Experimental Archaeology at Sha˒ar Hagolan: A Reconstruction of Neolithic PotteryProduction in the Jordan ValleyAuthor(s): Daphna ZuckermanSource: Near Eastern Archaeology, Vol. 63, No. 1, Ethnoarchaeology I (Mar., 2000), pp. 45-50Published by: The American Schools of Oriental ResearchStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3210807 .

Accessed: 02/07/2014 19:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Near Eastern Archaeology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A rti-Facts Edited by Eric H. Cline

Experimental Archaeology at Sha)ar Hagolan: A Reconstruction of Neolithic Pottery Production in the Jordan Valley

The first potters in Israel were the inhab- itants of the Neolithic village of Sha)ar Hagolan. The village was built on the northern banks of the Yarmouk River, a watercourse that has lent its name to a developmental phase of the Neolithic cultures of Israel and her neighbors, the Yarmukian (Franken 1924; Garfinkel 1999; stekelis 1966).

During the recent excavations at Sha)ar Hagolan, volunteers from all over the world joined in unearthing a number of structures in the Neolithic village built nearly 8,000 years ago. At the end of each day, as we sorted and classified the finds, the buckets revealed large amounts of sherds, remnants of a flourishing pottery industry. As I worked, many ques- tions concerning the potters and their efforts came to mind:

* What was the nature of the pottery industry in the Neolithic village? * Were pots for daily use produced in each individual household? * If pots were not made by each house- hold where were they made and fired? * Were the ornate pots and ceramic fig- urines typical of this culture produced at some central location by a group of expert potters? * What were the sources of the raw mate- rials used to make the pots?

Examining the pottery, we searched for evidence of production techniques which might have been used in forming and firing the ceram- ics. We were also interested in understanding the connections with other crafts that might have influenced the pottery industry, such as the production of stone tools, con- struction of houses of mud brick, weaving of mats, etc.

Following a hands-on pottery workshop held in 1998 for the volunteers at the Sha)ar Hagolan Prehistoric Museum, I decided to cre- ate a pottery workshop on site, trying to emulate, as closely as possible, the conditions under which the neolithic pottery was pro- duced. Prior to the 1999 excavation season we

prepared a comprehensive plan for the pro- ject, which included classification of pottery finds from the site, laboratory testing and a pottery workshop encompassing all stages of production, from gathering the clay to the final firing of the pots.

The Ancient Pottery Before beginning our work we carefully

studied the pottery from the excavation. The pottery from one locus (No. 201, unearthed during the 1998 season) was chosen as a representative sample because it was a large and varied assemblage of the Yarmukian wares that had been found at the site. Some of the sherds were painted and decorated with inci- sions typical of pottery from this culture. Classification of the pottery included pro- viding a description of each sherd, identifying the type vessel of origin, interpreting the results of petrographic (and other) tests, recording any unique markings, and noting details likely to further aid identification such as color, thick- ness, texture, material, temper, and the degree of hardness (Matson 1965; Shepard 1965). We also tried to determine how the pot had been made, burnished, painted, and/or decorated. The quality of the execution was noted and we tried to judge which tools had been used in production. Finally, we looked for evi- dence of the firing techniques. Laboratory Testing

The first step was to review the petro- graphic tests previously conducted by Y Goren (1992). He had determined that the potters used two types of local materials. The large vessels were made of a chalk-like coarse- grained clay collected from a ledge high above the Yarmouk River and containing a large num- ber of tempering and organic materials. The more delicate vessels were made of fine-grained alluvial clay from the river banks. One of our objectives was to locate the site of the ancient quarry.

The pots appeared to have been fired at low temperatures (500-800o C), a suggestion that we planned to test through experimen-

tal firing of our own pots. X-rays of the Neolithic sherds did not yield satisfactory results (such as imprints of the mats upon which the pots were made), and we plan to conduct additional tests in the future.'

Field work at the Site of ShaIar Hagolan

Having gathered this preliminary infor- mation, we went out into the field. On the first day of excavation we designated an area located in the center of the site for the pottery workshop. Water was piped in from the Yarmouk River and work surfaces were prepared. Soon the workshop was operational. We were joined by the volunteers, mem- bers of the host kibbutz and neighboring kibbutzim, local archaeologists, potters and other professionals. The Clay

We conducted a survey to identify deposits of clay appropriate for our project. Samples were collected from five different local deposits, each varying in color, texture and composi- tion.

Each potter chooses the clay suitable for his or her work. Thus did the Yarmukian pot- ters and so did we. First we ground the raw material to a powder, added water and kneaded it, preparing day coils and small pots. We tested the plasticity of the clay and its condition after drying. Finally, we chose clay from two of the deposits, from the date groves (referred to as "day 4") and from a deposit on the bank of the Yarmouk ("clay 3"). These had high plasticity and were easy to work with.

Although the Yarmukian potters must have mined their clay with tools of wood and stone, then hauled it in skins or baskets, we gathered the clay with hoes and picks and car- ried in pails and baskets. However, in keeping with the spirit of ancient times, we trans-

ported most of the clay on foot (excluding that from the date grove).

Next we collected fuel and supplemen- tary materials to serve as temper (reeds, straw, branches and manure from the kibbutz

Sti-Fact Near Eastern Archaeology 63:1 (2000) 45

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

cow shed). Samples of the raw materials, Neolithic sherds and prepared clay were sent to the laboratory in order to discern the grain sizes, types of temper, and firing tempera- tures, as well as compare the ancient clay with that presently available in the area. Preparing the Clay and Making the Pots

First we cleaned the clay of plant roots, rocks and gross clumps and soaked it in a hydration pool we had dug and filled with water. This allowed us to lift the finer debris off the surface of the water and remove for- eign bodies from the wet day. As we pumped the water out of the pool, the wet clay sank to the bottom. Next we kneaded the wet clay with our hands and feet creating a uniform substance. This was removed in dumps and left to partially dry on the work surfaces. Four different varieties of clay were prepared rang- ing from fine-grained to coarse-grained with different additives (i.e., straw, manure). The day containing temper was then re-kneaded before the final kneading in order to remove any air pockets. Each type of day received an identity number and each pot produced was marked with the appropriate number.

The workshop participants were inex- perienced in working with day and the problems we encountered were most likely similar to those encountered by the Yarmukian potters. Like our ancient predecessors, we solved our difficulties through trial and error. As "beginner potters" we learned how to utilize local environmental resources. We wove reed mats on which the pots would be placed. We collected smooth river pebbles and shells for burnishing and smoothing the vessels. We used flint tools, sharpened branches and bones for incising. Basalt mortars served as molds for producing bowls. Ground coal was used for blackening, and ground ochre and iron- oxide powder for creating a reddish-yellow color. The paint brushes were prepared from reeds, straw and hair. The pots were fash- ioned at the workshop using techniques typical of the Yarmukians, i.e., from lumps, coils, or sheets of clay. Small and large pots, and other ceramic wares were produced during a three week period, including small bowls, jugs, rit- ual incense burners, spoons and figurines

1. Locating sources of day near the site of Sha'ar Hagolan. 2 M/lining and collecting the raw materials. 3 The dry clay powder is soaked in water

i?.kkh~ ~p~ ?~ cf; ~~~ r ?r:

r~;~s~P~CIG: r ~-T~Tu~ ?~C~j -)'- ~4C-~ .i --- .;? .c?? 4'1 4 o ;?i i

.v .:~l~t~~t~ r ~~.,,~,,,, ~ts~/?1 : ~Lliv-

-k p~,~.;~-'Ct \'

'-" --, n.-"r? '4??-~k~ ~j ~ ~U?~-

?1?~' ~B_~;? ' ' r;'Ci~~t~f ~:;

~r.:??~'?~P?2 i?.?r~ . h.

-1 " t :.

*? ~i=r~c?r r t~j .. ?_? it:=. :e

\ ~ ?ir"j`~?. ?= .. il~h~~CIC '.i-?I'.

'? ~Oi~T rflL~ ?1 c~*~1C I. ci .,.. ;. ~-,.. -~tc=c?-J .I

? \ ~? -.??

r-r ? .~ ?~ ~C.f?.:.'`~3 -??-? rT~c: r ;',~; ?? t

c ?-

r' ..

r

IIY ;r ,c~c~~ "s~~a; .I

~C~k? ~?~ II: ,r ?C -?

r- r~Lr~iQ~Y ,V~s~E~a=T1~ -.C ?~ 2;. ~ " ??-r ~ ?.?1~. ~

- ? ??? I? a lor Y r~ ?'5 ?~

i ~f~.0--. `?'w* -?iJ~s~ ;Jqys " .'5. .~~ '' ~;.~~???'+-;?;?~?~?ic~.-

s .c- ss -- -?i.k: ~u~~ ??~r4

i~r isii;f?,;r rrT ' ; ~p-~" rc~

??- ~ -- ,. ? .~` , C~s- h

~? C:. .r ~ ;~pT?:-l? ??' u. ?!v ?,

'' ?,

:' -~ ?( El' .-.r?? ?r ; ~.~i6i3L~ .", ?? r " ' ?i

r 5 ~C?.';-~ ".i '.~'~:'i~S~L;;T-~:~ai?_ +~?i~: -:-?-L?.^??? c- -?r i.,-~???~? ;1 ~;? ?. i?p~-7~ ..

''' iZ -~ ~ .? ~: ~ ?IT~te~-C;:Ei~ ~ I-lr ._. :

=, ?. :d ?/?~i `?L7~~Cf-~j-CI- , ,Y? _..r~.~wa-uJ -c~ -rC ..~ It C?: r .t I

??? :~:?i --,. J:, ?c?? i? IZ~ I?c~ ' ?r~-~ST? _:?-~72?:? - tt 't --' j;r' "=? ..... .~

~tY: ~-I7 ..???j ~-?~ B1. .;e

~-C ~; ;I? ? -?4 !? .e

??~?,iLu~ ~? -~-- ? ." - ~,; ~5''a'~6~aLcli r ~;? c? r?:?;

,r -? ?' ?-- .i iY.? ;? ~r'du~ ~t~2 ~b~'Z=-Ull.r -.?4? I- ~s?. i-, ,"? 'r.? -? 5:~41.13~ 5?C'~C ~l~tf~; '' .. ,r

-?~ '1~c, ?????????????????????????????????~ ?- ?~~z ~; ~~g i.- 'i'

v r ... :;4 4;?11: r~Lri~ r; ~t~? ? ~?~4?r' ;jc? LU~i~7 C, ~isa?-j;~~ ?. .. ~ ~: ~-~ .,:.?-~~t~I~x~r" lb ~c?"-f~t~;] ~ _~-~3~ ??? ?z~Ti ?.:C

r.,.r. ~-~6~ L; li~c~';? ~Z'~:=e r? i' ?' ~-";iE~~i '.~...u.-??- ??.?i]f~F ,? ;Z~>T~J ~ 1C ?~?

1 ~~ C s , Ii Cr'j?? ?????r~rr??? ??

-- -?~ -...?? .:.=.S.-'?;~L ~ ?'?~5 :? ??-??; t ~?J \~F~h .. ~v--~c~,

Ar ?Ta N ??~ ? 46 Near Eastern Archaeology 63:1 (2000)

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

found in Yarmukian assemblages. The process of drying consoli- dates the clay and makes it harder. Because quick drying can cause cracks or distortions in a hot climate, we were careful to dry the pots carefully in a shady area covered with mats or sheeting. Most of the pots dried in about two days; larger pots were then placed close to the fires to facilitate their complete drying. Firing the Pots

The final and most crucial stage of pottery making is the firing. Poor firing can destroy the fruits of hours of hard labor. The heat trans- forms the minerals in the clay into ceramic, which is hard and does not disintegrate in water. The Yarmukian pottery was fired on open fires in which the fire and the fuel was in direct contact with the pots.

As the final stage in the workshop, we experimented with several methods of firing. Pots were fired piled on the earth, placed in a pit and piled on twigs and reeds, placed in a pit piled on Neolithic sherds,

piled on burning coals, and, finally, placed in a deep pit covered with manure. In open fires the temperature quickly rises to a maxi- mum and then drops suddenly, creating an uneven heat. It is therefore crucial to use clay containing temper or organic additives. The pots produced from coarse-grained, sandy, porous day fired well on the open fires. The pottery had soot marks resulting from the uneven tem- peratures and from direct contact with the fire and the fuel materials. Pots that were covered with fuel containing animal manure were totally blackened. With each firing a heavy cloud of smoke rose up from the burning organic materials. It appears that the Yarmukian pot- tery industry and its fires was probably located at the edge of the village due to the unpleasant odors and the smoke.

4 Adding organic temper-chopped straw and dung-to the clay 5 Kneading the clay 6. Making lumps of clay

Arti-Facts Near Eastern Archaeology 63:1 (2000) 47

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Summary and Conclusions The Yarmukian potters were skilled craftsmen who created pots,

decorative and ritual artifacts using local materials. They produced items using flint, basalt, chalk, bone and perishable organic materi- als. The clay, abundant in the vicinity of the site, was also used to

prepare bricks for building and plaster for walls and floors. As they became familiar with the day, they learned how to manufacture pots, and mastered the secrets of firing clay into long-lasting ceramic ves- sels and objects. These ancient potters produced many pots in varying sizes for domestic use. These included large storage vessels for agri- cultural products, jugs for storing liquids, wide mouthed vessels and

cooking pots for preparing food, different sized serving bowls, and small vessels for powders and precious liquids such as balms and per- fumes. Although they were the earliest potters in the region, they were indeed skillful, processing the clay so that it could easily be

7 Building a vessel with coils. 8. 'New Neolithic" potters working in Sha ar Hagolan in 1999 9 Incised decorations executed with flint tools "Yarmukian" style

48 Near Eastern Archaeology 63:1 (2000) Arti-lacts

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

worked while guarding it from premature drying in the hot climate.

The pots were made of the local clay con- taining light chalk, of which there were several deposits in the area. They selected coarse-grained day to which they added organic materials for the production of larger, plain pots. Smaller, less robust pots, those to be decorated, were made of fine- grained clay. These are lighter in color and are adorned with the "fishbone pattern," a motif char- acteristic of this culture. The pattern is incised with a sharp tool of bone or reed, and painted red. The multiple variations of the pattern, each unique and different from the other, testify to the ancient potters creativity.

The pots were produced using various meth- ods. Small pots were made by pinching them in the palm of the hand. The medium and large pots were made by the coiling method or with sheets of clay. Some vessels were formed using several techniques. The potter worked on a flat surface or reed mat so that the vessels could be rotated

easily. Imprints from the mats are clearly visible on the pot bases. Various kinds of handles were fastened to the different types of pots. The manner in which the handles were attached, as well as the final finish, again demonstrates the skill of the ancient potters who mastered the raw materials despite the difficulties they presented. Most of the pots were smoothed both inside and out, using bundles of straw, hide or fingers, as may be seen in the marks remaining on the vessels. Many pots were finished with slip and/or bur- nish, using smooth river pebbles, bone or flint tools.

In addition to the pottery, Yarmukian potters produced other clay objects, such as figurines, weights, and clay disks and cylinders whose func- tion is unknown. All clay objects were fired in open fires burnt in pits dug into the earth. The materials used as fuel-straw, wood and animal manure-were gathered locally. Our questions regarding the firing temperatures have not yet been answered. The pots produced in the workshop were sent for petrographic analysis and for comparison with Neolithic sherds. The

10. Painting the vessel with an iron-oxide red

11. Vessels are dried in the sun and are almost ready to be fired. 12 The vessels are placed over a layer of straw and branches used as fuel, and covered with branches and bark.

-- IW i.

_

:':! .

' . :,.. .

' / .,

.: ?

i-tir :.;.

" :..

.~iT .:-.,-,

, ., ' '

Arti-Facts Near Eastern Archaeology 63:1 (2000) 49

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

composition of the raw and supplementary materials we collected will also be analyzed so that we can identify the precise clay deposit used by the Yarmukian potters. The'source of the red color used to paint and color the

pots is also being investigated as a result of the experiments we conducted using local materials and those originating from the foot of Mt. Hermon.2

The pottery workshop at Sha'ar Hagolan was unique in the fact that it was a joint on- site effort between archaeologists and potters actually held during the excavations. Archae-

ologists, in their attempts to learn and conduct scientific research about the people who cre- ated and used the material objects usually have artifacts, mainly pottery, at their disposal. Pot- ters, on the other hand, trying to replicate ancient pottery customarily refer to the ancient wares in their search for the stamp of the ancient potters and evidence of the technol-

ogy they employed. The excavators of Sha>ar

Hagolan both investigated the Yarmukian sherds and wrestled with the production of

pottery using ancient methods. Experi- menting firsthand with production methods on site gave us all a new respect for the abil-

ity and skills of the Neolithic craftsmen who fashioned the very pottery being unearthed in the current excavations.

. . .' ' . . . .

. . -

-. o ...

.. . .

"" .~f~ '~

d,= tc'

.- 'c

"....,

' ".

-" ?.1, ."

'.?:: ? "J .'- ? "7

.c .. .,i??-yY1

lr ~ ~?? ?YI. =-'-i ???-'~3' r ~ c~~LC~~L~?,-.y -.

13 Open flring 14 Vessels were removed from the layer of ashes after the fire died down.

Notes

1Anat Cohen-Weinburg of the Israel Antiquities Authority and Trina Arpin of Boston University are conducting the petrographic testing. The CATSCAN photography will be done by Nachum Applebaum of The Hebrew University. The x-rays are executed by Mimi Lavi in the conservation lab- oratory of The Hebrew University.

2 We extend our gratitude to Dudi Ben Ami of Katzrin who contributed generously of his per- sonal knowledge regarding the regional sources of ochre.

Bibliography

Franken, H. J. 1974 In Search of theJericho Potters New York:

North Holland. Garfinkel,

Y. 1993 The Yarmukian Culture in Israel.

Palotrient 19(1):115-34. 1999 Neolithic Art from Shaar Hargolan. Cat-

alog of the Exhibition. Jerusalem: The

Bible Lands Museum. Goren, Y 1992 Petrographic Study of the Pottery

Assemblages from Munhata. Pp. 329-48 in Sha ar Hagolan and Wadi Rabah Pot-

tery Assemblages from Munhata (Israel), edited by Y Garfinkel. Paris: CNRS.

Matson, E R., ed. 1965 Ceramics and Man. Viking Fund Pub-

lications in Anthropology 41. Chicago: Aldine.

Shepard, A. O. 1965 Ceramics for the Archaeologist. Wash-

ington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution. Stekelis, M. 1966 The Yarmukian Culture. Jerusalem:

Museum of Prehistory Sha>ar Har-

golan.

Daphna Zuckerman

50 Near Eastern Archaeology 63:1 (2000) Arti-Facts

This content downloaded from 74.56.14.40 on Wed, 2 Jul 2014 19:20:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions