to the terraces, from the upper terrace on the west to the lower terrace on the east, and from north to south.

Upper Terrace (Plan 3; Fig. 9)
Two rows of rooms were exposed on the upper terrace of the building, descending from west to east.

Room 357. This room, at the northwestern corner of the exposed part of the building, was delimited by W354 and W365, and probably by the western extension of W358; the northwestern corner of the room was damaged. Wall 354, constructed on bedrock, had three extant courses of large boulders (the largest c. 1.40×0.75 m,0.85 m1.40 \times 0.75 \mathrm{~m}, 0.85 \mathrm{~m} high), and functioned as a terrace wall between this room and Room 393 to its east (Plan 2: Section 1-1). The room was entirely covered by collapsed stones from the walls. The bedrock basal level (603.65-603.82 asl) served as the floor or floor foundation. This room may have been used for storage, as suggested by the many pithoi body sherds retrieved here, along with storage jar sherds and a bowl (not illustrated); the density of finds, however, was relatively low.

Room 301. This room ( 11.3 sq m ) was entirely covered by a layer of boulders and stones that collapsed from the walls (W309, W365, W415, W318). Wall 309 was preserved for

Fig. 9. Upper terrace rooms, looking southeast.

Plan 3. Area A, upper terrace, plan and section.

three courses (over 1 m high) above ground surface (Plan 2: Section 3-3). Large pithoi body sherds were retrieved from beneath the stone collapse, and a small patch of a poorly preserved stone floor was exposed in the corner of the room.

Room 388. This room ( 7.5 sq m ) was bordered by three walls (W308, W318, W310) and by an elongated, stone-built platform (L389; 0.7 m preserved height) that abutted the fourth wall (W326; Fig. 10); an oven (L451) built on this platform indicated its function as a cooking installation. An in situ pithos in the corner next to the platform was smashed by the stone collapse from the walls. The floor (L388) was mainly the sloping bedrock, partly paved with some flat stone slabs. Many cooking-pot body sherds (not illustrated) provided additional evidence for cooking activities in this room.

Room 336. The southwestern room was bordered by three walls (W422, W326, W310); a row of stones visible in the southern baulk was probably part of the fourth enclosing wall (W327). Wall 422 was preserved for three dry-constructed courses overlying a foundation layer of small stones. A stone-slab and bedrock floor (L336) was exposed below the massive stone collapse in the room.

Room 329. The room, delimited by W358 and W417, lay mostly north of the excavation boundary. An entrance (L419; c. 0.7 m wide; Fig. 11) in W358 originally led into Room 393 but was subsequently blocked.

Fig. 10. Room 388, showing oven (L451) on stone platform (L389) and pithos in corner of room, looking northwest.

Fig. 11. Room 393, showing Entrance 419 in W358 and table-shaped stone installation in foreground, looking north.

Room 393. This large room ( 15.2 sq m ) was bordered by W354, W358, W403 and W331 and divided into two parts by a narrow low partition (W420; 0.35 m wide); a table-shaped stone or podium was placed in the middle of the room (Fig. 12; Plan 3: Section 1-1). The corner of W331 and W354 was well-preserved to a height of 1.0−1.5 m1.0-1.5 \mathrm{~m} (Fig. 13). The northern part of the room was a low, stone-paved platform (L371), whilst the southern part had a hard-packed, crushed limestone living surface with many burned patches (L393). The table-shaped installation was constructed of a large smoothed flat square stone ( 0.45 ×0.50 m\times 0.50 \mathrm{~m} ) placed on top of another rectangular stone (Figs. 14, 15). The placing of the stone installation in the center of the room with circular access, in conjunction with the burned patches in the room, could possibly indicate its use as a cultic altar (see below). An alternative interpretation of this installation as a worktable is less likely, as the grinding stones at the site were found in situ on benches alongside the walls (e.g., in Room 399, see below). The pottery finds in the room included bowls, kraters, a cooking pot and pithoi (see Fig. 53), whilst no ground stone implements were retrieved here.

Room 399. A large rectangular room (c. 22 sq m ) was bordered by four walls (W415, W331, W311, W318). Wall 311 was preserved for four stone courses (over 2.1 m high), these courses visible from the lower Room 342 on the middle terrace. Room 399 comprised a

Fig. 12. Room 393, stone-paved floor (L371) and table-shaped installation in middle of room, looking northeast.

Fig. 13. Room 393, corner of W331 and W354, looking southwest.

Fig. 14. Room 393, stone-paved floor platform (L371) and table-shaped installation in middle of room, looking northeast.

Fig. 15. Room 393, table-shaped installation (altar?), looking north.
main area and a small area defined by a short wall segment (W332; Fig. 16). The room had two entrances aligned on a direct north-south access, facilitating passage in and out of what apparently functioned as a central area. The northern entrance had a wide threshold (L452; 1.35 m wide), and the southern entrance ( L 421 ) had a narrower ( 0.7 m wide) threshold flanked by large boulders (Plan 2: Section 3-3). A massive layer of stones that had collapsed from the walls covered the room, the impact of the large boulders damaging the partially stone-paved floor that overlay the bedrock.

Many pithos body sherds were found here, indicating that more than one pithos originally stood in this room (see Fig. 54). A large assemblage of five upper grinding stones found near

the entrance in W318 (Fig. 17) probably originally lay on a bench or platform that was not preserved. The area west of the short wall (W332) contained an oven (L450) and a smashed in situ pithos (see Fig. 54:5); this wall either defined a corner installation or secondarily enclosed the corner of the room, possibly providing limited evidence for phasing. The size

Fig. 16. Room 399, looking northeast.

Fig. 17. Room 399, intact upper grinding stone, looking west.

of the room, the partially stone-paved floor, the oven, the pithos sherds and the large number of grinding stones (see Table 5, below) suggest that this space was a courtyard exploited for processing and storage of agricultural produce.

Room 363. This room, accessed from Room 399, was enclosed by three walls (W310, W318, W320), the fourth wall lying beyond the excavation limits (Fig. 18). The room, covered by a massive stone collapse, was mostly paved with various-sized limestone slabs (e.g., 0.6×0.6 \times 0.5 m ) with smaller filler stones, overlying bedrock and abutting W320 (Fig. 19). On the western, non-paved side of the room (L353), three pithoi bases were found in situ on the

Fig. 18. Room 363, looking north.

Fig. 19. Room 363, stone-paved floor abutting W320, looking southeast.

Fig. 20. Room 363, pithoi in L353 next to W310, looking east.
bedrock, wedged in with grinding stone fragments and other small stones, indicating that a row of at least three pithoi once stood here, leaning against W310 (Fig. 20).

The pottery assemblage in the room included several cooking pots (see Fig. 55:2-5, 13), and some grinding stones were found on the stone floor close to the pithoi. Several fragments of ovens were found here, but there was no extant oven. This room was probably a stone-paved open courtyard, similar to adjoining Room 399.

Middle Terrace (Plan 4; Fig. 21)
The drop in elevation between the upper and middle terraces was clearly evident along the north-south row of walls (W417-W403-W311-W320; see Plan 2: Sections 1-1, 2-2, 3-3).

Room 335. Two walls (W385, W346,) were partially exposed in the excavation, the room mostly lying beyond the excavation boundary.

Room 400. This room ( 11.2 sq m ) was bordered by four walls (W417, W346, W407, W312), and was accessed from the lower terrace via an entrance in W407 (L454; 0.75 m wide); W417 and W346 were preserved for up to 1.3 m high. The room was split-level due to the sloping bedrock (Plan 2: Section 1-1), with Floor 400 lying 0.40−0.55 m0.40-0.55 \mathrm{~m} higher than Floor 401 and separated from it by a stone step (W379) with an entrance (L453; 0.6 m wide; Fig. 22); the floors were mostly of crushed limestone overlying the bedrock. A pithos was found in the southeastern corner of the room, but there were relatively few other potsherds

Plan 4. Area A, middle and lower terraces, plan and sections.

Plan 4. (cont.).

Fig. 21. Middle terrace rooms, looking east.
here. A small, cylindrical basalt stone, possibly a roof-roller (Fig. 73), and a loaf-shaped upper grinding stone were retrieved on Floor 401, next to W312. Poorly preserved specks originating from unidentified carbonized seeds may indicate that this room served as a storage room.

Fig. 22. Room 400, showing step (W379) in foreground, looking west.

Room 349. This narrow room ( 6.8 sq m ) was accessed from Room 328 on the lower terrace, via an entrance in W407 (L416; 0.6 m wide), with a step to accommodate the west-east downsloping bedrock. Wall 403 was very wide ( 1.3 m ), constructed of large boulders on bedrock, and functioning as a retaining wall between the upper and middle terraces. Wall 312, protruding above topsoil, had three extant stone courses directly overlaying the bedrock; part of the southern wall (W325) may have been a later addition (see below).

The room comprised an oven installation (L356; Fig. 23; Plan 2: Section 2-2) and a small entry area (L349) with a pithos in situ near the southwestern corner, wedged in with small stones. Oven 356 was built in a shallow depression on an elevated, sloping bedrock platform next to W403 (Fig. 24); it was constructed of clay on a base arranged in a circle of small stones (diam. 0.85 m ), and its exterior was lined with large pithos sherds (Fig. 25). The pottery assemblage retrieved in this room included serving, cooking and storage vessels (see Fig. 56).

The southern wall of this room, W325, was preserved for two courses, and it may reflect phasing, as W315 on the lower terrace seems to have originally continued toward the west with an entrance between Rooms 349 and 342, and this entrance may later have been blocked by W325. If this reconstruction is correct, Room 349 may originally have been a passage rather than a room, enabling access from Room 393 on the upper terrace to Room 328 on the lower terrace, and this passage may have later been closed off to accommodate Oven 356, thus indicating some phasing and changes in the functions of the rooms.

Fig. 23. Room 349, oven installation (L356) above elevated bedrock, looking northwest.

Fig. 24. Oven 356, above bedrock platform, looking northwest.

Fig. 25. Oven 356, close-up, looking northwest.

Room 342. This room ( 16 sq m ) was delineated by four walls (W311, W325, W314, W317) and accessed via an entrance in W317 (L456; 0.65 m wide; Fig. 26). The southwestern corner of W311 and W317 was reinforced by a curvilinear join that was possibly a construction technique to accommodate the slope (Fig. 27; Plan 2: Section 3-3). A poorly preserved stone bench built of smallish fieldstones (L418; 0.55 m wide; c. 0.15 m extant height) was built against W314. The room was partially paved with flat stones (L359) that were damaged by the stone collapse from the walls. Two pithoi were placed along the southern wall (Fig. 28), their bases-wedged with small fieldstones-extant in a small shallow pit (Fig. 29). The many potsherds found above the crushed limestone floor patches on the western side of the room, belonged to serving, processing and storage vessels (see Fig. 57); there were also two grinding stone fragments.

Room 397. This room, delimited by three walls (W320, W317, W402), extended south beyond the excavation border. A thin hard-packed earth floor (L397) overlay the bedrock, and the fragmentary remains of a large storage vessel lay in the northeastern corner. A restorable cooking pot (see Fig. 58:2), storage vessels (see Fig. 58:3-10) and stone implements, including an upper grinding stone and a hammerstone, were found in this room.

Fig. 26. Room 342, looking west.

Fig. 27. Room 342, showing curvilinear corner of W311 and W317, looking west.

Fig. 28. Room 342, pithoi installations next to W317, looking south.

Fig. 29. Room 342, close-up of pithoi base next to W317, looking south.

Lower Terrace (Plan 4; Fig. 30)
Two rows of interconnected rooms were exposed on this terrace. Additional walls visible on the surface (but not excavated), indicated that the building extended further to the north, east and south, beyond the excavation limits.

Space 364. Wall 345 and W385 defined part of a space that extended to the north; the excavation only reached the stone collapse layer here.

Room 328. This room ( 8.5 sq m ) was accessed from the adjacent rooms via four entrances (Fig. 31). Wall 407 had two entrances, one from Room 400 (L454; 0.72 m wide) and another from Room 349 (L416; 0.55 m wide; Fig. 32), both stepped to accommodate the slope down from the middle terrace rooms. Additional entrances (L411, L455) accessed the rooms to the south and east. A possible blocked entrance in the northern wall (W345) may have led into Space 364 (Fig. 33), reflecting a change in the building.

The floor of Room 328 was made of a layer of packed small stones overlying and leveling the uneven bedrock (Fig. 34). An in situ pithos wedged in the northwestern corner of the room was smashed by the overlying stone collapse. Many pottery vessels, including several cooking pots, were found here (see Fig. 59), as well as some grinding stone fragments. These finds, and the direct access to Oven 356, indicate that food-processing and preparation was carried out here. A complete bronze needle (see Fig. 74:1) lay directly above the floor next to W407.

Fig. 30. Lower terrace, looking east.

Fig. 31. Room 328, showing four entrances, looking east.

Fig. 32. Room 328, showing two entrances (L416, L454) in W407, looking west.

Fig. 33. Room 328, possible blocked entrance in W345 with scale at threshold, looking north.

Fig. 34. Room 328, Entrance 416 into Room 349, looking west.

Fig. 35. Room 361, showing Entrance 411, looking north.

Room 361. A narrow room or space ( 5.3 sq m ) delimited by four walls (W314, W315, W398, W412; Fig. 35) was accessed via an entrance (L411; 0.7 m wide) with a threshold of two large flat stones bordered on the north by small fieldstones, framed between two large upright doorpost stones (Fig. 36). The room, covered by stone collapse from the walls, was partially divided by a small wall (W410) defining two spaces (L361, L343); a corner installation (L408) constructed with a curved wall closed off the northeastern corner of the room. A few pottery vessels were found here. An intact bronze toggle pin (see Fig. 74:2)

Fig. 36. Entrance 411, looking north.
retrieved above the floor stones abutting the entrance may possibly have come from an intramural burial below the floor, but there is no clear evidence. Wall 398, bordering the room on the east, was built as a partition wall incorporating upright standing monoliths and intervening shelves (see Room 360, below; Plan 4: Section 1-1).

Room 381. A narrow space ( 3 sq m ) accessed from Room 328 had patches of small stones levelling the natural bedrock floor (Fig. 37). There were a few small pottery vessels on this floor (see Fig. 60). This small room provided access to Niches 373 and 387.

Niche 373. A small niche ( 1 sq m ) was defined by two walls (W369, W376) and two short low walls (W377, W378; Fig. 38). Wall 369, probably constructed as the continuation of W345, terminated with a large boulder at its eastern end. Wall 376, protruding above the modern topsoil, was constructed of a very large boulder ( 1.74×0.80 m,1 m1.74 \times 0.80 \mathrm{~m}, 1 \mathrm{~m} high) laid on the bedrock, aligned along the same axis as W406, and abutting W369 and W377. Wall 377 was a narrow partition constructed of a single stone slab with a smoothed upper surface. Niches 373 and 387 may originally have been part of Room 381, and the partitions may have been a later addition to set apart these two ritually significant niches; indeed, potsherds found below W378 may support two phases, indicating that the wall had closed off the niche, following the interment of a storage jar burial. The enclosed space contained an infant burial in a storage jar (Tomb 392) that lay on its side in the southern part of the niche alongside W377 (Fig. 39); the pit in which it was interred was lined with small to

Fig. 37. Room 381, looking north.

Fig. 38. Niches 373 and 387, looking east.

Fig. 39. Niche 373, with storage jar burial T392, looking south.
medium-sized stones. Very poorly preserved skeletal remains and body sherds of a small, closed vessel, probably a juglet (not illustrated), were found in the jar (see Fig. 61). In the Middle Bronze Age, storage jar burials were primarily found below the floors of dwellings. However, since the Ramat Razim floors were of hard limestone bedrock, the geological restrictions may have precluded digging burial pits below floors, in which case, placing the storage jar burial above floor-level, in a spatially segregated area, may have been an adaption of the intramural burial tradition.

Niche 387. A second small niche ( 1 sq m ) was accessed from Room 360 via an entrance in W315 (L413) with a large flat, smoothed stone threshold abutted by an upright boulder (Fig. 40; see Plan 2). A stone slab lying next to the monolith was a remnant of the floor. An upright, square-sectioned monolith limestone ( 0.83 m high, c. 0.45 m wide), wedged with small-to medium-sized stones around its base, stood in this niche. Niche 387 was attributed a ritual function, as the monolith was understood as a mazzeva and as it was adjacent to Room 360 that contained a unique pottery assemblage.

Room 360. This room was bordered by W398, W315 and W384; the southeastern corner of the room not preserved. Wall 404 was probably part of a corner installation. Wall 398, the partition wall between Rooms 361 and 360 (Fig. 41), was constructed of a single row of stones with three upright monolithic stones ( 0.6−0.7 m0.6-0.7 \mathrm{~m} high), interspaced at intervals with a shelf-like construction between two of the monoliths (Figs. 42, 43; Plan 4: Section 1-1); this wall did not have a superstructure. It is possible that these monoliths functioned as standing mazzevot, suggesting domestic cultic activity in this room (which would include both

Fig. 40. Niche 387 showing Entrance 413, looking north.

Fig. 41. Rooms 360 and 361, looking north.

Rooms 361 and 360). Alternatively, these monoliths may have been a building technique, as they were part of a stone construction. The room was covered with stones collapsed from the walls. Several pottery vessels (see Fig. 62), ground stone tools (see below) and some special finds, including a scarab (see Fig. 76) and the jaw of a goat/sheep, lay on the bedrock

Fig. 42. Partition wall (W398) separating Rooms 360 and 361, looking east.

Fig. 43. Room 360, pithos neck next to partition wall (W398), looking west; note Monoliths A and B.
floor. The presence of four pithoi necks, but a marked absence of pithoi body sherds (as observed in the pottery restoration process), led to the understanding that the necks may have secondarily functioned as stands (Fig. 43); a lamp fragment and a few other vessels, including a cooking pot, were also retrieved.

An iron awl, a nail and an intact brass bracelet, dating to the late Ottoman period, were found on the surface above the stone collapse (see Fig. 75:1-3).

Plan 5. Area B, plan.

Fig. 44. Area B, probe with W101, looking east.

Area B (Plan 5)

An excavation square was opened 25 m east of Area A to define the settlement limits (see Plan 1). It exposed a small wall fragment abutted by a small stone accumulation (L100), overlaying sterile soil. Wall 101(2.4 m101(2.4 \mathrm{~m} long, 1 m wide, preserved height 0.4 m ) was constructed of two rows of medium-sized stones with small filler stones (Fig. 44). The potsherds retrieved from the accumulation abutting the wall, were water-worn and nondiagnostic, but their fabric was similar to the pottery from Area A, and they were attributed to the same general time span. It was not possible to determine whether the wall was contemporary to the structure in Area A.

Area C (Plan 6)

A 35 sq m area, c. 10 m north of Area A (see Fig. 1), comprised a mechanically excavated trench, and a manually excavated square, positioned where a stone wall protruded above the modern surface (Fig. 45). The north-south wall (W200; 7.15 m long, c. 1 m wide), constructed above bedrock of a single row of large stones, some over one meter long (c. 0.5 m high) with smaller filler stones, was preserved for two courses ( 0.95 m high; Fig. 46). Although no diagnostic potsherds enabled dating this wall, the close proximity to Area A firmly suggested that it was connected to and contemporary with Unit I.

Plan 6. Area C, plan.

Fig. 45. Areas A and C, looking north.

Fig. 46. Area C, W200, looking north.

Area D (Plan 7)

The development survey encompassing the area surrounding the settlement site identified a stone clearance heap on one of the hills northwest of the settlement site (Stepansky and Bron 2011: Feature 6). The excavation ( 31.5 sq m ) exposed a wide north-south oriented stone wall, preserved for three courses that protruded above the modern surface (W2; 9 m long, 2.2 m wide, 0.7 m high; Plan 7; Figs. 47, 48). The wall was constructed of two faces of medium to large, roughly hewn limestone blocks with smaller filler stones; no finds dated the construction of the wall.

Plan 7. Area D, plan and section.

Fig. 47. Area D, W2, looking south (photography: O. Zingboym).

Fig. 48. Area D, W2 descending toward the valley, looking north.

BUILDING TECHNIQUES

The exposure of Unit I in Area A provided some data regarding the building techniques at Ramat Razim. The building was constructed of the local hard limestone, including smalland medium-sized fieldstones, and also larger boulders, irregularly incorporated in the walls. The massive stone collapse found in all the rooms indicated that the walls were entirely constructed of stone, with no evidence for the use of mud bricks in the superstructure. The walls were built directly above the bedrock floor level and no foundation trenches were observed. The dry construction of the walls sometimes comprised a basal foundation course of small stones to level the sloping bedrock, as, for example, W422 in Room 336. Some walls exhibited construction techniques to accommodate the sloping bedrock surface and to create the terraces, as, for example, W311, with four courses of large boulders visible in middle terrace Room 342, whilst only the top course was visible in upper terrace Room 399. Several walls were built of single stone rows, whereas the split-level walls were mostly constructed of two rows of stones, as, for example, W320 and W403, with one row facing the upper terrace and the other facing the middle terrace (Fig. 49). The presence of a possible roof roller (see below) may indicate that such implements first appeared in the Southern Levant in this period, attesting to a possible development in construction and maintenance methods.

The floors were composed of hard packed earth, crushed limestone, stone-slab paving, or smoothed levelled bedrock. Some of the preserved entrances had large upright boulders

Fig. 49. Multi-level construction of the upper, middle and lower terraces, looking northeast.

flanking one or both sides of the thresholds. The three cooking installations (L450, L451, L356) were all elevated on a bedrock or stone-built platform, as, for example, L389, and they were fabricated with a circular stone base above which thick-walled, fired clay domes were built. The proximity of the large fixed pithoi and grinding implements to the ovens facilitated identifying the food preparation and storage areas. The many pithoi installations placed in most of the rooms were storage receptacles for liquids or dry foodstuffs. Their accumulated large capacity could be connected to settlement strategies considering the landscape and risk management not in the form of concentrated community storage but scattered throughout the building (see below).

Regarding construction phases, in some rooms the east-west walls were built first, at least technically, after which the north-south walls were added, as, for example, W318 and W415. On the upper terrace, the blocked entrance in W358 provided evidence for construction phases, although the absence of built-up floors in adjoining Rooms 329 and 393, precluded a clear distinction between two phases. On the middle terrace, W325 may have been a later wall blocking an entrance between Rooms 342 and 349 . On the lower terrace, Niches 373 and 387 may originally have been part of Room 381 and were closed off at a later date.

Site Spatial Analysis

Spatial analysis of the site and aspects of intrasite organization were derived from aerial photographs and surface exploration carried out during the excavation. While the excavation primarily uncovered Unit I, it became evident that at least two more units (Units II and III) had walls that were visible, clustered to the south of Area A (Fig. 50). The examination of the exposed bedrock in the area surrounding the site enabled estimating the settlement’s size as approximately one hectare. The settlement’s location and dimensions within the rugged landscape, along with the close grouping of architectural units, suggested the likelihood of kinship affiliation among its inhabitants. This spatial arrangement implies that the residents had some form of familial or social bonds that influenced the organization and layout of the settlement.

Beyond the architectural units described here, a wall uncovered in Area D and several long walls identified during the survey, as well as in aerial photographs of the vicinity surrounding the settlement (Figs. 51, 52), raised the possibility that these structures served as contemporary animal pens and delineated spaces for various activities; alternatively, they could have belonged to later periods. Further investigation and analysis would be required to ascertain their purpose and chronological context. 5{ }^{5}

[1]

1. 5{ }^{5} For additional structural activities associated with late historical activity on the hills surrounding the site, see Berger and Gottschalk 2019. ↩︎

Fig. 50. Aerial view of the site, showing Units I, II and III, looking south.

Fig. 51. Aerial view of walls and stone piles in the vicinity of the site, looking southwest.

Fig. 52. Wall in the vicinity of the site, looking northeast.

The Finds

All the excavation debris was sieved at the site. The finds comprised pottery vessels and ground stone implements, as well as very few metal objects, a scarab and flint implements (see below). The low density of finds is understood to reflect the nature of the settlement and its abandonment. The massive collapse of the stone walls over most of the finds contributed to their poor preservation.

The Pottery AsSemblage

The small homogeneous pottery assemblage retrieved in the excavation comprised 233 diagnostic rim sherds (including restored vessels); several body sherds (bases, handles and decorated sherds) were also retained. The statistical analysis included the 233 rim sherds, each rim representing a single vessel (Table 1), this approach was justified by three considerations: (1) the small size of the assemblage; (2) the rims were mostly of large vessels, such as pithoi, kraters, cooking pots and storage jars-with fewer rims of smaller vessels, such as bowls, jugs and juglets-the rims of the large vessels of relatively small diameter and therefore each rim presents a large portion of the original rim (Table 2); (3) multiple rims of the vessels were probably restored or discarded in the restoration process.

Table 1. Pottery Vessel Types/Quantities

Table 2. Pottery Types According to Rooms

The assemblage is presented here typologically from open to closed vessels (bowls, kraters, cooking pots, pithoi, storage jars, jugs and juglets), with reference to the typological classification of the Middle and Late Bronze Age pottery at Tel Hiazor (Bechar 2017). 6{ }^{6} Selected vessels are illustrated in the pottery figures according to rooms (Rooms 393, 399,

[1]

1. 6{ }^{6} The small size of the Ramat Razim assemblage did not warrant an independent typological scheme. ↩︎

363,349,342,397,328,381363,349,342,397,328,381 and 373), the figures following the same order as the rooms described in the architectural section.

Bowls.- Bowls are the second most common vessels at the site (N=49)(\mathrm{N}=49), comprising 21%21 \% of the pottery assemblage. They are classified as open bowls (N=25)(\mathrm{N}=25) and carinated bowls (N=24)(\mathrm{N}=24). The open bowls include shallow bowls (Figs. 53:1, 2; 54:1; 55:1; 56:1; 57:1, 2; 59:1,2;60:1,2)59: 1,2 ; 60: 1,2) and deep bowls (Fig. 60:3, 4). A small, simple round shallow bowl (Fig. 58:1) could be a miniature vessel.

The carinated bowls are divided into three groups: closed carinated bowls (Fig. 56:2, 3), shallow carinated bowls (Fig. 60:5, 6) and deep carinated bowls (Fig. 57:3), corresponding to Hiazor Types CB1, CB3 and CB4 respectively (Bechar 2017:203-205). The deep carinated bowls are more typical of the Late Bronze Age, but they begin to appear in MB II, e.g., in Hiazor Stratum XVII, Tel Qashish Stratum IXa and Bet She’an Stratum R-5 (see Bechar 2017:205, with further references).

Kraters.- Kraters are the third most common vessels at the site (N=41)(\mathrm{N}=41), comprising 17.6%17.6 \% of the pottery assemblage. They are classified into open necked kraters and closed kraters, the former more common. The open necked kraters have a high neck and usually ledged rims (Figs. 57:4, 5; 60:7) or rounded rims (Fig. 54:2), or they are large bowls (Fig. 57:6); the closed kraters usually have a rounded ledge rim (Fig. 53:3).

Closed kraters are characteristic of Middle Bronze Age assemblages and are uncommon in the Late Bronze Age. They appear from MB I (Ilan and Marcus 2019:13) and continue to MB II but are absent in MB III (Bonfil 2019:82), their presence, therefore pointing to an early date for the assemblage. The open high-necked krater with a ledge rim found in Niche 373 (Fig. 60:7) is characteristic of both MB II and the Late Bronze Age (Hiazor Type NK5a; Bechar 2017:215), whilst no high-necked kraters with ridged rims (Hiazor Type NK5b), typical of MB II-III and early LB I, were found.

Cooking Pots.- The cooking pots (N=38;16.3%(\mathrm{N}=38 ; 16.3 \% of the assemblage) are divided into two types. The handmade upright cooking pots (N=8)(\mathrm{N}=8) include one rim with an applied thumbimpressed decoration (Fig. 55:2), and mainly body sherds. These cooking pots, designated Hiazor Type UCP, were previously considered to date only to the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age (Maeir 2007:261), but they appear throughout the Middle Bronze Age (Bechar 2017:217).

The wheel-made cooking pots are globular, usually with simple rims (Figs. 53:4; 55:3, 4; 56:5;59:4;62:1)56: 5 ; 59: 4 ; 62: 1) or externally thickened rims (Figs. 55:5; 56:4; 58:2; 59:6); one cooking pot from Room 328 had a triangular rim (Fig. 59:5). Whilst cooking pots with triangular rims (Hiazor Type CP3a; Bechar 2017:222) are the fossiles directeurs of the Late Bronze Age, they have also been noted in MB II assemblages at Yoqne’am Stratum XXII (Ben-Ami and Livneh 2005:276-278) and in MB II-III assemblages in Tel Qashish Strata IX-VIII (Bonfil 2003:285), as well as in the Lower City of Hiazor (Bechar, forthcoming: Fig. 3.25:7).

Fig. 53. Pottery from Room 393.

4 Fig. 53

A body sherd of a very large cooking pot is decorated with a characteristic Middle Bronze Age incised herringbone design (Fig. 62:7). Whilst decoration is not common on cooking pots, when it does appear, it is usually this herringbone design on large cooking pots, e.g., in Hażor Stratum 3 (Yadin et al. 1960: Pl. CX:15) and Stratum XV (Bechar 2017: Fig. 7.11:4) and Tel Qashish Stratum VIII (Ben-Tor and Bonfil 2003: Fig. 95:3).

Pithoi.- The pithoi are the largest family of vessels at the site (N=79;33.9%(\mathrm{N}=79 ; 33.9 \% of the assemblage). 7{ }^{7} The several pithoi bases found in situ included both pointed bases (Figs. 56:11; 57:25), characteristic of the Middle Bronze Age (Bechar 2017:222), and small flat bases (Figs. 54:6; 57:26), characteristic of the Late Bronze Age. The pithoi mostly have out-turned high necks characteristic of MB III (Bonfil 2019:85), whilst some have short necks (Figs. 56:9; 58:5; 60:13), characteristic of MB II (Bonfil 2019:85). The pithoi are divided into two main types based on the rim forms. Type A usually has an out-folded rim and a ridge in the middle of the neck, sometimes known as ‘collared pithoi’ but distinct from the ‘classic’ Iron Age I collared-rim pithoi (Ben-Ami and Livneh 2005:285). These pithoi usually have a thickened rim (Figs. 53:6, 7; 54:3-5; 55:6, 8; 56:8, 9; 57:7, 9-19, 21−24;58:3−9;59:7,8;60:8−11,13;62:5,621-24 ; 58: 3-9 ; 59: 7,8 ; 60: 8-11,13 ; 62: 5,6 ). One pithos (Fig. 57:18) has a ridged rim characteristic of MB II-III kraters, similar pithoi also appearing in Yoqne’am Strata XXIVXIX (Ben-Ami and Livneh 2005:282-284, Type P 1a3). Pithoi are not common in Middle Bronze Age contexts at Hażor, and Type A pithoi are very rare (Bechar 2017:223).

Type B pithoi have simple thickened rims and high necks, and they are less common in the assemblage (Figs. 53:5; 55:7; 56:6, 7; 57:8, 20; 60:12; 62:2-4 ). A pithos with a ridged

[1]

1. 7{ }^{7} It is noteworthy that whilst several pithoi bases were uncovered in situ at the site, no complete pithoi could be restored. ↩︎

Fig. 54. Pottery from Room 399.

rim (Fig. 55:7) is similar to LB II pithoi found at Haẓor Strata XIV-XIII (Hazor Type P2; Bechar 2017:223), and Strata 1b-1a in the Lower City (Bechar, forthcoming). Pithoi with thickened rims are known at Tel Qashish, where they have short necks (Bonfil 2003:293, Fig. 124, Type P II) and at Yoqne’am, where it is not clear whether the necks are high or short (Ben-Ami and Livneh 2005:282-283, 286, Type P V).

Several decorated body sherds (e.g., Figs. 53:9, 10; 62:8) most probably belong to pithoi; this decoration is noteworthy as it is not known from Haẓor in the Middle or Late Bronze Ages.

Fig. 55. Pottery from Room 363.

Fig. 56. Pottery from Room 349.

4 Fig. 56

Fig. 57

Fig. 57. Pottery from Room 342.

Fig. 57. (cont.).

Fig. 58. Pottery from Room 397.

Fig. 59. Pottery from Room 328.

Fig. 60. Pottery from Room 381.

A petrographic analysis conducted on the Ramat Razim pithoi deduced that the pithoi were probably not manufactured at the site (see below).

Storage Jars.- There are relatively few storage jars in the assemblage (N=20;8.6%)(\mathrm{N}=20 ; 8.6 \%). Some jars have a collared rim, similar to the rims of the Group A pithoi (Figs. 55:10, 11;

4 Fig. 60

Fig. 61. Storage jar containing infant burial T392 (Reg. No. 3137/5) in Niche 373.

60:14), whilst others have a folded rounded rim (e.g., Figs. 55:9; 56:10; 58:10; 59:9, 10; 60:15,1660: 15,16 ). The only almost complete storage jar was found in Niche 373 and contained an infant burial (T392) (Fig. 61).

Fig. 62. Pottery from Room 360.

4 Fig. 62

The paucity of storage jars compared to pithoi at Ramat Razim stands in contrast to their relative proportions in assemblages at other Middle and Late Bronze Age sites in the region, such as Haẓor, Yoqne’am, Tel Qashish and Bet She’an, where storage jars are usually more prevalent (see Discussion, below).

Jugs and Juglets. - The smallest component in the assemblage are the jugs ( N=5;2.1%\mathrm{N}=5 ; 2.1 \% ), consisting of five rims (Figs. 59:11-13; 60:17), one handle (Fig. 55:12) and one base (Fig. 57:27), and a single juglet neck ( N=1;0.4%\mathrm{N}=1 ; 0.4 \%; Fig. 59:14). Consequently, no general comments are proffered regarding these vessels.

Decorated Sherds.- Thirty-three decorated body sherds were found, most applied and incised (e.g., Figs. 53:8; 59:15), one sherd bearing an impressed hatchwork decoration, probably impressed with some kind of cylinder (Fig. 53:10). A pithos has an applied impressed band at the base of the neck (Fig. 57:10). A cooking pot base sherd has an incised wavy decoration (Fig. 55:13), rare in Middle and Late Bronze Age assemblages. The absence of slipped sherds may be due to the poor state of preservation of the sherds.

Chronological and Functional Aspects of the Pottery

The ceramic assemblage of Ramat Razim bears strong similarities to MB II-III published assemblages in the northern part of the country, such as Tel Qashish Strata IX-VIII, dated to MB II-III, Yoqne’am Stratum XXI, dated to MB III, and especially Haẓor Lower City Stratum 3 of the MB II-III (Bechar, forthcoming). Features specifically supporting the attribution of the assemblage to MB III rather than to MB II, include the many pithoi in the assemblage (Bonfil 2019:85), the predominance of high-necked pithoi, and the similarity of some of the pithoi to Late Bronze Age pithoi from Haẓor.

The assemblage comprises some features that could support an LB I attribution for the assemblage, but these features can also be understood within a late MB II-III context: (1) The parallels from Hažor to the Type B pithoi with simple thickened rims date to the Late Bronze Age (Hazor Strata XIV-XIII on the acropolis, and 1b-1a in the Lower City), whereas these pithoi are characteristic of both Middle and Late Bronze Age levels at other sites; (2) The sherds of the cooking pots with triangular rims (Hazor CP3a), support the understanding that they appear already in MB II in the Upper Jordan Valley (Bonfil 2019:84), as they cannot be considered late intrusions at this single-stratum settlement; (3) The deep carinated bowls characteristic of the Late Bronze Age (Hazor Type CB4), and the absence of characteristic Middle Bronze Age vessels, such as ridged-ledge rim kraters and high-necked closed carinated bowls, may be due to the rural nature of the site rather than a chronological indicator; (4) The absence of red-slipped and burnished sherds that are common in the earlier part of the Middle Bronze Age, may also support the later date of the assemblage, within the Middle Bronze Age, although it may be due to post-depositional processes at the site.

The compilation of the evidence leads to dating the pottery assemblage to the later part of the Middle Bronze Age (MB II-III), or possibly to the transitional period between the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, about the seventeenth to the end of the sixteenth centuries BCE.

The ceramic assemblage is a domestic assemblage, mainly attesting to food-processing activities, including the storage, cooking and consumption of food. The paucity of serving vessels, such as jugs and juglets, further supports the utilitarian nature of the site. The absence of specific ceramic cultic objects, such as stands, chalices and figurines (apart from the miniature bowl in Fig. 58:1), suggests that the main function of the site was not of a cultic nature.

The assemblage is not a typical household one. In most Middle and Late Bronze Age urban assemblages in the northern part of the Southern Levant, bowls are the most common vessels, and in many of these sites, large storage vessels, namely storage jars and pithoi, are the second most common vessels (see Bechar 2022: Tables 4.1-4.21, including Middle and Late Bronze Age assemblages from Hažor, Tel Qashish, Yoqne‘am and Bet She’an). At Ramat Razim, large storage vessels constitute more than double the number of bowls. The large storage vessels are mainly pithoi ( 34%34 \% ), with far fewer storage jars. In most Middle Bronze Age assemblages, storage jars are much more common than pithoi, although a similar phenomenon of pithoi outnumbering storage jars was noted in a few other MB II-III assemblages, such as Bet She’an Stratum R-3 (Bechar 2022: Graph 4.63) and Tel Qashish Strata IX and VIII (Bechar 2022: Graph 4.51). It should also be noted that the petrographic analysis showed that the pithoi were not produced at the site (see below), but transported to it, mostly from the adjacent mountainous eastern Upper Galilee.

The ceramic assemblage predominantly signifies the engagement in food-processing activities at the site, encompassing the storage, preparation and consumption of food. The abundance of stationary pithoi installations and fragments of various vessels, juxtaposed

with the scarcity of fully restorable vessels, strongly suggests that the site was vacated with no plans for reoccupation.

Petrographic Analysis of the Pithoi

Fifteen pithoi from Ramat Razim were analyzed petrographically to identify the raw materials used for their production, determine the geological sources, and assess the possible regions of manufacture. The raw materials and provenance of the Ramat Razim pithoi were compared to pithoi analyzed from Ḥorbat Nesibba (Eisenberg 1981; 2006), a Middle Bronze Age rural site located in Moshav Kerem Ben Zimra, c. 10 km northwest of Ramat Razim and c. 9 km west of Tel Haẓor (see Fig. 1). 8{ }^{8} Understanding the distribution and trade of these pithoi may help reconstruct cultural and economic aspects of the Middle Bronze Age in the eastern Upper Galilee, constituting an indicator of social hierarchy and economic organization. The provenance attributed to the raw materials is based on geological and soil maps and literature, and previous petrographic studies of pottery from this region (e.g., Shenhav 1964; Levite 2001; Sneh and Weinberger 2006; Zuckerman, Ziv-Esudri and CohenWeinberger 2009). Previously conducted petrographic studies of ceramics from Haẓor (e.g., Shenhav 1964; Goren 2000; Goren, Finkelstein and Na’aman 2004; Zuckerman, Ziv-Esudri and Cohen-Weinberger 2009), indicated that they were made of a combination of basaltic and calcareous rock fragments, supporting the source of their raw materials at and around Tel Haẓor. Hand samples of clay and wadi sand collected and petrographically analyzed from Tel Haẓor and the surrounding area indicated the same composition and combination of rocks (Goren, Finkelstein and Na’aman 2004). However, no in-depth petrographic study of Middle Bronze pithoi from Haẓor has been carried out to date.

Geological Setting

The local lithology of Ramat Razim is characterized by limestone, chalk and chert of the Eocene Timrat and Bar Kokhba formations. The Pliocene ‘Cover Basalt’ is exposed east of the site in the Korazim Plateau (Sneh and Weinberger 2006), and marl, clay and chalk of the Maastricht Ghareb and Paleocene Taqiye formations crop out west of the site; the extent of the marl units is uncertain since these two formations were mapped together. Further west, chalk and marl of the Senonian Aḥihud Member (including Kabri Marl) of the Menuḥa Formation is exposed (Levitte and Sneh 2013). The local lithology of Tel Haẓor includes Pliocene to Pleistocene conglomerate and interbedded chalk units (Sneh and Weinberger 2006; Weinberger, Sneh and Shalev 2008). In the immediate surroundings of the tell there

[1]

1. 8{ }^{8} The excavations in Ḥorbat Nesibba were carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority in 2006 (Permit No. A-4823) under the direction of Emmanuel Eisenberg and Alon de Groot. The petrography of the pithoi from these excavations was conducted by Anat Cohen-Weinberger, who is grateful to the excavators for permission to publish some of the unpublished results. ↩︎

is a series of Senonian to Eocene carbonates with the sporadic appearance of chert beds, Turonian dolomite and limestone and Pliocene to Quaternary alkali-olivine basalt series (Sneh, Bartov and Rosensaft 1998; Sneh and Weinberger 2006). Late Pliocene basalts, called ‘Dalton basalts,’ are exposed in the 'Alma and Dalton Plateaus in nine volcanic eruption centers scattered in the eastern Galilee (Levitte and Ilani 2015), and the basalt fragments were transported to the foot of the Hazor mound as alluvial material, and they are also exposed in the northwestern edge of Tel Hazor (Sneh and Weinberger 2006). Basalts from 'Alma and Dalton Plateaus were petrographically analyzed by Oppenheim and described as a fine-grained magmatic rock, mineralogically close to essexite in composition, but of unusual texture (Amiran, Nir and Schick 1959). These basalts were also analyzed by Shenhav (1964), who characterized them as porphyritic alkali-olivine basalts and tholeiitic basalts. Levitte and Ilani (2015) characterized the composition of the volcanic rocks in the Dalton area as basenit that includes olivine basalts and pyroclastic rocks. Horbat Nesibba is located on limestone and chalky rocks of the Eocene Timrat formation. Limestones of the Eocene Bar Kokhba formation are exposed in the immediate vicinity of the site, as well as marl, chalk and limestone of the Ghareb and Taqiye formations. Senonian chalk of the Menuḥa formation is exposed southeast and southwest of the site, as well as limestone of the Turonian Bina formation. Late Pliocene basalts are exposed south of the site in the Dalton Plateau and northeast of the site, in the 'Alma Plateau (Sneh and Weinberger 2006; Levitte and Sneh 2013). Several soil types appear in the vicinity of these sites including terra rossa, rendzina, Mediterranean brown forest soils, alluvial soils and brown basaltic soils (Ravikovitch 1969).

Results

The 15 pithoi from Ramat Razim were analyzed and compared to five unpublished pithoi from Horbat Nesibba (Table 3). Three petrographic groups were identified according to their matrix and non-plastic components. The petrographic groups of the analyzed vessels are noted in the figure description tables (designated PG A, PG B, PG C).

Group A. Four pithoi from Ramat Razim belong to this petrographic group (Table 3:14); two pithoi from Horbat Nesibba also belong to this group. This group is characterized by optically active matrix with ∼3%\sim 3 \% silt-sized quartz grains and abundant discrete foraminifera, which are rarely silicified, and a few echinoids. The sand-sized non-plastic components comprise 20%20 \% of the paste and contain coarse fragments ( <2 mm<2 \mathrm{~mm} ) of quartz geode, chert, chalcedony chert, chalk, quartzolite, igneous rock fragments, and elongated voids in the matrix that indicate straw that disintegrated in the firing process (Figs. 63, 64). The igneous rock fragments are medium-grained with ophitic texture. The plagioclase laths ophitically enclose pyroxenes. Iddingsite minerals which are pseudomorph after olivine and pyroxenes also appeared in the rock (Figs. 65, 66); these rock fragments are basalt or dolerite. The matrix of Group A may derive from a marl unit, or a soil developed from chalk or marl. The foraminifera include Upper Cretaceous genii, such as Hedbergela sp., and the

Table 3. Petrographic Groups of Analyzed Pithoi

silicified foraminifera are typical of Eocene rocks (Binyamin Buchbinder, pers. comm.), which widely appear in the vicinity of the studied sites. The mixed Upper Cretaceous and most likely Paleogene foraminifera in some samples may indicate the use of soils rather than marl. Soils rich in foraminifera developed in the vicinity of the site on chalks such as those of the Senonian Menuḥa, Maastricht Ghareb and the Eocene lower Timrat formations (Levitte and Sneh 2013). Previous petrographic analyses of the Dalton basalts mentioned unique textures and basanite compositions (Amiran, Nir and Schick 1959; Shenhav 1964; Ilani and Levitte 2015). 9{ }^{9} The medium-grained rock fragments in this group may originate in an intrusive rock. Some intrusive bodies are known in the area of Dalton (Levitte and Ilani 2015). The Albian Kamon and Cenomanian Deir Hana formations are characterized by dolomite, quartzolite, chert and quartz geodes and these rocks are common as non-plastic components in pottery produced in Galilee (e.g., Cohen-Weinberger and Goren 1996). The combination of all these sedimentary and igneous rocks is expected to be found in wadis such as Naḥal Dishon c. 10 km north of Ramat Razim, that drains the Cenomanian rock areas in its upper part and the Dalton volcanic rocks.

[1]

1. 9{ }^{9} Basanites are usually fine-grained in contrast to the rock fragments in Group A. However, chemical analyses may indicate if the rock fragments in Group A are basanite and as a result may contribute to the provenance identification of the vessels of this group. ↩︎

Fig. 63. Petrographic Group A: Quartz geode and chert fragments embedded in matrix (B3233/4), XPL.

Fig. 64. Petrographic Group A: Quartz geode embedded in matrix (B3096/4), XPL.

Fig. 65. Petrographic Group A: Igneous rock fragment (B3233/4), XPL.

Fig. 66. Petrographic Group A: Igneous rock fragment embedded in matrix (B3096/4), XPL.

Group B. Nine pithoi from Ramat Razim belong to this group (Table 3:5-13); a single pithos from Ḥorbat Nesibba may possibly also belong to this group. This group is characterized by optically active matrix rich in silt-sized calcareous components, secondary calcite in fine veins and rounded ferruginous nodules. The sand-sized non-plastic components comprise 20%20 \% of the paste and contain medium grained basalt with intergranular and ophitic textures (Fig. 67) and alterations to iddingsite, and also rounded decomposed calcareous rock fragments. Fine ( <300μ m<300 \mu \mathrm{~m} ) rounded quartz grains appear in all samples in various quantities (Fig. 68). The veins in the matrix are probably decarbonated foraminifera and these were poorly preserved in one of the samples (Table 3:11). The combination of sedimentary and volcanic rocks in this group indicates the possibility of production in northeastern Galilee, however not in the immediate vicinity of Ramat Razim site. The appearances of quartz grains in the vessels of this group are infrequent but consistent, therefore, indicating a natural component of in the matrix or the non-plastic assemblage. Such fine quartz grains are

Fig. 67. Petrographic Group B: Coarse basalt fragment and abundant fine calcareous nonplastic components embedded in matrix (B3061), XPL.

Fig. 68. Petrographic Group B: Fine quartz grains, calcareous components and secondary calcite embedded in matrix (B3234/5), XPL.

Fig. 69. Petrographic Group C: Weathered basalt embedded in matrix (B3093/4), XPL.

Fig. 70. Petrographic Group C: Weathered basalt embedded in matrix (B3093/4), XPL.
expected to appear in the Jordan River, and therefore, these pithoi were probably produced in a site located east of the mountainous region of Galilee.

Group C. Two pithoi from Ramat Razim belong to this group (Table 3:14, 15). This group is characterized by optically active matrix and is rich in silt-sized calcareous components, fine veins filled with secondary calcite, and rounded ferruginous nodules. The non-plastic components comprise 15−20%15-20 \% of the paste and contain mainly rounded decarbonated calcareous rock fragments ( <1 mm<1 \mathrm{~mm} ) and highly weathered fine-grained basalt with sparry calcite and alterations to iddingsite (Figs. 69, 70). These calcite crystals could be derived from an area with calcite veins associated with or next to basalts (e.g., Oppenheim 1959; 1962). A few fine ( <300μ m<300 \mu \mathrm{~m} ) rounded quartz grains also appear. The composition of this group indicates a possible source in northeastern Galilee, the presence of basalt precluding its identification at the Ramat Razim site.

Discussion

The pithoi from Ramat Razim, divided into three petrographic groups, were produced in various places, most probably in eastern Galilee but not locally at the site. The combination of sedimentary and volcanic rocks, such as in petrographic Groups A-C, is most common in ceramic assemblages from eastern Galilee, the Jezreel Valley and the Jordan Valley (e.g., Cohen-Weinberger 1997; Arie, Buzaglo and Goren 2006; Shalem et al. 2019), the absence of volcanic rocks in the immediate vicinity of Ramat Razim precluding the possibility that the pithoi were manufactured at the site. Previous petrographic studies of basalt and ceramic vessels with basalt inclusions encountered difficulties in identifying exact provenances (e.g., Amiran and Porat 1984; Shalem et el. 2019), as various basalt textures appear in the same geographic area, and the same textures and mineralogical compositions appear in several geographic localities (Oppenheim 1964; Shaliv 1991; Weinstein et al. 2006). Despite these limitations, the various basalt textures and the other inclusions in the petrographic groups may hint to different provenances or workshops. The three petrographic groups suggest that the pithoi of Ramat Razim were manufactured in different places. Several petrographic groups were also identified for the pithoi from Ḥorbat Nesibba, whose location close to basalt exposures may indicate local production on the site. The Ramat Razim Group A pithoi may have the same provenance as some of the Ḥorbat Nesibba pithoi, but Groups B and C differed from the other Ḥorbat Nesibba petrographic groups.

Further research, incorporating petrographic analysis of the pithoi unearthed at Tel Haẓor, possesses the potential to significantly advance our understanding of the distribution and trade networks involving these vessels, consequently contributing to the comprehensive reconstruction of crucial cultural and economic elements defining the Middle Bronze Age in the eastern Upper Galilee region. These pithoi may serve as invaluable indicators of both social hierarchy and economic organization. Notably, the probable origin of the raw materials of Group A pithoi in Naḥal Dishon, in close proximity to Tel Haẓor, along with the presence of Jordan River sand in Group C, raises the possibility of their localized production within the Tel Haẓor vicinity. The prolonged use of the Ramat Razim pithoi over several decades or even a century, may reflect a long period of production, the secondary use of some pithoi as stands further reflecting their long use. The pithoi from Tel Haẓor that were found in different stratigraphical contexts will allow us to examine these aspects along a timeline. However, it is imperative to approach this hypothesis with caution, recognizing that additional research is essential to substantiate these preliminary findings.

The Ground Stone Tool AsSemblage

The ground stone tool assemblage found in the building includes lower and upper grinding stones, pounders, a perforated item, a couple of flaked discs and various other items and fragments ( N=48\mathrm{N}=48; Tables 4, 5). The tools are made of vesicular and compact basalt, limestone, flint, quartz geodes and pumice; 14 were found intact, the others broken.

The attribute analysis of the tools included tool morphology, preservation, raw material, measurements (length, width, thickness, weight) and production marks. The typological classification generally follows Wright (1992), Milevski (1998) and Rosenberg and Tzin (2021). The distribution of the tools in the building is also presented (Table 6). 10{ }^{10}

Grinding Stones

The grinding stones (N=27)(\mathrm{N}=27) generally identified as food-related tools, 11{ }^{11} comprise lower and upper stones; six fragments were too small to classify. The larger, lower grinding stones were usually fixed in installations (Mazar, Rotem and Weinblatt 2012: Fig. 2.4, Photograph 2.16) or on floors, and the smaller portable upper grinding stones were moved mechanically over them.

Lower Grinding Stones (Fig. 71:1, 2).— The lower grinding stones, typed saddle-shaped querns ( N=6\mathrm{N}=6; all broken), are made of vesicular basalt and their active surfaces are concaved and highly smoothed from use. One fragment (Fig. 71:l; width of preserved active surface 35 cm ) has an offset angled edge differentiating the margins from the grinding surface, a common feature in MB II ground stone tool assemblages (see Ben-Ami 2005: Fig. V.6:1; Yahalom-Mack and Panitz-Cohen 2009: Fig. 14.5:24; Rosenberg and Tzin 2021: Fig. I).

Table 4. Ground Stone Tool Types and Raw Materials

[1]

1. 10{ }^{10} Three of the 48 tools retrieved were not found in the rooms.
   11{ }^{11} For an alternative view, see Adams 1988; 1989. ↩︎

Table 5. Ground Stone Tool Catalogue, According to Room

Table 5. (cont.)

Table 6. Distribution of Ground Stone Tools in Rooms

The other illustrated lower stone (Fig. 71:2; width 30 cm ) has a flattened and polished active surface, and an edge without an angle that may be the opposite edge of the tool. Another saddle quern is a fragment of the middle part of the tool, featuring polished marks on the side. All the saddle quern fragments featured concaved and smoothed active surfaces, as well as small flake scar marks on the stone circumference and large flake scars on the base, probably for better fixing the lower stone in the floor or installation.

Upper Grinding Stones (Fig. 71:3-5).— The upper grinding stones (N=16)(\mathrm{N}=16) comprise 11 loaf-shaped tools, and five smaller one-hand abraders. The loaf-shaped tools are made of vesicular basalt and feature a slightly concaved, active surface with a plano-convex crosssection whose thickness varies, probably due to the intensity of usage. Two loaf-shaped stones are intact, one found in Room 399(39×19 cm)399(39 \times 19 \mathrm{~cm}), the other in Room 349(37×17349(37 \times 17 cm ; Fig. 71:3, 4); another nearly intact tool from Room 399(32×15 cm)399(32 \times 15 \mathrm{~cm}) also features a concave, highly smoothed active surface. The loaf-shaped tool fragments also feature a

Fig. 71. Lower and upper grinding stones.

preserved edge and middle fragments with highly smoothed active surfaces, whilst their opposite surface is smoothed, mostly at the middle; on some of the edges, small, polished areas are seen on the opposite side, 3−6 cm3-6 \mathrm{~cm} from the edge, these smoothed and polished areas probably being the holding position of the tools (see Rosenberg and Tzin 2021). The grinding stones were dispersed in several rooms (Rooms 342, 349, 363, 397, 399, 400) on the upper and middle terraces.

The one-handed abraders (N=5)(\mathrm{N}=5) are mostly amorphous-shaped pebbles with irregular cross-sections; two are intact ( 7−12 cm7-12 \mathrm{~cm} long; Room 399:2; Room 400:2; Room 342:1). Four tools are made of compact basalt and one of limestone, the former featuring a single flattened and smoothed active surface, whilst the latter (Fig. 71:5) has two opposite polished active surfaces, one edge featuring battering marks, possibly from secondary use as a pounder.

Pounders (Fig. 72:1-3).—The pounders (N=4)(\mathrm{N}=4) comprise two pestles and two hammerstones. The pestles found in Rooms 399 and 360 are intact dome-shaped, 12{ }^{12} made of compact basalt, both with highly smoothed bodies and two opposite active surfaces (Fig. 72:1, 2). The main surface is polished and features rotation marks, indicating that it was used to grind and mash materials by rotation, whilst the secondary active surface is smoothed and features battering marks, indicating that it was used to crush materials. One tool is shorter than the other, possibly reflecting more extensive use. An intact hammerstone made of compact basalt (Fig. 72:3) features multiple battering marks and flake scars on most of the tool, indicating extensive usage; one surface is flattened and smoothed with a few rotation marks, possibly from secondary use as a pestle.

Perforated Item (not illustrated).- An intact tool from Room 399, made of a limestone pebble with a natural perforated small concave hole smoothed around both sides, may be an ad hoc tool.

Flaked Discs (not illustrated).— Two intact flaked discs were made of compact basalt. The larger item (diam. 16 cm ) is a highly smoothed oval pebble with a convex-convex crosssection, exhibiting large flake scars on both sides; the smaller one (diam. 7 cm ) is a highly smoothed disc, with a bi-plano cross-section that may have been grinded to erase the flake scars. Flaked discs are common in early assemblages, mainly in the Late Pottery Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic periods, where they may have various possible uses, including as lids, 13{ }^{13} weights or doorstoppers (Rosenberg et al. 2008:149).

[1]

1. 12{ }^{12} Also designated “conical pestles” (see Rosenberg and Tzin 2021:101-102, Fig. 4:3).
   13{ }^{13} Flaked discs are used as lids for storage vessels during the Intermediate Bronze Age (see Covello-Paran 2020:384). ↩︎

Fig. 72. Grinding stone, pestles, hammerstone and varia.

Varia (Figs. 72:4-6; 73).- Three quartz geodes are intact natural items without signs of working (Fig. 72:4, 5; see Eilon et al. 1988), one in Room 397 and the other found near a pumice item in Room 399. Several geodes have been noted in contemporary stone tool assemblages from some sites in the Jezreel Valley and Lower Galilee. 14{ }^{14} Four items of compact basalt and limestone were not classified.

[1]

1. 14{ }^{14} This is based on Tzin’s observations whilst processing the ground stone assemblages from Ḥorbat Sirim and 'En Shihor. ↩︎

Fig. 73. Broken roof-roller made of compact basalt (L401, B3263).

A nearly intact, smoothed limestone item found in Room 400 is roughly shaped as a hand-held, long cylindrical implement (Fig. 72:6); another limestone fragment may also have been part of a small cylindrical item.

A compact basalt, well-finished pillar-shaped item (Fig. 73; diam. 17 cm , extant length 35 cm ) has a slightly flattened and smoothed edge with some battering marks. The item resembles a roof-roller, a well-known implement in Iron Age urban sites; 15{ }^{15} to date, there is no clear evidence for roof-rollers in Middle Bronze Age contexts in the Southern Levant. The implement lacks the typical dent on the edge, and it could possibly be an early prototype of a roof roller.

A few additional small fragments of vesicular and compact basalt with some worked areas were found, as well as an amorphous pumice with no worked areas.

Nature and Distribution of the Ground Stone Assemblage

The ground stone tool assemblage at Ramat Razim is dominated by basalt as the main raw material, with small quantities of limestone, geodes, flint and pumice. While basalt is not natural to the site, close basalt outcrops are known, for example at Tel Ya‘af, c. 3.5 km to the northeast, the area that supplied raw material for the basalt vessel workshop at Haẓor (Ebeling and Rosenberg 2015).

The distribution of the ground stone tools in the rooms reflected some organization of the grinding activities at the site. Room 399 contained an oven (L450) and an in situ pithos, and 11 tools (Table 6). Loaf-shaped tools and hand-size abraders, as well as a perforated item, a natural geode and a pumice tool, were all found clustered here next to W318, suggesting

[1]

1. 15{ }^{15} See, for example, at Haẓor (Ebeling 2012: Fig. 17.8:7), Timna-Tel Baṭash (Cohen-Weinberger 2001: Pl. 52:13), Tel Miqne-‘Eqron (Milevski 2019: Fig. 13:5, 6) and Be’er Sheva’ (Paz 2016: Fig. 26.7:3). ↩︎

that these tools may have been stored on a bench or a shelf that collapsed. Although no lower grinding stones were found here, this room was probably a courtyard, in which we can identify communal grinding activity. Adjacent Room 363 contained two lower and four upper grinding stones, a flaked disc and a geode, near an in situ pithos, suggesting a connection between the grinding activity and the contents of the pithos. In Room 400, a loaf-shaped grinding stone, a possible roof roller and a small limestone implement were found under and in the stone collapse. Room 349 contained an oven (L365), as well as an intact loaf-shaped tool, and a lower grinding stone fragment near the oven base, whilst adjacent Room 328, contained grinding stone fragments, concentrated near its northeastern corner. Room 360 contained two lower grinding slabs, a grinding stone fragment and a pestle, indicating significant grinding activity. Ground stone tools were also found in Rooms 342 and 397. Fragments of grinding stones and other tools retrieved in the stone collapse, possibly indicate that broken tool fragments were used in walls as small filling stones (see Rosenberg 2013).

Grinding stones are the main tool type represented (56%). The saddle-shaped lower grinding stones with angled edges noted here are the common tool type in assemblages from other sites dating from the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. The loaf-shaped upper grinding stones are similar in size, morphology and production to the same tool type known from the excavations near Tel Bet She’an (Rosenberg and Tzin 2021: Fig. 2). Slightly smaller tools of this type are common in MB II-Iron Age periods in the Southern Levant, for example, at Yoqne‘am (Ben-Ami 2005: Fig. V.6:4, 5), el-Aḥwat (Ben-Yosef and Bar 2012: Fig. 19.2:8, 9), Tel Yin’am (Liebowitz 2008: Fig. 12.2) and Tel Bet She’an (Yahalom-Mack 2007: Fig. 11.7:1). Thus, the pairs of saddle-shaped lower grinding stones and the elongated loafshaped upper grinding stones appear in urban and rural settlements dating from MB II to Iron II. This defined time span makes a typo-chronological case for identifying these tools as local traditional Southern Levantine grinding stones.

Metal Artifacts

Middle Bronze Age Artifacts (Fig. 74)
Two artifacts retrieved from Unit I-a toggle pin and a needle-are dated to the Middle Bronze Age. The connection of both artifacts with textiles is interesting in light of the specialized sheep production observed at the site (see Marom, below).

The long bronze needle (Fig. 74:1; 16.6 cm long), found on the floor in Room 328, has a flat eye and a shaft with a circular section; the needle was probably used for sewing textiles. Although uncommon, similar contemporary bronze needles were found at Megiddo in Strata XIV-X (Loud 1948: Pl. 186:3-6).

The intact long bronze toggle pin (Fig. 74:2; 12.5 cm long), found in Room 361, has a nail head and a ribbed surface adorning the upper part of the pin around the passing hole or

eye; the pin may have come from an unpreserved intramural burial. Similar pins were found in a contemporary Middle Bronze Age tomb near Zefat (Damati and Stepanksy 1996: Fig. 19:6, 7).

Post-Abandonment Artifacts (Fig. 75)
Three artifacts found on the surface among the collapsed stones above Room 360 and W315, are attributed to late antiquity. An intact awl (Fig. 75:1) and a broken nail (Fig. 75:2) were made of iron. An intact brass bracelet (Fig. 75:3) decorated with a combination of incised lines and three protrusions resembling horned structures, is the Haydari type bracelet worn by rural women in Late Ottoman Palestine (Hasson 1987:29). The retrieval of the three items within a one-square-meter area suggests that they may have been deposited at the same time. Ottoman-period activity was documented in the Ramat Razim survey (see Stepansky and Bron 2011).

Fig. 74. Middle Bronze Age metal artifacts.

Fig. 75. Post-abandonment metal artifacts.

XRF Analysis of the Metal Objects

Sariel Shalev 16{ }^{16}
The chemical composition of the five metal objects was analyzed using a non-destructive X Ray Florescence (XRF) chemical compositional analysis conducted on the surface of the objects after being cleaned and conserved in the IAA conservation lab (Table 7). For the qualitative and quantitative analyses, a Thermo Scientific NITON XL3t GOLD+, hand-held XRF analyser was used.

Needle (Fig. 74:1; Table 7:1, 2).— The needle is made of good quality tin bronze. The surface that contains some corrosion, shows copper (Cu)(\mathrm{Cu}) alloyed with c. 15Wt%tin⁡(Sn)15 \mathrm{Wt} \% \operatorname{tin}(\mathrm{Sn}) and 0.8Wt%0.8 \mathrm{Wt} \% arsenic (As), as well as impurities of lead (Pb)(\mathrm{Pb}), antimony (Sb)(\mathrm{Sb}) and iron (Fe)(\mathrm{Fe}). This composition could fit well with the MB II dating context. The measured quantities of alloying and trace elements are slightly affected and, in most cases, could be slightly enriched by remains of surface corrosion.

Toggle Pin (Fig. 74:2; Table 7:3, 4).— This object is made of arsenical (As) copper (Cu) of up to 1.5Wt%As1.5 \mathrm{Wt} \% \mathrm{As} and relatively low tin of up to 2Wt%Sn2 \mathrm{Wt} \% \mathrm{Sn} and close to 0.5 Wt of lead (Pb)(\mathrm{Pb}). This kind of ‘mixed’ composition, as well as its typology, resemble the slightly earlier MB I-II toggle pins from Kabri Tomb 498 (for a detailed typology, metallurgy and

[1]

1. 16{ }^{16} The analyses were conducted in November 2021 by Sariel Shalev, independent researcher, in the Analytical Lab, 34 Yehuda Ha-Yamit St., Tel Aviv. ↩︎

Table 7. XRF Main Analytical Results of Metal Artifacts (in Wt%) of Point Analyses ( 8 mm beam size) 1{ }^{1}

1{ }^{1} n.d. == not detected.
chronology, including references to finds in other sites, see Shalev 2002:313-316). This engraved toggle pin belongs to MB II typologically and metallurgically. It may have come from an unidentified burial, or it was kept as an heirloom. As in the other analyses here, the measured quantities of alloying and trace elements are slightly affected and, in most cases, could be slightly enriched by remains of surface corrosion.

Awl and Nail (Fig. 75:1, 2; Table 7:5, 6).— These artifacts could typologically belong to any period, their metal analyses showing that they were made of iron and therefore do not predate the Iron Age.

Bracelet (Fig. 75:3; Table 7:7, 8).— The metal analytical results show a clear composition of solid brass containing copper alloyed with zinc ( 12−15Wt%Zn12-15 \mathrm{Wt} \% \mathrm{Zn} ) with some lead (4$5 \mathrm{Wt} % \mathrm{~Pb}$ ) and tin ( 3Wt%Sn3 \mathrm{Wt} \% \mathrm{Sn} ). The technology required for adding such quantities of zinc and create brass metal by the cementation process was unknown before the second century BCE (for the history of brass and for a summary of the technical details and references, see Craddock 1998), the bracelet thus postdating the Middle Bronze Age site by over a millennium. According to its style and overall composition, it could date to Medieval or late Islamic periods.

Fig. 76. Scarab.

Scarab (Fig. 76)

Noa Ranzer 17{ }^{17}
A scarab (Reg. No. 3129) was found in Room 360, in proximity of the toggle pin (Room 361 ), the juxtaposition possibly related to its function.

Type: B3/E4/0 (according to Tufnell’s typology; Tufnell 1984:31-38).
Material: Steatite. 18{ }^{18}
Preservation: Broken in front part of the head, around the perforation hole; worn.
Engraving Technique: Linear engraving with hatching.
Measuremens: 18 mm (length), 12 mm (width), 8 mm (height).
Base Description: The base of the scarab has a vertical layout with a single frame line, divided into two registers by a double horizontal line. In the upper register, there is a schematic sun disc with rays, or a stylized podium; in the lower register, to the right, a

[1]

1. 17{ }^{17} Jacob M. Alkow Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Cultures, Tel Aviv University; Religionswissenschaftliches Seminar, Universität Zürich.
   18{ }^{18} Microscopic examination by Anastasia Shapiro. ↩︎

uraeus, looking right (I12 Gardiner’s signs list; Gardiner 1957:476), and to the left, a single papyrus stem (Keel 1995:163).

This layout can be assigned to Design Class 3A3 of Ben-Tor’s Early Palestinian Series group of scarabs (Ben-Tor 2007:126, Pl. 51). The division into virtual two or three registers was attested on other Middle Bronze Age local scarabs, many displaying similar signs: a stylized podium, as, for example, shown on a scarab from an MB II Tomb at Rishon LeZiyyon (Ben-Tor 2018:566, No. 21) or a rising sun above mountains, classified as N27 in Gardiner’s sign list, with examples from MB II tombs at Jericho (Keel 2017: Nos. 321, 333) and from MB II Stratum 3-a at Ḥazor (Keel 2013: No. 17). The specific rendering of the uraeus is attested on other locally produced Middle Bronze Age scarabs, for example, from an unknown context at Tell el-'Ajjul (Keel 1997: No. 986), and from an early MB II tomb at Tell Beit Mirsim (Keel 2010: No. 78). The single papyrus stem is known from 'Amman (see Keel 1995:163; Eggler and Keel 2006: No. 13).
Parallels: No exact parallel was found. The depiction of a schematic sun disc with rays appears on scarabs from an MB III tomb at Lakhish (Tufnell 1958:99, 115, 301, Pl. 32/33:78) and from an unstratified context at Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939:158, Pl. 69/71:71). For similar layouts see the abovementioned items, and items from the Middle Bronze Age cemetery at Rishon Le-Zyyion (Ben-Tor 2018:595, Fig. 10.27:92) and from Jericho (Keel 2017: Nos. 204, 236).
Date: The scarab is attributed to MB II-III based on the comparanda, and it is either contemporary or slightly earlier than its find context.

Flint AsSemblage (Fig. 77)
Polina Spivak 19{ }^{19}
A small lithic assemblage comprising 15 flint artifacts was collected from total sieving employed during the excavation. Two types of flint were recorded: fine homogenous gray flint with bright patina, and dark brown flint with occasional marvel-like incisions with random signs of fire damage. Cortex is present on implements made of both types of raw material, possibly indicative of local manufacture or even indigenousness of the flint.

The composition of the assemblage is poor (Table 8). The debitage is clearly dominated by flakes, whilst blades were generally used for tools (Fig. 77:1-5). The core trimming elements (CTE) are coarse and non-related to a specific core type side sections; a scraper was fixed on one of them (Fig. 77:6). Although scarce, the CTEs together with the flakes indicate in situ production of ad hoc tools at the site.

Five of the six processed blades were used as sickle blades that may be divided into two groups. The first group comprises two blades, which, although broken, clearly present similar dimensions and production technique, being long and narrow, and more delicate

[1]

1. 19{ }^{19} Israel Antiquities Authority. ↩︎

Fig. 77. Flint assemblage.

Table 8. The Flint Assemblage

than the second group, with triangular cross-section and varying degrees of lateral retouch. The two implements: a proximal fragment with an unmodified base (Fig. 77:1), and a proximal fragment with a truncated end (Fig. 77:2), demonstrate a single lustrous edge, the light polish found along a single working edge. One (Fig. 77:2) has a semi-abrupt retouch along the opposite lateral side clearly projected to facilitate hafting. An additional bilaterally retouched medial fragment presents no sickle shine.

The second group includes three complete implements (Fig. 77:3-5), each with two central scar ridges along their back, and trapezoid, or semi-trapezoid cross-sections; these are reminiscent of Canaanean blades, although they are distinct from the Canaanean technology as the ridges are not parallel. The sickles are wide and robust, suggesting a less standardized mode of manufacture, more resembling the geometric sickles of the second millennium BCE (Rosen 1997:44-59). In effect, they could have been produced on flakes rather than on blades. One sickle (Fig. 77:3) still preserves cortex, while another (Fig. 77:4) bears evidence of using a hard hammerstone and then removing the pronounced bulb of percussion. Two of the pieces (Fig. 77:4, 5) are severely desilicified, thus the silica polish is hardly visible. A single specimen (Fig. 77:3) presents notable lustrous polish on a fine denticulated working edge. All three sickle fragments were found in one room (L360) together with other plantprocessing tools and therefore could have belonged to the same sickle.

Although the lithic assemblage is small, it is comprised of two main components that are typical components of the Middle Bronze Age: an expedient ad hoc industry and a more complex and standardized production of sickle blades. Comparable tools were previously recorded at sites with Middle Bronze Age strata, for example, at Qiryat Shemona South (Shimelmitz 2012, and references therein). However, as most of the related chaîne opératoire components are missing from the sieved assemblage, it seems that these blades reached the site as end-products, similar to those of the preceding Early Bronze Age (Rosen 1997:107-108; Milevski 2013).

The Ramat Razim flint assemblage exhibits the general decline of usage of flint tools. Following the disappearance of the highly standard centralized Canaanean blade technology (Rosen 1997:108), there is a consistent degeneration of knapping skills involved in flintsickle manufacture, eventually leading to the complete loss of complex blade technology, expressed in large geometric flake-based sickles common in flint assemblages from the Late Bronze and Iron Ages.

Faunal Remains

Nimrod Marom 20{ }^{20}
The faunal sample from the Middle Bronze Age site of Ramat Razim provides a glimpse into the rural economy of the Hula Valley region in this period. The bones were collected by sieving and were identified as to biological taxon and body portion (head, forelimb, hind limb, and feet; Table 9) using the comparative collection of the Laboratory of Archaeozoology at the University of Haifa.

The faunal assemblage comprised 38 identified bones, most of which belonged to sheep and goats (Ovis aries/Capra hircus; N=19,50%\mathrm{N}=19,50 \% ). Six of the caprine bones were identified based on morphological criteria (Zeder and Lapham 2010) as sheep, and none as goats.

[1]

1. 20{ }^{20} Laboratory of Archaeozoology, University of Haifa. ↩︎

Table 9. Faunal Remains

Demographic data on sheep and goats obtained by calculating their age-at-death based on tooth eruption and wear (Grant 1982, interpreted by Haber 2001), revealed that two of the sheep mandibular fragments were yearlings, and two were adults in their fourth or fifth years of life. Pig (Sus scrofa cf. Domesticus; N=10,26%\mathrm{N}=10,26 \% ) was the second most abundant taxon in the assemblage, followed by cattle (Bos taurus; N=4,11%\mathrm{N}=4,11 \% ), gazelle (Gazella gazella; N=2,5%\mathrm{N}=2,5 \% ), and equids (Equus sp.; N=2,5%\mathrm{N}=2,5 \% ); one donkey (Equus asinus) lower molar was identified in addition to a very large equid astragalus that probably belonged to a horse. A dog (Canis lupus familiaris) humerus fragment tops this list.

Two noteworthy observations can be made on the data. The first is what appears to be the specialized husbandry of sheep. Specialization on sheep departs from the traditional South Levantine mixed sheep/goat herding strategy, but aligns perfectly with the sheep-dominated assemblage from roughly contemporary Hiazor, a major urban center that exported textiles (Marom et al. 2014). The second is the presence of yearling sheep, suggesting that the animals were reared at the site rather than supplied to it. At Hiazor almost all animals are young-adult males that were probably supplied to the city from sites in its rural hinterland, such as Ramat Razim (Marom et al. 2014). The occasional lamb or ewe were supplemented by household pigs and by sporadic gazelle hunting, which were staples of Bronze Age rural economy.

Discussion: The MB II Rural Site at Ramat Razim

The archaeological excavations conducted at the Ramat Razim site have yielded new and insightful data pertaining to the rural settlement situated on the southern slopes of Mount Canaan during the second millennium BCE. These findings illuminate our understanding of how the inhabitants of this locale engaged with both the physical and social aspects of their environment, encompassing the site and its vicinity.

In relation to the temporal extent of this settlement, the analysis of the pottery assemblage revealed that it was both established and subsequently deserted in Middle Bronze Age IIIII. Notably, the sparse distribution of artifacts strongly suggests a deliberate abandonment

of the site, devoid of intentions for reoccupation. The extant discoveries predominantly comprised immobile, sizeable storage vessels such as pithoi, alongside ground stone implements. An examination of the economic activities and practices of its inhabitants is essential to ascertain whether the settlement experienced uninterrupted occupation during this chronological span or underwent periodic interruptions.

The assortment of ground stone tools unearthed at the Ramat Razim site aligns with the typical assemblage characteristic of a rural setting during the Middle Bronze Age. The prevalence of food-related implements within this collection serves as a direct reflection of the agricultural-based economy that thrived at the site during this era. Moreover, the specific features of these tools offer valuable insights into the distinctive grinding traditions prevalent in the second millennium BCE.

An intriguing observation emerges when considering the spatial distribution of these stone tools in conjunction with pottery findings and the presence of ovens. This confluence of evidence strongly supports the hypothesis of organized communal workspaces, notably exemplified by the courtyard, Room 399. It is plausible that other areas containing stone tools served various purposes, such as storage facilities or locations designated for activities related to working with stone, possibly including hide-processing.

The potential identification of activities associated with domestic cult practices at the Ramat Razim site is hinted at through the examination of three distinct rooms. On the upper terrace, in Room 393, a possible cultic feature takes the form of a purposefully constructed table-shaped stone installation. This structure could plausibly be interpreted as an altar, possibly utilized in connection with burnt offerings. Moving to the lower terrace, two noteworthy elements come into focus: the upright monolith located within Niche 387, and the monolithic stones in W398. These features bear a resemblance to mazzevot and are situated in and in proximity to Room 360, which contains various artifacts, including pithos neck stands and a caprine jaw. These findings collectively suggest a potential link to ritual activities. It is important to note, however, that while these interpretations are possible, there is a lack of contemporary excavated parallels to substantiate this proposal, and the evidence remains confined to the intra-site context.

The evidence of food-processing activities conducted at the site is prominently discernible through two primary sources: the ground stone implements and the ceramic assemblage, notably the numerous storage vessels. An intriguing aspect to consider is the absence of constructed silos, which may suggest that there was a comparatively lower surplus of agricultural produce. This inference gains further support from the dispersion of storage pithoi across various rooms within the unit, indicating a decentralized approach to grain storage.

In addition, insights gleaned from the analysis of the faunal sample, underscore the preeminent role of pastoralism within the local economy. Specialization in sheep rearing appears to have been a defining aspect of the site, and in conjunction with the aforementioned limited accumulation of agricultural surpluses, it is conceivable that livestock and their associated secondary products served as the foundation for economic

exchange. Furthermore, this exchange mechanism is construed as an integral component of the regional economy, seemingly under the influence and oversight of the Hazor polity.

The intriguing question of the connection between the rural settlement at Ramat Razim and Tel Hazor can be further elucidated through the petrographic analysis of the pithoi. This examination revealed valuable insights into the origin of these vessels and their close ties to regions situated to the northeast, specifically the fertile agricultural expanses of the Hula Valley-a territory firmly within the sphere of influence of the Hazor polity.

Noteworthy is the connection discerned between Ramat Razim and the rural site of Horbat Nesibba, located c. 10 km to the north-northwest. This connection is evident through the shared acquisition of pithoi from a common source, a phenomenon that warrants deeper exploration within the framework of a more extensive regional study. It is essential to underscore that the simplified premise that Tel Hazor may have exclusively supplied pithoi to its surrounding rural areas, or vice versa, that the rural settlements exclusively provided pithoi to Hazor, is not fully substantiated by the findings of the present study. The production and distribution systems appear to have been more complex. Furthermore, the continued reuse of a pithoi type well-recognized from Hazor, might suggest not only economic connections but also shared cultural codes or symbolic elements that extended throughout the rural hinterland of Hazor. The intricacies of the interdependence between these sites remain elusive and warrant further investigation.

Analysis of contemporary intra-regional sites situated along the slopes of Mount Canaan highlights that Ramat Razim was not the only settlement type in the vicinity during the Middle Bronze Age. A notable tell site was identified on the Zefat Citadel, located c. 2.5 km northwest of Ramat Razim. While no excavations of the tell layers have been undertaken, examination of potsherds retrieved from inspection trenches during modern construction activities offers evidence of settlement activity spanning both the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. Additionally, in close proximity to the tell, a rock-hewn, multi-interment tomb was in use throughout the Middle Bronze Age. The burial offerings discovered within this tomb were rich, encompassing numerous local and imported pottery vessels, metal weapons, and personal adornments, including a scarab ring. This suggests a potentially more complex and stratified settlement pattern along the slopes of Mount Canaan. It is noteworthy that the material culture at the Ramat Razim site, which includes domestic pottery, a scarab, and two metal artifacts, differs from the rich material culture found in the tomb. However, the potential for interaction between these sites may be unveiled through future excavations conducted on the tell.

During the Middle Bronze Age, the Hazor polity exerted influence and control over the rural hinterland, including sites like Ramat Razim, along the rugged slopes of Mount Canaan. This influence was characterized by interconnected settlements, potential economic exchanges, and shared cultural elements (see Maeir 2010). The polity’s dominance was likely hierarchical, with a centralized authority, but the exact nature and extent of its control over the hinterland remain subject to ongoing archaeological research and investigation.

SUMMARY

The excavations at Ramat Razim have revealed a relatively small settlement, likely representing the rural agro-pastoral component of the region along the rugged slopes of Mount Canaan during the second millennium BCE. This site demonstrated interconnections with other rural sites to the north and northeast, suggesting integration within the hierarchical settlement structure of the Hazor polity.

REFERENCES

Adams J.L. 1988. Use-Wear Analyses on Manos and Hide-Processing Stones. JFA 15:307-315. https://doi.org/10.1179/009346988791974394

Adams J.L. 1989. Methods for Improving Ground Stone Artifact Analysis: Experiments in Mano Wear Patterns. In D.S. Amick and R.P. Mauldin eds. Experiments in Lithic Technology (BAR Int. S. 528). Oxford. Pp. 259-276.

Amiran D.H.K., Nir D. and Shick A.P. 1959. The ‘Lake’ of Dalton: Agam Dalton. IEJ 9:246-259.
Amiran R. and Porat N. 1984. The Basalt Vessels of the Chalcolithic Period and Early Bronze Age I. Tel Aviv 11:11-19. https://doi.org/10.1179/tav.1984.1984.1.11

Arie E., Buzaglo E. and Goren Y. 2006. Petrographic Analysis of Iron Age I Pottery. In I. Finkelstein, D. Ussishkin and B. Halpern eds. Megiddo IV/I: The 1998-2002 Seasons (Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series 24). Tel Aviv. Pp. 558-567.

Bechar S. 2017. The Middle and Late Bronze Age Pottery. In A. Ben-Tor, S. Zuckerman, S. Bechar and D. Sandhaus. Hazor VII: The 1990-2012 Excavations; The Bronze Age (History, Archaeology and Culture of the Levant 11). Jerusalem. Pp. 199-467.

Bechar S. 2022. Political Change and Material Culture in Middle to Late Bronze Age Canaan. (History, Archaeology and Culture of the Levant 11). University Park, Pa. https://doi. org/10.1515/9781646022045

Bechar S. Forthcoming. The Typology of the Middle and Late Bronze Age Pottery from Area S. In I. Wachtel, S. Bechar and S. Zuckerman eds. The Rise and Decline of a Canaanite Kingdom: A View from the Lower City: An Account of the 2008-2010 Excavation Seasons of Area S. Jerusalem.

Ben-Ami D. 2005. Stone Objects. In A. Ben-Tor, D. Ben-Ami and A. Livneh eds. Yoqne’am III: The Middle and Late Bronze Ages; Final Report of the Archaeological Excavations (1977-1988) (Qedem Reports 7). Jerusalem. Pp. 363-369.

Ben-Ami D. and Livneh A. 2005. The Typological Analysis of the Pottery of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages. In A. Ben-Tor, D. Ben-Ami and A. Livneh eds. Yoqne’am III: The Middle and Late Bronze Ages (Qedem Reports 7). Jerusalem. Pp. 247-348.

Ben-Tor A. and Bonfil R. 2003. The Stratigraphy and Pottery Assemblages of the Middle and Late Bronze Ages in Area A. 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. Pp. 185-276.

Ben-Tor D. 2007. Scarabs, Chronology, and Interconnections: Egypt and Palestine in the Second Intermediate Period (OBO.SA 27). Fribourg-Göttingen.

Ben-Tor D. 2018. Scarabs. In Y. Levy and R. Kletter. Rishon le-Zion I/2: The Middle Bronze Age II Cemeteries; Finds and Conclusions (Ägypten und Altes Testament 88). Münster. Pp. 557-620.

Ben-Yosef D. and Bar S. 2012. The Stone Objects. In A. Zertal ed. El-Ahwat, a Fortified Site from the Early Iron Age near Nahal 'Iron, Israel: Excavations 1993-2000. Leiden-Boston. Pp. 313-328.

Berger U. and Gottschalk M. 2019. Z̧efat, Ramat Razim (North). HA-ESI 131 (August 12). http://www. hadashot-esj.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=25594&mag_id=127 (accessed June 30, 2021).

Bonfil R. 2003. Pottery Typology of the Middle Bronze Age II and Late Bronze Age. 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. Pp. 277-318.

Bonfil R. 2019. Middle Bronze Age IIB-C. In S. Gitin ed. The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors: From the Middle Bronze Age through the Late Bronze Age 3. Jerusalem. Pp. 77-136.

Brink E.C.M. van den, Shmueli O., Yannai E., Horwitz L.K. and Vadaei E. 2014. Middle Bronze Age IIA and Later Settlement Remains near Yehud on the Coastal Plain. 'Atiqot 79:131-174.

Cohen-Weinberger A. 1997. The Typology and Petrography of the Egyptian Pottery from Tel Beth Shean in the Light of the Renewed Excavation. M.A. thesis. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew).

Cohen-Weinberger A. 2001. Stone Objects. In A. Mazar and N. Panitz-Cohen. Timnah (Tel Batash) II: The Finds from the First Millennium BCE (Qedem 42). Jerusalem. Pp. 225-247.

Cohen-Weinberger A. and Goren Y. 1996. Petrographic Analysis of Iron Age I Pithoi from Tel Sasa. 'Atiqot 28:77-83.

Covello-Paran K. 2011. Z̧efat, Ramat Razim. HA-ESI 123 (December 29). http://www.hadashot-esj. org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1901 (accessed December 1, 2021).

Covello-Paran K. 2020. Excavations at Kfar Vradim and Intraregional Settlement Patterns of the Western Upper Galilee during the Intermediate Bronze Age. In S. Richard ed. New Horizons in the Study of the Early Bronze III and Early Bronze IV of the Levant. University Park. Pp. 376-394.

Craddock P.T. 1998. 2000 Years of Zinc and Brass: British Museum Occasional Paper No. 50. London.

Damati E. and Stepansky Y. 1996. A Middle Bronze Age II Burial Cave on Mt. Canaan, Z̧efat (Wadi Ḥamra). 'Atiqot 29:1*-29* (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 107-108).

Ebeling J.R. 2012. Ground Stone Artifacts. In A. Ben-Tor, D. Ben-Ami and D. Sandhaus eds. Hazor VI: The 1990-2009 Excavations; The Iron Age. Jerusalem. Pp. 542-558.

Ebeling J.R. and Rosenberg D. 2015. A Basalt Vessel Workshop and Its Products at Iron Age Hazor, Israel. JFA 40:665-674. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2015.1101941

Eggler J. and Keel O. 2006. Corpus der Siegel-Amulette aus Jordanien: Vom Neolithikum bis zur Perserzeit (OBO.SA 25). Fribourg-Göttingen.

Eilon G., Lang B., Starinsky A. and Touret J. 1988. A Fluid Inclusion Investigation of Cenomanian Quartz Geodes in Israel: A Possible Heliothermal Effect. Bulletin de Minéralogie 111:557-566.

Eisenberg E. 1981. H. Nesibah (Kerem Ben Zimra). HA 77:5-6.
Frankel R., Getzov N., Aviam M. and Degani A. 2001. Settlement Dynamics and Regional Diversity in Ancient Upper Galilee: Archaeological Survey of Upper Galilee (IAA Reports 14). Jerusalem. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1fzhd5w

Gardiner A.H. 1957. Egyptian Grammar: Being an Introduction to the Study of Hieroglyphs. Oxford.
Goren Y. 2000. Provenance Study of the Cuneiform Texts from Ḥazor. IEJ 50:29-42.
Goren Y., Finkelstein I. and Na’aman N. 2004. Inscribed in Clay: Provenance Study of the Amarna Letters and Other Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series 23). Tel Aviv. https://doi.org/10.1179/033443504787997782

Grant A. 1982. The Use of Tooth Wear as a Guide to the Age of Domestic Ungulates. In B. Wilson, C. Grigson and S. Payne eds. Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites (BAR British S. 109). Oxford. Pp. 91-108.

Haber A. 2001. The Faunal Analysis of Hagoshrim: Biological and Economic Aspects of Prehistoric Agricultural Societies and the Process of Domestication. MSc. diss. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew; English summary).

Hasson R. 1987. Early Islamic Jewelry (L.A. Mayer Memorial Institute for Islamic Art). Jerusalem.
Ilan D. and Marcus E. 2019. Middle Bronze Age IIA. In S. Gitin ed. The Ancient Pottery of Israel and Its Neighbors: From the Middle Bronze Age through the Late Bronze Age 3. Jerusalem. Pp. 9-75.

Keel O. 1995. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Palästina/Israel: Von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit: Einleitung (OBO.SA 10). Friburg-Göttingen.

Keel O. 1997. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Palästina/Israel: Von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit I: Von Tell Abu Farağ bis 'Atlit (OBO.SA 13). Fribourg-Göttingen.

Keel O. 2010. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Palästina/Israel: Von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit II: Von Bahan bis Tell Eton (OBO.SA 29). Friburg-Göttingen.

Keel O. 2013. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Palästina/Israel: Von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit IV: Von Tel Gamma bis Chirbet Husche (OBO.SA 33). Friburg-Göttingen.

Keel O. 2017. Corpus der Stempelsiegel-Amulette aus Palästina/Israel: Von den Anfängen bis zur Perserzeit V: Von Tell el-Idham bis Tel Kitan (OBO.SA 35). Friburg-Göttingen.

Lamon R.S. and Shipton G.M. 1939. Megiddo I: Seasons of 1925-34, Strata I-V (OIP XLII). Chicago.
Levitte D. and Ilani S. 2015. The Volcanism of Ramat Dalton. Isr. Geol. Soc. Annu. Meet., Kinar, Field Trips Guidebook. Pp. 93-112.

Levitte D. and Sneh A. 2013. Geological Map of Israel 1:50,000, Sheet 2-III, Zefat. Jerusalem (partly revised 2016). https://www.gov.il/he/departments/general/zefat-map (accessed May 19, 2024).

Liebowitz H.A. 2008. Wear Patterns on Ground Stone Implements from Tel Yin‘am. In Y.M. Rowan and J.R. Ebeling eds. New Approaches to Old Stones: Recent Studies of Ground Stone Artifacts. London-Oakville. Pp. 182-195.

Loud G. 1948. Megiddo II: Seasons of 1935-39 (OIP LXII) (2 vols.). Chicago.

Maeir A.M. 2007. The Middle Bronze Age II Pottery. In A. Mazar and R.A. Mullins eds. Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989-1996 II: The Middle and Late Bronze Age Strata in Area R (The BethShean Valley Archaeological Project 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 242-389.

Maeir A.M. 2010. “In the Midst of the Jordan”: The Jordan Valley during the Middle Bronze Age (Circa 2000-1500 BCE); Archaeological and Historical Correlates (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften XXVI; Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie LXIV). Vienna.

Marom N., Yasur-Landau A., Zuckerman S., Cline E.H., Ben-Tor A. and Bar-Oz G. 2014. Shepherd Kings? A Zooarchaeological Investigation of Elite Precincts in Middle Bronze Age Tel Hazor and Tel Kabri. BASOR 371:59-82. https://doi.org/10.5615/bullamerschoorie. 371.0059

Mazar A., Rotem Y. and Weinblatt D. 2012. Area M: The Stratigraphy and Architecture. In A. Mazar ed. Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989-1996 IV: The 4th and 3rd Millennia BCE (The BethShean Valley Archaeological Project 4). Jerusalem. Pp. 34-85.

Milevski I. 1998. The Groundstone Tools. In G. Edelstein, I. Milevski and S. Aurant. Villages, Terraces and Stone Mounds: Excavations at Manahat, Jerusalem, 1987-1989 (The Rephaim Valley Project) (IAA Reports 3). Jerusalem. Pp. 61-77.

Milevski I. 2013. The Exchange of Flint Tools in the Southern Levant during the Early Bronze Age. Lithic Technology 38:202-219. https://doi.org/10.1179/0197726113Z.00000000021

Milevski I. 2019. The Stone Tools and Vessels from Tel Miqne-Ekron: A Report on the Bronze and Iron Ages. In A. Squitieri and D. Eitam eds. Stone Tools in the Ancient Near East and Egypt: Ground Stone Tools, Rock-Cut Installations and Stone Vessels from Prehistory to Late Antiquity. Oxford. Pp. 305-344. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvndv6sd. 24

Oppenheim M. 1959. The Petrology of the South-Eastern Lower Galilee Region, Israel (2 vols.). Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew; English summary).

Oppenheim M.J. 1962. The Geology of the South-Eastern Galilee Lava Fields. Bulletin of the Research Council of Israel 11:58-84.

Oppenheim M.J. 1964. Basalt Textures from the Southeastern Lower Galilee, Israel. Geological Magazine 101:548-557. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756800050123

Paz Y. 2016. Stone Tools. In Z. Herzog and L. Singer-Avitz eds. Beer-Sheba III/III: The Early Iron IIA Enclosed Settlement and the Late Iron IIA-Iron IIB Cities; Artifacts, Ecofacts and Concluding Studies (Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series 33). Winona Lake. Pp. 1258−12851258-1285.

Ravikovitch S. 1969. Soil Map 1:250000, North (Survey of Israel). Jerusalem.
Rosen S.A. 1997. Lithics after the Stone Age: A Handbook of Stone Tools from the Levant. Walnut Creek-London-New Dehli.

Rosenberg D. 2013. Not 'Just Another Brick in the Wall? The Symbolism of Groundstone Tools in Natufian and Early Neolithic Southern Levantine Constructions. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 23:185-201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095977431300022X

Rosenberg D., Assaf A., Getzov N. and Gopher A. 2008. Flaked Stone Discs of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 34/2:137-151. https://doi.org/10.3406/ paleo. 2008.5259

Rosenberg D. and Tzin B. 2021. The Middle Bronze Age IIB Ground Stone Tool Assemblage from el-Muntar el-Abyad. 'Atiqot 102:113-127.

Shalem D., Cohen-Weinberger A., Gandulla B. and Milevski I. 2019. Ceramic Connections and Regional Entities: The Petrography of Late Chalcolithic Pottery from Sites in the Galilee (Israel). In H. Goldfus, M.I. Gruber, S. Yona and P. Fabian eds. “Isaac went out. . . to the field” (Genesis 24:63): Studies in Archaeology and Ancient Cultures in Honor of Isaac Gilead. Oxford. Pp. 262277.

Shalev S. 2002. Metal Artifacts. In A. Kempinski. Tel Kabri: The 1986-1993 Excavation Seasons (Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeology Monograph Series No. 20). Tel Aviv. Pp. 307-318.

Shaliv G. 1991. Stages in the Tectonic and Volcanic History of the Neogene Basin in the Lower Galilee and the Valleys. Ph.D. diss. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew; English summary, pp. i-ii).

Shenhav H. 1964. Petrographic Analyses of Sherds from Hazor Excavations. M.Sc. thesis. The Hebrew University. Jerusalem (Hebrew).

Shimelmitz R. 2012. The Flint Finds and the Character of the Middle Bronze Age Sickle Blades. In Y. Gadot and A. Yasur-Landau eds. Qiryat Shemona (S): Fort and Village in the Hula Valley (Salvage Excavation Reports 7). Tel Aviv. Pp. 171-183.

Sneh A., Bartov Y. and Rosensaft M. 1998. Geological Map of Israel 1:200.000. Sheet 1. Jerusalem.
Sneh A. and Weinberger R. 2006. Geological Map of Israel 1:50,000. Rosh Pinna. Sheet 2-IV. Jerusalem. https://doi.org/10.34194/geusm.v2.4614

Stepansky Y. 2002. Safed and Its Surroundings in Antiquity. In E. Schiller and G. Barkay eds. Safed and Its Sites (Ariel 157-158). Jerusalem. Pp. 51-58.

Stepansky Y. 2007. Zefat, the Western Slope of Giv’at Ha-Mezuda. HA-ESI 119 (April 17). http:// www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report\_Detail\_Eng.aspx?id=509&mag\_id=112 (accessed June 30, 2021).

Stepansky Y. and Bron H. 2011. Zefat, Ramat Razim (South), Survey. HA-ESI 123 (December 29). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report\_detail\_eng.aspx?id=1912 (accessed June 30, 2021).

Tufnell O. 1958. Lachish (Tell ed-Duweir) IV: The Bronze Age (The Wellcome-Marston Archaeological Research Expedition to the Near East Publications IV) (2 vols.). London-New York-Toronto.

Tufnell O. 1984. Studies on Scarab Seals II: Scarab Seals and Their Contribution to History in the Early Second Millennium B.C. Warminster.

Weinberger R., Sneh A. and Shalev E. 2008. Hydrogeological Insights in Antiquity as Indicated by Canaanite and Israelite Water Systems. JAS 35:3035-3042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jas.2008.06.024

Weinstein Y., Navon O., Altherr R. and Stein M. 2006. The Role of Lithospheric Mantle Hetrogeneity in the Generation of Plio-Pleistocene Alkali Basaltic Suits from NW Harrat Ash Shaam (Israel). Journal of Petrology 47:1017-1050. https://doi.org/10.1093/petrology/egl003

Wright K.I. 1992. Ground Stone Assemblage Variations and Subsistence Strategies in the Levant, 22,000 to 5,000 B.P. Ph.D. diss. Yale University. New Haven.

Yadin, Y., Aharoni Y., Amiran R., Dothan T., Dunayevsky I. and Perrot J. 1960. Hazor II: An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956. Jerusalem.

Yahalom-Mack N. 2007. Groundstone Tools and Objects. In A. Mazar and R.A. Mullins eds. Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989-1996 II: The Middle and Late Bronze Age Strata in Area R (The Beth-Shean Valley Archaeological Project 2). Jerusalem. Pp. 639-660.

Yahalom-Mack N. and Panitz-Cohen N. 2009. Groundstone Implements. In N. Panitz-Cohen and A. Mazar eds. Excavations at Tel Beth-Shean 1989-1996 III: The 13th-11th Century BCE Strata in Areas NN and SS (The Beth-Shean Valley Archaeological Project 3). Jerusalem. Pp. 719-736.

Zeder M.A. and Lapham H.A 2010. Assessing the Reliability of Criteria Used to Identify Postcranial Bones in Sheep, Ovis, and Goats, Capra. JAS 37:2887-2905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jas.2010.06.032

Zuckerman S., Ziv-Esudri A. and Cohen-Weinberger A. 2009. Production Centres and Distribution Patterns of Khirbet Kerak Ware in the Southern Levant: A Typological and Petrographic Perspective. Tel Aviv 36:135-180. https://doi.org/10.1179/033443509x12506723940604