Laden Animal Figurines from the Chalcolithic Period in Palestine
Author(s): Claire Epstein
Source: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 258 (Spring, 1985), pp. 53-
62
Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1356898 .
Accessed: 30/03/2011 12:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asor. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.
http://www.jstor.org
Laden Animal Figurines from the
Chalcolithic Period in Palestine
CLAIRE EPSTEIN
Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums
POB 586
Jerusalem 91004, Israel
Animal figures laden with receptacles of several types have beenfound in Chalcolithic
Palestine. Executed in various materials (basalt, pottery, and on a wall
painting), animals and containers alike are closely connected with the two main
branches of the contemporaryeconomy, namely, sheep/goat rearingand agriculture.
Thefigures are essentially cultic in character, implying a use in rites to promote
increase and prosperity, probably in an everyday domestic context. Whilemost of
thefigures discussed have long been known, this is thefirst time that they have been
considered as a group: all are seen to have been fashioned to the same end: the
guarantee of basic subsistence needs essential to man's existence.
L ong before the discovery of pottery man
was fashioning primitive schematic clay
female and animal figurines, which he
probably believed were imbued with special powers
and which he used to promote fertility on the
one hand and success in hunting on the other.
Figurines of this kind are known from Pre-Pottery
Neolithic sites throughout the Near East. The
female figures are portrayed in a variety of ways,
with emphasis usually on sexual characteristics,
many clearly pregnant and some actually in the
process of giving birth (Albright 1940: 98; Mallowan
1956: 14; Mellaart 1967: fig. 52, from a
grain bin). The animal figures are represented as
both hunted and herded species, some of the
quarryhaving been intentionally maimed, broken,
or "stabbed" in some sort of magical hunting rite
(Braidwood et al. 1961; Singh 1974: fig. 64; Mellaart
1967: 78 and pl. 66; 1975: 88). Zoomorphic
vessels are also found, pointing to a cultic use
(Mellaart 1970: pls. 61:2, 62:7, a boar; and 1975:
fig. 64, a deer). Over time there was increased
emphasis on the representation of herded animals,
especially sheep and goats.
Later, effigy vases occur at several more or less
contemporary sites, some modeled in the form of
a seated goddess, but all bearing her likeness in
the form of a painted face, often with eyes inlaid
with obsidian or cowrie shells, and many having
tattoo marks on the cheeks (Lloyd and Safar
1945:fig. 1:2,pl. 17:2-3; Abu Al-Soof 1968:pl. 13;
Oates 1968: pl. 20; Mellaart 1975: fig. 69). The
inference is that such vessels were used in rites to
promote fertility, or that the effigy of the goddess
was regarded as having apotropaic powersprobably
a combination of the two. Certainly the
vase shape points to libations or votive offerings.
In this connection contemporary, ovoid churnshaped
vessels should be noted in Anatolia, similar
to the later pottery churns of the Chalcolithic
period in Palestine and possibly similarly used.
On a vessel of this type the neck, which is treated
in the same manner as on the goddess vases, is
painted to representa face with inset eyes of obsidian
(Parrot 1969: fig. 4; fig. 1 here), doubtless in
the belief that the very association of the goddess
with a vessel connected with the milk-giving flocks
was a means to ensure fertility and increase.
It thus appears that long before the fourth millennium
B.C. it was widely believed that man's
basic subsistence needs could be assured by invoking
the beneficent powers of tutelarydeities, which,
while differing in name and aspect, ultimately
represented the essential concept of a life-giving
53
CLAIRE EPSTEIN
_'
Fig. 1. Churn-shaped goddess vase, from Anatolia. Height
26 cm; width: 2602 cm.
force governing both man and the world in which
he lived. Although relativelylittle is known of early
cult practices, much can be deduced from the
paraphernalia and objects that have come to light
at site after site, nearly always associated with a
series of recognized symbols. Summing up the
'Ubaid period, B. L. Goff writes (1963: 88):
Peoplewerepreoccupiedwithhopesfor fertility,
the increaseof their flocks and herds,growing
fruitsand grain,humanwell-beingand productivity....
The continuity in human hopes and
fears produced a basic similarityin symbolic
motifs.
This similarity is seen not so much in the form
that the symbol takes as in the underlying concept
for which it stands, expressed in each region in a
different way.
In Chalcolithic Palestine the indications are
that there were certain accepted symbols whose
latent potency, it was believed, could be transferred
to objects with which they were associated.
The use of such symbols was prompted by the
desire to promote fertility within the family unit
and the wider tribal group, as well as among the
flocks and herds, and likewise to ensure prosperity
and abundance in the fields and cultivated
areas. Although we do not always entirely understand
them, their import can hardly be in doubt in
view of the growing body of evidence from sites
throughout the country pointing to the use of the
same symbols on ossuary frontons, on temple
equipment from 'En-gedi (found in the Cave of
the Treasure), on vessels and on basalt pillar-form
figures in the Golan, on both human and animal
figurines in the Negev, and painted on the walls of
the houses at Ghassul (Epstein 1978a, 1982).
With the expansion of stock-raising and the
resultant need to process part of the milk yield,
and with the diversification of cultivated crops
(includingfruits), potteryfigurinesof animals laden
with receptacles commonly used for milk or produce
appear for the first time in the Chalcolithic
period. These occur side by side with simpler
animal figurines, including domesticated dogs
(Macdonald et al. 1932: pl. 27:D1, 83, 84; Mallon
etal. 1934: figs. 35:1, 3, 4, 36:1, 11; Hennessy
1969:fig. 11:4;Bar-Adon 1980: 143, Ill. 11). These
naturalistic figurines not only reflect the current
economy, but their small size and their containeroffering
vessels lead to the assumption that they
were used in rites to promote increase and fertility
much as were the circular basalt figures from the
Golan, all of which terminate above in an offering
bowl (Epstein 1975).
Support for an interpretation of this kind is
provided by a closely-allied basalt figure of a ram,
found on the surface at Tell Turmus (fig. 2a,b),
which, unlike the stylized pillar figures, is a naturalistic
representation, only the forepart of which
is extant.' The animal is sculpted with curling
horns, a prominent muzzle (or nose), low earknobs
on either side (similar to those on the pillar
figures), and stumpy front legs (now broken off);
on its back is an offering bowl with thickened
rounded rim. A second surface find from the same
site is a circular basalt figure with offering bowl
on top and ear-knobs on either side, but no other
facial features.2The two belong to the same cultural
background, and the ram-like the horned
pillar-figures found in contemporary house contexts
(Epstein 1977: 59, 60; 1979: pl. 26:D; 1982:
64 and figs. 33, 34)-was almost certainly connected
with a domestic cult to promote increase
among the flocks and herds. While the shallowness
of the bowl on its back precludedthe pouring
of milk libations, it was clearly intended to receive
an appropriate offering.
The basalt ram belongs to the same general
class as two well-known pottery figurines of a
ram, one from the 'En-gedi sanctuary, bearing on
its back two hollow churns3 (fig. 3a,b), the other
54 BASOR 258
CHALCOLITHIC FIGURINES
b.
Fig. 2a, b. Basalt figure of ram with bowl on the back
(incomplete), from Tell Turmus. Height: 21 cm; extant
length:25 cm.
from Gilat (fig. 4), carrying three tall vessels (Alon
1976: pls. 33, 34; 1977: 65). In addition, a small
pottery fragment showing the hindquarters of an
animal-probably a ram or goat-was found in
the 1960 Ghassul excavations (North 1961: No.
8728, from Level 8 D2, fig. 15 and pl. 10; fig.
5a-c here). The curve of what remains of the two
vessels on its back (which are interconnected within)
makes it almost certain that these were churns
-possibly some kind of "bird vase"-while the
broken tail recalls that of the Gilat ram.4 On the
analogy of the offering bowl on the back of the
b
Fig. 3a,b. Pottery figurine of ram (?) bearing churns,
from'En-gedi.
Tell Turmus ram, it can be plausibly suggested
that the vessels carried by its pottery counterparts
likewise served as receptacles in which offerings
(probably milk libations) were placed, and that all
were used in rites to promote fertility and success
in the pastoral component of the economy. The
sanctuary context of the CEn-gedi animal, coupled
with the fact that it is carrying churns, strengthens
such an interpretation, while the cultic significance
of the Gilat ram has been stressed from the
outset.5 The churn itself, a vessel in everyday use
and essential for the preparation of milk products,
has been found at many Chalcolithic sites. It is
not surprising, then, to find miniature churns
(clearly cultic in character; fig. 6) that were also
probably used in rites to ensure a good milk yield
(Sukenik 1948: pl. 1:1; Mallon etal. 1934: pls.
50:A, 102; de Contenson 1956: 227 and fig. 9:9;
Dothan 1959: fig. 10:3; Perrot 1961: fig. 39:1, 3
and pl. 9:11, 14; the churn on the head of the
1985 55
CLAIRE EPSTEIN BASOR 25856
17.5 cm;
Miniature pottery churn, from Azor. Height:
width:23 cm.
Fig. 4. Pottery figurine of ram bearing cornets, from
Gilat.Height (excluding cornets): 12 cm; length:27.5 cm.
Fig.5a-c. Fragmentsof potteryfigurineof animalbearing
churns, fromGhassul. (Drawingsby Ms.T. Mazziola.)
Gilat goddess, Alon 1977: pl. 36; Epstein 1982:78
and fig. 53).6
In the light of all this it can be assumed that to
insure fertility and increase among the flocks it
was common practice to place appropriate small
offerings in vessels borne by realistically portrayed
animals that were closely identified with this
branch of the economy. If this be so, it is likely
that another animal figure can be included in this
group, although not made of pottery or sculpted
in stone. This is the so-called "dragon" figure in
the Ghassul mural, discovered some 50 years ago
(Mallon et al. 1934: 179 and Frontispiece; fig. 7
here). While much is enigmatic regardingthe overall
meaning of the superimposed layers of the
fresco, the excavators were of the opinion that the
a if .'I
)/ ,I'y
I//!
Se/
Fig.7. Suggested restorationof animalfromwall painting
at Ghassul.
two masks, the "dragon," and the central star
belonged together (Koeppel etal. 1940: 17 and
pl. 7). It is not within the scope of this article to
attempt to interpret the significance of the various
elements in the Ghassul frescoes, which by general
consent are considered to be cultic in inspiration.
In the present context it is to the animal figure
shown between the two upper left-hand rays of
the star that attention is directed. Zoologist F. S.
Bodenheimer concluded that this red-colored figure
was intended as a carnivore, possibly a fox
(Bodenheimer 1960: 155; 1972:Frontispiece). Since
in addition to the ears the animal has two horns,
I*
.... I
s"....:'' " i
I Fig. 6. I
CHALCOLITHIC FIGURINES
m Fig.
8. Pithos from house at Rasm Harbush, Golan. Height: 39 cm; width (excluding
handles):35 cm.
Fig. 9. Pottery figurine of donkey laden with baskets,
fromGiv'atayim.Height:7.4 cm;extant length:8 cm.
it is unlikely that a fox was intended, especially as
this is an animal completely alien to the iconography
of the period. Mallon suggested that this
was a winged monster with open jaws and darting
fang (the latter perhaps intended as a snake and
belonging to a different layer of the painting).
With the laden ram figures in mind, we suggest
that the one-dimensional fresco animal was also
intended as a ramand that it is similar in approach
to the pottery figurines.
Thus what Mallon saw as the lower jaw is in
fact a depiction of the animal's forelegs, and what
he interpreted as the front teeth is a careful depiction
of the shaggy hair on the dewlap, likewise
shown on the Gilat ram. Three lines across the
upper part of the body no doubt indicate the base
of the head, recalling the ridge at the base of the
head on a number of pillar figures (Epstein 1975:
201 and fig. 3:9), while the head itself is disproportionately
large on account of the pair of large
white eyes shown frontally. On the underside of
1985 57
CLAIRE EPSTEIN
.~~~~~~~~~~~~6"'';4: i" 'h.
~~=t~fE
,.'";' .:'..:":':',;: :.:, .: i{; t '?".
length:9.5 cm.
. -'..;'.t..~, . ~..:'.:;:
'::
3} ~~~~~~~~~~~~.4?
'"i!
~~~...
.,. ....
Fig. 10. Pottery figurine of donkey laden with bins, from Azor. Height: 7 cm;
length: 9.5 cm.
II \
II \
I ' \
I
I \
I \1
Y.?C?r???I
"1 , I
;pv,_
.?
1'. 4
a
rbcai, ?.
-.4i.-t,.c;u.?..
Fig. 11a, b. Pottery head of bridled animal, probably a
donkey, from site near the Yarmuk River. Size of fragment:
7.5 x 4.5 cm. (Drawing by Ms. M. Yanai.)
the body the sexual organ is shown, but the figure
is incomplete and neither the hind legs nor the tail
is extant. As is the case with the Gilat ram, the
body itself is unduly elongated, while on its back
is not a "butterfly wing" (as suggested by Mallon)
but a wide-mouthed jar-possibly one of a paircarried
in exactly the same way as the churns and
the cornets on the backs of the pottery figurines.
In support of this interpretation it should be
noted that this pithos-like vessel is decorated with
a series of ornamental motifs, including what may
well have been intendedas a "rope-pattern"design,
common on contemporary wares (fig. 8).7 Thus
the painted figure falls into place alongside the
modeled figures of rams, its very depiction on a
house wall emphasizing its cultic significance.
Reviewing the above, we see that at four sitesin
the far north, in the Negev, and in the Dead
Sea region-the figure of a ram has come to light
bearing on its back a receptacle for offerings or
libations. To be sure, the 'En-gedi figurine was
found in a sanctuary; nevertheless it is likely that
all originated in house contexts8 where they had
58 BASOR 258
CHALCOLITHIC FIGURINES
been used in simple domestic rites to promote fertility
in the pastoral branch of the economy.
Other pottery figurines, closely allied to those
discussed and exemplifying an identical approach,
are modeled to represent the donkey. They are
likewise laden, but with jars and baskets, clearly
pointing to a connection with agriculture. The
donkey figure apparently fulfilled a function similar
to that of the ovids, being used in simple rites
to insure good harvests; the vessels borne on their
backs likewise must have served as containers for
appropriate offerings. As in the case of the churns,
these are miniature representations of vessels that
were in daily use for bringing in the crops: panniers
for olives, pulses and fruit, large pottery bins
and jars for grain. Allowing for a certain amount
of diversity, this ties in well with what is known of
contemporary crop varieties.9
Two laden donkey figurines were found in ossuary
caves at Giv'atayim (Kaplan 1969:pl. 8; 1976:
452; fig. 9 here) and at Azor (Druks and Tsaferis
1970:578 and pl. 40:B; fig. 10 here). Both are realistically
modeled and in all probability had been
made in the first instance for use in a domestic
context and only later deposited with other grave
goods in a tomb cave. In addition there is a
pottery head of a harnessed animal (fig. lla),
which may qualify for inclusion in this group,
although there is nothing to identify the complete
figure or any indication as to whether or not it
bore receptacles of any kind on its back. Made of
light buff ware covered with red paint, the reins
are plastically rendered in the form of raised
bands or a "rope-pattern." The fragment was
found on the surface at a site situated on the
north bank of the Yarmuk river near its emergence
into the Jordan Valley (Epstein and Gutman
1972: Site 209; Epstein 1976:454), and it can
be assumed that it originated in a house.'? Since
the ears have broken off, its identification is uncertain;
but it is likely that it once formed part of
a donkey figurine (cf. fig. lb, with suggested
restoration) and that it was laden, there being few
other candidates for domesticated beasts of burden
at this time. The continued use of laden donkey
figurines in the subsequent Early Bronze Age
strengthens this suggestion. For just as the miniature
churn from Giv'atayim (Kaplan 1969, 1976)
illustrates the continuance for centuries of cult
practices relating to pastoralism (Amiran 1981),
so the two laden figures-probably intended as
donkeys-from an Early Bronze I horizon at Ras
el-'Ain (Eitan 1969: 51 and fig. 3:1, 2) demonstrate
a similar tendency in regardto agriculture."T
Another once-laden figurine of a donkey, which is
of even later date, was found in an Early Bronze
III tomb at Jericho (Kenyon 1960: 124and pl. 7:3,
from Tomb D 12); as in the case of the donkeys
deposited in the ossuary tomb caves, it is likely
that it, too, was originally made for domestic use
and only later placed in the tomb.
The series of laden animal figurines not only
provides additional evidence regarding the economy
of groups settled up and down the country,
but it illustrates the importance attached to and
the connection between cult practices and daily
life.'2 Whether a ram bearing churns or other vessels
used for milk and milk products, or a donkey
carrying the produce of the fields, the emphasis is
on animal husbandry and agriculture: success and
abundance for everything connected with these
occupations was widely regardedas depending on
the favor of tutelary deities.
NOTES
'The incompletefigure was found on the surface
some years ago by Dr. M. Prausnitz,to whom I am
indebtedfor permissionto publishit here.Thefigureis
on permanentexhibitinthe HulehPrehistoricMuseum,
Ma'ayan Barukh. For Tell Turmus, see Dayan 1969;
Epstein 1978b:39-40.
2Unpublished, on exhibit in the Huleh Prehistoric
Museum, Ma'ayan Barukh. Height: 30 cm; Diameter:
18cm.
3Theanimal is described as a bull by the excavators,
although there are no clear indications on the fragmentary
figurine to support this (Mazar 1963: 105; Ussishkin
1980:20andfig. 11.SeenowAmiran1981:49).
41 am grateful to the Pontifical Biblical Institute,
Jerusalem, for allowing me to examine the fragment
and publish new drawings here.
5In my opinion the building in which the two Gilat
figures were found was neither a temple nor a shrine,
591985
CLAIRE EPSTEIN
but a house similar in size to contemporary houses in
the Golan (many of them measuring 15x 6 m). The
ram and churn goddess figurines were probably used in
domestic cult practices directed towards guaranteeing
increase and plenty. This applies equally to the fragmentary
Ghassul figure found in a living area.
6Another churn from Giv'atayim, published as Chalcolithic
(Kaplan 1976: 452), would be a candidate for
inclusion in this list; but J. Kaplan (personal communication)
is convinced that it belongs to the Early Bronze I
phase of the tomb.
7This medium-sized pithos is cited since, in addition
to the bands of impressed "rope-pattern"decoration, it
has on the shoulder a single, nonfunctional "hornhandle,"clearlyassociating
it with the milk-giving flocks
(Epstein 1982: 77 and fig. 52). When found, only the
stumps of the horns remained; these were restored,
modeled on plastic horns that had broken off from
other vessels.
8Thecontext of the fresco figure is not in doubt since
it was painted on the wall of a house; the Tell Turmus
ram was almost certainly from a house.
9Typical crops include emmer wheat, einkorn barley,
flax, lentils, pea and vetch, dates, pomegranates and
olives, with the addition of gathered wild fruits, nuts,
acorns and pistachios. For Ghassul: Lee 1978: 1213;for
Beersheba: Perrot 1968: cols. 432, 435; for the Cave of
the Treasure:D. V. Zaitschek apud Bar-Adon 1980:223;
for the Golan, Lifschitz and Waisel 1977, 1979; Hopf
1982[emmer wheat].
'OSincethis article was written, the allocation of this
surfacefind to the Chalcolithic period has been rendered
less certain in view of the results of recent excavations
by the writer at the site, since Chalcolithic levels have
not yet been reached below the Early Bronze I layers
uncovered.
"After this article had been completed the find was
reportedof a laden donkey figurine in an Early Bronze I
context at Tell Kishion (C. Arnon, Hadashot Archaeologiot
78-79: 18(Hebrew).
'2In the third millennium there is evidence for the
elaboration of this approach (Amiran 1981). It is particularly
well illustrated by a unique alabaster plaque
dating to the EarlyDynastic III period, which was found
in secondary usage at Tell Chuera. On it are shown, in
relief, seven female figures identically dressed, representing
different aspects of the Mother Goddess, each
holding in her lap a child or young animal. Although
the plaque considerably postdates the cult figures discussed
here, it is inspired by the same fundamental
approach-above all, a belief in the transferenceof the
potency inherent in the godhead to promote fertility in
humans, flocks, and fields. These are tangibly expressed
through the figures of children, sheep, goats, and a
donkey, while the lion and bull-calf figures almost certainly
symbolize virility. (Moortgat-Correns 1977-78:
Abb. 20-21).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abu Al-Soof, B.
1968 Tell es-Sawwan: Excavations of the Fourth
Season (Spring 1967). Sumer 1:3-15.
Albright, W. F.
1940 From the Stone Age to Christianity. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins.
Alon, D.
1976 Two Cult Vessels from Gilat. 'Atiqot 11:
116-18.
1977 A Chalcolithic Temple at Gilath. Biblical
Archaeologist 40: 63-65.
Amiran, R.
1981 Some Observationson Chalcolithicand Early
Bronze Age Sanctuaries and Religion. Pp.
47-53 in Temples and High Places, ed. A.
Biran. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College.
Arnon, C.
1982 Tell Kishion: Hadashot Archaeologiot 78-79:
18(Hebrew).
Bar-Adon, P.
1980 The Cave of the Treasure. Judean Desert
Series. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute and Israel
Exploration Society.
Bodenheimer, F. S.
1950 Animal and Man in Bible Lanls, I. Text;
1972 II, Plates. Leiden: Brill.
Braidwood, R. J. et al.
1961 The Iranian PrehistoricProject. Science. 133:
2008-10.
de Contenson, H.
1956 La ceramique chalcolithique de Beersheba:
etude typologique. Israel ExplorationJournal
6: 163-79, 226-38.
Dayan, Y.
1969 Tell Turmus in the Huleh Valley. Israel Exploration
Journal 19:65-78.
Dothan, M.
1959 Excavations at Horvat Beter (Beersheba).
60 BASOR 258
CHALCOLITHIC FIGURINES
'Atiqot 2: 1-42.
Druks, A., and Tsaferis, V.
1970 Chronique archeologique-Azor. Revue biblique
77: 578.
Eitan, A.
1969 Excavations at the Foot of Tell Rosh Ha'Ayin.
'Atiqot 5: 49-68, 6* (Hebrew).
Epstein, C.
1975 Basalt Pillar Figures from the Golan. Israel
Exploration Journal 25: 193-201.
1976 Golan. Pp. 453-56 in Encyclopediaof Archaeological
Excavations in the Holy Land, Vol.
II, ed. M. Avi-Yonah. Jerusalem: Massada.
1977 The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan. Biblical
Archaeologist 40: 56-62.
1978a Aspects of Symbolism in Chalcolithic Palestine.
Pp. 23-35 in Archaeology in the Levant
(Kenyon Festschrift), eds. P. R. S. Moorey
and P. J. Parr. Warminster:Aris and Phillips.
1978b A New Aspect of Chalcolithic Culture. Bulletin
of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 229: 27-45.
1979 Golan-Chalcolithic Sites. Israel Exploration
Journal 29: 225-27.
1982 Cult Symbols in Chalcolithic Palestine. Bolletino
del Centro di Studi Preistorici 19:
63-82.
Epstein, C., and Gutman, S.
1972 The Golan. Pp. 244-98 in Judaea, Samaria
and the Golan-Archaeological Survey 1967-
1968, ed. M. Kochavi. Jerusalem:Carta (He-
brew).
Goff, B. L.
1963 Symbols of Prehistoric Mesopotamia. New
Haven: Yale.
Hennessy, J. B.
1969 Preliminary Report of a First Season of Excavations
at Teleilat Ghassul. Levant 1: 1-24.
Kaplan, J.
1969 'Ein el-Jarba. Chalcolithic Remains in the
Plain of Esdraelon. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research 194:2-38.
1976 Giv'atayim. Pp. 451-52 in Encyclopedia of
Archaeological Excavations in the Holy
Land, Vol. II, ed. M. Avi-Yonah. Jerusalem:
Massada.
Kenyon, K. M.
1960
Excavations at Jericho, vol. I, The Tombs
Excavated in 1952-4. London: The British
School of Archaeology in Jerusalem.
Koeppel, R. et al.
1940 TeleilatGhassul,II. CompteRenduedesfouilles
de l'Institut Biblique Pontifical, 1932-1936.
Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.
Lee, J. R.
1978 Tuleilat Ghassul. Pp. 1203-13, in Encyclopedia
of Archaeological Excavations in the
Holy Land, Vol. IV, eds. M. Avi-Yonah and
E. Stern. Jerusalem: Massada.
Lifschitz, N., and Waisel, J.
1977 Dendroarchaeological Investigations: No. 53,
Golan-Chalcolithic Sites (1976). Mimeographed
report. Tel-Aviv: Department of
Botany, Tel Aviv University.
1979 Dendroarchaeological Investigations: No. 73,
Golan. Mimeographed report. Tel-Aviv: Department
of Botany, Tel Aviv University.
Lloyd, S., and Safar, F.
1945 Tell Hassuna.Journalof Near EasternStudies
4: 255-89.
Macdonald, E. et al.
1932 Prehistoric Fara. Beth Pelet, II. London:
British School of Archaeology in Egypt.
Mallon, A. et al.
1934 TeleilatGhassul,I. Compterenduedesfouilles
de l'Institut Biblique Pontifical, 1929-1932.
Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute.
Mallowan, M. E. L.
1956 Twenty-five Years of Mesopotamian Discovery.
London: British School of Archaeology
in Iraq.
Mazar, B.
1963 Excavations at the Oasis of 'Ein-Gedi. Archaeology
16: 100-7.
Mellaart, J.
1967 (atal Hiiyiik: a Neolithic Town in Anatolia.
London: Thames and Hudson.
1970 Excavations at Hacilar, Vols. I, II. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University.
1975 The Neolithic of the Near East. London:
Thames and Hudson.
Moortgat-Correns, U.
1977-78 Tell Chuera in Nordost Syria. Annales archeologiques
Arabes Syriennes 27-28: 41-69.
North, R.
1961 Ghassul 1960 Excavation Report. Annalecta
Biblica 14. Rome: Pontifical BiblicalInstitute.
Oates, J.
1968 PrehistoricInvestigationsNear Mandali, Iraq.
Iraq 30: 1-20.
Parrot, A.
1969 Figurines et ceramiques anatoliennes. Syria.
46: 52-63.
Perrot, J.
1961 Une tombe a ossuaires du IVe millenaire a
Azor, pres de Tel-Aviv. 'Atiqot 3: 1-83.
1968 La Prehistoire Palestinienne. Cols. 286-446
in Supplement au Dictionnaire de la Bible 8,
ed. H. Cazelles. Paris: Letouzey et Ane.
1985 61
CLAIRE EPSTEIN
Singh, P.
1974 Neolithic Culturesof WesternAsia. London:
Seminar.
Sukenik, E. L.
1948 ArchaeologicalInvestigationsat 'Affula. Journal
of the Palestine Oriental Society 221:
1-19.
Ussishkin, D.
1980 The Ghassulian Shrine at cEn-Gedi. TelAviv
7: 1-44.
`aWi ~JSOT Tb Publish ASOR Monograph Series %4fIA*o
The American Schools of Oriental Researchand JSOTPress are pleased to announce the
resumption of the ASOR MonographSeries. At least two monographsa year will be
published in the areas of ASOR'straditional interests, especially biblical studies and
ancient Near Easternhistory and archaeology.Manuscripts are now being solicited for the
fourth and subsequent numbers in the series. Submit manuscripts to:
EricM. Meyers
Editor,ASOR-JSOTMonographSeries
Box H.M.
Duke Station
Durham, NC 27706
62 BASOR 258