The Sea Peoples and Their World

Eliezer D. Oren

Published by University of Pennsylvania Press

Oren, Eliezer D.
The Sea Peoples and Their World: A Reassessment.
University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013.
Project MUSE.muse.jhu.edu/book/26954.

For additional information about this book

https://muse.jhu.edu/book/26954

Access provided at 1 Apr 2020 02:36 GMT with no institutional affiliation

 12

Aegean-Style Early Philistine

Pottery in Canaan During the Iron
I Age: A Stylistic Analysis of
Mycenaean IIIC:lb Pottery and Its
Associated Wares

Ann E. Killebrew
University of Haifa, Haifa
The end of the Late Bronze Age in Canaan is usu- 1973; Yadin and Geva 1986; Mazar 1993; 1997:
ally identified by the disappearance of imported My- 157-158]), Megiddo (Stratum VIlA [Ussishkin
cenaean IIIB and Late Cypriote liB pottery types 1998]) and Akko (M. Dothan 1986), pottery in the
which are ubiquitious at 13th century B.C.E. sites typical Late Bronze II Canaanite tradition continues
throughout Canaan. The dawn of the Iron Age is tra- to appear well into the Iron I period (12th century
ditionally seen as a period devoid of international B.C.E.), sometimes alongside small amounts of im-
trade and cultural connections with the west. Recent ported wares which differ from those most frequently
excavations in Israel have modified this interpreta- imported during the Late Bronze liB (13th century
tion and it has become clear that relations between B.C.E.). Most notable are Grey Burnished Trojan
Canaan and areas in the eastern Mediterranean, es- wares originating from Troy (e.g. Lachish and Miq-
pecially with Cyprus and the southern and western ne-Ekron [Allen 1994]), imported Mycenaean IIIC:l
coasts of Anatolia, continued throughout the 12th pottery, probably originating from Cyprus or the Do-
century B.C.E., albeit representing a different type of decanese, and previously unknown Cypriote types
relationship and carried out on a more limited scale. such as the White-Painted Wheel-made ware (see Kil-
This paper presents recent ceramic evidence regard- lebrew 1998c for a summary of the Late Mycenaean
ing interconnections between southern Canaan, Cy- IIIB and Mycenaean IIIC wares in Canaan). This in-
prus, and coastal Anatolia during the initial stages of dicates a limited, but significant contact with Cyprus,
the Iron I period, focussing on early Philistine pot- coastal Anatolia and perhaps other islands, such as
tery and its implications for the initial appearance Rhodes, in the eastern Aegean. In northern Canaan,
and origins of the early Philistines in Canaan. most of the imported Mycenaean IIIC:1 pottery con-
At several sites in Canaan, most notably Lachish sists of closed forms, especially stirrup jars, and bear
(Stratum VI [Ussishkin 1985]), Tel Sera' (Stratum IX elaborate painted decoration. Limited petrographic
[Oren 1985; 1993:1330-1331]), Tel Miqne-Ekron analysis of these vessels suggest that they were im-
(Stratum VIlla, Field INE [Killebrew 1996b:26-27; ported, possibly from Cyprus.
1998a]), Beth Shean (Level VI Uames 1966; Oren In the southern coastal plain of Canaan, at Tel
234 SEA PEOPLES

Miqne-Ekron and Ash dod, and most likely at Tel Ash- IIIC:1b pottery appears in Stratum XIIIb, on top of
kelon and Tell es-Safi, a previously unknown locally the Stratum XIV Late Bronze II settlement (M. Doth-
produced Aegean-style pottery, termed Mycenaean an 1979). To better understand and define the phe-
IIIC: 1b appears in large quantities during the Iron I. nomenon of locally produced Aegean-style pottery, I
At Miqne-Ekron, Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery appears present in this paper a stylistic analysis,l including ty-
in Stratum VII (T. Dothan 1989; 1992; 1995; 1998) pological and technological aspects, of Mycenaean
and, based on the well-stratifed remains in Field INE, IIIC: 1b pottery and its associated assemblages, with a
largely replaces the indigenous Canaanite-style pot- focus on the repertoire from Field INE at Tel Miqne-
tery (Killebrew 1998a). A similar picture is revealed Ekron.
at Ashdod where significant quantities of Mycenaean

Typology
Locally produced Aegean- and Aegeo-Cypriote- eluding decorated fine wares (Mycenean IIIC: 1b),
style pottery, appearing at the end of the 13th and undecorated fine wares, and the coarse wares (main-
beginning of the 12th centuries B.C.E. in the eastern ly cooking wares), which have clear Aegean and/or
Mediterranean, has received extensive attention by Cypriote antecedents.
archaeologists. It is often referred to as Mycenaean Until now, no detailed discussion of Mycenaean
IIIC: 1b, a term which includes a class of pottery char- IIIC:1b pottery and its associated wares found in the
acterized by Aegean-inspired forms and decorative southern coastal plain of Canaan, coinciding with the
motifs which was locally produced at numerous man- initial Philistine settlement in Philistia, has been pub-
ufacturing centers (see Asaro et al. 1971, Asaro and lished. Typologies of the later Iron I phenomenon of
Perlman 1973, and Gunneweg et al. 1986 regarding bichrome painted pottery, which developed out of
its local production in Canaan). Its development and the monochrome Mycenaean IIIC: 1b wares, have
typology were first discussed by A. Furumark (1941a; been described by T. Dothan (1982) and later ex-
1941b; 1944) who clear mainland Greek antecedents panded upon by A. Mazar (1985b). The following ty-
and cultural influences in the shape and decoration pological and technological discussion of Mycenaean
of Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery. This type appears on IIIC:1b and related wares from Field INE at Tel Miq-
mainland Greece following the decline of the Myce- ne-Ekron is intended to fill this gap.
naean palace centers, sometime near the close of the Based primarily on vessel proportion and morphol-
13th century B.C.E.2 During the 12th century B.C.E. it ogy, the assemblage from Tel Miqne-Ekron can be
is found in significant quantities at sites located grouped typologically according to two basic func-
throughout much of the Aegean, Cilicia, Cyprus, and tional categories, which probably reflect the primary
at a number of coastal sites in Syria and Palestine. use these ceramic objects may have served in antiqui-
On Cyprus, Mycenaean IIIC: 1b pottery first ap- ty:4 (I) kitchenwares which include (A) tablewares
pears in small quantities during the Late Cypriote IIC and (B) cooking wares; and (II) containers, which
period and then in larger amounts during the Late are sub-divided into (A) handleless domestic contain-
Cypriote IliA period, replacing the dominant Base ers; (B) handled storage containers, and (C) special-
Ring and White Slip wares of the Late Cypriote IIC ty containers.
period. It shares features of fabric, technique, shape,
and decoration with Decorated Late Cypriote III, a
class of Late Cypriote IliA wheelmade pottery having
a light fabric decorated with a dark matt paint.3
Though White Painted Wheelmade III, as suggested Kitchen wares
by P. Astrom (1972a:271-288) is, in my opinion, the
more accurate term for this ceramic assemblage I use TABLEWARES
Mycenaean IIIC:1b to refer to all shapes included in
the White Painted Wheelmade Cypriote assemblage
as is customary in publications dealing with this style BOWLS
of pottery in the Levant (see Kling 1989b for the
most comprehensive treatment of Mycenaean IIIC:1b The bowl forms included in this family (Forms AS
pottery in Cyprus). In this typological discussion of 1-4) are all semi-hemispherical to hemispherical in
Mycenaean IIIC: 1b pottery in Canaan I use the neu- shape, with two horizontal handles, and have no lo-
tral term, Aegean-style (AS) to refer to all pottery, in- cally produced Canaanite antecedents.
 KILLEBREW 235

FORM AS 1 (FIGS. 12.1:1-2; 12.2:1) these bowls are indigenous to the Cypriote ceramic
SMALL SEMI-HEMISPHERICAL BOWL tradition.
WITH TWO HORIZONTAL HANDLES
Date: Cyprus: LC IIC-LC IIIB; Aegean: LH
IIIB2-LH IIIC; Canaan: Iron lA
This bowl, measuring ca. 5-10 em. in depth, is se- Distribution: Cyprus, the Aegean, and Tel Miqne-Ek-
mi-hemispherical in shape, usually with two flat hori- ron (and most likely other major Iron I cities in Phil-
zontal strap handles at the rim or just below it. The istia)
deeper version, ca. 15 em. in depth, is referred to
here as Form AS 2. Two different types of rims are as-
sociated with this general shape: a simple, often
thickened, rim (Fig. 12.1:1) or a flattened everted FORM AS 2 (FIGS. 12.1:3; 12.2:2)
rim (Fig. 12.1:2). The base is usually a low ring base LARGE SEMI-HEMISPHERICAL BOWL
or disc base. This bowl can be undecorated or deco- WITH TWO HORIZONTAL HANDLES
rated on the interior and exterior with simple hori-
zontal bands, occasionally with spirals on the interior Bowl Form AS 2 is a deeper version of Form AS 1.
of the base. This shape, measuring ca. 10 em. high, It is present in very small quantities at Tel Miqne-Ek-
has been recovered from Stratum VII levels at Tel ron. One complete example was recovered from Stra-
Miqne-Ekron in the early Iron I levels however it is tum VII in Field INE (Fig. 12.1:3). This large semi-
rare in Canaan and only one similar example is pub- hemispherical to hemispherical bowl was termed FS
lished from Ashdod (Stratum Xlllb: M. Dothan and 294 (Form 85) byFurumark (1992: pl. 161:294). This
Porath 1993: fig. 14:8). bowl is characterized by flat horizontal strap handles
Bowl Form AS 1 is well-known from the Aegean and is generally ca. 15 em. deep. The larger bowl,
and Cyprus where it tends to be shallower in depth generally with a flat everted rim, is rare on Cyprus
(ca. 4-7 em.) than the Tel Miqne-Ekron examples. It and is far less popular than Forms AS 1 and AS 3. P.
was classified by A. Furumark as FS 296, one of the Mountjoy (1986:131-133) notes that FS 294 appears
shapes of Form 85, and he described it as belonging only sporadically in Late Helladic IIIB2, becoming
to the group termed Levanto-Mycenaean.s Most of prevalent only in the Late Helladic IIIC period.
Furumark's examples originate from Cyprus and on-
ly a few are from mainland Greece and the Levant.6 Date: Aegean: Late Helladic IIIB2-Late Helladic
On Cyprus, where this bowl was most ubiquitous, the IIIC; Canaan: Iron lA
interior design often includes a spiral or set of con- Distribution: Aegean, Cyprus, and Tel Miqne-Ekron
centric circles in the interior of the base7 and occa- (probably also at other major Iron I cities in Philis-
sionally other decorative motifs appear on this type tia)
of pottery within the bands on the interior.s B. Kling
distinguishes two versions of our Form AS 1: a wide
conical bowl with plain rim (Kling 1989b:131, fig.
5a) 9 and a wide conical bowl with out-turned rim FORM AS 3 (FIGS. 12.1:4-7; 12.2:3)
(Kling 1989b: fig. 5d).IO CARINATED SEMI-HEMISPHERICAL BOWL
Locally produced bowls from Cyprus and Philistia WITH HORIZONTAL HANDLES
are decorated with matte paint which differentiates
them from their imported Aegean counterparts This bowl, with its high carination below the hori-
which are decorated with a glossy paint. Due to the zontal handles, is well known from early Iron I levels
clear similarities between the matte-painted, locally at the Philistine pentapolis cities such as Tel Miqne-
produced bowls and imported Mycenaean bowls of Ekron (Killebrew 1998a), Telles Safi (Bliss and Mac-
similar type, it has been suggested that the former alister 1902: pl. 35: 7, 8) and Ashdod (Area G, Stra-
were simple imitations of the latter. However, as tum XIIIb: M. Dothan and Porath 1993: fig. 14:24-26
has been noted by Sjoqvist (1940:103-104), Stub- [pl. 36:10, 11]; 16:11; Area H: M. Dothan 1971: fig.
bings (1951:40, n. 2), and Kling (1989b:133-134), 74:1). Several Form AS 3 bowls were found at Ras Ibn
conical and rounded bowls with horizontal strap Hani (Bounni et al. 1979: fig. 25:3-6). These bowls
handles have been locally produced on Cyprus for can be decorated with simple horizontal bands but
some time before the appearance of the imported are often undecorated.
Mycenaean bowls.II Direct Mycenaean inspiration This bowl has been classified by A. Furumark as be-
seems most likely for bowls with out-turned rims, longing to Form 85, FS 295 (1992: pl. 162:295). It is
which appear in Greece from the LH IIIB:2.12 B. characterized by its conical shape and angular, high
Kling ( 1989b: 134) concludes that although the carinated vessel profile, with a simple everted rim,
popularity of Bowl Form AS 1 in LC IIC through measuring 5-12 em in depth. He attributed this bowl
LC IIIB on Cyprus may be due to inspiration from type to his Hellado- and Rhoda-Mycenaean group,
imported Mycenaean ceramics, may features of appearing mainly in Mycenaean IIIC contexts where
236 SEA PEOPLES

it is slightly deeper and more sharply carinated. B. been classified by A. Furumark (1941a:634) as FS
Kling (1989b:132:132, fig. 5b) defined the Cypriote 284, the small version of Furumark's Form 80 (Deep
versions as a conical bowl with carinated rim (Late Rounded Bowl with Horizontal Handles).
Mycenaean IIIB or Decorated Late Cypriote III) In Canaan, Bowl Form AS 4 in Mycenaean IIIC:1b
where by the LC IIC it had became a very popular ware, especially examples with a linear design, is
form, continuing into the LCIIIA periods.l3 Similar ubiqutious during the Iron I period at sites in Philis-
bowls are also known from Cilicia (e.g. Tarsus: tia, such as Tel Miqne-Ekron, Ashdod,l6 Ashkelon
French 1975: figs. 16; 17). Undecorated carinated (Phythian-Adams 1923: pl. II:7, 12), and Tell es-Safi
bowls were present in Mycenaean pottery during the (Bliss and Macalister 1902: pl. 35:1 0). It appears at
LH IIIBl. However, since their appearance on Cy- several other sites along northern coastal Canaan,l7
prus dates to the LC IB where this shape is part of including Akko (M. Dothan 1986:106; figs. 8.2-8.3
the Cypriote White Painted Wheelmade I ceramic who associates this pottery with the Sherden from
repertoire (Sjoqvist 1940:106), a Mycenaean inspira- Sardinia), where their provenience is unknown. This
tion for this form has been ruled out. It is now sug- shape continues to be popular in later Iron I con-
gested that Form AS 3 evolved independently in Cy- texts, decorated with a bichrome decoration or red
prus and Greece (e.g. Kling 1989b:134; Sherratt slip .IS
1994:38). On mainland Greece, it was the most popular
shape throughout the LH IIIB and Early and Middle
Date: Cyprus: Late Cypriote IB-Late Cypriote IliA; LH IIIC periods, found mainly in settlement and on-
Aegean: Late Helladic IIIB-Late Helladic IIIC; Ca-
ly rarely in tombs.l9 It is less common in Crete, first
naan: Iron IA
appearing at the end of LM IIIB and the beginning
Distribution: Cyprus, southern coastal Anatolia, the of LM IIIC, probably reflecting influence from
Aegean, the Syrian coast, and major Iron I cities in
Greece (Popham 1965:318; 1970:196; Kanta 1980:
Philistia
258-260; Mook and Coulson 1993:351; Gesell et al.
1995:117; fig. 22). In Cyprus this shape appears in
large quantities especially in the LC IliA period.20
Bowl From AS 4 is also well-known in Cilicia.21 The
FORM AS 4 (FIGS. 12.1:8-11; 12.2:4)
decorative treatment of bowls from eastern Cyprus
HEMISPHERICAL (BELL-SHAPED) BOWL
and Cilica is similar to that on bell-shaped bowls
from Philistia, however the shape is first known in
Hemispherical Bowl Form AS 4 with its relatively the Aegean indicating that Form AS 4 has its an-
small size, horizontal handles and ring base, is a well- tecedents in the Mycenaean world.
known type often referred to as a bell-shaped bowl Several carinated bell-shaped bowls are included in
(e.g. T. Dothan 1982:98-106; Mazar 1985b:87-90 the Tel Miqne-Ekron Iron I repertoire of vessels (Fig.
[Type BL 16]) or a skyphos.l5 These bowls are often 12.1:11) though it is less common that the standard
decorated only with a monochrome linear decora- bell-shaped bowl (Fig. 12.1:8-10). B. Kling (1989b:
tion or more elaborately painted with bands at the fig. 5c) refers to it as a Mycenaean IIIC Carinated
rim and below the handle, paint at the stumps of Bowl (equalling carinated FS 295). It appears on
handles and on top of the handles, and geometric or Cyprus during the LC IIIA-IIIB contexts (e.g. Fum-
occasionally figurative designs in the handle zone. Es- mark 1941a:636; Astrom 1972a:377-378), in the
pecially popular were variations on the spiral. It has Aegean during the LH IIIB-IIIC (e.g. Perati: Iakovidis

Figure 12.1. Locally produced Aegean-style Mycenaean II1C: 1b pottery and associated wares
(Forms AS l-AS 5) (Killebrew 1998b: ill. 111:25).

No. Fonn Site Reg. No. Locus No. Date

1 Bowl AS 1 Miqne-Ekron 3.421/12 3078 Iron I
2 Bowl AS 1 Miqne-Ekron 3.370/56 3076 Iron I
3 Bowl AS 2 Miqne-Ekron 2.581.1 2138.1 Iron I
4 Bowl AS 3 Miqne-Ekron 37.80/12 37029 Iron I
5 Bowl AS 3 Miqne-Ekron 4.408 4123 Iron I
6 Bowl AS 3 Miqne-Ekron 4.395/2A 4117 Iron I
7 Bowl AS 3 Miqne-Ekron 36.206/7 36081 Iron I
8 BowlAS4 Miqne-Ekron 3.506 3100 Iron I
9 BowlAS4 Miqne-Ekron 3.371/31 3074 Iron I
10 BowlAS4 Miqne-Ekron 4.392/1 4117 Iron I
11 Bowl AS 4 Miqne-Ekron 37.74/23 37027 Iron I
12 Krater AS 5 Miqne-Ekron 37.74/64 37029 Iron I
13 Krater AS 5 Miqne-Ekron 4.240 4076 Iron I
 KILLEBREW 237

Bowls

Form AS 1 Form AS 2

~~
... --,
~·~- ......

Form AS 3

) q:
4 6 7

Form AS 4

9 10 11

Kraters

Form AS 5

12
238 SEA PEOPLES

l 2

6
\ _ _/ 7

8 9

10 11

Figure 12. 2. Locally produced Aegean-style Mycenaean IIIC: I b pottery and associated wares (Forms AS l-AS II)
from Philistine sites in Israel (Killebrew 1998c: pl. XVI).
 KILLEBREW 239

1969-1970: vol. B:225, fig. 88; Mycenae: Mountjoy (Bounni et al. 1979: fig. 25:1-2; 7-8).
1986, 153, fig. 197.1; and Athens: Broneer 1939: 379, On Cyprus, Krater Type Cl appears during the LC
fig. 61), and Cilicia (Tarsus [Goldman 1956: pl. 332: IIC, when it is often classified as the so-called Rude
1266; French 1975: fig. 20:13]) and they are often un- Style23 continuing to be manufactured during the LC
painted or decorated with a linear motif.22 IliA and the LC IIIB.24 The majority of bell kraters
found in LC IliA contexts are classified as either My-
Date: Aegean: Late Helladic IIIB-Late Helladic
cenaean IIIC:lb or Decorated Late Cypriote III and
IIIC; Cyprus: first appearing in small numbers dur-
include a new range of motifs that are sometimes
ing the Late Cypriote IIC, becoming popular during
similar to those found on contemporary bell-shaped
the Late Cypriote IIIA-B; Canaan: Iron I
bowls, Form AS 4. The bell krater appeared in the lo-
Distribution: Aegean, Cyprus, southern coast of Ana-
cal Cypriote ceramic repertoire in LC IIC apparently
tolia, several sites along the Syrian coast, and espe-
imitating imported Mycenaean kraters of similar
cially at sites in Philistia, southern coastal plain, with
shape. However on Cyprus, as in Philistia, Krater
smaller quantities at Iron I sites in Canaan
Form AS 5 developed along its own distinctive, local
style, continuing to be popular during the 12th and
11th centuries B.C.E.
KRATERS Date: Aegean: Late Helladic IIIB-IIIC; Cyprus: Late
Cypriote IIC-IIIB; Canaan: Iron I, especially Iron IB
The three basic krater forms presented here, AS Distribution: Aegean, Cyprus, the Syrian coast, and
5-7, are distinctly different from the same family of sites in Philistia, southern coastal plain, with smaller
forms known in Canaan during the Late Bronze liB quantities at Iron I sites in Canaan
and Iron lA periods, thus indicating a clear cultural
break with all preceeding ceramic traditions in Ca-
naan.
FORM AS 6 (FIGS. 12.2:6; 12.3:1)
DEEP STRAIGHT-SIDED KRATER
(KALATHOS)
FORM AS 5 (FIGS. 12.1:12-13; 12.2:5)
HEMISPHERICAL (BELL-SHAPED) KRATER This deep krater-basin is a slightly everted, straight-
walled vessel with horizontal handles, thickened rim
This krater is termed a bell-shaped krater by T. and flat base which rises in the center. It makes its
Dothan (1982:106-115). Krater Form AS 5 equals the first debut in the early phases of Stratum VII at Tel
large version ofFurumark's Form 80: Deep Rounded Miqne-Ekron (Killebrew 1998b: figs. II:22:25;
Bowl with Horizontal Handles. Furumark (194la: II:25:17-18; II:26:9; II:28:13). The vessel, often
633) distinguished two variants of this shape, FS 281, termed a kalathos (Kling 1989b:l45-147, fig. lOc), is
characteristic of LH IIIB, and 282, dated to LH found with the Mycenaean IIIC: 1b and bichrome as-
IIIB-IIIC:l early. It is similar in vessel profile and semblages at Tel Miqne-Ekron. It marks a clear de-
proportions to Bowl Form AS 4 but its significantly parture from the typical Canaanite-style kraters of
larger size indicates a different functional use than its the preceding Late Bronze II levels at Tel Miqne-
smaller relative. Ekron. Krater Form AS 6 is related to Furumark's
These kraters can be divided to two major classes Form 82, FS 291 (deep conical bowl) .25 E.S. Sherratt
according to shape of the rim (Mazar 1985b:90-91): (1981:231) proposed that the shape developed in
(a) kraters with flattened everted rim (Fig. 12.1:13) Early LH IIIC in the Dodecanese from an earlier
and (b) kraters with simple everted rim (Fig. form, the conical krater, and spread from there to
12.1:12). It is a common shape found at Tel Miqne- Cyprus and mainland Greece, mainly during the
Ekron and at other Philistine Pentapolis sites such as middle phase of LH IIIC.26 However, the Tel Miqne-
Ashdod (e.g. M. Dothan and Porath 1993: Stratum Ekron example differs from its Aegean prototypes by
XIIIa: figs. 21-22; Stratum XII: figs.27; 28:1-5, 7; its undecorated everted, straight-sided vessel profile
29:1-3, 5; all are bichrome examples) and Ashkelon which lacks exact parallels on mainland Greece and
(Phythian-Adams 1923: pl. II: 10), where this shape the Aegean. Modest numbers of this krater type are
rarely appears in a monochrome decoration, but is known from Ashdod (M. Dothan and Porath 1993:
numerous in bichrome ware. Krater Form AS 5 is al- Stratum XIIIb: 58, fig. 24:2; Stratum XI: 88, fig. 41:5).
so one of the most prevalent shapes in bichrome The most similar comparative vessel form with an
ware at Tell Qasile (Mazar 1985b:90-92) and is also everted straight-sided profile originates on Cyprus.
appears at other Iron I sites in Canaan (T. Dothan One possible early prototype, but with vertical han-
1982: 106-115 and Mazar 1985b:90-92 for a compre- dles, appears at several sites on Cyprus such as Pyla-
hensive survey of the evidence). Several examples of Kokkinokremos (Karageorghis and Demas 1984: pl.
Krater Form AS 5 are also known from Ras Ibn Hani XXI:l8; XXXVI:l8 where it is classified as Plain
240 SEA PEOPLES

White Handmade Ware). The closest example, simi- 12.3:3-6). Examples are known from Strata VII and
lar in general shape and size, is from Enkomi (Di- VI at Tel Miqne-Ekron. They are either undecorated
kaios 1969: Level IIIB: pl. 120:2 [no. 1734]). or often decorated with horizontal bands at the rim,
neck and occasionally the base. In Canaan feeding
Date: Aegean: LH IIIC; Cyprus: LCIIIA-B; Canaan:
bottles in early Iron I levels are also attested to at
Iron I
Ashdod, one with its basket handle located in line
Distribution: Aegean, Cyprus and Philistia in the
with the spout (M. Dothan and Porath 1993: Stratum
southern coastal plain of Canaan
XIIIb: fig. 15: 4, 10; Stratum Xllla: fig. 23:5, 6). A sec-
ond example, with the basket handle in line with the
spout, comes from the Beth Shean Valley (Fig.
FORM AS 7 (FIGS. 12.2:7; 12.3:2) 12.3:5-6; see also Gal 1979: fig. 4:3). This shape con-
SHALLOW KRATER TRAY tinues to appear in later bichrome ware. Juglet Form
8 appears in T. Dothan's (1982:155-157) typology of
Philistine bichrome pottery and A. Mazar
A single fragmentary example of this rare krater-
(1985b:97-98) classifies it as jug Type 7.
tray was uncovered in Stratum VII, Field INE at Tel
Juglet Form AS 8 is a well known shape on Cyprus
Miqne-Ekron. It is a large shallow tray with a slightly
during the Late Cypriote IliA and IIIB periods.27 The
everted, straight-sided vessel profile with high hori-
origin of this type has been the subject of debate. Sjo-
zontal handles. This vessel, which does not have any
qvist (1940:74) noted that jugs with a tubular spout
comparative published material from Canaan, be-
and basket handle appear already in the Aegean dur-
longs to Furumark's Form 97, FS 322 termed a tray.
ing the LH IliA and suggested a Mycenaean origin
Examples are known from Asine, Thebes, and Ialy-
for this form.2s However, as Furumark (1944:
sos, dated to the Late Helladic IIIB-IIIC (Furumark
236-238) noted, the handle placement in line with
1941a: FS 322). A richly decorated tray was recovered
the spout was far more common than at a right angle
atPhylakopi (Mountjoy 1985:188, fig. 5.19).
with the spout, which was more prevalent in the east.
Date: Aegean: LH IIIB-IIIC; Canaan: Iron lA As has been recently pointed out, the appearance of
Distribution: Aegean and Tel Miqne-Ekron Form AS 8 in Mycenaean ware is a mainly eastern
Aegean phenomenon, in some cases predating the
Late Helladic IIIC period.29 Currently the evidence
for an Aegean, probably eastern Aegean source, is
JUGLETS most convincing.
Date: Aegean: LH IIIB-IIIC; Cyprus: LC IIIA-IIIC;
FORM AS 8 (FIGS. 12.2:8; 12.3:3-6) Canaan: Iron I
SPOUTED JUGLET Distribution: Aegean, especially the east, Cyprus,
and Canaan, especially the major Iron I cities of Phil-
Form AS 8 is a spouted juglet with globular body istia, southern coastal plain and the Beth Shean Val-
profile and a basket handle at a right angle to the ley.
spout over the opening at the top (Figs. 12.2:8;

Figure 12.3. Locally produced Aegean-style Mycenaean 11/C: 1b pottery and associated wares
(Forms AS 6-AS 11) (Killebrew 1998b: ill. 111:26).

No. Form Site Reg. No. Locus No. Date

1 Krater AS 6 Miqne-Ekron 3.371/17 3074 Iron I
2 Krater AS 7 Miqne-Ekron 37.86/1 37027 Iron I
3 JugletAS 8a Miqne-Ekron 4.395/2 4117 Iron I
4 JugletAS 8a Miqne-Ekron 4.240a/9 4076 Iron I
5 JugletAS 8b Beth Shean 27.10.513 1248 LBII
6 JugletAS 8c Beth Shean 27.10.515 1252 LBII
7 JugAS9 Miqne-Ekron 4.379 4117 Iron I
8 Jug AS 9 Miqne-Ekron 4.379/41 4117 Iron I
9 JugAS9 Miqne-Ekron 37.74/40 37027 Iron I
10 Stirrup Jar AS 11 Miqne-Ekron 36.204/2 36081 Iron I
11 Cooking jug AS 10 Miqne-Ekron 3.376/6 3073 Iron I
12 Cooking jug AS 10 Miqne-Ekron 36.225/8 36081 Iron I
13 Cooking jug AS 10 Miqne-Ekron 36.226/1 36081 Iron I
14 Cooking jug AS 10 Miqne-Ekron 3.439/3 3087 Iron I
 KILLEBREW 241

Kraters

Form AS 6 Form AS 7

Juglets

Form AS 8

AS8a AS 8b AS8c

Jugs Stirrup Jars

Form AS 9 Form AS 11

<
\
8

m m. . Ckr
t' ,'~ I

'1..-~m
\\

10

Cooking Pots

Form AS 10

? I ~:
!1~:
242 SEA PEOPLES

JUGS tion indigenous cooking pot of the Late Bronze and

Iron I periods. Fragmentary examples of this cooking
jug appear in the Iron I pits at Deir el-Balah (Kille-
FORM AS 9 (FIGS. 12.2:9; 12.3:7-9)
brew 1998b) .
GLOBULARJUG WITH CONCAVE NECK
Cooking Jug Form AS 10 is relatively uniform in
size, measuring ca. 20 em. high. Often this jug is
This jug is characterized by its tall concave neck, blackened on its exterior, a result of its use as a cook-
often with a trefoil mouth. It is usually decorated ing jug. Cooking jugs similar in shape, either with
with painted linear bands at the rim. Complete ex- one or two handles, are well-known from Ashdod
amples of this type have a globular body and ring where they appear in Strata XIIIb (M. Dothan and
base. Several rim sherds of Form AS 9 originated in Porath 1993: fig. 17:4, 5) and XII (M. Dothan and
Stratum VII at Tel Miqne-Ekron. Most are fragmen- Porath 1993: fig. 34:2, 7). They also make a debut at
tary pieces, however at least one (Fig. 12.3:5) has a Tell Aitun (Edelstein and Aurant 1992: figs. 2 Uug on
trefoil pouring spout. Form AS 9 is equally rare at left] and i0:9 where they are classified as jugs) and
Ashdod, apparently without a trefoil mouth (Stratum possibly at Beth Shemesh (Grant and Wright 1938:
XIII: M. Dothan and Porath 1993: fig. 13:5). pl. LXI:27-31) and Tell Qasile (Mazar 1985b: Type
Jugs without trefoil spouts on Cyprus derive from CP 3: 53; fig. 41:1). This cookingjug bears no resem-
LC IIC-IIIA contexts, corresponding to Kling's blance typologically to the typical indigenous cook-
(1989b:149) fig. 13b. These jugs have a typically My- ing pots of the Late Bronze and Iron I periods.
cenaean form and are especially close to imported The single and double handled cooking jug is a
Mycenaean LH IIIB examples on Cyprus. 30 A few form well-known in Cyprus during the Late Cypriote
fragmentary examples are also known from Tarsus IIC and IliA periods. The single-handled cooking
(French 1975: fig. 2). jug, some with a round base, appears at H~a Sultan
In contrast, jugs with trefoil mouths have a long Tekke (Obrink 1979:23; fig. 111 [F 6171]; Astrom et
history in Cyprus in various wares. In the Aegean, al. 1983: figs. 318, 409), Pyla-Kokkinokremos (Kara-
however, the jug with trefoil spout is regarded as a georghis and Demas 1984: pls. XX:102, XXXVl:102;
later feature of Middle and Late LH IIIC (French XX:104; XXXVl:104; classified as Coarse Handmade
1975: fig. 2). It equals Furumark's FS 137 (1941a: ware), Maa-Palaeokastro (for single and double-han-
606), which he dated to LH IIIC:1 early through Sub- dled cooking pots, see e.g. Karageorghis and Demas
mycenaean. Thus the addition of a trefoil spout to 1988: pls. LX:692; CLXXXIII:692; LX:578; CLXXXI-
the globular jug with tall concave neck seems to be 11:578; CIX:387; CCXI:387), Athienou (Dothan and
an eastern embellishment on a Mycenaean form Ben-Tor 1983: fig. 50:7-8), Enkomi (Dikaios 1969: pl.
(French 1975: fig. 2). 106:3), and Kourion (Daniel1937: pls.II-III, V), and
Date. Aegean: Late Helladic IIIB-IIIC; Cyprus: Late along the southern coast of Anatolia (Tarsus: Gold-
Cypriote IIC-IIIB; Canaan: Iron lA man 1956: pl. 324:1220-1221).
Distribution: Aegean, Cyprus, southern coast of Ana- Similar cooking jugs also are found, although in
tolia, and Iron I cities of Philistia, the southern coast- smaller quantities, in the Aegean (e.g. Lefkandi: Pop-
al plain of Canaan ham and Milburn 1971: fig. 2:5 and Perati: Iakovidis
1969: pl. 62:720; double handled cooking pots are
known from Phylakopi, see Mountjoy 1985:196, fig.
5:22:379; p. 207; fig. 5.29:543). However, the typical
COOKING WARES Late Helladic cooking pot is usually placed on a tri-
pod and was classified by Furumark (1941a:640) as
COOKING JUGS Form 95, FS 320, the tripod caldron (see also Moun-
tjoy 1985: fig. 5.22:376, 377 from Phylakopi). The
FORM AS 10 (FIGS. 12.2:10; 12.3:11-14) long history of this cooking pot type on a tripod has
GLOBULAR COOKING JUG been traced on Crete (Martlew 1 988; Haggis and
Mook 1993). Though the body of this cooking pot is
similar in shape to our Form AS 10 cooking jug, its
Cooking Jug Form AS 10 has the shape of a globu-
placement on three legs clearly distinguishes it from
lar jug with one or two handles from the rim to the
the Tel Miqne-Ekron examples. Thus, typologically
shoulder, and a flat base. The rim is usually a simple
the closest and most numerous parallels are found
or slightly thickened everted rim. This cooking jug
on Cyprus and at Tarsus.
first appears in Stratum VII at Tel Miqne-Ekron,
alongside Mycenaean IIIC:1b and related wares. It is Date. Aegean: Late Helladic IIIC:1(?); Cyprus: Late
the most popular cooking shape in the early Iron I Cypriote IIC and IliA; Canaan: Iron I
levels at Tel Miqne-Ekron, almost replacing the tradi- Distribution: Isolated examples in the Aegean, with
 KILLEBREW 243

larger quantities known on Cyprus, the southern

coast of Anatolia and mainly at sites in Philistia,
Summary
southern coastal plain of Canaan
Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery and its associated plain
and coarse wares from the southern coastal plain of
Canaan are nearly identical to those found on Cy-
prus during the Late Cypriote IliA period (see Kling
Containers 1989b for a comparable typology). It differs signifi-
cantly from Mycenaean IIIC:1b pottery from the Ae-
SPECIALTY CONTAINERS gean proper, both in the variety of shapes, decorative
motifs, and associated cooking wares. As has been
noted by H. W. Gatling (Gatling and Jones 1986) and
STIRRUP JARS S. Sherratt (1991) with respect to Mycenaean IIIC:1b
assemblages found on Cyprus, the number of shapes
FORM AS 11 (FIGS. 12.2:11; 12.3:10) appearing in this typology is select and limited when
STIRRUP JARS compared to the rich variety of shapes known from
Mycenaean IIIB and IIIC assemblages on mainland
The appearance of local imitations of imported Greece. The shapes are largely domestic kitchen-
Mycenaean stirrup jars and the eventual adaptation wares (with the exception of the stirrup jar) used by
of this form into the local Philistine bichrome pot- the producers and consumers of this ware in south-
tery repertoire has been discussed in detail by T. ern Canaan, identified by most scholars as the Philis-
tines (Mazar 1985a, Finkelstein 1995, Stager 1995).
Dothan (1982:115-125). Its integration into the My-
cenaean IIIC:llb assembalge on Cyprus has been The two vessel types which appear in any number
traced by B. Kling (1989b:161-165) who notes that during the earliest phases of Stratum VII and contin-
ue the Late Bronze Age tradition at Tel Miqne-Ekron
the stirrup jar was already produced on Cyprus dur-
ing the Late Cypriote IIC and continues into the My- are the flask and Canaanite storage jar, both shapes
well known in the Aegean and Cyprus during the
cenaean IIIC:1b Cypriote repertoire. Stirrup jars pro-
duced in local Mycenaean IIIC:1b wares in Philistia preceding period. Thus, I conclude that events and
the inhabitants of Cyprus and the southern coast of
are rare. One fragmentary example is known from
Anatolia during the 12th century B.C.E. were closely
the sondage in Field INE at Tel Miqne-Ekron, howev-
er several additional examples appear in Iron I con- connected to the largescale migration of people to
the southern coast of Canaan during the 12th centu-
texts in other fields at the site. Locally produced stir-
ry B.C.E., a group identified as the biblical Philistines.
rup jars are more frequent in bichrome Iron I wares
at the Philistine Pentapolis cities (Ashdod: M. Doth-
an 1971: fig. 102:8-9; M. Dothan and Porath 1993:
figs. 17:8-9; 31:1-6).

Technology
Investigation of the technology used to produced Bronze II pottery making techniques. Potters produc-
pottery associated with the initial appearance of the ing the Aegean-style Mycenaean IIIC:1b decorated
Philistines in southern Canaan is based on several di- and undecorated tablewares preferred a very fine lo-
verse methodological approaches, including archaeo- cal mixture of loess and chalk, with very little or no
metric characterization studies (chemical and miner- temper to fashion their pots. What is especially note-
alogical analyses), replication studies, ethnoarchaeo- worthy is the use of the same clay recipe, with little or
logical research, and archaeological evidence for the no temper, for vessels of very different shapes and
potters craft at Tel Miqne Ekron (for a detailed dis- functions: bowls, kraters, jugs, and storage jars. The
cussion of these results see Killebrew 1998b: ch. IV). only exception is the cooking jug where the potter
This investigation includes all aspects of the pottery added sand-sized quartz and a small bit of limestone
production sequence, including clay procurement as temper. However, the ware of the cooking jugs al-
and preparation, formation techniques, and firing so illustrates this break with Late Bronze II pottery
temperatures. In all aspects of the pottery production traditions: the loess clay used in producing cooking
sequence, the ceramic tradition of Mycenaean jugs lacked any shell or calcite temper typical of Late
IIIC:1b pottery and its associated assemblages at Tel Bronze II cooking pots.
Miqne-Ekron represents a complete break with Late Vessels included in this Iron I assemblage of
244 SEA PEOPLES

Aegean-style pottery were produced solely on the fast ments evidence from several kilns at Tel Miqne-
wheel, as evidenced by several technological features Ekron, where the lack of vitrification in the fire-boxes
clearly visible on the surface of the pottery. These in- testifies to a low firing temperature (see Killebrew
clude spiral rhythmic grooves and ridges on the inte- 1996a for a detailed description of the Tel Miqne-
rior of their bases (a feature only visible on pottery Ekron kilns). For now, the issue cannot be conclu-
produced on a fast wheel). Also the extremely well- sively resolved due to the lack of knowledge regard-
levigated, highly-plastic clay without temper, which ing kiln firing times and the effects ofreburial on the
was used to manufacture most of the Mycenaean chemical and mineralogical composition of the pot-
IIIC:lb pottery assemblage, could only be used to tery.
produce pottery on a fast wheel. This also represents Based on the results of the technological analyses it
a change from typical indigenous potting practices is possible to conclude that Mycenaean IIIC:lb pot-
where a variety of techniques, including coil, mold, tery and its associated assemblages were produced in
and wheel, were used to produce Canaanite pottery a professional workshop setting.3I However, several
out of a coarser, more tempered clay. technological aspects, such as the carefully prepared
The most difficult stage of the pottery production clays and highly skilled potter required to produce
sequence is the firing of ceramics, both from the these fine wares, may indicate that its roots lie in a
viewpoint of the pottery and of the researcher at- large-scale industrial production. This factory-style
tempting to reconstruct this phase. Several character- mode of manufacture32 was probably that which pro-
ization studies were employed in order to understand duced the widely exported Mycenaean IIIB wares, ap-
this last phase of production. While petrographic pearing throughout the Aegean and eastern Mediter-
and X-ray diffraction studies indicate high firing tem- ranean and can be considered an ancestor of Myce-
peratures for several vessel types of the Mycenaean naean IIIC:lb pottery. However, this later develop-
IIIC:lb assemblage, other characterization studies in- ment of Mycenaean IIIC: 1b pottery also coincided
dicate the opposite. Most of the pottery examined by with the decentralization of the production of this
isotopic (carbon and oxygen; see Nissenbaum and pottery (Killebrew 1998c). During the 12th century
Killebrew 1995), infra-red, and thermogravemetric B.C.E., it was manufactured at numerous locations
analyses and refiring experiments indicate a much and at this time probably reverted from a factory pro-
lower firing temperature, in the range of 500-7000C duction mode to a smaller-scale professional work-
for the Mycenaean IIIC:lb assemblage. This comple- shop mode.

Conclusions

Based on this stylistic study of Mycenaean IIIC:lb and Canaan following the cessation of mass-pro-
pottery in Canaan, several conclusions can be duced 13th century B.C.E. Aegean and Cypriote im-
reached regarding the nature and origin of this bibli- ports.
cal people. The Iron I inhabitants of Tel Miqne- These newcomers arrived with a different ceramic
Ekron clearly had a completely different origin from tradition, which is apparent not only in its shape and
the preceding Late Bronze Age residents, an observa- decorative style, but also in its technological style. It
tion which is reflected in all aspects of the material marks a clear break with the preceding Late Bronze
culture. I suggest that they came as well-organized Age assemblages of Canaan. Within a generation or
and relatively prosperous colonizers, representing a two, their ceramic traditions began to acculturate, in-
large-scale immigation. The newcomers quickly set- corporating elements of the surrounding indigenous
tled at several sites on the southern coastal plain. culture as is evidenced in the bichrome pottery as-
Their ability to construct rapidly urban centers (com- semblage which developed out of Mycenaean IIIC:lb
plete with fortifications at sites such as Tel Miqne- pottery. When considered together with the biblical
Ekron), and to overshadow the very modest Late and Egyptian texts and the stratigraphic evidence,
Bronze Age settlement at the site, indicates that they the appearance of large quantities of Mycenaean
were not destitute refugees who arrived in southern IIIC:lb pottery and its associated assemblages at sev-
Canaan due to lack of choice. Rather, this appears to eral Pentapolis cities during the 12th century B.C.E. in
be a very deliberate act and may well indicate a previ- the southern coastal plain of Canaan represents the
ous acquaintance with this region, as is hinted at in initial settlement of the Philistines.
the sporadic connections between Cyprus, Anatolia,
 KILLEBREW 245

Notes
1. Style, as a methodological approach, is unavoid- 42 [pl. XV:42] and 43 [pl. XV:43] where he terms
able in archaeological analysis. It defines artifact these bowls Cypro-Mycenaean ware).
types and cultural affiliation. It can be studied at
many levels-on the individual, group, or societal lev- 7. The spiral in the interior was an especially popular
el. It includes the visual appearance (i.e. typology) as feature during all periods in Cyprus. In the Argolid it
well as less visible aspects such as the production has been regarded as a criterion of the beginning of
processes which produced it (i.e. technology). Style the LH IIIC (French 1969a:135). Attempts have been
cannot be separated from its social contexts which made to demonstrate the chronological overlap of
bestow material culture their meaning and social val- the LC IIC in Cyprus with LH IIIC in the Aegean
ues. However despite the fact that style is inseparable (Heuck 1981:68) or as a possible local Cypriote de-
from archaeological analysis, it is highly subjective, velopment which preceded the introduction of this
difficult to define, and ambiguous by nature. For a feature in Argive ceramics (Russell 1983: Ill; Demas
comprehensive discussion of the history of stylistic 1984:203). It should be noted that spirals in the inte-
analysis see Conkey 1990; Conkey and Hastorf 1990. rior of open vessels appear in the Argolid already
during the LH IIIB (French 1967:167, fig. 12.97) and
2. For a discussion of Mycenaean IIIC pottery in the on open vessels from Crete during LM IIIB (Kanta
Aegean see Desborough 1964:3-28; Schachermeyr 1980:258; see Kling 1989b:l34 for a detailed discus-
1980; Sherratt 1981, 1985; and Mountjoy 1986: sion).
134-193.
8. P. Dikaios (1969-1971) termed these bowls deco-
3. See Astrom 1972a:272-288; French and Astrom rated in a matt-paint as Late Mycenaean IIIB.
1980; Kling 1984, 1987, 1989a, 1989b, 1991; Sherratt
and Crouwel1987; Sherratt 1991; Leonard 1994:6-10 9. Conical bowls with plain rims equals]. L. Benson's
for a discussion of these terms and development of (1972:81-83) Type 3 Decorated Late Cypriote III
Cypriote LC liB-IliA ceramic terminology. bowl at Kourion, F.-G. Maier's (1985) Types I and IV
Decorated Late Cypriote bowls from Kouklia, and P.
4. Very little research has been conducted on the Astrom's (1972a:282) White Painted Wheelmade III
functional use of ceramic vessels in this region. Sever- Type IIIc. Conical bowls with simple rims are known
al noteworthy exceptions dealing with ceramic ty- from Kition (Late Cypriote IIC examples classified as
pologies based on vessel function is H. J. Franken's Late Mycenaean IIIB bowls: Karageorghis 1974: pls.
(1992:164-165) analysis of Late Bronze Age pottery CXXIX:188; CXXX:145, 147, 148; CXLVII:50, 57, 58;
at Tell Deir Alia, R. Holthoer's 1977 study of Egypt- Late Cypriote IliA examples classified as Late Myce-
ian pottery in Nubia, the Museum of Fine Arts, naean IIIB bowls: Karageorghis 1974: pls. CLVI:ll,
Boston 1982 catalogue of an exhibit of New Kingdom 36, 42, 162; CLVIII:2, 32, 63; CLXI:197; Karageorghis
objects, and A. Leonard's 1981 article on morpholog- 1985:96, 114; pls. CIX:2238, 5289; CXIII:3269; Maa-
ical variation in Mycenaean pottery from the south- Palaeokastro: Floor II (LC IIC/LC IliA): Kara-
east Mediterranean (see also Leonard et al. 1993). georghis and Demas 1988: pls. XLII:98; CLXX:98;
See also Mazzoni (1994) and Caneva (1994) for an Athienou: Dothan and Ben-Tor 1983: Stratum III:
analysis of container shape vs. function of drinking shallow version (Late Mycenaean IIIB) fig. 13:23;
vessels from Ebla and ancient Sudan respectively. See deeper version: fig. 50:4; Hala Sultan Tekke: Hult
Killebrew 1998b for a discussion of this approach in 1978:60; fig. 131 [White Painted Wheel-made III];
light of 13th and 12th century B.C.E. pottery pro- Enkomi: Tomb 18: Schaeffer 1952: figs. 98; 100:4; be-
duced in Canaan. tween Floors VI and V: Dikaios 1969: pl. 113:5908/1;
Courtois 1981: fig. 158:2; see Kling 1989b:131-134
5. Furumark 1941a:636; 1992: pls. 161-162, pl. for a detailed discussion of the Cypriote evidence.
162:296. It should be noted that Furumark (1944:
235-236) classified it as Decorated Late Cypriote III. 10. Conical bowls with out-turned rims have been
classified by J. L. Benson (1972:111-112) as Myce-
6. P. Moun~oy (1986:133) published two additional naean Bowl Type 1b and by F.-G. Maier (1985) as
examples of FS 296 dating to Late Helladic IIIB2 lev- Decorated Late Cypriote III ware Type II. They are
els from Tiryns. However she notes that this type did known from Kition (Late Cypriote IIC examples clas-
not become popular until the Late Helladic IIIC pe- sified as Late Mycenaean IIIB bowls: Karageorghis
riod. Several examples of bowl type FS 296, similar to 1974: pl. CXXIX:149, 204; Late Cypriote IliA exam-
those known from Cyprus, were recovered from a ples classified as Late Mycenaean IIIB bowls: Kara-
Late Bronze II tomb at Sarepta (Baramki 1959: nos. georghis 1974: pl. CLX:137; Karageorghis et al. 1981:
246 SEA PEOPLES

17; no. 14; pis. V:14; XIV:27; Karageorghis 1985:95). 1985b:87-90 for a comprehensive discussion of
At Hala Sultan Tekke, they are designated as Myce- bichrome and red slipped bell-shaped bowls in
naean IIIB and have a "polished slip" (Hult 1978:60: Canaan. At Tell Qasile the bell-shaped bowls painted
fig. 129). with a bichrome design appear in Strata XII-X. Ex-
amples from Stratum XII are generally white slipped
11. Bowls with plain rims, the most popular type in contining into Stratum XI. Other bowls from Stra-
Cyprus, have been present as early as LC lA; see tum XI are unslipped or have an unburnished red
Kling 1989b:133-134 for a detailed description. slip with black decoration (Mazar 1985b:88). The
most prevalent motif at Tell Qasile is the spiral while
12. Mountjoy 1986:132-133, fig. 164:1-2; B. Kling bowls with horizontal bands are almost entirely lack-
(1989b:134) has suggested that bowls with this rim ing (Mazar 1985b:90). Similar bell-shaped bowls with
type may reflect inspiration from the imported Myce- red slip also appear at Ashdod in Strata XII-XI (M.
naean bowls. Dothan 1971: fig. 74:2-3).

13. Kouklia: Maier 1969: pl. 3:4; Sinda: Period II: Fu- 19. Furumark 1941a:634; French 1966:222; 1967:169;
rumark 1965:114; pl. 1: bottom right hand corner; 1969b:74-75, 87; Wardle 1969:273-275; 1973:
Enkomi: Level liB: Dikaios 1969: pl. 67:22; Levels 311-318, 334-336; Mountjoy 1976:87-90; 1985:
IIIA-IIIC: Dikaios 1969: pis. 122:3; 123:9; Maa- 181-185; figs. 5.8; 5.16-5.18; 1986:93, 117-118, 121,
Palaeokastro: Floor II (LC IIC/LC IliA): Kara- 129-131, 134, 149-151, 176-178; Sherratt 1980,
georghis and Demas 1988:124, pis. LXXVIII:590; 1981:566; see Kling 1989b:106 for a summary.
CXCII:590; p. 141; pis. XCVIII:136; CCVII:36 and
many other examples; Athienou: Stratum III: Dothan 20. See e.g. Enkomi: Schaeffer 1952: fig. 114; Level
and Ben-Tor 1983:111, fig. 50:1-3 (pl. 33:3); Hala IliA: Dikaios 1971: pis. 306-307; Pyla-Kokkinokre-
Sultan Tekke: Layer 2: Ubrink 1979: fig. 200; Kition: mos: Karageorghis and Demas 1984: pl. XXXV:
Tomb 9: Karageorghis 1974: pl. LXXI: no. 81; Tomb 1952/22, 1952/23; Kouklia: Maier 1969:40, pis.
9 (upper): Karageorghis 1974: pl. CLXII:no. 336; 4:5-6; 5:1-2; Kition: Karageorghis et al. 1981: pl.
Kourion: LC III: Benson 1972: pl. 21:B441, B442, 7:32, 40; Karageorghis and Demas 1985: Floors
B445, B449, B452, B468. IliA-IV: pl. XL:927; Floor III: pl. XLIV:896/1, 896/2,
906/1, 912/1, 931/1; Maa-Palaeokastro: Kara-
14. Furumark 1941a:636; French 1967:175-177; fig. georghis and Demas 1988: numerous examples from
18; 1969a:135, continuing into Late Helladic IIIC Floor II (LC IIC/LC IIIA)-Floor I (LC IIIA)-see
(see e.g. Phylakopi: Mountjoy 1985:192; fig. e.g. Kling 1988:317-327 for a detailed discussion of
5.20:364-368; note that many of the vessels are "pol- the Maa skyphoi; Athienou: Stratum II: Dothan and
ished"). Ben-Tor 1983:115-117; fig. 53 (pis. 36:1, 2; 37:1, 2);
Hala Sultan Tekke: Layer 3: Obrink 1979:37; fig. 184
15. Kling 1989b:94-95, Fig. 3a. Astrom (1972a:280, (White Painted Wheel-made III).
Type II, Deep Bowl) classified the skyphos shape as
part of his White Painted Wheelmade III but origi- 21. See e.g.: E. S. Sherratt and Crouwell 1987:332,
nally catalogued most examples as Mycenaean II- fig. 4:8; Tarsus: Goldman 1956:220-221; pis. 330,
IC:1a and b (Astrom 1972a:375-377). Bell-shaped 331, 334, 335; French 1975: figs. 10, 13, 17, 18.
bowls from Hala Sultan Tekke have been assinged to
White Painted Wheelmade III ware (Astrom et al. 22. Linear decoration on this shape has been identi-
1977:93; see Kling 1989b:106 for a detailed discus- fied as a criterion of the beginning of LH IIIC in the
sion). Argolid (French 1969a:135; Rutter 1977:2, who
places it in his phase 2 of Mycenaean IIIC: Iakovidis
16. See e.g. Stratum XIII: M. Dothan and Porath 1969-1970: vol. B:225-226).
1993: fig. 13:1; Stratum XIIIb: M. Dothan and Porath
1993: small bowls: fig. 14:9-15, 17-18; large bowls: 23. See e.g. LC IIC: Kition Floor IV: Pastoral style:
figs. 14:16, 19, 21-23; 16:7-10; Stratum XII: M. Karageorghis and Demas 1985: pl. IX:1140; LC
Dothan and Porath 1993: small bowls: fig. 26:2, 8, 10; IIC/IIIA: Athienou: Stratum III: Dothan and Ben-
large bowls: fig. 26:1,3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14; Stratum XI: M. Tor 1983:49; fig. 13:1; Enkomi: Level liB: Dikaios
Dothan and Porath 1993: fig. 40:1, 2. 1969:249-250.

17. Sarepta: Herscher 1975: fig. 52:1-3; Koehl 24. See e.g. LC IliA: Enkomi: Level IliA: Dikaios
1985:119-120, nos. 192-197; figs. 8, 20; Ras Ibn Rani: 1969:263-264; Maa-Palaeokastro: see Kling 1988:327
e.g. Bounni et al. 1978:281, fig. 28; 1979:240, fig. 19. for a summary; Kition: Myc. IIIC:1 krater: Kara-
georghis and Demas 1985: pl. XIV:129/1; Floor III:
18. See e.g. T. Dothan 1982:98-106 and Mazar Karageorghis and Demas 1985: pl. XIX: 914/1;
 KILLEBREW 247

907 /B; LC IIIA/IIIB: Kition: Floor III: Karageorghis ic record, have been proposed to describe the orga-
and Demas 1985: pl. XCIV:914/1, and continuing in- nization of pottery production (see e.g. Balfet
to the LC IIIB; see Kling 1989b:126 for a detailed dis- 1965:162-163; van der Leeuw 1976, 1984; Peacock
cussion. 1981, 1982; Redman and Myers 1981:289-290; Rice
1981; Tosi 1984:23-24; Santley, Arnold and Pool
25. Furumark 1941a:635-636 who dates FS 291 to the 1989). These different production models consider
Late Helladic IIIC. This type has concave sides with technological features, such as formation techniques
an angular profile. Only one straight-sided kalathos, and variability in both raw materials and products as
originating from Mycenae, is catalogued by Fum- well as ecological, economic, and social criteria such
mark. as frequently and seasonality of production, number
of workers, their age, sex, and status, degree of labor
26. P. Dikaios (1969:267, no. 3845/4) compared this division, kind and extent of investment in special
form to kalathoi in the mainland, on Rhodes and at spaces or tools and proximity of consuming groups
Perati, where LH IIIC examples are common and ap- (Rice 1987:183-184). S. E. van der Leeuw (1976:
pear in several variations. B. Kling (1989b:147) con- 394-398; 402-403) has divided pottery production
curs with Sherratt's suggestion that the shape was in- into six different states of pottery economy which can
troduced to Cyprus from the Aegean, probably the be defined by certain technological and economic
Dodecanese. characteristics. His "states" are based on modes of
production which can be divided into two basic in-
27. It has been classified under many different terms dustries: (a) domestic production, including (1)
such as Gjerstad's (1926:223) Submycenaean Jug 9 household production and (2) household industries;
Sjoqvist's (1940:67, fig. 18) Painted Submycenaean and (b) professional production, including (3) work-
Jug Type 2; Furumark's (1944:234-235; 236-237; fig. shop industries, (4) village industries, (5) large-scale
10) Decorated Late Cypriote III Type I, and Astrom's industries, and (6) individual industries. In general,
(1972a:286-287) White Painted Wheelmade III Type as pottery production becomes a profession and full-
Xb. See Kling 1988:331-332 and 1989b:160, fig. 17c, time activitiy, standardization, range and number of
for a detailed discussion of the Cypriote evidence. items, and technological complexity increases.

28. See Furumark 1941a:609, FS 158, 159. Daniel 32. Large-scale factory industry is characterized by
(1942:292) and Dothan (1982:157) also suggested substantial capital investment in production for a
and Aegean origin for this shape. maximum output and minimal cost per unit (van der
Leeuw 1976:397). Innovations which have maximized
29. See e.g. Ialysos (Maiuri 1923-4:142, fig. 63;Jacopi efficiency are utilized. Thus production is full-time
1930-31:259, fig. 4); Amorgos (Morricone 1965-66: for the entire year (Arnold 1985:230-231). Full-time
252); Chalcis (Morricone 1965-66: note 1); Kos professional potters are employed in this type of pot-
(Morricone 1965-66:250-251, fig. 276) and especial- tery production, along with full-time hired hands.
ly Sherratt 1981:455-461 and Kling 1989b:160 for a The technological level of large-scale industries is
detailed discussion. high, utilizing the wheel, case, or press. Each vessel
type serves a particular function. Examples of this
30. See e.g. Furumark 1941a: FS 105, 110, 116. Fum- type of production center are the Terra Sigillata fac-
mark's FS 116 (1941a:603), the Levanto-Helladic tories of the Roman world. The highly specialized
type, was distinguished by its higher neck. clays were prepared so as to suit the unique and spe-
cific manufacture methods used in factories.
31. Several models, based mainly on the ethnograph-
248 SEA PEOPLES

Bibliography
Allen, S. H. Benson,]. L.
1994 Trojan Grey Ware at Tel Miqne-Ekron. Bul- 1972 Bamboula at Kourion. The Necropolis and the
letin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Finds. Philadelphia. University of Pennsylva-
293:39-52. nia Press.

Arnold, D. E. Bliss, F.J., and Macalister, A. S.

1985 Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cam- 1902 Excavations in Palestine During the Years
bridge. Cambridge University Press. 1898-1900. London. Palestine Exploration
Fund.
Asaro, F., and Perlman, I.
1973 Provenience Studies of Mycenaean Pottery Bounni, A.; Lagarce, E. and].; and Saliby, N.
Employing Neutron Activation Analysis. Pp. 1978 Rapport preliminaire sur la deuxieme cam-
213-224 in Acts of the International Archaeologi- pagne de fouilles (1976) a Ibn Rani (Syrie).
cal Symposium "The Mycenaeans in the Eastern Syria 55:233-301.
Mediterranean," Nicosia 27th March-2nd April 1979 Rapport preliminaire sur la troisieme cam-
1972. Nicosia. Department of Antiquities, pagne de fouilles (1977) a Ibn Rani (Syrie).
Cyprus. Syria 58:217-291.

Asaro, F.; Perlman, 1.; and Dothan, M. Broneer, 0.

1971 An Introductory Study of Mycenaean IIIC:1 1939 A Mycenaean Fountain on the Athenian
Ware from Tel Ashdod. Archaeometry 13: Acropolis. Hesperia 8:317-433.
169-175.
Caneva, I.
Astrom, P. 1994 Recipienti per Liquidi nelle Culture Pastor-
1972a The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Architecture and ali dell alto Nilo. Pp. 209-226 in L. Milano,
Pottery. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, Vol. IV, ed., Drinking in Ancient Societies. History and
Part IC. Lund. Swedish Cyprus Expedition. Culture of Drinks in the Ancient Near East.
1972b The Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Relative and Ab- Padova. Sargon.
solute Chronology, Foreign Relations, Historical
Conclusions. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition, Catling, H. W., and Jones, R. E.
Vol. IV, Part 1D. Lund. Swedish Cyprus Ex- 1986 Cyprus, 2500-500 B.C.: The Aegean and the
pedition. Near East, 1550-1050 B.C. Pp. 523-625 in R.
E. Jones, Greek and Cypriot Pottery: A Review of
Astrom, P.; Astrom, E.; Hatziantoniou, A.; Niklasson, Scientific Methods. Athens. British School of
K.; and Obrink, U. Archaeology.
1983 Hala Sultan Tekke 8. Excavations 1971-79.
Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 45:8. Conkey, M. W.
Goteborg. Paul Astroms Forlag. 1990 Experimenting with Style in Archaeology:
Some Historical and Theoretical Issues. Pp.
Astrom, P.; Hult, G.; and Olofsson, M. S. 5-17 in M. W. Conkey and C. A. Hastorf,
1977 Hala Sultan Tekke 3. Excavations 1972. Studies eds., The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cam-
in Mediterranean Archaeology 45:3. Gate- bridge. Cambridge University Press.
borg. Paul Astroms Forlag.
Conkey, M. W., and Hastorf, C. A.
Balfet, H. 1990 Introduction. Pp. 1-4 in M. W. Conkey and
1965 Ethnographical Observations in North C. A. Hastorf, eds., The Uses of Style in Archae-
Mrica and Archaeological Interpretation. ology. Cambridge. Cambridge University
Pp. 161-177 in F. R. Matson, ed., Ceramics Press.
and Man. Chicago. Aldine.
Courtois, J.-C.
Baramki, D. C. 1981 Alasia II: Les tombes d'Enkomi, le mobilier fu-
1959 A Late Bronze Age Tomb at Sarafand An- neraire. (Fouilles C. F.-A. Schaeffer 1947-1965).
cient Sarepta. Berytus 12:129-142. Paris. Mission Archeologique d'Alasia.
 KILLEBREW 249

Daniel,]. F. 1995 Tel Miqne-Ekron: The Aegean Mfinities of

1937 Two Late Cypriote III Tombs from Kourion. the Sea Peoples (Philistines) Settlement in
American journal ofArchaeology 41:56-85. Canaan in Iron Age I. Pp. 41-59 in S. Gitin,
1942 Review of E. Sjoqvist, Problems of the Late ed., Recent Excavations in Israel: A View to the
Cypriot Bronze Age. American journal of Archae- West. Dubuque, lA. Kendall/Hunt.
ology 46:286-293. 1998 Initial Philistine Settlement: From Migration
to Coexistence. Pp. 148-161 inS. Gitin, A.
Demas,M. Mazar, and E. Stern, eds., Mediterranean Peo-
1984 Pyla-Kokkinokremos and Maa-Palaeokastro: ples in Transition Thirteenth to Early Tenth Cen-
Two Fortified Settlements of the End of the turies BCE. Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Soci-
13th Century in Cyprus. Ph.D. dissertation, ety.
University of Cincinnati.
Dothan, T., and Ben-Tor, A.
Desborough, V. R. d'A. 1983 Excavations at Athienou, Cyprus 1971-1972.
1964 The Last Mycenaeans and Their Successors: An Qedem 16.Jerusalem. Hebrew University.
Archaeological Survey c. 1200-c. 1000 B.C. Lon-
don. Oxford University Press. Edelstein, G., and Aurant, S.
1992 The "Philistine" Tomb at Tell 'Eitun. Atiqot
Dikaios, P. 21:23-41.
1969-71 Enkomi Excavations 1948-1958. Mainz am
Rhein. Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Finkelstein, I.
1995 The Date of the Settlement of the Philistines
Dothan, M. in Canaan. Tel Aviv 22:213-239.
1971 Ashdod II-III: The Second and Third Seasons of
Excavations 1963, 1965 Soundings in 1967. Franken, H.].
Atiqot 9-10.Jerusalem. Israel Department of 1992 Excavations at Tell Deir 'Alla: The Late Bronze
Antiquities and Museums. Age Sanctuary. Louvain. Peeters.
1979 Ashdod at the End of the Late Bronze Age
and the Beginning of the Iron Age. Pp. French, E.
125-134 in F. M. Cross, ed., Symposia Celebrat- 1966 A Group of Late Helladic IIIB:1 Pottery
ing the Seventy-Fifth Anniversary of the Founding from Mycenae. Annual of the British School at
of the American Schools of Oriental Research Athens 61:216-238.
(1900-1975). Cambridge, MA. American 1967 Pottery from Late Helladic IIIB:1 Destruc-
Schools of Oriental Research. tion Contexts at Mycenae. Annual of the
1986 Sardinia at Akko? Pp. 105-115 in M. S. Bal- British School at Athens 62:149-193.
muth, ed., Studies in Sardinian Archaeology 1969a The First Phase of LH IIIC. Archiiologischer
Vol. II, Sardinia in the Mediterranean. Ann Ar- Anzeiger84:133-136.
bor. University of Michigan Press. 1969b A Group of Late Helladic IIIB:2 Pottery
from Mycenae. Annual of the British School at
Dothan, M., and Porath, Y. Athens 64:71-93.
1993 Ashdod V.· Excavations of Area G. The Fourth- 1975 A Reassessment of the Mycenaean Pottery at
Sixth Seasons of Excavations 1968-1970. Atiqot Tarsus. Anatolian Studies 25:53-75.
23. Jerusalem. Israel Antiquities Authority.
French, E., and Astrom, P.
Dothan, T. 1980 A Colloquium on Late Cypriote III Sites. Re-
1982 The Philistines and Their Material Culture. ports of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus
Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Society. 1980:267-269.
1989 The Arrival of the Sea Peoples: Cultural Di-
versity in Early Iron Age Canaan. Pp. 1-14 in Furumark, A.
S. Gitin and W. G. Dever, eds., Recent Excava- 1941a The Mycenaean Pottery: Analysis and Classifica-
tions in Israel: Studies in Iron Age Archaeology. tion. Stockholm. Svenska Institutet I Athen.
Winona Lake, IN. Eisenbrauns. 1941b The Chronology of Mycenaean Pottery. Stock-
1992 Social Dislocation and Cultural Change in holm. Svenska Institutet I Athen.
the 12th Century B.C.E. Pp. 93-98 in W. A. 1944 The Mycenaean IIIC Pottery and Its Rela-
Ward and M. S. Joukowsky, eds., The Crisis tion to Cypriote Fabrics. Opuscula Archaeolog-
Years: The 12th Century B.C.-From Beyond the ica 3: 194-265.
Danube to the Tigris. Dubuque, lA. 1965 The Excavations at Sinda, Some Historical
Kendall/Hunt. Results. Opuscula Atheniersia 6:99-116.
250 SEA PEOPLES

1992 Mycenaean Pottery III Plates, eds. P. Astrom, R. Archaeology 45:4. Goteborg. Paul Astroms
Hiigg, and G. Walberg. Stockholm and Gate- Forlag.
borg. Paul Astroms Forlag.
Iakovidis, Sp.
Gal, Z. 1969-70 Perati: To Nekrotafian. Athens. Archiologike
1979 An Early Iron Age Site Near Tel Menorah in etairia en Athenais.
the Beth-Shan Valley. TelAviv6:138-145.
Jacopi, G.
Gesell, G.; Day, L. P.; and Coulson, W. D. E. 1930-31 Nuovi scavi nella necropoli micenea di Ialis-
1995 Excavations at Kavousi, Crete, 1989 and so. Annuario della Scuola italiana di Atene e
1990. Hesperia64(1): 67-120. delle missioni italiani in oriente 13-14:
253-345.
Gjerstad, E.
1926 Studies on Prehistoric Cyprus. Uppsala. Uppsala James, F. W.
Universitets Arsskrift. 1966 The Iron Age at Beth Shan: A Study of Levels
VI-IV. Philadelphia. University Museum,
Goldman, H. University of Pennsylvania.
1956 Excavations at GOzlu Kule, Tarsus Vol. II: From
the Neolithic through the Bronze Age. Princeton. Kanta, A.
Princeton University Press. 1980 The Late Minoan III Period in Crete. A Survey of
Sites, Pottery and Their Distribution. Studies in
Grant, E., and Wright, G. E. Mediterranean Archaeology 58. Goteborg.
1938 Ain Shems Excavations (Palestine). Part IV, Pot- Paul Astroms Forlag.
tery. Haverford, PA. Haverford College.
Karageorghis, V.
Gunneweg,J.; Dothan, T.; Perlman, I.; and Gitin, S. 1974 Excavations at Kition I. The Tombs. Nicosia.
1986 On the Origin of Pottery from Tel Miqne- Department of Antiquities.
Ekron. Bulletin of the American Schools of Orien- 1985 Excavations at Kition V. The Pre-Phoenician Lev-
tal Research 264:3-16. els, Part II. Nicosia. Department of Antiqui-
ties.
Haggis, D. C., and Mook, M. S.
1993 The Kavousi Coarse Wares: A Bronze Age Karageorghis, V., and Demas, M.
Chronology for Survey in the Mirabella 1984 Pyla-Kokkinokremos: A Late 13th Century BC For-
Area, East Crete. American journal of Archaeol- tified Settlement in Cyprus. Nicosia. Depart-
ogy 97:265-293. ment of Antiquities.
1985 Excavations at Kition V. The Pre-Phoenician Lev-
Hankey, V. els: Areas I and II, Part I. Nicosia. Department
1966 Late Mycenaean Pottery at Beth Shan. Ameri- of Antiquities.
can journal of Archaeology 70:169-171. 1988 Excavations at Maa-Palaeokastro 1979-1986.
Nicosia. Department of Antiquities.
Herscher, E.
1975 The Imported Pottery. Pp. 85-96 in J. B. Karageorghis, V.; Coldstream, J. N.; Bikai, P. M.;
Pritchard, ed., Sarepta: A Preliminary Report on Johnston, A. W.; Robertson, M.; andJehasse, L.
the Iron Age. Philadelphia. University Muse- 1981 Excavations at Kition IV. The Non-Cypriot Pot-
um, University of Pennsylvania. tery. Nicosia. Department of Antiquities.

Heuck, S. Killebrew, A. E.
1981 Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios 1979: A Prelimi- 1996a Pottery Kilns from Deir el-Balah and Tel
nary Ceramic Analysis. Reports of the Depart- Miqne-Ekron. Pp. 131-159 in]. D. Seger,
ment ofAntiquities, Cyprus 1981:64-80. ed., Retrieving the Past: Essays on Archaeological
Research and Methodology in Honor of Gus W
Holthoer, R. VanBeek. Winona Lake, IN. Eisenbrauns.
1977 New Kingdom Pharaonic Sites: The Pottery. The 1996b Tel Miqne-Ekron Report of the 1985-1988 Exca-
Scandinavian Joint Egyptian Expedition to Su- vations in Field INE: Areas INE.5, INE.6 and
danese Nubia, Vol. 5:1. Lund. Berlings. INE. 7. The Bronze and Iron Ages. Text and Data
Base (Plates, Sections, Plans), ed. S. Gitin.
Hult, G. Jerusalem. Albright Institute of Archaeologi-
1978 Hala Sultan Tekke 4. Excavations in Area I in cal Research
1974 and 1975. Studies in Mediterranean
 KILLEBREW 251

1998a Ceramic Typology and Technology of Late Leonard, A.,Jr.

Bronze II and Iron I Assemblages from Tel 1981 Considerations of Morphological Variation
Miqne-Ekron: The Transition from Canaan- in the Mycenaean Pottery from the South-
ite to Philistine Culture. Pp. 379-405 in S. eastern Mediterranean. Bulletin of the Ameri-
Gitin, A. Mazar, and E. Stern, eds., Mediter- can Schools of Oriental Research 241:87-101.
ranean Peoples in Transition: Thirteenth to Early 1994 Late Bronze Age Aegean Pottery from Syria-Pales-
Tenth Centuries B.C.E. Jerusalem. Israel Explo- tine. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology
ration Society. 114. Jonsered. Paul Astroms Forlag.
1998b Ceramic Craft and Technology during the
Late Bronze and Iron I Ages: The Relation- Leonard, A., Jr.; Hughes, M.; Middleton, A.; and
ship between Pottery Technology, Style, and Schofield, L.
Cultural Diversity. Ph.D. dissertation, He- 1993 The Making of Aegean Stirrup Jars: Tech-
brew University ofJerusalem. nique, Tradition, and Trade. Annual of the
1998c Mycenaean and Aegean-Style Pottery in Ca- British School at Athens 88:103-123.
naan during the 14th-12th Centuries BC. Pp.
215-230 in E. H. Cline and D. Harris-Cline, Maier, F.-G.
eds., The Aegean and the Orient in the Second 1969 Excavations at Kouklia (Palaeopaphos). Re-
Millennium: Proceedings of a Conference Held at ports of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus
the University of Cincinnati 18-20 April 1997. 1969:33-42.
Liege. Universite de Liege. 1985 A Note on Shallow Bowls. Pp. 122-125 in F.-
G. Maier and M.-L. von Wartburg, eds., Ex-
Kling, B. cavations at Kouklia (Palaepaphos), Thir-
1984 Mycenaean IIIC:1b Pottery in Cyprus: Princi- teenth Preliminary Report: Seasons 1983
pal Characteristics and Historical Context. and 1984. Reports of the Department of Antiqui-
Pp. 29-38 in V. Karageorghis and]. D. Muh- ties, Cyprus 1985:100-125.
ly, eds., Cyprus at the Close of the Late Bronze
Age. Nicosia. A. G. Leventis Foundation. Maiuri, A.
1987 Pottery Classification and Relative Chronolo- 1923-24Jalisos, Scavi della Missione Archaeologica
gy of the LCIIG-LCIIIA Periods. Pp. 97-113 Italiana a Rodi. Annuario della scuola italiana
in D. Rupp, ed., Western Cyprus: Connections. di Atene e delle missioni italiane in oriente 6-7:
Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 77. 83-341.
Goteborg. Paul Astroms Forlag.
1988 Some Stylistic Remarks on the Pottery of Martlew, H.
Mycenaean IIIC:1 Style from Maa-Palaeokas- 1988 Domestic Coarse Pottery in Bronze Age
tro. Pp. 317-339 in V. Karageorghis and M. Crete. Pp. 421-414 in E. B. French and K A.
Demas, eds., Excavations at Maa-Palaeokastro Wardle, eds., Problems in Greek Prehistory Pa-
1979-1986. Nicosia. Department of Antiqui- pers Presented at the Centenary Conference of the
ties. British School of Archaeology at Athens Manches-
1989a Local Cypriot Features in the Ceramics of ter, April1986. Bristol. Bristol Classical Press.
the Late Cypriot IliA. Pp. 160-170 in E.].
Peltenburg, ed., Early Society in Cyprus. Edin- Mazar,A.
burgh. Edinburgh University Press. 1985a The Emergence of the Philistine Culture. Is-
1989b Mycenaean IIIC: 1 b and Related Pottery in rael Exploration ]oumal35:95-1 07.
Cyprus. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeolo- 1985b Excavations at Tell Qasile. Part Two, The Philis-
gy 87. GOteborg. Paul Astroms Forlag. tine Sanctuary: Various Finds, the Pottery, Con-
1991 A Terminology for the Matte-Painted, clusions, Appendixes. Qedem 20. Jerusalem.
Wheelmade Pottery of Late Cypriot IIG-IIIA. Hebrew University.
Pp. 181-184 in J. A. Barlow, D. L. Bolger, 1993 Beth Shean in the Iron Age: Preliminary Re-
and B. Kling, eds., Cypriot Ceramics: Reading port and Conclusions of the 1990-1991 Ex-
the Prehistoric Record. University Museum cavations. Israel Exploration Journal 43:
Monograph 74. Philadelphia. University Mu- 201-229.
seum Publications, University of Pennsylva- 1997 The Excavations at Tel Beth Shan during
nia. the Years 1989-94. Pp. 144-164 inN. A. Sil-
berman and D. Small, eds., The Archaeology of
Koehl, R. B. Israel: Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Pre-
1985 Sarepta III. The Imported Bronze and Iron Age sent. Sheffield. Sheffield Academic Press.
Wares from Area II, X Beyrouth. Librairie Ori-
entale, B.P. Mazzoni, S.
1994 Drinking Vessels in Syria: Ebla and the Early
252 SEA PEOPLES

Bronze Age. Pp. 245-276 in L. Milano, ed., tions in the Holy Land, Vol. 4. Jerusalem. Is-
Drinking in Ancient Societies: History and Cul- rael Exploration Society.
ture of Drinks in the Ancient Near East. Padova.
Sargon. Peacock, D. P. S.
1981 Archaeology, Ethnology and Ceramic Pro-
Mook, M. S., and Coulson, W. D. E. duction. Pp. 187-194 in H. Howard and E.
1993 The Late Minoan IIIC Pottery from the Kas- Morris, eds., Production and Distribution: A Ce-
tro at Kavousi. American Journal of Archaeology ramic Viewpoint. Oxford. British Archaeologi-
97:351. cal Reports.
1982 Pottery in the Rnman World: An Ethnoarchaeolog-
Morricone, L. ical Approach. London. Longmans.
1965-66Eleona e Langada: sepolcreti della Tarda
Eta de Bronzo a Coo. Annuario della Scuola Phythian-Adams, W.].
italiana di Atene e delle missioni italiani in ori- 1923 Reports on Soundings at Gaza, etc. Palestine
ente 43-44: 5-311. Exploration Quarterly 55:11-36.

Mountjoy, P. Popham,M.
1976 Late Helladic IIIB: 1 Pottery Dating the Con- 1965 Some Late Minoan IIIB Pottery from Crete.
struction of the South House at Mycenae. Annual of the British School at Athens 60:
Annual of the British School at Athens 326--342.
71:77-111. 1970 Late Minoan IIIB Pottery from Knossos. An-
1985 The Pottery. Pp. 151-208 in C. Renfrew, ed., nual of the British School at Athens 65:195-202.
The Archaeology of Cult: The Sanctuary at Phy-
lakopi. London. The British School of Ar- Popham, M., and Milburn, E.
chaeology at Athens. 1971 The Late Helladic IIIC Pottery of Xeropolis
1986 Mycenaean Decorated Pottery: A Guide to Identifi- (Lefkandi): A Summary. Annual of the British
cation. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeolo- School at Athens 66:333-367.
gy 73. Goteborg. Paul Astroms Forlag.
Redman, C. L., and Myers,]. E.
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston 1981 Interpretation, Classification and Ceramic
1982 Egypt's Golden Age: The Art of Living in the New Production: A Medieval North Mrican Case
Kingdom 1558-1085 B.C. Catalogue of the Exhi- Study. Pp. 285-307 in H. Howard and E.
bition. Boston. Museum of Fine Arts. Morris, eds., Production and Distribution: ACe-
ramic Viewpoint. Oxford. British Archaeologi-
Nissenbaum, A., and Killebrew, A. E. cal Reports.
1995 Stable Isotopes of Carbon and Oxygen as a
Possible New Tool for Estimating Firing Rice, P.M.
Temperatures of Ancient Pottery. Israel Jour- 1981 Evolution of Specialized Pottery Production:
nal of Chemistry 35:131-136. A Trial Model. Current Anthropology 22:
219-227.
Obrink, U. 1987 Pottery Analysis. Chicago. University of Chicago.
1978 Hala Sultan Tekke 5. Excavations in Area 22
1971-1973 and 1975-1978. Studies in Russell, P.J.
Mediterranean Archaeology 45:5. Goteborg. 1983 Ceramics. Pp. 104-113 in A. South, ed.,
Paul Astroms Forlag. Kalavasos-Ayios Dhimitrios 1982. Reports of
1979 Hala Sultan Tekke 6. A Sherd Deposit in Area the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus 1983:
22. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 92-116.
45:6. Goteborg. Paul Astroms Forlag.
Rutter,].
Oren, E. D. 1977 Late Helladic IIIC Pottery and Some Histori-
1973 The Northern Cemetery of Beth Shan. Leiden. cal Implications. Pp. 1-20 in E. N. Davis, ed.,
EJ. Brill. Hunter College Symposium on the Greek Dark
1985 Architecture of Egyptian Governors' Resi- Ages. New York. Hunter College.
dencies in Late Bronze Age Palestine. Eretz
Israel (Nahman Avigad Volume) 18:183-199. Santley, R. S.; Arnold, P.J., III; and Pool, C. A.
(Hebrew) 1989 The Ceramics Production System at Mataca-
1993 Sera', Tel. Pp. 1329-1335 in E. Stern, ed., pan, VeraCruz, Mexico. Journal of Field Ar-
The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excava- chaeology 16:107-132.
 KILLEBREW 253

Schachermeyr, F. Tosi, M.
1980 Die Agaische Friihzeit IV: Griechenland im Zeital- 1984 The Notion of Craft Specialization and Its
ter der Wanderungen vom Ende der mykenischen Representation in the Archaeological
Ara bis auf die Dorier. Wien. Verlag der Oster- Record of Early States in the Turanian
reichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Basin. Pp. 22-52 in M. Spriggs, ed., Marxist
Perspectives in Archaeology. Cambridge. Cam-
Schaeffer, C. F.-A. bridge University Press.
1952 Enkomi-Alasia I. Paris. Klincksieck.
Ussishkin, D.
Sherratt, S. 1985 Levels VII and VI at Tel Lachish and the
1980 Regional Variation in the Pottery of Late End of the Late Bronze Age in Canaan. Pp.
Helladic mB. Annual of the British School at 213-228 in J. N. Tubb, ed., Palestine in the
Athens 75:175-202. Bronze and Iron Ages Papers in Honour of Olga
1981 The Pottery of Late Helladic me and its Sig- Tufnell. London. Institute of Archaeology.
nificance. Ph.D. thesis, Somerville College. 1998 The Destruction of Megiddo at the End of
1985 The Development of Late Helladic me. Bul- the Late Bronze Age and Its Historical Sig-
letin of the Institute of Classical Studies, Universi- nificance. Pp. 197-219 inS. Gitin, A. Mazar,
ty of London 32:161. and E. Stern, eds., Mediterranean Peoples in
1991 Cypriot Pottery of Aegean Type in LCII-m: Transition Thirteenth to Early Tenth Centuries
Problems of Classification, Chronology and BCE.Jerusalem. Israel Exploration Society.
Interpretations. Pp. 185-198 inJ. A. Barlow,
D. L. Bolger, and B. Kling, eds., Cypriot Ce- van der Leeuw, S. E.
ramics: Reading the Prehistoric Record. U niversi- 1976 Studies in the Technology of Ancient Pottery. Am-
ty Museum Monograph 74. Philadelphia. sterdam. Huisdrukkerij Universiteit van Am-
University Museum Publications, University sterdam.
of Pennsylvania. 1984 Pottery Manufacture: Some Complications
1994 Patterns of Contact Between the Aegean and for the Study of Trade. Pp. 55-69 in P. M.
Cyprus in the 13th and 12th Centuries BC. Rice, ed., Pots and Potters: Current Approaches
Archaeologia Cypria m:35-43. in Ceramic Analysis. Los Angeles. University
of California Press.
Sherratt, E. S., and Crouwel, H.
1987 Mycenaean Pottery from Cilicia in Oxford. Wardle, KA.
Oxford journal of Archaeology 6:97-113. 1969 A Group of Late Helladic IIIB:1 Pottery
from Within the Citadel at Mycenae. Annual
Sjoqvist, E. of the British School at Athens 64: 261-298.
1940 Problems of the Late Cypriote Bronze Age. Stock- 1973 A Group of Late Helladic mB:2 from Within
holm. Victor Pettersons Bokindustriaktieboiag. the Citadel at Mycenae: The Causeway De-
posit. Annual of the British School at Athens
Stager, L. 68:297-348.
1995 The Impact of the Sea Peoples in Canaan
(1185-1050 B.C.E.). Pp. 332-348 in T. E. Yadin, Y., and Geva, S.
Levy, ed., The Archaeology of Society in the Holy 1986 Investigations at Beth Shean: The Early Iron Age
Land. New York. Facts on File. Strata. Qedem 23.Jerusalem. Hebrew Uni-
versity.
Stubbings, F. H.
1951 Mycenaean Pottery from the Levant. Cambridge.
Cambridge University Press.