Yavne and Its Secrets ‫קובץ מחקרים‬ Collected Papers ,‫ ליאת נדב־זיו‬,‫ אלי הדד‬:‫עורכים‬ ,‫ פבלו בצר‬,‫ דניאל וורגה‬,‫יוחנן (ג'ון) זליגמן‬ ‫ אורן טל ויותם טפר‬,‫עמית שדמן‬ Editors: Elie Haddad, Liat Nadav-Ziv, ‫ קובץ מחקרים‬:‫יבנה וצפונותיה‬ ‫יבנה וצפונותיה‬ Jon Seligman, Daniel Varga, Pablo Betzer Amit Shadman, Oren Tal and Yotam Tepper 1* Yavne and Its Secrets Collected Papers Editors: Elie Haddad Liat Nadav-Ziv Jon Seligman Daniel Varga Pablo Betzer Amit Shadman Oren Tal Yotam Tepper Jerusalem 2022 2* Editors Elie Haddad Liat Nadav-Ziv Jon Seligman Daniel Varga Pablo Betzer Amit Shadman Oren Tal Yotam Tepper Editorial Coordinator Einat Kashi Language Editors Hana Hirschfeld Galit Samora-Cohen Anna de Vincenz Production Editor Ayelet Hashahar Malka Typesetting, Layout and Production Ann Buchnick-Abuhav Cover Illustrations Hebrew: The excavation at the foot of Tel Yavne (photography: Asaf Peretz) English: Glass bottles and cooking pot from the Roman period (photography: Asaf Peretz) © 2022, The Israel Antiquities Authority, Tel Aviv University and Israel Land Authority ISBN 978-965-406-765-2 EISBN 978-965-406-766-9 Printed at Digiprint Zahav Ltd. 2022 3* CONTENTS 5* List of Abbreviations 7 Editorial 13 Present, Future, Past: Israel Antiquities Authorityʼs Excavation Project at Yavne (East) Diego Barkan and Amit Shadman ARCHAEOLOGICAL-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 19 Ancient Yavne: Preliminary Finds from the Extensive Excavations at the Foot of Tel Yavne Liat Nadav-Ziv, Elie Haddad, Jon Seligman, Daniel Varga and Pablo Betzer 9* The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavne Environs, Southern Coastal Plain of Israel, and its Connection to Ancient Human Settlement Joel Roskin, Oren Ackermann, Yotam Asscher, Jenny Marcus and Nimrod Wieler 25* Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam from the Persian to the Beginning of the Crusader Period Itamar Taxel 55 The Hasmonaean Battle near Iamnia (Yavne) Ze’ev Safrai THE ARCHAOLOGICAL REMAINS 73 A New Site from the Chalcolithic Unearthed in Yavne Yael Abadi-Reiss 89 The Yavneh Pit: A Repository (Genizah) of a Philistine Temple Raz Kletter, Wolfgang Zwickel and Irit Ziffer 111 A New Inscribed Sling Bullet from Iamnia (Yavne) Yulia Ustinova, Pablo Betzer and Daniel Varga 125 Preliminary Insights on the Economy and Industry of Yavne in the Roman Period: A Zooarchaeological View Lee Perry-Gal, Pablo Betzer and Daniel Varga 143 Glass Production at Yavne, First Impressions from Area L Yael Gorin-Rosen, Pablo Betzer, Daniel Varga and Ariel Shatil 161 “May My Coffin Be Perforated to the Earth” (JT, Ketubot 12.3.3): Roman-Period Cemeteries at Yavne Eriola Jakoel, Alla Nagorsky, Pablo Betzer and Daniel Varga 4* 55* Put Your Shoulder to the Wheel: Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne—Uses and Reconstruction Inbar Ktalav, Ariel Shatil, Natalia Solodenko, Yotam Asscher and Lee Perry-Gal 185 Beachrock Finds from Yavne-East Excavations: Preliminary Results Amir Bar, Elie Haddad, Yotam Asscher, Chen Elimelech, Aliza van Zuiden, Revital Bookman and Dov Zviely WINE AND COMMERCE 205 It’s a “hangover”: The Winepress Complex of Byzantine Yavne Mor Viezel and Hagit Torge 219 Jar Mass Production for the Yavne Wine Industry: The Relationship between the Pottery Kilns and the Pottery Dumps Orit Tsuf 241 Yavne and the Wine Industry of Gaza and Ashqelon Jon Seligman, Elie Haddad and Liat Nadav-Ziv 265 Eastern Mediterranean Trade Routes in Late Antiquity Deborah Cvikel 5* List of Abbreviations AAAS Annales archéologiques arabes syriennes 1966– AJA American Journal of Archaeology BAIAS Bulletin of the Anglo-Israel Archaeological Society (Strata BAIAS from 2009) BAR Int. S. British Archaeological Reports (International Series) BASOR Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research DOP Dumbarton Oaks Papers HA–ESI Hadashot Arkheologiyot–Excavations and Surveys in Israel (from 1999) IAA Reports Israel Antiquities Authority Reports IEJ Israel Exploration Journal IJNA International Journal of Nautical Archaeology INR Israel Numismatic Research JAMT Journal of Archaeological Methos and Theory JAS Journal of Archaeological Science JFA Journal of Field Archaeology JGS Journal of Glass Studies JIPS Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society (Mitekufat Haeven) JMA Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies JRA Journal of Roman Archaeology JWP Journal of World Prehistory LA Liber Annuus NEA Near Eastern Archaeology NEAEHL 5 E. Stern ed. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 5: Supplementary Volume. Jerusalem 2008 NGSBA The Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology OBO.SA Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Series Archaeologica PBSR Papers of the British School at Rome PL J.-P. Migne ed. Patrologiae cursus completus, series latina. Paris 1844–1880 QDAP Quarterly of the Department of Antiquities of Palestine RB Revue Biblique RDAC Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus SCI Scripta Classica Israelica 6* ZPE TMO ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 7* List of Contributors Diego Barkan, Israel Antiquities Authority diego@israntique.org.il Amit Shadman, Israel Antiquities Authority shadman@israntique.org.il Liat Nadav Ziv, Israel Antiquities Authority liat.ziv26@gmail.com Elie Haddad, Israel Antiquities Authority haddad@israntique.org.il Jon Seligman, Israel Antiquities Authority jon@israntique.org.il Daniel Varga, Israel Antiquities Authority daniel@israntique.org.il Pablo Betzer, Israel Antiquities Authority pablo@israntique.org.il Joel Roskin, Bar Ilan University, Israel Antiquities Authority joel.roskin@biu.ac.il Oren Ackermann, Ariel University orenack@gmail.com Yotam Asscher, Israel Antiquities Authority yotama@israntique.org.il Jenny Marcus, Ariel University, Israel Antiquities Authority jenny@israntique.org.il Nimrod Wieler, Israel Antiquities Authority nimrodw@israntique.org.il Itamar Taxel, Israel Antiquities Authority itamart@israntique.org.il Ze`ev Safrai, Bar Ilan University zeev.safrai@gmail.com Yael Abadi-Reiss, Israel Antiquities Authority yaelab@israntique.org.il Raz Kletter, Helsinki University kletterr@gmail.com Wolfgang Zwickel, Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz zwickel@uni-mainz.de Irit Ziffer, Eretz Israel Museum, Tel Aviv irit.ziffer@gmail.com Yulia Ustinova, Ben-Gurion University yulia@bgu.ac.il Lee Perry-Gal, University of Haifa, Israel Antiquities leepg@israntique.org.il Authority Yael Gorin-Rosen, Israel Antiquities Authority gorin@israntique.org.il Ariel Shatil, Israel Antiquities Authority arielsh@israntique.org.il Eriola Jakoel, Israel Antiquities Authority ejakoel@walla.co.il Alla Nagorsky, Israel Antiquities Authority alla@israntique.org.il Inbar Ktalav, University of Haifa, Israel Antiquities Authority ananlotus@gmail.com Natalia Solodenko, Hebrew University natalya.solodenko-vernovsky@ mail.huji.ac.il Amir Bar, University of Haifa, Israel Antiquities Authority hazirbar@gmail.com Chen Elimelech, Israel Antiquities Authority chene@israntique.org.il 8* Aliza van Zuiden, Israel Antiquities Authority alizavanz@gmail.com Revital Bookman, University of Haifa rbookman@univ.haifa.ac.il Dov Zviely, Ruppin Academic Center dovz@ruppin.ac.il Mor Viezel, Israel Antiquities Authority morv@israntique.org.il Hagit Torge, Israel Antiquities Authority torge@israntique.org.il Orit Tsuf, Independent Scholar oritsuf@netvision.net.il Deborah Cvikel, University of Haifa dcvikel@research.haifa.ac.il Editors Elie Haddad, Israel Antiquities Authority haddad@israntique.org.il Liat Nadav Ziv, Israel Antiquities Authority liat.ziv26@gmail.com Jon Seligman, Israel Antiquities Authority jon@israntique.org.il Daniel Varga, Israel Antiquities Authority daniel@israntique.org.il Pablo Betzer, Israel Antiquities Authority pablo@israntique.org.il Amit Shadman, Israel Antiquities Authority shadman@israntique.org.il Oren Tal, Tel-Aviv University orental@tauex.tau.ac.il Yotam Tepper, Israel Antiquities Authority yotam@israntique.org.il The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavne Environs, Southern Coastal Plain of Israel, and its Connection to Ancient Human Settlement Joel Roskin, Oren Ackermann, Yotam Asscher, Jenny Marcus and Nimrod Wieler Introduction This paper aims to comprise a basic geomorphic framework for archaeological and geoarchaeological analyses of the mega site excavation of Tel Yavne. We present the basic geomorphic, sedimentological, hydrological, and geological features of the tel and its environs based on academic literature, reports, GIS-based geospatial analysis, and preliminary surveys at the excavation and its surroundings. We also provide initial mineralogical ratios from Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), a method to characterize materials based on their molecular composition and used in archaeology to identify ancient materials (Weiner 2010). Geographic Setting Tel Yavne is located in Israel’s inner and southern coastal plain (Fig. 1) in a Mediterranean climate of 480 mm/yr annual average precipitation (Negev, Simin and Keller 1970). South of Yavne begins a north-south climate gradient with the Negev desert. Only fifty km south of Yavne, south of the Shiqma basin, begins the Negev desert fringe, where precipitation is 200–300 mm/yr. The gradient is sensitive to climate change. The general geological components of the environs of Tel Yavne contain discrete aeolianite (kurkar in Hebrew) ridges that run parallel to the past and modern coastline (Figs. 1b, 2), red sand and loam, and Holocene alluvium. The surface is characterized by red sandy soils (also known locally as ḥamra) and alluvial brown and hydromorphic soils (Vertisols/Grumusols) (Dan et al. 1972; 1976; Dan, Fine and Lavee 2007). The site is located within the Mediterranean vegetation belt. However, the natural vegetation is absent. The current vegetation is dominated by volunteer crops and ruderal species of annual herbaceous plants. These species characterize neglected 10* | Yavne and Its Secrets and disturbed lands and agricultural crops. These species dominate since the area has undergone intensive anthropogenic and agricultural activity for millennia. These anthropogenic processes affected the late Holocene surficial processes that, in turn, changed the ancient landscape, yielding today’s anthropogenic one. Aeolianite Ridges Dictate Landscape and Settlement patterns North-south trending aeolianite ridges comprise the morphological and topographical backbone of the coastal plain of Israel (Fig. 1a, b). The southern coastal plain has the most significant amount of discrete inland aeolianite ridges. Aeolianites are ancient coast-parallel accumulative dunes that, following sand deposition, became a rock due to precipitation of calcium carbonate. The ridges and their interdune valleys or troughs are usually many hundreds of meters to several kilometers wide. The aeolianite cliffs along the Sharon and Carmel coast near the shoreline have been dated by optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) to the late Pleistocene. However, the inland aeolianite ridges have been sporadically dated to the middle to early Pleistocene (Malinsky-Buller et al. 2016; Harel et al. 2017; Zaidner et al. 2018). The aeolianite ridge of Yavne has not been dated. The fertile Grumusol clay-rich soils and sediments in the interdune valleys between the aeolianite ridges have been an important factor in ancient settlement. The nineteenth-century Arab villages that appear on the Palestine Exploration Fund (PEF) map (1871–1877) were commonly situated upon remains of ancient settlements (Schaffer and Levin 2016). These villages usually were located on the slopes of the aeolianite ridges, probably to maximize the agricultural potential of the adjacent interdune valleys. Tel Yavne is bordered by valleys and plains that are relatively wide for Israel’s southern and central coast (Fig. 1b). The Soreq-Gamliel segment of the Naḥal Soreq valley to the east is one of the widest and largest valleys. The aeolianite ridge 5 km southeast of the Soreq-Gamliel plain, where the ancient village of El-Maghar was situated, at 94 m above sea level, is the highest in the region (Gophna, Paz and Taxel 2010). This ridge may have provided regional security and control on the valuable agricultural expanses of the Soreq-Gamliel plain between Yavne and El-Maghar. Fig. 1. Tel Yavne in the southern coastal plain: (a) Orthophoto; (b) Elevation map ► demonstrating the wide valley of the northern flowing Soreq with lines of two topographic cross-sections (see Fig. 2). Grey dashed arrows delineate five aeolianite ridges of different elevations and widths (orthophoto and map: N. Wieler). The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs (A) | 11* (B) Yavne Plain SoreqGamliel valley W Tel Yavne Tel Yavne Soreq stream Elevation (m.a.s.l) 110 20 a (B) N Yavne Plain Tel Yavne Tel Yavne Elevation (m.a.s.l) 110 b 20 Al Ma gha r am ridg e SoreqGamliel valley W S Soreq stream E S Soreq stream 12* | Yavne and Its Secrets Elevation (meters) B 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 South North Tel Yavne Soreq-Gamliel valley Soreq stream Tel Yavne aeolianite ridge 0 2000 Topographic saddle 4000 Tel Yavne aeolianite ridge 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 Distance (meters) Fig. 2. Cross-sections of the Yavne environs (see location in Fig. 1). Top: Crosssection perpendicular to the coastline (ca. west–east), exemplifying the SoreqGamliel valley and the Maghar aeolianite ridge to its east. Bottom: Cross-section parallel (ca. north–south) to the coastline along the Tel Yavne aeolianite ridge. Note the dashed line connecting similar ridge elevations on both sides of the Soreq-Gamliel valley within an ancient valley of the palaeo-Soreq stream (drafting: N. Wieler). Fluvial Geomorphology of Naḥal Soreq The dynamics of Naḥal Soreq appear to have been the major geomorphic force dictating a wide range of impacts on the anthropogenic activities of the various populations of Yavne. The Soreq basin, also known as Wadi Qalunia/Sarar/Beit Ḥanina in the Judean Hills (Highlands), drains westward into the Mediterranean Sea (Figs. 1, 4a, b). The currently ephemeral and highly meandering basin, extending over c. 760 km2, is the most extensive, deepest, and oldest (see below) drainage system in the Judea and Samaria Hills. The Soreq drainage includes three main segments: the Judean Hills segment (800–250 m a.s.l.), the Judean Foothills (400–200 m a.s.l.), and the coastal plain (250–0 m a.s.l.) segment where Tel Yavne is located. Here the average wadi gradient is very subtle, 6.3m/km (Nir 1964). The Soreq sediment is fine-grained in the Yavne environs, and clasts are rare. The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs | 13* Fluvial Regime of Naḥal Soreq Naḥal Soreq has been found to have an extensive range of flow discharges. The mean annual discharge of the Soreq based on data from the 1950s–60s was reported as 2.7–3 M m3/s (Nir 1964). Discharge measured at the outlet of the Soreq from the Judean Hills into the Judean Shephela (Lowlands) is only about 2% of the rainfall on the catchment. This stems from high infiltration attributed to the cracked and karstic-rich geology of the highland slopes. Thus, local runoff partly influences the flow in the coastal lowlands. Today the Soreq flow is channeled in the Yavne environs (Fig. 3), making current data less reliable for hydrological reconstruction. Today, the flows of the Soreq transport relatively small amounts (by a magnitude) of suspended sediment estimated at 47 m3/km/yr, compared to other Israeli ephemeral wadis in Mediterranean environments. This anomaly may be due to the highly vegetated and terraced character of the Jerusalem Hills basin in a preserved environment in relation to the environmentally neglected Judea and Samaria Hills under split Palestinian and Israeli administrations. Current suspended (fine-grained) sediment is only 1% of the total fluvial load (Avron 1973). The Soreq neither incises nor aggrades in the hills and deposits fluvial sediment in its channel and floodplains. Thus, most of the suspended sediment of the Soreq is transferred to the coastal lowlands, where it is either deposited or flushed into the Mediterranean Sea. Quaternary Geology of the Yavne Environs Tel Yavne is spread over the crest, slopes, and colluvial slope of an aeolianite ridge adjacent to the fringe of the Naḥal Soreq valley. The tel rises to 55 m a.s.l. near the northern tip of the aeolianite ridge (Yavne ridge) that trends north–south (Figs. 2–4). Tel Yavne is not a classic tel mound, and its position was probably a result of ancient geomorphic-based logic – to settle the best controlling grounds in the region adjacent to water sources and significant available croplands. The tel is upon a high point of the aeolianite ridge, approximately 25 m above two topographic saddles to its north and south (Fig. 3). To the west of the tel is a ca. 2 km wide valley at 2–25 m a.s.l. that hosts Naḥal Soreq and Naḥal Gamliel that runs parallel to the Soreq to its north. Here these wadis flow to the north-northwest between two prominent aeolianite ridges of the southern coastal plain of Israel. To the east runs the El-Maghar ridge (Fig. 1a, b). West of the Yavne aeolianite ridge lies the Yavne (Palmaḥim) dune field (Fig. 1a). However, from the Bronze Age to Byzantine times, the area of the dune field was devoid of dunes. Dunes apparently encroached several km inland into the coastal plain only during the last centuries (Roskin et al. 2015, 2017; Taxel et al. 2018). 000 177 000 176 000 Yavne and Its Secrets | 175 14* 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 644 20 20 20 Yavne megasite Naḥal 20 20 20 20 20 20 000 20 20 20 20 20 Main roads 20 20 20 Buildings 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Elevation lines 20 20 20 20 20 high: 250 20 20 20 Value 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 low: 5 20 643 30 20 20 20 000 20 20 20 20 30 20 20 20 20 20 30 20 20 30 20 20 20 30 40 30 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 30 20 20 20 30 20 642 20 000 30 40 C H 30 Tel Yavneh 50 L 20 S K 40 30 R J 30 A 641 000 U Naḥ al Sore q M B 20 30 20 G 30 O 04 D 40 30 30 40 500 m 40 0 30 40 30 40 30 30 Fig. 3. Elevation map of the Tel Yavne environs (drafting: Y. Gumani). Elevations are based on the Digital Elevation Model (DEM) from the ALOS-PALSAR satellite (Alaska Satellite 210 Facility). Letters mark excavated areas at the Yavne mega site. The yellow-colored elevation marks aeolianite ridges and remains of such ridges. The low, green-colored areas have alluvial deposits. Note, the hypothesized remains of the ancient Soreq marked by a dashed-dot blue line via the topographic saddle south of the tel, west of Area R. The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs | 15* Instead, the surface was comprised of sandy brown loam soil with thin sand sheet additives (Taxel et al. 2018; Roskin and Taxel 2021) and probably served as an agricultural area. Thus, the tel developed upon an elevated peninsula-like ridge between two vast and flat agricultural zones; the Tel Yavne-Yavne Yam plain and the Soreq-Gamliel valley (Fig. 1b, 3). Main Sediment Types The aeolianite ridge, slope, base of Tel Yavne, and Soreq valley reveal a wide range of geological and mainly sediments dictated by fluvial, slope, and aeolian geomorphological processes. These display granular textures from medium size sand to clay loam with significantly different geotechnical properties that challenge geophysical prospecting (Reeder et al. 2019). Quartz-dominated sand is a significant component in most of the sediments and settings. The lower and moderate colluvial slope of the tel between Areas C to H exposes a 0.3–2 m. thick, mixed grey-brownish sandy loam anthropogenic soil bearing quartz sand pockets (up to 5 cm diam. in places) and ceramics and other artifacts (Fig. 5a). Here at Area H, Middle Bronze features and artifacts were found buried in 4 m thick Soreq valley sediments. The silicates to carbonate ratio measured by FTIR of the grey-brownish sandy loam anthropogenic soil is distinctly 1.5:1, while the modern topsoil of the site is 1:1. This anthrosol comprises the contemporary topsoil filling the base of the aeolianite ridge that was shaped by diverse and intense human construction and anthro-stratigraphic buildup since Chalcolithic times. At the tel base in Areas R and C (Fig. 3) also appear weathered exposures of aeolianite, comprised of weakly consolidated and dipping sand beds (Fig. 5b). Here, a carbonate-rich quartz sand unit appears at the surface and beneath the anthrosol. Carbonate-rich quartz sand comprises abundant calcium carbonate concretions in various shapes, including root casts within loose and massive yellow sand. FTIR silicates to carbonate ratio of the carbonate-rich quartz sand are 1:1 as opposed to unconsolidated aeolian sand, which is 5:1. Carbonaterich quartz sand appears to be a poor, inert, and porous substrate poorly suitable for agriculture. Therefore, it is not surprising that the sand units were targeted as a substrate for the construction of installations. The base of the tel is a contact zone between sequence of sandy soils and the tel substrate, colluvial tel anthrosols (Fig. 5 c, d), and the edge of the Soreq floodplain deposits (Fig. 5e). The sandy soils appear in a wide range of yellow-red colors with different amounts of silt and clay contents (Fig. 5d). These soils probably range from incipient sandy Regosols to ḥamra soils of varying maturity. Here, these ḥamra-like soils developed upon loose sand and not upon aeolianite rock as often perceived. FTIR 16* | Yavne and Its Secrets a b c Fig. 4. The geomorphology and sedimentology of Naḥal Soreq: (a) The Soreq-Gamliel valley with Tel Yavne in the background. Note the low topographic saddle on the far left where the train station is situated (Photography: O. Ackermann); (b). The modern channel of Naḥal Soreq, whose modern flow is partially supplied by agricultural excesses (Photography: O. Ackermann); (c) Section in Soreq floodplain by Area J (Fig. 3). Here, couplet laminas cover Chalcolithic remains (Photography: E. Marco). The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs | 17* a b c b e d Fig. 5. Photo gallery of sediments and soils (Photography: J. Roskin). (a) Grey colluvial anthrosol/archeosediment in Area C; (b) Weathered and exposed aeolianite in Area R; (c) Section with a wide range of sediments suggesting periods of deposition and truncation in Area C; (d) Grey colluvial anthrosol/archeosediment overlying sandy ḥamra-like soils; (e) Grumusol at the edge of the Soreq floodplain by the margin of Area A. 18* | Yavne and Its Secrets silicates to carbonate ratio of the ḥamra-like soil is 3:1, indicating more carbonate than aeolian sand. Some of the sandy soils and deposits may also be anthropogenic. (1–3 m thick). Within this region, remains of the aeolianite ridge were found at depths of 3–5 m (Fig. 5b). The fringes of the Soreq valley near the tel are slightly sloped and are comprised of a sequence of brownish sandy Grumusol (up to 4 m thick) bearing charcoals and ceramic artifacts at depths of 1.5 and 3.5 m (Fig. 5e). A prismatic brown and more clayey Grumusol comprises the upper 1.5 m of the section with up to ~40% carbonate concretions. FTIR silicates to carbonate ratio of this floodplain material are 3:1, similar to the ḥamra-like sediment. In the flat Soreq-Gamliel valley, sand layers appear more frequently at shallow depths and interfinger with clay loam units often, hosting groundwater (Fig. 4c). The sandy character of many of the sediments allowed good drainage of water that limited erosive fluvial effects and often generated competent drainage of the soils making them suitable for agriculture. The surrounding deposits and raw materials of Tel Yavne were well-utilized: Soreq floodplain clay-rich deposits were mixed in the sandy substrates below the walls, and aeolianite stones were used as construction materials. Young beach rock slabs and shells, probably from the shore interface and beach pockets near Yavne-Yam, were used as construction materials and in plaster production respectively (Bar et al., this volume). Altogether, an extensive range of sediment types and textures reflect the fluctuations and complex interactions between human activity and the environment, and periods of post-abandonment impacts on sheet flow and the overflow of the Soreq. The character of each sediment reflects a unique anthro-geomorphic response to human or human-induced landforms. The Morpho-Fluvial Impact of the Plio-Pleistocene Soreq Drainage system The morpho-fluvial impact of the Plio-Pleistocene drainage system of Naḥal Soreq explains the wide valley of Naḥal Soreq east and north of Yavne, with a gap of several km between the Yavne aeolianite ridge and its continuation by the southern outskirts of Reḥovot (Fig. 1a, b). This gap suggests that the flow and ancient canyon of the Soreq never permitted the development of a pre-aeolianite dune. The topographic saddles on both sides of Tel Yavne may be remains of ancient pathways of the Soreq before or following the development of the aeolianite ridge despite the lack of observed fluvial remains (Fig. 3). If so, this hypothesized ancient and buried channel may still be a conduit for shallow underground floodwater of the Soreq. The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs | 19* The Soreq and its tributaries in the coastal plain cross several aeolianite ridges upstream of the Soreq-Gamliel valley. As such, a significant part of its suspended load should include fine to medium size quartz sand grains eroded from the aeolianites. The other fraction of the load may be dominated by cyclic dust-sourced red Mediterranean silt-loam soil mantles (Frumkin, Stein and Goldstein 2022). These probably originated on the steep slopes of the Naḥal Soreq segment in the Judean Hills. During the Quaternary, ample fine-grained sediments were fluvially delivered to the Soreq-Gamliel valley near Yavne. Different grain sizes are expected in the Soreq-Gamliel sediments and soils as a mixture and in cases where flow was absent, probably in the form of couplets where the lower unit is sandy and the upper loam and clay. Fine-grained couplets are common where aeolian and fluvial environments interact (aeolian-fluvial interactions; Fig. 4c) (Robins et al. 2022). The Soreq-Gamliel valley is often flooded and is part of the (spatial) water losses (contribution) to the shallow aquifer along the path. Unfortunately, fluvial sediment monitoring in Israel is sparse, and there is limited data on the modern Soreq sediment budget. However, the study of the excavated sections at the Yavne mega site may be able to provide valuable insight that can be inferred to reconstruct ancient flows and sediment loads and investigate sedimentation amounts and rates. Ancient Fluvial Regime of Naḥal Soreq The general hydrological regime of Naḥal Soreq in the Late Holocene was probably similar to earlier Holocene times and relatively stable. In the Judean Hills, the vegetation cover, the karstic and jointed nature of the strata, and the thin sediment cover do not allow short-term rainwater storage on the slopes and flow within the alluvium. The theorized stable character of the Soreq basin in the Hills for at least 100,000 years (Ryb et al. 2013) suggests that the flow regime was relatively steady and usually dry (see below). The paucity of fluvial terraces in the Hills is also field evidence that the Soreq flows produced a limited range of flow discharge values during the Holocene. Therefore, these low floodplains are stable surfaces and are not usually prone to flooding (Roskin et al. 2022). This stable regime, though, does not necessarily imply that the sediment loads were the same. However, a mostly stable fluvial-sedimentological regime may have led to general gradual aggradation in the Yavne-Gamliel plain. The runoff and flow regime in Naḥal Soreq differs today from historic and prehistoric times due to the current climate and human-shaped geomorphology. While the terraced slopes reduce the present-day flow, increased and concentrated, urban runoff may cause a trade-off. These low fluvial load values may not indicate 20* | Yavne and Its Secrets brief intervals when terraces were absent, and erosion rates of fine-grained material were higher, especially when vegetation cover was degraded by anthropogenic agents or decimated, say by fire (Inbar, Tamir and Wittenberg 1998). However, the fluvial regime may have been different in the past before the intensive terracing of its headwaters in the Judean Hills, mainly since the Roman–Byzantine periods and especially in Ottoman times (Porat et al. 2019). Thus, before the terracing of the uplands, sediment yield and consequent deposition were probably higher in the coastal plains, leading to floodplain aggradation near Yavne. The fertile sediment fill may mask underlying aeolianite exposures that may have been fluvially eroded, and mixed with the suspended load, resulted in sandy loam floodplain deposits. Role of the Fluvial Regime of Naḥal Soreq upon Ancient Settlement The sediment availability and depositional regime of the coastal plain of Israel are highly variable. In several broad valleys, thick 3–5 m alluvial deposits cover Chalcolithic sites (Itach et al. 2019; Brink et al. 2019). In other valleys, even Roman– Byzantine fills hide evidence of earlier energetic flows that deposited coarse sand, pebbles, and gravel (Roskin, Asscher and Bennestein 2021). It appears that the depositional environment of Naḥal Soreq in the Yavne environs is one of the most prominent ones on the whole coastal plain of Israel. This fact makes the Yavne environs a prime settlement setting at a regional level! The Soreq-Gamliel plain narrows to the north. The southern coast has ephemeral to locally perennial stream segments. The central coastal streams and Sharon and Carmel coast streams are perennial and transect a narrower coastal segment than south of the Yarkon. Thus, the southern coast’s longer and less steep gradient allows for more fine-grained sedimentation. Furthermore, the Soreq stream has one of the largest basins and, accordingly, sediment availability for deposition on the coast. Thus, the Terra-Rossa sourced clay-rich Grumusol valleys of the western segment of Naḥal Soreq near Yavne, still within the Mediterranean climate zone, are one of the most extensive and most fertile zones of the coastal plain. This may explain the region’s relatively high 19th-century Arab village density (Schaffer and Levin 2016). Possible Role of Late Holocene Dune Incursion on the Naḥal Soreq Path The aeolianite ridges south of Yavne are undergoing substantial erosion leading to fluvial choking of local wadis with sand (Laronne and Shulker 2002). This process can lead to overflow and enhanced floodplain sedimentation. Current urbanization that increases local discharges not fit to natural channel cross-sections can also enhance flood-plaining. This process may have also happened during peak times of ancient settlement. The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs | 21* The flat base of the tel is actually the edge of the Naḥal Soreq floodplain that seems to have significantly expanded and aggraded several meters of sediments since the middle Holocene, covering Bronze Age and Byzantine features as reported 6 km downstream (Jakoel and Rauchberger 2014). The incursion of sand sheets during the late Holocene across the Yavne dune field and into the Soreq valley (Fig. 1a), downstream of the site where the Soreq breaks to the west, may have contributed to channel narrowing, meandering and loss of transmission energy, leading to upstream sedimentation in floodplains and vertical and lateral growth of the floodplains. Damming the Soreq by encroaching dunes would surely lead to water bodies depositing amplified amounts of sediment. However, the amount of dunes required to dam a stream the size of the Soreq were probably not present before the last centuries. Conclusions The ancient Tel Yavne environs have undergone considerable and non-linear anthrogeomorphic evolution since the middle Holocene (Chalcolithic times). Earlier aeolian and fluvial processes shaped the physical setting and character of the region. The Naḥal Soreq-Gamliel valley floor was several meters lower and less wide than today’s geometry. The hydrological regime was probably more copious and reliable for ancient water needs. The agricultural soils were slightly different than today’s that may explain the transition from vines during Mishanaic times to orchards and field crops today. It is unclear if the geologically rapid aggradation and growing spatial cover of the fluvial deposits along the fringes of the Naḥal Soreq valley had a deterministic impact during the settlement and expansion phases of ancient Yavne. This preliminary study highlights the importance of detailed geoarchaeological investigations to decipher ancient landscapes that are found to be substantially different from today’s. References Avron M. 1973. Sediment Yield and Differences in Erosional Regimes in Several Streams of Israel. M.A. thesis. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Hebrew). Bar A., Haddad E., Asscher Y., Zuiden A. van, Elimelech C., Bookman R. and Zviely D. This volume. Beachrock Finds at Yavne-East Excavations: Preliminary Results. Brink E.C.M. van den, Ackermann O., Anker Y., Dray Y., Itach G., Jakoel E., Kapul R., Roskin J. and Weiner. S. 2019. Chalcolithic Groundwater Mining in the Southern Levant: Open, Vertical Shafts in the Late Chalcolithic Central Coastal Plain Settlement Landscape of Israel. Levant 51(3):236–270. 22* | Yavne and Its Secrets Dan J., Fine P. and Lavee H. 2007. The Soils of the Land of Israel. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Dan J., Yaalon D.H., Koyumdjisky H. and Raz Z. 1972. The Soil Association Map of Israel. Israel Journal of Earth Sciences 21:29–49 (Hebrew). Dan J., Yaalon D.H., Koyumdjisky H. and Raz Z. 1976. The Soils of Israel (Volcani Center Institute of Soils and Water Pamphlet 159). Bet Dagan (Hebrew). Frumkin A., Stein M. and Goldstein S.L. 2022. High Resolution Environmental Conditions of the Last Interglacial (MIS5e) in the Levant from Sr, C and O Isotopes from a Jerusalem Stalagmite. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 586:110761. Gophna R., Paz Y. and Taxel I. 2010. Al-Maghar: an Early Bronze Age Walled Town in the Lower Soreq Valley and the EB IB–II Sequence in the Central Coastal Plain of Israel. Strata: BAIAS 28:9–37. Govmap - Soil Types Layer https://www.govmap.gov.il/?c=197509.43,661024.28&z=5&lay =SOIL_TYPES (retrieved 11 January 2022) Harel M., Amit R., Porat N. and Enzel Y. 2017. Evolution of the Southeastern Mediterranean Coastal Plain. In M. Harel, R. Amit, N. Porat and Y. Enzel eds. Quaternary of the Levant: Environments, Climate Change, and Humans. Cambridge. Pp. 433–446. Inbar M., Tamir M.I. and Wittenberg L. 1998. Runoff and Erosion Processes After a Forest Fire in Mount Carmel, a Mediterranean Area. Geomorphology 24(1):17–33. Itach G., Brink E.C.M. van den, Golan D., Zwiebel E.G., Cohen-Weinberger A., Shemer M., Haklay G., Ackermann O., Roskin J., Regev J., Boaretto E. and Turgeman-Yaffe Z. 2019. Late Chalcolithic Remains South of Wienhaus Street in Yehud, Central Coastal Plain, Israel. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 49:190–283. Jakoel E. and Rauchberger L. 2014. El-Jisr. HA–ESI 126 (August 28) https://www.hadashot-esi. org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=9565&mag_id=121 (accessed July 23, 2022). Laronne J.B. and Shulker O. 2002. The Effect of Urbanization on the Drainage System in a Semiarid Environment. In E.W. Strecker and W.C. Huber eds. Global Solutions for Urban Drainage (Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Urban Drainage, Portland, OR, 8–13 September 2002). Reston, VI. Pp. 1–10. Malinsky-Buller A., Barzilai O., Ayalon A., Bar-Matthews M., Birkenfeld M., Porat N., Ron H., Roskin J. and Ackermann O. 2016. The Age of the Lower Paleolithic Site of Kefar Menachem West, Israel—Another Facet of Acheulian Variability. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 10:350–362. Negev M., Simin A and Keller P. 1970. Surface Water in the Soreq Drainage Near the Coastal Road. Tahal report HG/70/024. Tel-Aviv (Hebrew). Nir Y. 1964. Studies on Recent Coarse Clastic Sediments from Nahal Soreq. Israel Journal of Earth Sciences 13(1):27. Porat N., López G.I., Lensky N., Elinson R., Avni Y., Elgart-Sharon Y., Faershtein G. and Gadot Y. 2019. Using Portable OSL Reader to Obtain a Time Scale for Soil Accumulation and Erosion in Archaeological Terraces, the Judean Highlands, Israel. Quaternary Geochronology 49:65–70. The Geomorphology and Sedimentology of the Tel Yavneh Environs | 23* Reeder P., Pol H.M., Bauman P., Darawsha M., Workman V., Yanklevitz S., Freund R. and Savage C. 2019. From Bethsaida to Yavne and Beyond. In F. Strickert and R. Freund eds. A Festschrift in Honor of Rami Arav “And They Came to Bethsaida…”. Newcastle Upon Tyne. Robins L., Roskin J., Yu L., Bookman R. and Greenbaum N. 2022. Aeolian-Fluvial Processes Control Landscape Evolution Along Dunefield Margins of the Northwestern Negev (Israel) Since the Late Quaternary. Quaternary Science Reviews 285:107520. Roskin J., Asscher Y. and Bennestein N. 2021. Function and Development Stages of WadiTerrace and Field Walls in the Nahal Zanoah Valley, Judean Foothills, Israel. Judea and Samaria Research Studies 30(2):189–220 (Hebrew). Roskin J., Asscher Y., Khalaily H., Ackermann O. and Vardi J. 2022. The Palaeoenvironment and the Environmental Impact of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Motza Megasite and its Surrounding Mediterranean Landscape in the Central Judean Highlands (Israel). Mediterranean Geoscience Reviews 4:215–245. Roskin J., Sivan D., Shtienberg G., Porat N. and Bookman R. 2017. Holocene Beach Buildup and Coastal Aeolian Sand Incursions off the Nile Littoral Cell. Geophysical Research Abstracts 19:844. Roskin J., Sivan D., Shtienberg G., Roskin E., Porat N. and Bookman R. 2015. Natural and Human Controls of the Holocene Evolution of the Beach, Aeolian Sand and Dunes of Caesarea (Israel). Aeolian Research 19A:65–85. Roskin J. and Taxel I. 2021. “He Who Revives Dead Land”: Groundwater Harvesting Agroecosystems in Sand Along the Southeastern Mediterranean Coast Since Early Medieval Times. Mediterranean Geoscience Reviews 3(3):293–318. Ryb U., Matmon A., Porat N. and Katz O. 2013. From Mass-Wasting to Slope Stabilization: Putting Constrains on a Tectonically Induced Transition in Slope Erosion Mode: A Case Study in the Judea Hills, Israel. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 38(6):551–560. Schaffer G. and Levin N. 2016. Reconstructing Nineteenth Century Landscapes from Historical Maps—the Survey of Western Palestine as a Case Study. Landscape Research 41(3):360–379. Taxel I., Sivan D., Bookman R. and Roskin J. 2018. An Early Islamic Inter-Settlement Agroecosystem in the Coastal Sand of the Yavneh Dunefield, Israel. Journal of Field Archaeology 43(7):551–569. Weiner S. 2010. Microarchaeology: Beyond the Visible Archaeological Record. Cambridge. Zaidner Y., Porat N., Zilberman E., Herzlinger G., Almogi-Labin A. and Roskin, J. 2018. GeoChronological Context of the Open-Air Acheulian Site at Nahal Hesi, Northwestern Negev, Israel. Quaternary International 464A:18–31. Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam from the Persian to the Beginning of the Crusader Period Itamar Taxel1 In antiquity, the southern coastal plain of historical Palestine (between Naḥal Yarqon and Naḥal Besor) had a unique phenomenon in terms of local settlement patterns and inter-settlement relationships, namely the development of pairs of inland and seashore urban/semi-urban centers that shared a similar name and nurtured connections based on mutual reliance alongside lines of independence and uniqueness. This paper discusses the northernmost pair of these “twin cities,” i.e., Yavne and Yavne-Yam (Figs. 1, 2).2 Although the first major phase of existence of both settlements occurred as early as the Middle Bronze Age II, this study only concentrates on the Persian period until the beginning of the Crusader period (fifth century BCE–twelfth century CE).3 This article is based on the preliminary published Yavne-Yam excavations and Yavne Map survey projects (see below) and on the published and unpublished results of many excavations carried out in Yavne, mainly before the present mega-excavation. Considering this vast amount of data, in the following pages, I will rather briefly describe the historical evidence and primarily focus on the archaeological findings regarding Yavne and Yavne-Yam (and, to a 1 2 3 This article is dedicated to the blessed memory of my teacher, colleague, and friend, Professor Emeritus Moshe Fischer, who passed away on August 22, 2021. Under the auspices of his academic home, Tel Aviv University (hereafter TAU), Moshe dedicated much of his time during the last three decades to the investigation of ancient Yavne, Yavne-Yam, and their surroundings, and I will always be grateful for the opportunity I had to work with him on these projects. The two other most prominent pairs of this kind were Ashdod and Ashdod-Yam and Gaza and Gaza Maiumas. For the archaeology of Yavne in the Middle and Late Bronze and Iron Ages, see Fischer and Taxel 2007:215–218; Kletter and Nagar 2015; Kletter, Ziffer and Zwickel 2010; Kletter, Zwickel and Ziffer, this volume. For Yavne-Yam in the same periods, see Fischer 2005:176– 183; 2008:2073; Uziel 2008:54–114. 26* | Yavne and Its Secrets lesser extent—their hinterland/s) during the discussed time period in an attempt to provide a first cross-period and simultaneous assessment of both sites. General Background Yavne was one of the major ancient cities in the southern coastal plain of Israel, situated about midway between Jaffa and Ashdod and 7 km east of the Mediterranean (Fig. 1). The main part of the site of ancient Yavne is a large, raised tel (c. 150 dunams in size), which developed on a natural kurkar (fossilized sandstone) hill located close to the western bank of Naḥal Soreq, the main river of the area (Fig. 2:1). Surface finds and architectural remains indicate that the mound was inhabited, possibly even continuously, between the MB II and British Mandate times, although virtually in every period the plain and hills that surround the tel were also inhabited or used for various activities (primarily funerary or industrial; see below).4 Although the former Arab village of Yubnā (situated on the mound) and the medieval monuments inside and around it were already documented in the late nineteenth century CE, modern archaeological research at the site began only in the mid-twentieth century and continues to the present day. This activity includes dozens of (mostly salvage) excavations carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and a thorough regional survey of the Map of Yavne (Archaeological Survey of Israel, no. 75) carried out by M. Fischer and the author on behalf of Tel Aviv University (TAU).5 The site of Yavne-Yam is located about 7 km northwest of the modern city of Yavne and 2.5 km to the south of Naḥal Soreq’s estuary (Fig. 1). It developed on the shore of a small natural bay which was delimited from the south by a promontory that protrudes c. 75 m into the sea (Fig. 2:2). In ancient times, this bay served as one of the few anchorages located on the southern coast of Israel (Galili 2009). The ancient settlement stretched to the east and northeast of the promontory covering an area of approximately 250 dunams delimited to the north, east and south by MB II earth ramparts.6 The site was inhabited, probably continuously, until the beginning of the Crusader period (early twelfth century CE) while only temporarily occupied during 4 5 6 Although the recent excavations revealed evidence for a Chalcolithic-period settlement on the plain to the east of Tel Yavne (Fadida et al. 2021; Abadi-Reiss, Betzer and Varga 2022) there is currently no indication that the mound itself was inhabited prior to the MB II. The final survey results are yet unpublished; for a preliminary discussion of the survey results and a review of excavations as for the early 2000s see Fischer and Taxel 2007. In Yavne-Yam, no evidence of a pre-MB II occupation has yet been found. However, intensive activity from the Chalcolithic period and the Early Bronze Age was found in various locations to the north and northeast of the site (e.g., Gorzalczany 2018). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 27* 180 000 175 000 170 000 165 000 655 ran ean Sea 000 Bet Hanan ter Nahal S or 000 Me di 650 Gan Soreq Tel Ya‘oz eq Yavne-Yam Yavne-Yam (South) el-Jisr Tel Mahoz Khirbat el-Furn Ṭirat Shalom Yavne dunefield P&B 645 000 Khirbat ed-Duheisha Yavne Ben-Zakkay 640 000 0 2 km Fig. 1. Location map (drafting: Y. Gumenny). the following centuries. Here too, the first archaeological investigations date back to the late nineteenth century, but actual excavations began at Yavne-Yam only in the 1960s, followed by several salvage (IAA) excavations and (between 1992 to 2011) a large-scale excavation project headed by M. Fischer and the author on behalf of TAU. The TAU excavations were concentrated on six main areas: Areas A and C on the promontory and the saddle to its east, Area B to the north of Area A over the sea cliff, Areas B1 and B2 east of Area B, and Area T further to the east close the site’s fringes (for preliminary discussions, see Fischer 2005; 2008; Fischer and Taxel 2014; 2021; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020).7 7 Due to the untimely death of Moshe Fischer, the first volume of the Yavne-Yam excavations final report, which will mainly concentrate on the MB II to Hellenistic period, is being prepared for publication by a team headed by Alexander Fantalkin and the author (hereafter YY1, in prep.). The second volume will deal with the Roman to Islamic periods and is prepared for publication by the author and additional scholars (hereafter YY2, in prep.). 28* | Yavne and Its Secrets 1 2 Fig. 2. (1) General views of Tel Yavne, looking west (photography: M. Fischer); (2) Yavne-Yam, looking south (photography: Sky View). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 29* The Yavne regional survey (c. 10 × 10 km; see Fischer and Taxel 2006; 2007; 2008; 2021; Taxel 2013a), initiated in 2001 and aimed at assembling data about the hinterland of Yavne and Yavne-Yam throughout their history, included systematic field walking over larger areas and collecting and documenting the finds visible on the surface. Thus far, most of the Yavne Map’s accessible area has been surveyed, with close to 100 sites identified, dating from prehistoric times through the British Mandate period. It should be noted, though, that most of the sites, or at least the largest and more intensively-settled ones, are located within the eastern half of the survey map, i.e., in the alluvial plain on both sides of Naḥal Soreq and the inland kurkar hills. On the contrary, the western half of the area, a strip of sand dunes extending about 5 km inland from the Mediterranean seashore, is characterized by smaller, often short-lived sites. However, likely, additional sites predating the intensive and relatively recent sand coverage are still hidden under the dunes. The Persian Period The mound of Tel Yavne, which formed the core of the settlement since the MB II, seems to continue to be the core during the Persian period (fifth to late fourth century BCE), as indicated by Persian-period pottery found across the mound in our survey and a salvage excavation carried out at its northeastern fringes. Persian-period pottery was also found in a few locations in the mound’s immediate surroundings, including on a hill known in Arabic as el-Deir (to the west of Tel Yavne), where a salvage excavation revealed a temple favissa containing clay figurines (Fischer and Taxel 2007:218–219, with references therein; on the same hill a favissa of an Iron Age temple was excavated sometime later; see Kletter, Ziffer and Zwickel 2010; Kletter, Zwickel and Ziffer, this volume). An important contribution to the knowledge of Persian-period Yavne was revealed in the 2019–2022 excavations to the southeast of the mound, in the form of an extensive industrial winery (that covered an earlier, smaller winepress, probably from the late Iron Age/early Persian period). Three pottery kilns were attributed to a transitional late Persian-early Hellenistic phase; at least one of them produced cooking pots. The construction of these kilns dismantled parts of the Persian-period winery. A well discovered to the north of the winery was probably constructed in the late Iron Age but continued to be used during the Persian and Hellenistic periods (Haddad et al. 2021; Nadav-Ziv et al., this volume). A substantial Persian-period phase was revealed at Yavne-Yam, mainly in the TAU excavations (in Areas A and C). Some of the associated building remains (among 30* | Yavne and Its Secrets them a complete room) were built according to the Phoenician technique combining ashlar piers with fieldstone fills in between. Notable small finds include imported Greek pottery, i.e., Black- and Red-Figure jugs and black-glazed bowls, fragmentary clay figurines, and a small limestone altar (Fischer 2005:183–184; 2008:2073–2074; YY1, in prep.). At the northern fringes of the site, to the north of the MB II rampart, remains of a Persian-period pottery kiln and three winepresses were excavated (by the IAA) and dated to either the Persian or Hellenistic period (Ajami and ‘Ad 2015). These remains seem to reflect the revival of the coast after the assumed Babylonianperiod settlement hiatus of the sixth century BCE, even though Persian-period historical sources do not mention the site. The site’s architectural and artifactual evidence reflects the Phoenician supremacy and the permanent supply and support of Grecized population along the southern Phoenician coast enjoyed on the eve of Alexander the Great’s conquest (Fischer 2005:184–185; 2008:2074). Shalev (2014:75, 112) suggested that in the Persian period, Yavne was the main settlement in the lower Naḥal Soreq area, with Yavne and Yavne-Yam maintaining strong connections between each other and between them and their rural hinterland. ‘Ad (2016:21, 357, Map 1) tends to attribute the status of main settlement in the area to Yavne-Yam, while claiming that inland Yavne was seemingly somewhat less important, constituting a large village. Noteworthy excavated and surveyed rural settlements—farmsteads and villages of various sizes—in the area roughly between Yavne and Yavne-Yam (see Fig. 1) include Tel Ya‘oz (Segal, Kletter and Ziffer 2006; Fischer, Roll and Tal 2008, according to whom the site was an administrative center), Gan Soreq (‘Ad 2016a; 2016b:53–115), Ṭirat Shalom, Ben-Zakkay and Tel Maḥoz (Fischer and Taxel 2006). The Hellenistic Period The archaeological evidence for the Hellenistic period (late fourth–early first century BCE) in Yavne is somewhat restricted, consisting of scattered pottery and a few coins on Tel Yavne and its surroundings—including a stamped Rhodian amphora handle (Fig. 3:1) (Fischer and Taxel 2007:221)—and a few remains unearthed in recent excavations to the east of the mound. These include (intentionally?) disturbed burials (second–first centuries BCE) found under the remains of a Roman-period cemetery (Yannai 2014; Yannai and Taxel, unpublished)8 and a pottery kiln in which 8 The final report of the IAA excavations directed by E. Yannai at Yavne in 2010–2012 will be published by Yannai and the author. Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 31* bowls, cooking pots, stands, and storage jars were probably produced and a pool for mudbrick production, both dated mainly to the third century BCE (Haddad et al. 2021). This dearth of archaeological materials contrasts the many references to Yavne in the Books of the Maccabees, referring to its important role during the war of the Jews against the Seleucids in the second century BCE. Yavne received the status of a polis named Iamneia as early as the beginning of the Hellenistic period and had a predominantly polytheistic population. It became part of the Hasmonean kingdom in the late second century after being taken by John Hyrcanus (for recent reviews on the literary evidence on Hellenistic-period Yavne, see Fischer and Taxel 2007:220–221; Farhi and Bachar 2020:111–112; Safrai, this volume). The picture reflected from Yavne-Yam regarding the Hellenistic period is quite the opposite of that seen in Yavne in terms of abundant archaeological finds and lesser historical documentation. The TAU and some IAA excavations revealed various remains and rich artifactual assemblages. Building remains were found within the settlement proper (mainly in Area A), sometimes directly over the Persian-period structures. Correctly, some of the latter continued to be used in Hellenistic times. Moreover, a well was built on the seashore. Three winepresses were unearthed at the site’s northern fringes, which probably continued to be used from the Persian period (see above). Small finds include a variety of local and imported ceramics; the latter mainly consisting of fine table wares (notably Eastern Terra Sigillata bowls and kraters as well as mold-made bowls) and wine amphorae with stamped handles from the Greek islands (Fig. 3:2) as well as from southern Italy. A significant local vessel is a jug whose handle bears a stamp of a certain Aristokrates, the agoranomos (the agora/market overseer), dated to 133/2 BCE. Other noteworthy objects are a clay figurine of a harp player and a glass pendant of Harpocrates (the Greek-Egyptian god of silence and confidentiality) (Ajami and ‘Ad 2015; Fischer 2005:188–190; 2008:2075; Nir and Eldar 1991; YY1, in prep.). These finds are accompanied by an important Greek inscription accidentally found at the site in the 1980s. This inscription consists of a letter and a petition representing the correspondence dated 163 BCE between the Seleucid king Antiochus V Eupator and the citizens of Yavne-Yam (“harbor of Iamneia”), named “Sidonians” in that letter. The inscription mentions the latter as providing a certain “marine service” to the king’s grandfather. Thus, the inscription should be interpreted against the background of the Seleucid-Jewish wars and the fear of Yavne-Yam’s Hellenized population of the Maccabean force. It should also be noted that the inscription mentioned above and the Book of Maccabees are the first sources in which the site’s name is directly linked to inland Yavne, as the latter’s harbor (CIIP III, No. 2267; Fischer 2005:187–188; 32* | Yavne and Its Secrets 1 2 0 1 Fig. 3. Hellenistic-period Rhodian amphora stamped handles: (1) from Yavne; (2) from Yavne-Yam (photography: P. Shrago). 2008:2074–2075, with references therein). Altogether, the artifactual evidence from Yavne-Yam reflects a society that has gone through Hellenization, with wellestablished connections within the East Mediterranean koine. The latest pottery (including dated amphora stamps) and coins found in the Hellenistic stratum in Yavne-Yam date the settlement’s final phase to around 100 BCE, and its destruction can be attributed to the conquests of John Hyrcanus or Alexander Jannaeus (Fischer 2005:190; 2008:2075; YY1, in prep.). It would be reasonable to assume that Yavne and Yavne-Yam shared—at least until the Hasmonean expansion—some similar characteristics in terms of population and Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 33* cultural identity, even though Yavne-Yam’s people may have had, as in the Persian period, a stronger “Phoenician” affiliation identified as such also by foreign imperial authorities. At any rate, this “sisterhood” between the inland town and its haven supported (and also leaned on) a relatively prosperous hinterland of farms and villages such as the sites mentioned above of Tel Ya‘oz, Ṭirat Shalom, Ben-Zakkay and Gan Soreq (the latter may have functioned as a settlement of foreign veterans of the Seleucid army; ‘Ad 2016b:113–115), and the site of el-Jisr which was probably established for the first time in the Hellenistic period (Fischer and Taxel 2006). Although Yavne-Yam was not necessarily the only place through which imported goods were distributed across the discussed micro-region, being the closest entrepot suggests that it was the primary source for commodities such as wines marketed in amphorae. Stamped Rhodian amphora handles found in our survey at Yavne (above),9 Ṭirat Shalom, el-Jisr, and other sites may testify to this activity. The Roman Period As will be shown below, archaeological evidence for Roman-period (late first century BCE–fourth century CE) occupation in Yavne mainly includes funerary remains. Architectural remains and finds associated with the settlement proper are relatively scarce. These include pottery and coins (of both the Early and Late Roman periods) found on Tel Yavne and its surroundings during our survey, and the lower part of a marble statue discovered on the mound in 1937, which can be dated to the third century CE and portrays a slightly undersized man, possibly a high provincial official or the god Aesculapius (Fischer and Taxel 2007:224–226). Most recently, segmented architectural remains and refuse pits from the Early Roman period (first century BCE–first century CE) and better-preserved remains of a large structure dated to the Middle Roman period (first–third centuries CE) were unearthed in the excavations to the east of the mound (Perry-Gal, Betzer and Varga, this volume). However, Roman-period Yavne is most clearly illustrated by tombs of various types and related elements which were excavated or documented since British Mandate times in multiple locations around the mound and at different distances. Close to the eastern foot of Tel Yavne, clusters of tombs were found, consisting of built cist tombs, 9 The single Rhodian amphora handle found in our survey at Yavne was discovered on the northern slope of the mound itself. 34* | Yavne and Its Secrets at least one built vaulted tomb, and about 120 infant jar burials (Fig. 4:1),10 limestone sarcophagi, and at least two lead coffins. Most of these burials were dated, based on the pottery, glass and other finds associated with them, including the jar types used for the infant burials, to the mid/late first to second/third century CE. Interestingly, some of these tombs were covered with thick deposits of pottery production waste and domestic refuse from the late Byzantine and beginning of Early Islamic periods (see Jakoel et al., this volume; Fischer and Taxel 2007:227; Segal 2011; Yannai 2014; Yannai and Taxel, unpublished; Varga, Betzer and Weingarten 2022; IAA Mandatory Archive, file Yibna, SRF_194). To the north of Tel Yavne, a mausoleum was excavated containing two sarcophagi and many finds (including gold jewelry) dated to the first– second century CE. Moreover, a built vaulted tomb that probably dates to the Late Roman period was also unearthed here. More distant tombs—single and clustered burial caves—were excavated between 1.5 to 4 km to the west and south of Tel Yavne. These caves had loculi, arcosolia, or floor-cut troughs, and their contents date them to various stages of the Roman as well as to the Byzantine period; some of the caves contained limestone ossuaries which clearly attribute these burials to the Jewish population which resided in Yavne or its immediate vicinity during the first to early second century CE. A fragment of another ossuary found in our survey on the mound itself should be added to this class of finds. Fragmentary (and complete?) sarcophagi made of limestone and marble were found in various locations around the mound since the late nineteenth century. A limestone slab, apparently a tombstone initially identified as a sarcophagus fragment, bears a Latin inscription indicating that the deceased was Julia Grata, the wife or daughter of Mellon, the local Roman procurator (financial officer or governor) of Yavne in the early first century CE (CIIP III, No. 2268; Fischer and Taxel 2007:227–230). These finds, which clearly point to the coexistence of Jewish and polytheistic communities in Yavne, seem to reflect rather faithfully the historical sources related to Yavne. According to these sources, the town had a mixed Jewish and gentile population since the beginning of the Roman period, including when Yavne constituted a royal estate from King Herod’s time until about the mid-first century CE.11 Following the 10 Close to 100 jar burials were discovered in Yannai’s excavation (Yannai and Taxel, unpublished), and about 20 additional jars were found in the recent excavations (Alla Nagorsky, pers. comm., May 2022). 11 It was recently suggested that Yavne even minted coins for a short period in the mid-first century BCE, following the Roman conquest and the apparent upgrading of the town’s administrative status (Farhi and Bachar 2020). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 35* destruction of the Second Temple and up until the Bar Kokhba Revolt, Yavneh was a major center of Jewish learning. Sometime in the second century or shortly afterward, Samaritans began to settle in Yavne and its vicinity, apparently at the expense of the declined Jewish population (see CIIP III:152–154; Farhi and Bachar 2020:112–113; Fischer and Taxel 2007:221, 223–224, with references therein). Compared to Yavne, Roman-period Yavne-Yam is lesser known from historical sources. However, the apparent (continuous) relation between the two is attested by first- and second-century CE Roman authors, e.g., Pliny the Elder, who mentioned Iamneae duae, altera intus (“the two [towns of] Iamneia, one of them inland”; Farhi and Bachar 2020:113; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:470, with references therein). Still, the archaeological evidence from Yavne-Yam points to an apparent gap in the site’s occupation from the time of the Hasmonean destruction to about the early first century CE. Scant architectural remains dated to the first or second centuries CE were unearthed within the settlement proper, in Areas B and B1 (and possibly B2), accompanied by contemporary pottery, coins, and some fragments of chalk vessels (such as “measuring mugs”) typical to the Jewish material culture of Early Roman times. Also tentatively attributed to this period is a Latin-inscribed bronze personal tag (signaculum) of a ship’s operator (Fig. 4:2), which was found in an Early Islamic context (CIIP III, No. 2273; Fischer 2005:190–191; Eich and Eck 2009; PiasetzkyDavid et al. 2020:473, 545; YY2, in prep.). In the IAA excavation at the northern fringes of the site, evidence for the renovation and continuous use of the three Persian-Hellenistic winepresses (above) into the first and second centuries CE was found, in addition to an Early Roman storeroom that served one of the winepresses and another installation of an unknown nature, perhaps part of a workshop which produced fishing gear. The finds accompanying these remains included additional fragments of Jewish chalk vessels and several Jewish coins from the Jerusalem mint. Also attributed to this period is a cluster of about 20 built cist tombs (Ajami and ‘Ad 2015). Funerary remains dated to the Early Roman period were also revealed in previous (the 1960s and 1980s) excavations at the foot of the MB II rampart and over its northern and northeastern sections, in the form of four additional clusters of tombs, primarily built cist tombs but also rock-cut chamber tombs, dug pit tombs, one jar burial, and three limestone ossuaries. The latter naturally indicates Jewish presence at the settlement during this period (Ayalon 2005; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:477–482). The Middle and Late Roman period (second–fourth centuries CE) at Yavne-Yam is similarly represented by segmented architectural remains, mostly plastered industrial installations, walls, and drainage channels excavated in Areas A, B, B1 and B2 36* | Yavne and Its Secrets (Fischer 2005:191; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:474; YY2, in prep.). These are accompanied by five rock-cut arcosolia burial caves excavated in the 1980s on a hill to the northeast of the settlement; based on their contents, at least some of these caves were hewn and used already in the third or fourth century CE, most probably by a polytheistic population, and continued in use into the Byzantine period (PiasetzkyDavid et al. 2020:482–544, 549). Archaeological evidence for Roman-period activity in the area between Yavne and Yavne-Yam is rather poor. The most notable site in this regard is el-Jisr (see Fig. 1), where our survey revealed some Early Roman-period sherds (Fischer and Taxel 2006), and later IAA salvage excavations unearthed remains of a contemporary cemetery composed of cist tombs, clusters of storage jars and a refuse pit. The identity of the population who occupied the site during this period is unknown (Ajami and Rauchberger 2008; Jakoel and Rauchberger 2014). 1 2 0 1 Fig. 4. (1) Part of a Roman-period cemetery with infant jar burials from Yavne (photography: E. Yannai); (2) Roman-period signaculum from Yavne-Yam (photography: P. Shrago). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 37* The Byzantine Period This period no doubt represents the heyday of Yavne in antiquity. Literary (mainly ecclesiastical) sources of the early fourth–seventh centuries CE, archaeological evidence (below), and the depiction of Yavne on the late sixth-century Madaba mosaic map, with the accompanying Greek inscription “Iabneel is also Iamneia” (CIIP III:154–156; Fischer and Taxel 2007:230–231, with references therein), indicate that Byzantine-period Yavne had a mixed population of Christians, Samaritans and perhaps Jews and that the place grew in size and importance to form a medium-sized town. The distribution of surface finds dated to the fourth and mainly fifth to seventh centuries CE is most extensive in Yavne compared to earlier and later periods and includes widespread areas around the mound. Our survey, which preceded the intensive IAA excavations to the east of Tel Yavne (below), revealed numerous Byzantine-period finds, including pottery, coins, marble, granite and limestone architectural and furnishing elements as well as other small finds (Fischer and Taxel 2007:232–233). The latter include a fragmentary ceramic vessel/object decorated with the motif of the Holy Cross on Golgotha depicted upside-down (Fig. 5:1). These finds are accompanied by two marble slabs with incised Samaritan inscriptions containing the Ten Commandments that were found in the area of Tel Yavne in the early and late twentieth century, and which can be dated to either the Byzantine or Early Islamic periods (CIIP III, Nos. 2265, 2266; Fischer and Taxel 2007:243, 245–246). Segmented Byzantine-period architectural remains, including pottery production kilns and refuse pits (some related to pottery workshops), were unearthed in smallscale salvage excavations or documented in inspection activities carried out in various locations around Tel Yavne between the 1980s and early 2000s (see Fischer and Taxel 2007:233, 235, 237–239; Feldstein and Shmueli 2011; Feldstein and ‘Ad 2014; Kletter and Nagar 2015:21*–26*; Segal 2011). Some of the excavated remains provided the first evidence for the production of the so-called Gaza amphorae (or Late Roman Amphora 4) in Yavne, the hallmark of the wine industry and marketing on the southern coast of late antique Palestine. A substantial contribution to our knowledge about Yavne in the Byzantine and beginning of the Early Islamic periods was provided by the recent extensive IAA excavations to the east and northeast of the mound. Eli Yannai’s excavations (2010– 2012) unearthed well-preserved remains of a pottery workshop that included two clusters of three kilns each and four peripheral, colonnaded buildings which enclosed the kilns from all directions. The various parts of the complex collapsed simultaneously during a major earthquake. The collapse of the kilns, or at least 38* | Yavne and Its Secrets the fully excavated one, which contained dozens of whole in situ bag-shaped jars, occurred while they were loaded with already fired vessels. The ceramic evidence from the kiln complex confines the time of the collapse to the seventh century CE, and palynological assemblages that included spring-blooming plants trapped under the collapse strongly suggest that the destruction of the kiln complex occurred as a result of the historically documented earthquake of June 659 CE. There is no evidence of a restoration of the pottery workshop after the earthquake. This workshop specialized in the production of bag-shaped jars, Gaza amphorae, and a newly identified type of globular amphora; the latter was relatively short-lived and was documented only in the Yavne region and in Egypt. Other noteworthy Byzantineperiod remains unearthed in Yannai’s excavations belonged to a (private? or public?) building paved with white and colored mosaics, which was probably built in the sixth century and abandoned during the seventh century CE (Yannai 2014; Langgut et al. 2016; Taxel and Cohen-Weinberger 2019; Yannai and Taxel, unpublished). The more recent excavations (2019–present) revealed, among other remains, sections of large buildings associated with industrial activity, seven winepresses, a glass workshop, a water reservoir, pottery workshop waste piles, and domestic refuse dumps. Most of these remains are dated to the sixth and seventh centuries, with some reflecting a more prolonged period of activity, into the eighth century CE (for further discussions, see Gorin-Rosen et al., this volume; Nadav-Ziv et al., this volume; Tsuf, this volume; for preliminary reports see Nadav-Ziv 2020; Nadav-Ziv et al. 2021; Varga, Betzer and Weingarten 2022). Altogether, these remains shed much new light on Yavne in Late Antiquity, specifically on its intensive and varied industrial activity and potential major role in the regional (and inter-regional?) economy. This regional perspective brings us back to Yavne-Yam. Unlike the rich archaeological evidence (below), literary sources on Byzantine-period Yavne-Yam are meager. They seem to include only two early sixth-century CE Syriac essays dealing with the life and activity of the Monophysite bishop Peter the Iberian. He spent his last years (end of the fifth century CE) at Yavne-Yam, in a mansion belonging to the Empress Eudokia, who also built a church there. Nevertheless, Yavne-Yam, named in these sources Maḥouza d’Yamnin and Maouza d’Yamnias, is described as a place also inhabited by Jews and Samaritans (see CIIP III:155; Fischer and Taxel 2014:213; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:474, 545–546, with references therein). The Byzantine period, starting in the fifth century CE, reflects the peak in settlement of Yavne-Yam, with contemporary remains revealed over the entire area of the site in the TAU and IAA excavations and random discoveries. In addition, our surface survey at the site indicates that the distribution of Byzantine-period remains and finds Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 39* includes rather substantial areas to the south and east of the promontory, including over and beyond the ancient MB II rampart (YY1, in prep.). Within the settlement’s main built-up/inhabited area (notably in the TAU excavation Areas A, B, B1 and B2 and in the IAA 1980s excavations north of Area B), many varied structures were excavated: remains of domestic (and public?) structures, some paved with white and colored mosaics (including an almost entirely unearthed villa), commercial and industrial complexes (including storerooms and plastered halls with freestanding and sunken dolia characteristic of harbor towns), a fishpond, a bathhouse, and a seven m-deep well and a quarry cave. Various architectural elements made of marble, notably three intact columns and a base found close to each other north of Area B, indicate the existence of at least one public building in this area, likely a church. All Byzantine structures were built according to a general southwest-northeast axis, most probably derived from early planning. Yavne-Yam’s urban layout was based on larger insulae divided by alleys. Most of these structures reflect two or three main phases of use and modification during the fifth to seventh centuries CE (Fischer 2005:191–200; Fischer and Taxel 2014; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:474–477; YY2, in prep.).12 Almost all Byzantine-period buildings within the settlement continued to exist for some time after the Muslim conquest, i.e., until the middle or later part of the seventh century, when they were abandoned and consequently dismantled or reused (Fischer and Taxel 2014; see further below). Byzantine-period remains were also excavated at the site’s northern fringes and include an irrigation system and arcosolia burial caves (a continuous use of those Late Roman caves mentioned above). At the eastern outskirts of the settlement (Area T of the TAU excavations), a rock-cut seclusion (monastic) cell was unearthed whose walls were covered with plaster and frescoes depicting medallions containing crosses, one of them flanked by the letters Α and Ω (Fig. 5:2) (Ayalon and Drey 2005; Fischer 2005:191–200; Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:477, 482–544; YY2, in prep.).13 The frescos mentioned above are accompanied by a bronze weight and a lead amulet 12 Of the various recent yet unpublished salvage and development excavations carried out at Yavne-Yam which yielded Byzantine-period remains, especially noteworthy are those directed by T. Tsuk and the author (quarry cave [A-6877/2013, A-7108/2014, on behalf of the Israel Nature and Parks Authority]); Y. Marmelstein (dolia hall [A-7342/2015, on behalf of the IAA]); and M. Ajami and U. ‘Ad (fishpond and other remains [A-7372/2015, on behalf of the IAA]). 13 It should be noted that so far, no Byzantine-period pottery kilns were found at Yavne-Yam; such features should most logically be searched for in the eastern fringes of the site, where very few archaeological excavations have been carried out. 40* | Yavne and Its Secrets 1 0 2 2 2 Fig. 5. (1) Byzantine-period ceramic vessel depicting the Holy Cross on Golgotha from Yavne (drawing: J. Rodman; photography: P. Shrago); (2) Christian fresco from a seclusion cave at Yavne-Yam (photography: M. Fischer). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 41* bearing crosses and Christian legends and a ceramic oil lamp decorated with a seven-branched menorah (all found in Area B), and some objects with an assumed Christian character found in the arcosolia burial caves. These finds hint at the multiethnic/cultural nature of Yavne-Yam’s population, as evident in the essays on Peter the Iberian’s life (above), as well as at the likely conversion of some of the local polytheistic community to Christianity in the course of the fourth and fifth centuries CE (Piasetzky-David et al. 2020:549). The Byzantine period is also well represented archaeologically in the rural hinterland of Yavne and Yavne-Yam. This is especially true for the former, as the area closer to Yavne-Yam is much less known due to current coverage by sand dunes; a small Byzantine-period site was surveyed by us to the south of Yavne-Yam (see Fig. 1) representing either a suburb of the latter or a separate rural settlement. Our regional survey, as well as previous and later salvage excavations and random discoveries, indicate the existence of a complex network of villages of various sizes, farmsteads, and perhaps agricultural monasteries. These settlements were inhabited by either Christians, Jews, or Samaritans, as opposed to the more mixed urban communities of Yavne and Yavne-Yam. Representative examples from the area closest to Yavne to its north are the Christian monastery/farm and estate at Khirbat el-Furn and Bet Ḥanan, respectively, and the Jewish village at Khirbat ed-Duheisha (Fig. 1; see Fischer and Taxel 2008; Taxel 2013a, with additional sites further to the east and south of Yavne). The Early Islamic Period Like other settlements in the country, Yavne surrendered to the Muslim forces following the battle of Ijnādayn in 634 CE. Historical sources and artifactual evidence show that sometime after the conquest, Yavne (now called Yubnā in Arabic) became a center of the administrative district (kūra), and during the Umayyad period, minted coins and administrative lead bullae. Other Muslim and Christian sources of the ninth and tenth centuries CE indicate that Christian and Samaritan communities still resided in Yavne, alongside Muslims, during the Abbasid period and perhaps until sometime in the Fatimid period (Fischer and Taxel 2007:242–243; Taxel 2013a:163, with references; for Yavne/Yubnā coins see also Amitai-Preiss and Bachar 2016). Until recently, however, Early Islamic Yavne was archaeologically known mainly from surface finds collected in our survey on and around Tel Yavne; these finds (mainly pottery) date as late as the tenth or eleventh century CE, though their relatively low number and restricted spatial distribution indicate for a certain shrinking of the settlement compared to its heyday in the Byzantine period (Fischer and Taxel 2007:243). Nonetheless, it is highly likely that at least some of the Byzantine- 42* | Yavne and Its Secrets period remains discovered in past salvage excavations around the mound represent structures and elements which continued in use into the beginning of the Early Islamic period (i.e., until the second half of the seventh or early eighth century CE). At any rate, substantial remains dated to various stages of the Early Islamic period were unearthed at Yavne only starting with Yannai’s 2010–2012 excavations to the east of Tel Yavne and more considerably during the recent excavations in the same area. First, as already noted, the large pottery workshop excavated by Yannai apparently functioned until its abrupt destruction in the mid-seventh century, perhaps by the 659 CE earthquake. However, building activity in the area continued and even intensified after that, when new buildings, mostly if not exclusively of domestic nature, were built closer to the mound beginning in the second half of the seventh and into the eighth century CE. This residential quarter was built over earlier Byzantine-period buildings, which were partially dismantled to reuse their usable materials. The earlier pottery workshop area, especially the colonnaded buildings, was partially dismantled and became an area of refuse disposal and maybe some other small-scale activity. In addition, part of a large urban dump of the seventh–eighth centuries CE was unearthed further to the south. Its artifactual contents included defective and unused ceramic lamps and a lamp mold, which indicate the production of lamps in Yavne at this time. The rich faunal remains associated with the Early Islamic remains provide much important evidence about the economy and social and religious affinity of the settlement’s inhabitants during this period. Specifically, the sharp decline in pig consumption during the late Umayyad and Abbasid periods suggests a dramatic change in the ethnic-religious identity of at least some of Yavne’s population.14 It seems that the number of Christians diminished sometime in the second half of the seventh century CE due to migration or conversion to Islam. At the same time, the population which inhabited the area beginning in the late Umayyad period was composed of religious groups that generally do not associate with pig consumption (i.e., Muslims, Jews, and Samaritans, however, regarding the finds from the more recent excavations, see below). Also noteworthy is that in none of the excavation areas, evidence was found for activity post-dating the tenth century. Probably, the eastern fringes of Early Islamic Yavne were gradually abandoned during the Abbasid period and became virtually empty of any permanent human presence 14 R. Bouchnik studied the faunal remains from Yannai’s excavation. According to his yet unpublished report, the breakdown of pig bones in the four main phases identified in the excavation is as follows: Roman period: 0 bones/0%; Byzantine-early Umayyad period: 38 bones/8%; late Umayyad-Abbasid period: 9 bones/1%; Abbasid period: 1 bone/0.3%. Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 43* towards the end of the Abbasid or the beginning of the Fatimid period. Consequently, the settlement has abated to include mainly the ancient mound of Tel Yavne and limited parts of its surroundings (Yannai 2014; Langgut et al. 2016; Taxel and CohenWeinberger 2019; Yannai and Taxel, unpublished). The more recent excavations to the east of the mound added much new evidence on the Early Islamic period at this part of the site but altogether reinforce the results of Yannai’s excavations. Some Byzantine-period buildings continued into the Umayyad period but were replaced during the eighth century CE by new domestic and industrial structures, including two winepresses and over 20 pottery kilns. These kilns were smaller than their Byzantine-period predecessors and specialized in the production of bag-shaped storage jars and cooking vessels. Seemingly, the remains revealed in these excavations are also dated no later than the tenth century (NadavZiv 2020; Nadav-Ziv et al. 2021, this volume; Tsuf, this volume).15 This intensive ceramic industry suggests that Early Islamic Yavne was a major regional pottery producer, perhaps partially competing with Ramla or alternatively complemented it. Interestingly, a preliminary synthesis of the faunal remains from these excavations indicates an unusual concentration of pig bones in one of the excavation areas (C3), in a context dated to the ninth–tenth centuries CE. These finds were interpreted as evidence for the occupation of this specific area by non-Muslims, either Christians or converts to Islam of Christian origin, who still consumed pork (Perry-Gal et al. 2022). Meanwhile, Yavne-Yam has also undergone substantial changes, as indicated primarily by the results of the TAU excavations and some specific accidental discoveries. First, as mentioned above, the archaeological evidence clearly shows that the beginning of the Early Islamic period (mid-seventh to early/mid-eighth centuries CE) at Yavne-Yam marked a sharp reduction in the size of the settlement and a significant shift in its nature. By the late eighth century CE, the occupied area included only about 15% of the Byzantine settlement. This area had a fortress (c. 40 × 70 m) built on the promontory at the southern end of the harbor and its immediate surroundings (Areas A and C). The excavated parts of the fortress include a massive square tower at its eastern end (perhaps part of the east gate of the fortress) and sections of the internal fortifications, rooms, installations, and a small bathhouse in the northern and southern areas. Additional remains of the fortress, notably its northern peripheral wall, are visible but have not yet been excavated. 15 The chronological reconstruction regarding the end of the Early Islamic phase at this part of the site is also reinforced by the pottery finds retrieved in the more recent excavations, which lack unequivocal post-tenth century CE types (Orit Tsuf, pers. comm., May 2022). 44* | Yavne and Its Secrets According to the ceramic, numismatic and other artifactual evidence, the fortress was built around the late seventh/early eighth century CE. It was occupied until about the mid-twelfth century CE (see below). The construction of the fortress was most probably accompanied by systematic dismantling and recycling of various building materials from many (if not most) of the abandoned Byzantine-period buildings, as indicated by clear signs of this activity within the excavated Byzantine remains and by evidence of the incorporation of contemporary architectural elements in the Early Islamic walls. Additional Early Islamic remains are meager and include a few walls and a water channel built over some of the Byzantine-period remains in Area B, further to the north (Fischer 2005:201–204; 2008:2075; Taxel 2013b:92, 94; 2014; Fischer and Taxel 2014; YY2, in prep.). The Yavne-Yam Early Islamic fortress is identified as Māḥūz Yubnā (“harbor of Yavne/Yubnā”), the ribāt (coastal stronghold; pl. ribāṭāt) mentioned by al-Muqaddasī� in 985 CE as part of the fortification system that protected the coast of Jund Filasṭīn and its capital Ramla, and as al-Māḥūz al-Thānī� (“the second harbor” [from Ashqelon northwards, i.e., after the “first harbor” which is Ashdod-Yam]), mentioned by alIdrī�sī� in 1154 CE but likely reflects the reality of earlier centuries (for the ribāṭāt, see e.g., Masarwa 2011; for the Yavne-Yam ribāt, see Taxel 2014:131, with references therein). As suggested elsewhere (Taxel 2013b:92, 94; Fischer and Taxel 2014), the establishment of this fortress, combined with other economic and social changes of the time, resulted in the abandonment of the harbor town, which existed at the site until the seventh century CE. Still, some of the remains and finds retrieved in the fortress’ excavation (see Taxel 2014), in addition to the results of underwater surveys in the Yavne-Yam anchorage (Galili and Sharvit 2005), indicate that the place still maintained maritime contacts—even if predominantly military in nature—and that its inhabitants enjoyed a relatively high living standard. Another unique evidence for the sharp change in the nature of Yavne-Yam at the beginning of the Early Islamic period is given by three marble columns of similar dimensions which were accidentally discovered on the site’s surface, near one another, north of our Area B. One of the columns was found along with its marble base in situ, and it seems that the three columns belonged to the same building, apparently a church, located at the very spot of the columns’ discovery. The columns bear at least 12 Arabic inscriptions (some incomplete), either incised or created by chiseling dots into the surface of the upright standing columns. The inscriptions of an explicit religious Muslim nature are paleographically dated to the early eighth Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 45* century CE. The longest and most significant inscription mentions a warrior who aspires for martyrdom (shuhadā)—death in a holy war (jihād), which could grant him the position of shahīd (a martyr). This and the other inscriptions (short prayers of other men asking for Allah’s forgiveness) support the interpretation that YavneYam was a ribāṭ in Early Islamic times. Indeed, it cannot be determined whether the edifice/s (a church?) to which the columns belonged were deserted when pious Muslims entered them and engraved their invocations on the columns. However, evidence from the rest of the site suggests that by the time of the column’s writing, virtually none of the settlement’s buildings were occupied or used for their original purposes (Sharon 2005; Fischer and Taxel 2014:234–236, 238). The exact nature of the relationships between the town of Yavne and the military stronghold of Yavne-Yam in Early Islamic times is unclear. However, it is reasonable to assume that the latter enjoyed the proximity to a prominent civic center and its rural hinterland. Our regional survey and a few salvage excavations conducted in the close vicinity of Yavne indicate that most of the rural settlements which existed in the area during the Byzantine and beginning of Early Islamic periods, such as Khirbat ed-Duheisha (Fig. 1), were largely reduced in size from the eighth century CE on and some of them were apparently abandoned (even if temporarily) before the eleventh century CE; still, there were also settlements, located further to the east and north of Yavne, which expanded and flourished during most of the Early Islamic period (see Taxel 2013a). Regarding the possible linkage between Yavne and Yavne-Yam, a unique phenomenon was identified during our survey and later studied in the sand dunes area (Yavne dunefield) exactly midway between the two sites (Fig. 1). These are two sparse clusters of agricultural plots, most of which were in the form of a square to rectangular depressions tens to several hundred meters wide that were confined and protected by berms that have a spatial crisscross pattern. Named by us Plot-and-Berm (P&B) agroecosystem, these plots (also identified to the south of Caesarea and at Ziqim south of Ashqelon) were enriched and stabilized by refuse (also containing fragments of pottery, glass and stone objects, a few coins, animal bones and seashells) transported from dumps located in the closest settlements. In the case of the Yavne dunefield P&B, an analysis of the artifacts from the plots suggests that their source was the town of Yavne. However, the possibility that some of the refuse material originated at Yavne-Yam should not be excluded. Based on the artifacts and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dates, it seems that the agroecosystem’s period of use covered the tenth to early twelfth centuries CE namely 46* | Yavne and Its Secrets the late Abbasid to early Crusader period.16 An administrative authority probably initiated this impressive agricultural enterprise, perhaps centered in Yavne, but the agroecosystem was maybe even protected and controlled by the Yavne-Yam ribāṭ (Taxel et al. 2018; Roskin and Taxel 2021). The Beginning of the Crusader Period As noted, Yavne’s history in the eleventh century CE, on the eve of the Crusader conquest, is unclear. Still, the relative proximity of the place to the harbor town of Jaffa, the administrative center of Ramla, and the Fatimid stronghold of Ashqelon made Yavne an arena of clashes between the Muslim and Frankish forces between 1099 and 1123 CE. The historical sources indicate that a (Frankish?) village named Ibenium or Hibelin existed in Yavne in the early 1120s or slightly before. Still, only in 1141 CE did King Fulk of Jerusalem establish a fort, constituting part of a chain of strongholds that encircled Fatimid Ashqelon. The fort, named Ibelin, became the center of a lordship (seigneurie) whose importance and territory gradually increased. Yavne/Ibelin remained in the hands of the Crusaders until their defeat in the Battle of Ḥiṭṭin in 1187 CE and excluding short periods in the late twelfth and mid-thirteenth centuries CE when it was controlled again by the Franks, Yavne remained in Muslim hands (see Fischer and Taxel 2007:246–247, 249; Kool and ‘Ad 2016:165–167, 171– 172, with references therein). Archaeologically speaking, Crusader-period Yavne is mainly known from the remains of the Frankish fort and nearby church (converted to a mosque under the Mamluks) built on Tel Yavne’s summit. The church was built in a somewhat lower area compared to the fort. The fort remains, documented by various scholars (also during our survey) and partially excavated in 2005, include massive walls (Fig. 6:1), a destroyed vault, and a possible gatehouse. Of the church-mosque building, however, very little was preserved to this day after the building’s destruction following Israel’s War of Independence in 1948 (Fischer and Taxel 2007:251–255). Small finds dated to the Crusader period include a handful of pottery sherds collected in our survey at Tel Yavne (Fischer and Taxel 2007:250) and a coin hoard dated to c. 1191 CE, which was discovered in a salvage excavation at the western fringes of the mound (Kool and ‘Ad 2016). 16 Our analysis of the pottery from the Yavne dunefield P&B shows that it lacks clear posttenth century CE types, which—given some of the later OSL dates—suggests that the refuse material transported to these plots originated, at least partially, in already abandoned dumps (Taxel et al. 2018). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 47* In Yavne-Yam, the first half of the twelfth century CE marked the end of the last permanent occupation phase of the site. The latest ceramics and other finds retrieved from the area of the Early Islamic fortress are mainly dated to the middle of the twelfth century, and there is a near-total absence of imports which usually characterizes sites with a clear Frankish presence. Other noteworthy finds are two Arabic inscribed glass weights that bear the names of Fatimid caliphs; the first is dated to 471 A.H./1078–1079 CE (from the days of al-Mustanṣir; Fig. 6:2a), and the second dates to the time of al-Ḥāfiẓ (525–544 A.H./1130–1145 CE; Fig. 6:2c).17 1 a 2 b 0 1 Fig. 6. (1) The northern wall of the Crusader fort at Yavne, looking south (photography: I. Taxel); (2a-b) two Fatimid glass weights from Yavne-Yam (photography: P. Shrago). 17 The weights were studied by N. Amitai-Preiss (Hebrew University of Jerusalem), whom I wish to thank. 48* | Yavne and Its Secrets These glass weights support the assumption that the Yavne-Yam ribāṭ remained in Fatimid hands almost until the takeover of inland Yavne by the Crusaders in 1141 CE. Yavne-Yam can therefore be considered the northernmost Muslim stronghold after Ashqelon, which only fell into Crusader’s hands in 1153 CE. It seems that following the abandonment of the fortress, it came under Crusader ownership, but so far, without evidence of an actual occupation. Crusader-period presence in the immediate rural hinterland of Yavne (and YavneYam) is archaeologically virtually absent. However, evidence for contemporary occupation was identified in slightly more northern and eastern sites. Our study of the Yavne dunefield P&B agroecosystem suggests that its abandonment may be linked to the Muslim-Crusader battles that took place in the area surrounding Yavne or even to the establishment of the Crusader fort there in 1141 CE. We assume that the political instability around Yavne in the early decades of the twelfth century CE, with parts of the area, probably changing hands between the Crusaders and the Fatimids, significantly disrupted life in the countryside, including the maintenance of the Yavne dunefield agroecosystem (Taxel et al. 2018). Summary Although brief and partial, the above review allows for several preliminary conclusions regarding the history of Yavne and Yavne-Yam and their relationship. It is clear that in antiquity, presumably from the MB II on, Yavne-Yam was the sea-gate of inland Yavne. However, this is not always directly apparent from the archaeological evidence. For instance, Persian-period Yavne is much less known than the contemporary settlement in Yavne-Yam. So far, the rich “pan-Mediterranean” material culture which characterized the latter is not reflected by the finds from Yavne. A fact that may actually be a matter of coincidence due to the relatively limited exposure of Persianperiod remains there. This is also partially true for the Hellenistic period. However, here we can identify for the first time, thanks to the historical sources and the YavneYam inscription, a religious-ethnic common denominator between the two places, which also shared a similar fate at the hands of the Hasmoneans. In the Early Roman period, Yavne no doubt prospered due to its status as a royal estate and, for a short period, became a hub of Jewish learning, with contemporary Yavne-Yam similarly being inhabited by Jews (alongside polytheists?). The Romanized, polytheistic character of both Yavne and Yavne-Yam intensified in the course of the second to fourth centuries CE, perhaps alongside first attempts of Samaritans to settle in these Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 49* towns. In the fourth and fifth centuries, Christianity gradually gained power in both Yavne and Yavne-Yam, with the latter preserving Yavne’s previous status as a private estate belonging now to Empress Eudokia. Nevertheless, Samaritans and Jews also found a home in both places, reflecting the mixed nature of urban centers of the time. From the economic point of view, it is relatively clear that Yavne-Yam served as the main harbor for the intensive wine industry of Yavne and its vicinity as late as the seventh century CE.18 A fundamental shift in the nature of Yavne-Yam occurred during the first century of Muslim rule when the place ceased to function as a busy civil harbor town and became a small but quite crucial military stronghold with a clear religious orientation protecting the new provincial capital. However, the town of Yavne, situated somewhat away from the newly-created Mediterranean frontier, maintained its civil character and even became an important producer of pottery vessels that were likely marketed across the region. Furthermore, Yavne’s authorities may have been involved in initiating a large-scale agricultural enterprise in the dunefield to the west. The first half of the twelfth century CE, following the arrival of the Crusaders, marked both the end of Yavne-Yam’s last phase of permanent occupation (as a Muslim ribāṭ) and the beginning of a new albeit short-lived era in the history of Yavne, becoming a Frankish lordship. From this point on, it seems that the linkage that existed for a rather prolonged period between Yavne and Yavne-Yam came to an end, or at least turned out to be very superficial. While Yavne continued to exist as a permanent, important village/town throughout the medieval period until the end of British Mandate times (Fischer and Taxel 2007), Yavne-Yam became a ruined site that formed a shelter for occasional fishermen and a source of building stones. Moreover, since sometime in the Mamluk period, Yavne-Yam’s new (Arabic) name—Minat Rubin (“harbor of Rubin/Reuben”)—no longer linked it to inland Yavne but to the important Muslim pilgrimage site of Nabi Rubin, situated in the sand dunes on the southern bank of Naḥal Soreq (Fischer and Taxel 2021; Taxel, Sasson and Fischer 2021). 18 It is interesting to note that one of the tales related to Yavne-Yam in Peter the Iberian’s life (Vita Petri Iberi 127–128) mentions vineyards located near the “river”, most probably Naḥal Soreq, i.e., to the north of the town. This detail suggests that wine production also took place in the immediate hinterland of Yavne-Yam. However, no remains of Byzantine-period winepresses have thus far been found in the site’s vicinity. 50* | Yavne and Its Secrets Acknowledgments I wish to thank the conference organizers for inviting me to present a lecture at the event and to contribute an article to the proceedings volume. The illustrations for this article were prepared by Y. Gumenny and A. Buchnick-Abuhav (IAA), to whom I am grateful. I also thank E. Yannai for allowing me to participate in the publication of his 2010–2012 excavations in Yavne and the directors and staff of the present Yavne excavations for sharing with me unpublished data relevant to this study. References Abadi-Reiss Y., Betzer P. and Varga D. 2022. Tel Yavne, Area J. HA–ESI 134 (July 17). http:// www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=26203&mag_id=134 (accessed August 8, 2022). ‘Ad U. 2016a. Gan Soreq. HA–ESI 128 (July 25). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_ Eng.aspx?id=25025&mag_id=124 (accessed August 5, 2022). ‘Ad U. 2016b. Settlement in the Southern Coastal Plain (“Philistia”) during the Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods (from the Last Third of the Sixth Century Until the Mid-Second Century B.C.E.). Ph.D. diss. Tel Aviv University. Tel Aviv (Hebrew). Ajami M. and ‘Ad U. 2015. Yavne-Yam (North): An Agricultural Area and Cemeteries from the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, and the Persian, Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods. ‘Atiqot 81:1–29 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 113*–115*). Ajami M. and Rauchberger L. 2008. El-Jisr. HA–ESI 120 (November 23). http://www.hadashotesi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=954&mag_id=114 (accessed August 5, 2022). Amitai-Preiss N. and Bachar R. 2016. An Arab-Byzantine Coin of Yubna (Iamnia). INR 11:135– 140. Ayalon E. 2005. Tombs from the Roman Period at Yavneh-Yam. In M. Fischer ed. Yavneh, YavnehYam and Their Neighborhood—Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 217−221 (Hebrew; English summary, p. XVII). Ayalon E. and Drey J. 2005. An Irrigation System from Byzantine Yavneh-Yam. In M. Fischer ed. Yavneh, Yavneh-Yam and Their Neighborhood: Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 229–252 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XVIII–XIX). CIIP III. W. Ameling, H.M. Cotton, W. Eck, B. Isaac, A. Kushnir-Stein, H. Misgav, J. Price and A. Yardeni eds. Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae/Palaestinae III: South Coast, 2161–2648. Berlin– Boston 2014. Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 51* Eich P. and Eck W. 2009. Ein neues römisches bronzenes signaculum aus Yavneh-Yam (Israel). ZPE 171:253–260. Fadida A., Milevski I., Nadav-Ziv L., Brailovsky-Rokser L., Weingarten Y., Peters I., Asscher Y., Shalev S., Ktalav I., Perry-Gal L. and Haddad E. 2021. A Ghassulian Chalcolithic Occupation at the Southern Margins of Tel Yavne. JIPS 51:225–260. Farhi Y. and Bachar R. 2020. Iamneia (by the Sea?): A Newly Discovered Mint in First Century BCE Provincia Syria. INR 15:111–126. Feldstein A. and ‘Ad U. 2014. Tel Yavne, Southwestern Slope. HA–ESI 126 (December 31). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=13707&mag_id=121 (accessed August 5, 2022). Feldstein A. and Shmueli O. 2011. Tel Yavne. HA–ESI 123 (July 10). http://www. hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=1735&mag_id=118 (accessed August 5, 2022). Fischer M. 2005. The Archaeology and History of Yavneh-Yam. In M. Fischer ed. Yavneh, YavnehYam and Their Neighborhood: Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 173−208 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XV−XVI). Fischer M. 2008. Yavneh-Yam. In NEAEHL 5. Pp. 2073–2075. Fischer M., Roll I. and Tal O. 2008. Persian and Hellenistic Remains at Tel Ya‘oz. Tel Aviv 35:123– 163. Fischer M. and Taxel I. 2006. Yavne: Survey Map. HA–ESI 118 (November 15). http://www. hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=437&mag_id=111 (accessed August 5, 2022). Fischer M. and Taxel I. 2007. Ancient Yavneh: Its History and Archaeology. Tel Aviv 34:204–284. Fischer M. and Taxel I. 2008. Rural Settlement in the Vicinity of Yavneh in the Byzantine Period: A Religio-Archaeological Perspective. BASOR 350:7–35. Fischer M. and Taxel I. 2014. Yavneh-Yam in the Byzantine–Early Islamic Transition: The Archaeological Remains and Their Socio-Political Implications. IEJ 64.2:212–242. Fischer M. and Taxel I. 2021. Life in the Dunes: The Western Hinterland of Yubna/Yavneh in Late Ottoman and British Mandate Times. JEMAHS 9(1–2):29–63. Galili E. 2009. Ancient Ports and Anchorages along Israel’s Coastline in Light of Five Decades of Marine and Coastal Archaeological Activity and Excavation. Qadmoniot 137:2–21 (Hebrew). 52* | Yavne and Its Secrets Galili E. and Sharvit J. 2005. Underwater Archaeological Remains at Yavneh-Yam. In M. Fischer ed. Yavneh, Yavneh-Yam and Their Neighborhood: Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 303–314 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XX−XXI). Gorin-Rosen Y., Betzer P., Varga D. and Shatil. This volume. Glass Production at Yavneh: First Impressions from Area L. Gorzalczany A. 2018. The Chalcolithic Cemetery at Palmaḥim (North): New Evidence of Burial Patterns from the Central Coastal Plain. ‘Atiqot 91:1–94. Haddad E., Nadav-Ziv L., Elisha Y., Tal G., Rauchberger L. and Sandhaus D. 2021. Tel Yavne, Area A. HA–ESI 133 (January 24). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng. aspx?id=25883&mag_id=133 (accessed August 5, 2022). Jakoel E. and Rauchberger L. 2014. El-Jisr. HA–ESI 126 (August 28). http://www.hadashot-esi. org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=9565&mag_id=121 (accessed August 5, 2022). Jakoel E., Nagorsky A., Betzer P. and Varga D. This volume. “May my Coffin be Perforated to the Earth”: Roman-Period Cemeteries at Yavneh. Kletter R. and Nagar Y. 2015. An Iron Age Cemetery and Other Remains at Yavneh. ‘Atiqot 81:1*–33*. Kletter R., Ziffer I. and Zwickel W. 2010. Yavneh I. The Excavation of the “Temple Hill” Repository Pit and the Cult Stands (OBO.SA 30). Fribourg–Göttingen. Kletter R., Zwickel W. and Ziffer I. This volume. The Yavne Pit: A Repository (Genizah) of a Philistine Temple. Kool R. and ‘Ad U. 2016. A Late Twelfth-Century Silver Purse Hoard from Ibelin. INR 11:163– 180. Langgut D., Yannai E., Taxel I., Agnon A. and Marco S. 2016. Resolving a Historical Earthquake Date at Tel Yavneh (Central Israel) Using Pollen Seasonality. Palynology 40(2):145–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2015.1035405 Masarwa Y. 2011. Transforming the Mediterranean from a Highway into Frontier: The Coastal Cities of Palestine during the Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods. In A. Borrut, M. Debié, A. Papaconstantinou, D. Pieri and J.-P. Sodini eds. Le Proche-Orient de Justinien aux Abbassides: peuplement et dynamiques spatiales (Actes du colloque “Continuités de l’occupation entre les périodes byzantine et abbaside au Proche-Orient, VIIe-IXe siècles”, Paris, 18–20 octobre 2007). Turnhout. Pp. 149–167. Nadav-Ziv L. 2020. Yavne. HA–ESI 132 (July 13). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_ Detail_Eng.aspx?id=25743&mag_id=128 (accessed August 5, 2022). Land and Sea: On the Relationships, Similarities, and Differences between Yavne and Yavne-Yam | 53* Nadav-Ziv L., Haddad E., Elisha Y., Tal G., Ben Shlush R., Gorin-Rosen Y., Tsuf O., Sandhaus D. and Golan D. 2021. Tel Yavne, Areas B and D. HA–ESI 133 (December 31). http://www.hadashotesi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=26102&mag_id=133 (accessed August 5, 2022). Nadav-Ziv L., Haddad E., Seligman J., Varga D. and Betzer P. This volume. Ancient Yavne: Preliminary Finds from the Extensive Excavations at the Foot of Tel Yavne. Nir Y. and Eldar-Nir I. 1991. The Hellenistic Well in Yavneh-Yam. In M. Fischer and B. Dashti eds. Yavneh-Yam and Its Environs. Palmachim. Pp. 106–110 (Hebrew). Perry-Gal L., Betzer P. and Varga D. This volume . Preliminary Evidence for Animal Bone-Marrow Industry during the Sanhedrin Period in Yavne: Archaeozoological and Archaeological Views. Perry-Gal L., Ktalav I., Nadav-Ziv L. and Haddad E. 2022. Pigs in a Pit: An Unusual Find of Ritual Suid Exploitation in an Early Islamic Context at the Site of Tel Yavne, Israel. JAS Reports 43:103462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2022.103462 Piasetzky-David M., Fischer M., Taxel I., Jackson-Tal R.E. and Tal O. 2020. Roman and Byzantine Burials at Yavneh-Yam: New Insights into the Site’s Settlement History. LA 70:469–577. Roskin J. and Taxel I. 2021. “He Who Revives Dead Land”: Groundwater Harvesting Agroecosystems in Sand Along the Southeastern Mediterranean Coast Since Early Medieval Times. Mediterranean Geoscience Reviews 3:293–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42990021-00058-5 Safrai Z. This volume. The Hasmonean Battle near Iamnia. Segal O. 2011. Tel Yavne. HA–ESI 123 (July 5). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_ Eng.aspx?id=1705&mag_id=118 (accessed August 5, 2022). Segal O., Kletter R. and Ziffer I. 2006. A Persian-Period Building from Tel Ya‘oz (Tell Ghaza). ‘Atiqot 52:1*–24* (Hebrew; English summary, p. 203). Shachar Y. 2005. Talmudic Yavneh—Two Generations, Then Eternal Glory. In M. Fischer ed. Yavneh, Yavneh-Yam and Their Neighborhood: Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 113−138 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XIII−XIV). Shalev Y. 2014. “The Mighty Grain-Lands”: Demographic and Commercial Aspects of “Southern Phoenicia” under the Achaemenid Regime. Ph.D. diss. University of Haifa. Haifa (Hebrew). Sharon M. 2005. Arabic Inscriptions from Yavneh-Yam. In M. Fischer, ed. Yavneh, Yavneh-Yam and Their Neighborhood: Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 253–258 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XIX–XX). Taxel I. 2013a. Rural Settlement Processes in Central Palestine, ca. 640–800 C.E.: The RamlaYavneh Region as a Case Study. BASOR 369:157–199. 54* | Yavne and Its Secrets Taxel I. 2013b. The Byzantine-Early Islamic Transition on the Palestinian Coastal Plain: A Reevaluation of the Archaeological Evidence. Semitica et Classica 6:73–106. Taxel I. 2014. Luxury and Common Wares: Socio-Economic Aspects of the Distribution of Glazed Pottery in Early Islamic Palestine. Levant 46(1):118–139. Taxel I. and Cohen-Weinberger A. 2019. A Newly-Identified Type of Late Antique Palestinian Amphora: Production, Evolution and Use of the Mediterranean Globular Amphora. JMA 32.1:3–31. Taxel I., Sasson A. and Fischer M. 2021. The Archaeology of Regional Muslim Pilgrimage Reevaluated: The Site of Nabi Rubin (Israel) as a Case Study. BASOR 386:237–282. Taxel I., Sivan D., Bookman R. and Roskin J. 2018. An Early Islamic Inter-Settlement Agroecosystem in the Coastal Sand of the Yavneh Dunefield, Israel. JFA 43.7:551–569. Tsuf O. This volume. Jar Mass Production for the Yavne Wine Industry: The Relationship between the Pottery Kilns and the Pottery Dumps. Uziel J. 2008. The Southern Coastal Plain of Canaan during the Middle Bronze Age. Ph.D. diss. Bar-Ilan University. Ramat Gan. Varga D., Betzer P. and Weingarten Y. 2022. Tel Yavne, Area M1. HA–ESI 134 (May 26). http:// www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=26172&mag_id=134 (accessed August 8, 2022). Vita Petri Iberi. Raabe R. 1895, ed. and transl. Petrus der Iberer. Ein Charakterbild zur Kirchen und Sittengeschichte des fünften Jahrhunderts: syrische Übersetzung einer um das Jahr 500 verfassten griechischen Biographie, Leipzig. Yannai E. 2014. Yavne. HA–ESI 126 (December 15). http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_ Detail_Eng.aspx?id=13677&mag_id=121 (accessed August 5, 2022). Put Your Shoulder to the Wheel: Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne—Uses and Reconstruction Inbar Ktalav, Ariel Shatil, Natalia Solodenko, Yotam Asscher and Lee Perry-Gal Introduction Bone tools can be made from various bones, with each anatomical part having physical and morphological properties suitable for making different types of tools. In this context, the scapula (shoulder blade) consists of a narrow, solid neck that extends into a fan-shaped blade bisected by a bony spine (Fig. 1). This structure of a large, flat and robust bone makes the scapula bone suitable for a variety of uses such as hoes, sickles, squash knives, bone scrapers, tools for skin softening and for the preparation of bark fiber and other plant processing tools (Hofman 1980; Northe 2001; Griffitts 2006; Moore 2013; Xie, 2014 Bradfield and Antonites 2018). These tools are usually made from the scapulae of large mammals such as Bovids (cattle, bison), Cervids (elk), Equids (horse/donkey), Ursids (bear), and Camelids (camel). The choice of animal species, the tool’s production method, and its purpose and usage vary depending on the period, geographical area, and cultural context (Hofman 1980; Griffitts 2006; Horwitz 2008; Studer and Schneider 2008; Xie et al. 2017). In the southern Levant, tools of the Late Antiquity that were made from scapula are mainly identified as ‘tarvadot’ (‫)תרוודות‬, which is a tool used for collecting and moving a variety of materials from place to place, for scraping and cleaning surfaces and even for mixing food. These tools were found in archaeological contexts dated to the Roman (especially Second Temple) and Byzantine periods. They are often found in contexts of olive oil presses or areas relating to olive oil production with a marked Jewish character, such as Gamla in the Golan Heights, Aḥuzat Ḥazzan and Qedumim in the Judean Shephela, and Ḥorbat Raqit and Ḥorbat ‘Eleq in the Carmel (Horwitz 2008; 2011). Camelid scapulae used as writing boards were found in several Nabatean and Islamic sites in the Negev desert, such as ‘Avedat (Negev 1977; Hakker-Orion 1984), 56* | Yavne and Its Secrets Margo vertebralis Blade Anterior border Margo cervicalis Posterior border Margo thoracius Spine Spina scapulae Neck Collum scapulae Coracoid process Tuber scapulae Glenoid cavity Glenoid process Process articularis Fig 1: Right camel scapula showing the different features mentioned in the text. Latin terms are shown in italics (photography: I. Ktalav). Niẓẓana (Negev 1988), ‘En Raḥel and from the Ma’agan Mikhael B Shipwreck (Harding 2021). Another variant of a worked scapula has two to three holes, which could have been used as raw material for round inlay parts (E. Ayalon, pers. comm.). This kind of worked scapula was found in Caesarea Maritima, Shiqmona and ‘En Ḥazeva in contexts dating to the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods (Ayalon 2005:515). Among the faunal remains from Tel Yavne were six worked but broken shoulder blades (scapulae) belonging to camels and cattle. One was recovered from Area C and five from Area G in contexts dating between the Late Roman and the Early Islamic periods. Three types of worked bones/tools were identified. The first resembles the Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 57* tarvadot (Ayalon and Sorek 1999; Horwitz 2008; 2011). The second is a decorated scapula with a circle-and-dot motif; the rest seem to belong to a different type of tool. In the present paper, we will describe the small assemblage of bone tools made from shoulder blades found at Tel Yavne and present a possible new type of tool. In addition, we seek to understand how these tools were created, how they were used, and for what purpose. We are basing this on experimental archaeology and Infrared spectroscopy (IR) analysis of traces of a plaster-like substance found on the working edge of two tools. The Site Tel Yavne (c. 60 m asl) is located in the southeastern part of the modern city of Yavne (see Fig. 1a in Nadav-Ziv et al., this volume) on the central kurkar ridge of the southern coastal plain and was continuously settled from the Middle Bronze Age II to the present day (Taxel 2005; Fischer and Taxel 2007; Kletter and Nagar 2015). Recent excavations were conducted to the east and north of the tel (Areas C and G see Fig. 1a in Nadav-Ziv et al., this volume)1. Excavations in Area C unearthed remains of occupation layers from the Hellenistic period to the twentieth century. The finds included mosaic floors of industrial nature from the Byzantine period; a winery, pottery kilns and other building remains dated to the Early Islamic period; irrigation channels that post-date the Early Islamic period; and dwellings of the Arab village that existed until 1948. Area G was used at different times for various purposes such as burial activity, city dump, and industrial purposes. Dozens of burials from the Roman period found at the site undoubtedly belong to an extensive cemetery. Other parts of the cemetery were discovered in different areas and previous excavations at the site. During the Byzantine period, a meticulously planned industrial zone was built, including impressive wineries and storage buildings incorporated into a street system with deep, roofed drainage channels. At the beginning of the Early Islamic period, numerous pottery kilns were built at the site, and later on, installations for processing plant products (Nadav-Ziv 2020; Haddad et. al. 2021; Nadav-Ziv et al., this volume). 1 The excavation at Tel Yavne was conducted on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority and funded by the Israel Land Authority. We would like to thank E. Haddad, L. Nadav-Ziv and J. Seligman the excavation directors; We thank H. Schechter for assisting in the microscope photography of the reconstructed bone tools, and D.A. Aladjem for the 3D scanning of the bone tools. 58* | Yavne and Its Secrets Methods Interrelated aspects of bone tool research include the type of raw material (element and species), manufacturing methods, tool morphology, and wear analysis. In this paper, we attempt to relate all of these aspects, though some of them, such as the experimental archaeology (see below), are only at a preliminary stage. The tools were identified to genus level by comparison to the comparative collection of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA). The tools were analyzed morphologically to identify different types and suggest functions based on previous interpretations. Polishes and cut marks were observed and photographed at the Laboratory for the Study of Human Cultural Evolution (LSHCE) at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.2 Tools with plaster-like substances were subjected to Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy. This analysis was performed in the analytical laboratory of the IAA to identify and analyze the bone material, sediments, and plaster that adhered to the bone (Weiner 2010). A gram of each sample was homogenized in an agate mortar, and approximately 0.2 mg were ground to a fine powder and then mixed with KBr (FTIR-grade). Samples were pressed into a 13-mm pellet using a manual hydraulic press at 7 tons (Specac). Infrared spectra were obtained using a Nicolet iS5 spectrometer at 4 cm-1 resolutions. A replication experiment of four archaeological tools was conducted to better understand production methods and ways of handling the tool and to have tools for the preliminary experiments with plaster and tanning. Untrained people performed the experiments. Results Description of the Worked Scapulae from Tel Yavne None of the worked scapulae were complete. One derives from a Late Roman layer at the site, three from a Byzantine–Early Islamic layer, and two from an Early Islamic layer. The tools are described below according to their chronological context from the Late Roman period to the Early Islamic period. The location of the tools in the different areas is presented in Fig. 2. The tools are shown with the distal part of the scapula (the glenoid cavity) pointing down. 2 For observation, we used a stereo-microscope Zeiss Discovery V8 with a zoom ratio of 8:1 and objective magnification of 10x with a light ring allowing control of the intensity and angle of the light and a high stand base that allows easier observation of large items. The photography was performed using a Zeiss Axiocam 208 color camera. Replicated tools used in experiments were photographed using a Zeiss Axiocam 105 color camera, and image processing was done in Zen 2.6. 641 | 59* 400 176 200 176 000 176 Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne C6 800 C7 Tool 2 C5 C5a C4 C3 C2 C1a C1b 641 Tel Yavne 600 G1b Tool 3 G1a G8 Tool 6 Tool 5 G5 G2a G2b G3 Tool 4 G7d G7c G7b G7a G6b G6a G4 Tool 1 641 400 Legend Late Roman Byzantine - Early Islamic 0 100 m Early Islamic Fig 2. Location map of the shoulder blade tools from Yavne (graphics: Y. Gumenny). Late Roman Layer Tool 1: Area G7a, L39163, B391961 (Fig. 3). Archaeological context – city dump. Right scapula of cattle. The fragment consists only of the distal end of the bone (the glenoid cavity) and the scapula’s neck. Most of the blade itself was broken off in antiquity. The coracoid process was removed, followed by intensive smoothing of the entire glenoid process, including the posterior border. The ventral side of the neck and the anterior border are polished. Byzantine–Early Islamic Layer Tool 2: Area C7, L27032, B270459 (Fig. 3). Archaeological context – accumulation. Fragment of a left cattle scapula consisting of a part of the blade and spine, close to the margo vertebralis, or the proximal end of the bone. The tool exhibits cutting and smoothing of the spine (Fig. 4a) and chopping of the margo vertebralis to a rounded 60* | Yavne and Its Secrets Tool 2 a b Tool 1 a b d Tool 3 a b c 0 5 Fig 3. Tools 1, 2, 3 (scanning: D.A. Aladjem). Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 61* shape. The ventral side is polished and diagonally sloping toward the edge. This tool was subjected to FTIR analysis because traces of a material resembling plaster were found on the tool’s working edge (Fig. 4b). Tool 3: Area G2a, L31079, B310598 (Fig. 3). Archaeological context – accumulation. Fragment of a left camel scapula, consisting of the middle part of the scapula’s spine, close to the distal end of the bone. The bone shows sawing of the scapula’s neck, and the ventral side is polished. Tool 4: Area G7b, L36101, B361546 (Fig. 5). Archaeological context – city dump. Fragment of a camel’s scapula, consisting of the middle part of the scapula’s blade and spine, close to the proximal end of the bone. The tool exhibits cutting and smoothing of the spine and diagonal chopping of the margo vertebralis. The ventral side is diagonally sloping toward the edge, with polish on the dorsal and ventral sides. The tool is characterized by sporadic striations on the ventral face (Fig. 4c). In addition, remnants of plaster can be recognized on some parts of the tool (Fig. 4d). Therefore, it was subjected to FTIR analysis (Fig. 4e). Early Islamic Layer Tool 5: Area G5, L34073, B340744 (Fig. 5). Archaeological context – accumulation dated to the Umayyad period. A camel’s scapula fragment. Only the part next to the posterior border remains; the rest was broken during excavation. The tool shows diagonal sawing of the scapula’s blade. Four occurrences of a circle-and-dot motif are drilled on the dorsal side along the complete margins of the tool. Two have an outer diameter of 13 mm, and two have an outer diameter of 5 mm. Tool 6: Area G5, L34065, B340620 (Fig. 5). Archaeological context – accumulation probably dated to the Abbasid period. A camel’s scapula fragment consists of the blade’s spine and parts close to the scapula’s distal end. The tool shows sawing of the scapula’s neck and cutting and smoothing of the spine. The ventral side appears polished. 62* | Yavne and Its Secrets a b c d Bone Tool 4 Bone Tool 2 Sediments Tool 2 Plaster Tool 4 e Fig 4. (a) Tool 2: Cutting and smoothing of the spine (X 1); (b) Tool 2: Traces of material that resembled plaster in the active edge (X 2); (c) Tool 4: Traces of polish and striations central ventral side (X 2.5); (d) Tool 4: Traces of polish, striations and plaster on the active edge (X 1.25); (e) FTIR results of samples that were found adhered to bones from L36101 and L27032. The spectra show that the bones are made of apatite (phosphate bands are marked with grey squares) that underwent calcification (carbonate bands are marked with green squares). Moreover, the samples show that the plaster is rich in silicates (blue squares), more than adhered sediments (Photograpy: N. Solodenko). Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne c d Tool 4 a b e Tool 5 a b Tool 6 a b c 0 5 Fig 5. Tools 4, 5, 6 (scanning: D.A. Aladjem). d | 63* 64* | Yavne and Its Secrets Experimental Tool Reconstruction Replication experiments were carried out to test potential manufacturing techniques based on diagnostic traces found on the archaeological bone tools. In addition, as all the tools from Yavne are incomplete, we attempted to reconstruct the complete tool’s possible shape and explore how it might have been handled and used. These preliminary experiments were conducted over two days in March 2022. Although fresh bone has been found to be more efficient for the production of bone tools than dry bone: less time-consuming, less likely to break, and easier to work with (e.g., Campana 1989; Griffitts 2006; Stone 2011), fresh (or even dry) camel bones are not easily obtained. However, we received dry camel scapulae from a raptor feeding station.3 The length of time these bones were exposed to the elements and left to dry is unknown and could range from a couple of weeks to several years. The dry bones were soaked in water for five days before working on them, which did not change their essential characteristics as the water did not penetrate the dry matrix. It was noticed, however, that the bones, despite being dry and sometimes cracked on the outside, still held fat and moisture. Modern handheld tools were used in the experiment, including a hacksaw, chisel, mallet, and file. According to Ayalon (2005:133–139), similar working tools to those used today were already used during the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods. At the start of the experiment, we identified the location of the sawing of the scapula blade close to its neck by tracing the location of the sawing on scapula tools 3 and 6. It appears that an area where the scapula’s neck begins to widen to form the fan-like blade was chosen for this cut (Fig. 6a). In this area, the trabecular bone is thinner and overlaid above and below by a thick solid bone matrix. We then traced the location of the sawing on the far side of the blade, close to the margo vertebralis, by comparing tools 2 and 4. We sawed the scapula blade at an angle of about 450 as observed on tool 4 (Fig. 6b). The exact location of this second cut, its distance from the first cut, and its precise angle had not been fully understood. We then removed the spine with a chisel, identifying what could be interpreted as chisel marks on tools 2, 4 and 6 (Fig. 6c). The chisel was held at an angle of 450 to 600. We started removing the matrix from the lower point of the spine near the margo vertebralis toward the distal end of the bone. After the spine was reduced to about half its height, we turned the bone around and chiseled it from the opposite direction until it reached a similar height 3 We would like to thank A. Peretz from the Israel Nature and Parks Authority for his assistance in obtaining the bones for the experiments. Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 65* b a c e d g1 f g 5 0 g2 Fig 6. Tool reconstruction. (a) Marking the areas to cut; (b) Sawing the scapula’s neck; (c) Chiseling the spine; (d–g) reconstructed tools, g1. Diagonal scratches of the saw (X12.5), g2. Signs from filing the spine (X 10) (photography: I. Ktalav, H. Schechter). 66* | Yavne and Its Secrets to that of the archaeological tools. The whole process took less than twenty minutes per tool. We also tried removing the spine by filing it off, which proved less efficient. In accordance with the archaeological tools, we smoothed the blade and other sharp edges with a file to avoid injuries/cuts while using the tool. This process only took one to two minutes. We produced four tools (Fig. 6d–g); one of them (Fig. 6g) broke during the reducing of the spine, while the others, though clearly exhibiting the brittle nature of the dry camel bone, represent a probable reproduction of the original archaeological specimen. It should be stressed that these preliminary experiments only explored the potential for technological production processes of such scapulae tools. These results are not enough to elucidate, for example, the most convenient production process (i.e., should the spine be removed before the sawing of the neck or viceversa?). In addition, although based on the experiment, we are pretty sure of the location of the sawing close to the neck and why it was chosen. The location of the sawing on the opposite side, as well as its exact angle, are still uncertain. Questions also remain as to the removal of the spine. Although reducing the spine height using a chisel and mallet was found to be more efficient than using a file, it should be noted that on scapula tool 3, for example, the spine was left untouched. In contrast, tool 4 exhibits a much rougher spine surface than the other tools where the spine was reduced. Experiments and Interpretations of the Tools’ Function As stated above, the scapula bone is suitable for various agricultural and industrial tools. In the Southern Levant of Late Antiquity, the prevalent interpretation that they were tarvadot is based on Jewish text (Mishna Shabbat 8:64), the tool’s morphology, and the context of finds (see Horowitz 2011). However, no experiments were carried out to explore the suitability of the scapula tools for the different suggested functions of the Tarvad or to examine use-wear appearing on any of the scapulae tools and compare it with use-wear produced by experiments. The fact that the neck of scapula tool 1 was not sawn off but rather shaped and smoothed to form a sort of handle suggests that this tool might have been similar to the scapulae tools identified as tarvadot (for parallels, see Ayalon and Sorek 1999; Horwitz 2008; 2011). 4 Quotations from the Mishnah are from the English translation of Danby 1933. Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 67* While scapulae tools 2 and 4 are missing their bottom (handle) end and might be fragments of tarvadot, tools 3 and 6 did not have such a handle, as their scapula’s neck was clearly sawn off. These two tools are most likely not the so-called tarvadot and should be examined further as they possibly represent a new type of tool, which was the focus of our reproduction experiments. Scapula tool 5 stands out as it is the only one that carries some sort of decoration. Possible parallels from the Early Islamic period are two fragments found at the Tyropoeon Valley (Shatil 2020: Fig. 21.1:5) and one from Caesarea (Ayalon 2005: Fig. 16:160). Rodziewicz (2012:69–73) describes other parallels at Fustat as polishers. However, based on incised lines appearing on two of these items, we suggest they were, in fact, writing tablets. Although scapula tool 5 from Tel Yavne has no incised guiding lines (see Harding 2021), the decoration, the blade’s sawing, and the dating resemble the tools found at Fustat, Jerusalem, Caesarea and the Ma‘agan Mikhael B Shipwreck. In our opinion, these are all writing tablets. Skin Processing Experiment This section explores the potential of experimental archaeology to better understand the possible uses of these tools. Here we report on two preliminary experiments, which we hope are only the beginning of a series of future experiments with scapulae tools that will enable us to understand these objects further. Rodziewicz (2012:30) suggests that the shoulder blade tools found in Fustat were polishers or scrapers used to work with leather. Although we now suspect that the tools from Fustat (or at least some of them) are indeed writing tablets, we decided to test this hypothesis. The experiment was conducted because the removal of hair during leather working was sometimes done using lime, which has the same chemical and mineralogical composition as lime-plaster, identified on one of the Yavne Tools (E. Ayalon and T. Emerich Kamper, pers. comm.). This preliminary experiment aimed to see if the tool was suitable to perform the task of leather working and how it was handled. We used replicate tool G for a preliminary experiment of removing the hair and grain of a Persian fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica).5 The skin was spread on a wooden beam. The tool was held with both hands. It was pressed against the skin and pushed down to remove the hair and grain layer (Fig. 7a). We started at the hind area of the fallow deer. This area has a very thick skin, and after 35 seconds, we only 5 The zooarchaeology laboratory at the University of Haifa received the dead Persian fallow deer from the Hai-Bar Carmel Nature Reserve. 68* | Yavne and Its Secrets d b c Working edge 5 0 a b c d g e 0 5 Working edge e f g Fig 7. (a) Removing the hair and grain of a Persian fallow deer skin; (b) Scratches and polishing marks on the active edge (X25); (c) Gentle scratches from contact with the outside of the skin on the ventral part (X 25); (d) Scratches and slight polishing on the oblique active side as a result of the removal of the hair and the grain layer of the skin (X 16); (e) Smearing the plaster; (f) Various scratches from working with the plaster on the ventral side (X 10); (g) Polishing marks and scratches from working with the plaster on the ventral part (X 10) (photography: I. Ktalav, H. Schechter). Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 69* managed to remove the hair but not the grain layer. At this point, we decided to move to a less thick area on the skin and tried again for another four minutes. This time we managed to remove both hair and grain, although less efficiently compared to a metal tool6 that we used in the same experiment for comparison. In addition, the bone tool was too narrow and not comfortable to handle for a long time. A tool with a wider working edge that can be easily held with two hands to produce downward pushing motions would have been more suitable for this task. Even after a short time of use, the active edge of the experimental bone tool showed striations and polish. Gentle striations and a homogenous polish were also observed on the ventral side of the tool from the contact with the hair on the skin (see Fig. 7b–d). Polish was also observed on the ventral side of tools 3 and 6, but without further research, we cannot determine their exact cause. Plaster Experiment Plaster traces were found on the active edge of tool 4 (see Fig. 4d), which motivated us to conduct a preliminary experiment of working with plaster. This preliminary experiment aimed to see if the tool was suitable to perform the task, i.e., plastering, and how it was handled. We used reconstructed tool E for this experiment of smearing plaster on a wall. We used a modern plaster compound. The tool was handled with one hand. We picked up the plaster from a container with the tool and smeared it in a single upward movement holding the tool at a 450 angle to the wall (Fig. 7e). After covering a specific area, we held the tool parallel to the wall and spread the plaster more evenly in arching round motions. We worked with the tool for 40 minutes. The tool seems suitable for the task. The task left fine striations and some polish on the ventral side of the tool and the active edge (Fig. 7f–g). Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy FTIR measurements of samples that were collected from the bone tools contained minerals that are commonly found in sediments but also in plaster (carbonates and silicates, marked with green and blue squares in Fig. 4e). These materials are clearly distinguished from bone, based on vibrational bands that can be detected using FTIR. The carbonates, minerals found in sediments and the plaster on the bone, are mainly calcite, and one way to distinguish between calcite of lime-plaster from sediments, is based on FTIR peak analysis (Regev et al. 2010). The ratio between the peak heights 6 The metal tool is a dull horizontal blade, not much different from a draw knife. Skin tanners used similar tools in Europe since the medieval period (T. Emerich Kamper, pers. comm.). 70* | Yavne and Its Secrets of the ᵥ2 and ᵥ4 vibrational bands indicates that the calcite on the bone of tool 4 is pyrogenic and not similar to the surrounding sediments. This analysis proves that the material observed on the bone (Fig. 4d) is indeed lime or lime-plaster. Discussion Five kinds of data are generally relevant in determining an artifact’s function: context, material, form, attributes of use or attrition, and associations to other artifacts in the vicinity of the tool (Hofman 1980). Considering these factors, we can see that two scapula tools resemble previously known types: the tarvad and a writing tablet. The characteristics of tool 1, the material, form and attributes of use, and the cultural and chronological context, are in accordance with those of the tarvad. The tarvad was used to clean the mill stones after crushing the olives and transferring them from the crushing basin to a basket placed under the press. After the pressing, the refuse of the crushed olives was disposed of with the aid of the tarvadot. Tarvadot were usually recovered from olive presses at Jewish sites dated to the Roman period. The occurrence of tarvadot at Jewish sites is related to the fact that according to the laws of purity, tools made of bone can be purified following submersion in water (Horwitz 2008; 2011). Tool 5, although only a fragment, resembled the tools found in Fustat and were incorrectly identified by Rodziewicz (2012:248–252) as “polishers,” whereas they should be identified as writing tablets. We identified them as such because they have incised lines for writing and polish on the ventral side of the scapula. This polish is caused by repeatedly erasing ink with a soft, damp cloth (Harding 2021). They have holes used to string the tablets and are decorated on the dorsal and ventral sides. Another resemblance is the sawing of the distal end of the scapula. They also fit within the chronological frame of the Early Islamic period, which is typical for these writing tablets (Negev 1977; 1988; Hakker-Orion 1984, 1993; Harding 2021). Tool 5 from Yavne resembles the writing tablets from Fustat and other known writing tablets in its raw material, shape, decoration and chronology. It was crafted from a camel’s scapula as were writing tablets from ‘Avedat (Negev 1977; Hakker-Orion 1984), Niẓẓana (Negev 1988), ‘En Raḥel and from the Ma‘agan Mikhael B shipwreck (Harding 2021). The distal end of the bone is sawn off; it is decorated with circle-anddot motifs on the dorsal side and was found in an Early Islamic context. Four incomplete tools remain, two showing the proximal edge (2 and 4) and two the distal edge of the scapula (3 and 6). At this point, we considered them to represent the same type of tool, appearing in Byzantine and Early Islamic contexts. Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 71* Concerning the context, none of the tools were found in situ; four were found in accumulations, and two were in dump fills. This implies that these tools were used and discarded when exhausted or broken. They were likely not heirlooms or tools imbued with symbolic or emotional meaning. The tools were made of bone, a raw material considered simple and cheap, suitable for a simple, functional tool. Cattle scapula is readily available as cattle were regularly used and slaughtered in the vicinity of Tel Yavne, as seen from the zooarchaeological assemblage.7 However, camel scapula is less trivial and less available on a daily basis. The repeated choice of camel’s scapula in four out of six Tel Yavne tools testifies to a deliberate choice of a specific material with specific qualities designated for a preplanned purpose. Further experiments are required to ascertain what this purpose was. Our experiments have shown that the manufacture of the tool does not require a high level of skill. They leave little doubt that the tools’ form was preplanned and fitted to specific tasks. The attributes of use indicate that the proximal and ventral sides of the scapula were used as the active edge that was in contact with other materials and that contact produced striations and polish on these surfaces. The association of the tools to other artifacts is irrelevant here since the tools were not found in situ. We conclude that the scapula tools from Tel Yavne, tools 2, 3, 4 and 6, were simple working tools designated for a specific task. The FTIR analysis has shown that one possible material that was in contact with the tool was plaster or lime. One of the possibilities we considered was that the tool was a trowel used for plastering. Vitruvius (VII:3, 6, 7) refers to a trowel made of metal used to spread mortar and plaster on walls. Metal was likely preferred because it is easier to clean the plaster from it. Roman builders’ trowels, made of iron, are known from Italy, the north-western Roman provinces and north Africa. They appear in various leaf and rhomboid shapes, most of which can be found on modern trowels to this day (DeLaine 2021:11–12). Vitruvius (VII:3, 7) also refers to polishing tools used to polish the plaster layer covering the mortar on walls; he did not describe them, however. A Roman-period stone relief discovered in Sens, France, shows a tool used to apply this final layer which could be painted or left polished and plain (Hirschfeld 1987:135–141; DeLaine 2021:12); this tool was not unlike the modern float used 7 The zooarchaeological assemblage from Tel Yavne is studied by three of the authors: I. Ktalav, A. Shatil and L. Perry-Gal. 72* | Yavne and Its Secrets by plasterers today and a few examples made of wood were found in excavations (DeLaine 2021:195). The bone tools were possibly used in the same processes, either as trowels to apply mortar and plaster or as floats to even out and polish the plaster covering of walls or floors. The results of our preliminary experiments are not clear enough to determine the function of each of the finds from Tel Yavne, and specifically, whether these tools were all used to smooth plaster or for leather working. Detailed experiments and comprehensive use-wear analysis are needed to address these questions. Conclusions The physical structure of the shoulder blade (scapula) bone is ideal for producing large, flat and robust tools that were used in daily life activities such as agriculture, the processing of skins and fibers, and writing tablets. We recognized three types of tools made from shoulder blades in the archaeological record of Tel Yavne. One is the tarvad, a tool used as a scoop, usually associated with the olive oil industry and recovered mainly from Jewish sites dated to the Roman period. The tarvad is generally made from a cattle scapula whose neck is used as a handle. A second type is the writing tablets, usually made from a camel’s scapula and typically appeared in Early Islamic contexts. These tablets are sometimes equipped with incised lines for writing and decorated with circle-and-dot motifs. They often have perforated holes that were used for stringing. The neck of the scapula is typically sawn off, and occasionally so is the scapula’s spine. In addition, we identified a new kind of working tool. Unlike the tarvad, in this tool, the neck of the scapula is sawn off and is not used as a handle. The spine is sometimes cut. In one instance, traces of lime-plaster were found on the tool’s working edge. This tool may have been used for smearing or polishing plaster, skin processing, or another yet unknown purpose. This tool appears in the Byzantine and Early Islamic periods. Additional experiments are required to produce a comparative database for use-wear analysis that can be used in analyzing the archaeological tools to understand the function of the tools and whether tools with similar morphology were used for the same tasks. Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 73* References Ayalon E. 2005. The Assemblage of Bone and Ivory Artifacts from Caesarea Maritima, Israel 1st– 13th Centuries CE (BAR Int. S. 1457). Oxford. Ayalon E. and Sorek C. 1999. Bare Bones: Ancient Artifacts from Animal Bones. Tel Aviv (Hebrew; English summary, pp. 6*–7*). Bradfield J. and Antonites A.R. 2018. Bone Hoes from the Middle Iron Age, Limpopo Province, South Africa. Quaternary International 472:126–134. Campana D.V. 1989. Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone Tools: The Manufacture and Use of Bone Implements in the Zagros and the Levant (BAR Int. S. 494). Oxford. Danby H. 1933. The Mishnah. Oxford. DeLain J. 2021. Production, Transport and On-Site Organisation of Roman Mortars and Plasters. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 13: article 195. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12520-021-01401-5 Fischer M. and Taxel I. 2007. Ancient Yavneh: Its History and Archaeology. Tel Aviv 34:204–284. Griffitts J.L. 2006. Bone Tools and Technological Choice: Change and Stability on the Northern Plains. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Arizona. Tucson. Haddad E., Nadav-Ziv L., Elisha Y., Tal G., Rauchberger L. and Sandhaus D. 2021. Tel Yavne, Area A. HA–ESI 133 (January 24). https://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng. aspx?id=25883&mag_id=133 (April 7, 2022) Hakker-Orion D. 1984. The Role of the Camel in Israel’s Early History. In J. Clutton-Brock and C. Grigson eds. Animals and Archaeology 3. Early Herders and their Flocks (BAR Int. S. 202). Oxford. Pp. 207–210. Hakker-Orion D. 1993. Faunal Remains from Sites along the Frankincense and Myrrh Route. In H. Buitenhuis and A.T. Clason eds. Archaeozoology of the Near East I. Leiden. Pp.77–87. Harding S. 2021. Analysis of the Faunal Remains from the Ma‘agan Mikhael B Shipwreck. M.A. thesis. University of Haifa. Haifa. Hirschfeld Y. 1987. The Palestinian Dwelling in the Roman-Byzantine Period. Jerusalem (Hebrew). Hofman J.L. 1980. Scapula Skin-Dressing and Fiber-Processing Tools. Plains Anthropologist 25(88):135–142. 74* | Yavne and Its Secrets Horwitz L.K. 2008. From Food to Function: Fauna and Bone Tools from Roman–Byzantine Horvat Hazzan. In S. Bar ed. In the Hill-Country, and in the Shephelah, and in the Arabah (Joshua 12, 8): Studies and Researches Presented to Adam Zertal in the Thirtieth Anniversary of the Manasseh Hill-Country Survey. Jerusalem. Pp. 236*–258*. Horwitz L.K. 2011. Partners in Purity: Second Temple Olive Presses and Scapulae Scoops. NEA 74(4):241–246. Kletter R. and Nagar Y. 2015. An Iron Age Cemetery and Other Remains at Yavne. ‘Atiqot 81:1*– 33*. Moore K.M. 2013. Economic and Social Context of Bone Tool Use, Formative Bolivia. In A. Choyke and S. O’Conner eds. From These Bare Bones: Raw Materials and the Study of Worked Osseous Objects. Oxford. Pp.174–187. Nadav-Ziv L. 2020. Yavne. HA–ESI 132 (July 13). https://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_ detail.aspx?id=25743&mag_id=128 (April 7, 2022). Nadav-Ziv L., Haddad E., Seligman J., Varga D. and Betzer P. This volume. Ancient Yavne: Preliminary Finds from the Extensive Excavations at the Foot of Tel Yavne. Negev A. 1977. The Nabateans and the Provincia Arabia. ANRW II.8. Berlin–New York. Pp. 520–686. Negev A. 1988. Nabatean Cities in the Negev. Ariel 62–63 (Hebrew). Northe A. 2001. Notched Implements Made of Scapulae – Still a Problem. In A.M. Choyke and L. Bartosiewicz eds. Crafting Bone – Skeletal Technologies Through Time and Space (BAR Int. S. 937). Oxford. Pp.179–184. Regev L., Poduska K.M., Addadi L., Weiner S. and Boaretto E. 2010. Distinguishing Between Calcites Formed by Different Mechanisms Using Infrared Spectrometry: Archaeological Applications. JAS 37(12):3022–3029. Rodziewicz E. 2012. Bone Carvings from Fustat-Istabl ʻAntar. Excavations of the Institut Fran�ais Dárchéologié Orientale in Cairo, 1985–2003 (Institut fran�ais dárchéologie orientale). Cairo Shatil A. 2020. The Bone Objects from Strata V–I. In D. Ben-Ami and Y. Tchekhanovets eds. Jerusalem: Excavations in the Tyropoeon Valley (Giv’ati Parking Lot) II: The Byzantine and Early Islamic Periods (IAA Reports 66/3). Jerusalem. Pp.731–786. Stone E.A. 2011. Through the Eye of the Needle: Investigations of Ethnographic, Experimental, and Archaeological Bone Tool Use Wear from Perishable Technologies. Ph.D. thesis. The University of New Mexico. Albuquerque. Bone Tools Made from Animal Shoulder Blades from Tel Yavne | 75* Studer J. and Schneider A. 2008. Camel Use in the Petra Region, Jordan: 1st century BC to 4th century AD. Archaeozoology of the Near East VIII (TMO 49). Lyon. Pp. 581–596. Taxel I. 2005. Ancient Yavne: Its History and Archaeology. In M. Fischer ed. Yavneh, Yavneh-Yam and Their Neighborhood: Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Judean Coastal Plain. Tel Aviv. Pp. 139–170 (Hebrew; English summary, pp. XIV–XV). Vitruvius:. de architectura libri decem (Hebrew translation by R. Reich 1997). Tel Aviv. Weiner S. 2010. Microarchaeology: Beyond the Visible Archaeological Record. Cambridge–New York. Xie L, 2014. Early to Middle Holocene Earth-Working Implements and Neolithic Land-Use Strategies on the Ningshao Plain, China. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Arizona. Tucson. Xie L., Lu X., Sun G. and Huang W. 2017. Functionality and Morphology: Identifying Si Agri- cultural Tools from Among Hemudu Scapular Implements in Eastern China. JAMT 24:377– 423.