Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
INTRODUCTION
After more than fifty years of scientific excavation beginning with the Beth Shean and Megiddo
expeditions of the 1930s, the architecture of the Early Bronze l' is still little known and even less
understood. The impetus provided by recent major architectural discoveries at En Shadud
(Braun 1984a; 1985a) and Yiftahel (Braun 1984b; 1985b) in Israel, and Dakerman-Sidon in
Lebanon (Saidah 1979), has prompted a long and critical examination of the information
available from previously excavated sites. The results, it is felt, justifY a radical reappraisal of
the architectural traditions of this cultural horizon to exclude the apsidal house from any, place
of importance and subs titute it with a truly and wholly curvilinear style of domestic architec-
ture. The object of this paper is to review briefly prevailing conceptions of this aspect of the EB I
cultures in the area under discussion, to analyse the evidence site by site, to summarize it, and
then to offer new insights and interpretations.
As late as 1978, one of the most popular and respected general introductions to the
archaeology of the region under discussion could describe the Proto-Urban period' as a time
when new peoples entered the area known today as Israel and Jordan and could further claim:
'Of their way oflife we know very little, for mos t of the evidence about them has been recovered
from tombs' (Kenyon 1979, 81) . Even when written' this statement was somewhat inaccurate,
but its author, the prominent archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, could hardly be blamed for her
observation considering the paucity of the sources available for study. Now, however, the
situation has changed dramatically, with each new excavating season bringing exciting and
important discoveries of the EB I period.
Despite the lamentable state of available information, or perhaps because of it, there has
been a marked tendency by scholars to impose rigid classification systems, often with a casual
disregard of obvious facts, on the architectural remains of the EB I Horizon. This tendency has
led researchers to claim that the apsidal 4 house-plan played an integral and even occasionally
the principal part in the architectural traditions of this period. The term apsidal has been
applied, at times indiscriminately, to all manner of fragmentary and irregularly shaped or
curvilinear structures. A curious result of this application has been to confirm, with little or no
justification, apsidal construction as a hallmark of this cultural horizon .
A brief survey of some of the more prominent views on the architectural tradions of the EB I
is instructive as to the extent to which the apsidal house was deemed important by researchers
and how belief in this importance effectively biased the study of the EB I Cultural Horizon.
• Indeed Albright ( 1960,70) recognized this type of building at several sites but noted important
disparities in plans and dates 5 Based on Albright's somewhat tentative acceptance of the
apsidal plan as a recurring type, the existence of this specific style of building came to be widely
accepted. Mellaart ( 1966, 4S-46). Hennessy ( 1967, 37, 44)' Ben-Tor ( 1968, 2S), Dothan ( 1971 ,
129), de Miroschedji (1971 , 43-44)' Aharoni ( 1982, SI), and Helms ( 1986, 31) all considered, to
PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
a greater or lesser extent, the existence ofapsidal houses, in the EB I period , to be a confirmed
phenomenon. Acceptance of the apsidal house as a type, so coloured scholars interpretations of
architectural remains, that the number of examples of apsidal structures was expanded to
include many with dubious bonafides. Thus the appearance of the apsidal house, considered to be
a widespread phenomenon, assumed the proportions of an architectural tradition of no little
importance. This tradition then became the basis for understanding much of the foreign
relations of the EB I culture, or for tracing some of its origins. Especially parallels with cultures
to the north of the Levant" were indicated (Yassine 1977-8; Best 1978), while it was even
suggested (Thompson 1969) 7 that these houses were part of a larger and venerable tradition
ranging from the Aegean World to India.
The bulk of information available on the architecture of the EB I is derived from limited
exposures often inadequately recorded . Results, if published at all, tend to have appeared
haphazardly in reports which are incomplete and non-specific. In order to attempt to overcome,
insofar as possible, these limitations, reliance was placed in this investigation on the most
primary of data : photographs and plans when available, straightforward descriptions next and
interpretations last. Finally, armed with new and important information, it was found possible
to re-evaluate much of this early data with the benefit of hindsight. The results alter radically
our understanding of the architectural traditions of the EB I period.
Earlier comparative studies of architecture from EB I occupations have brought about an
awareness of inter-site affinities and the recognition of some typical house plans. Ben-Tor (1973,
92 ) has, however, rightly pointed out inherent difficulties in comparing examples of domestic
architecture which are often affected by many variables. 8 Thus there was a need to develop a
classification system for house plans which could be equally applied to all structures, but be
neither too rigid so as to disallow these variables, nor so lax as to merely include the most basic
common characteristics of structures. The classification system adopted here, while attempting
to avoid the twin pitfalls of rigidity and laxity, is , nevertheless, biased towards a more strict
definition of plan types. Insufficient evidence in some instances did not allow for classification
and at other times it suggested new interpretations and reconstructions . It is for the reader to
judge the value of the speculative interpretations offered helow.
Sites chosen for this discussion meet broad criteria by which they may be said to conform to
the general pattern of this cultural horizon.9 Thus the inclusion of one or another site will not
meet with universal agreement, particularly as scholarly opinion is so divided on questions of
terminology and relative dating. 'o An attempt is made here to deal with as many of the sites
belonging to this broad cu ltural horizon as possible, provided they are pertinent to the
discussion , even to the inclusion of some perhaps not strictly falling within its limits. This
leeway, while reflecting the inexactitude of definitions of cultural horizons, has the advantage of
permitting the examination of broad lines of architectural traditions and development.
In analysing the domestic architecture of the EB I Horizon in Israel,Jordan, and Lebanon,
two distinct generalized traditions have been identified: rectilinear and curvilinear. A third, not
inconsiderable group of structures, does not appear to have been built according to set rules ,
shows no uniformity and so cannot be classified. The custom of constructing rectilinear and
more specifically, rectangular buildings, common to many cultures, is one encountered at
numerous EB I sites where it appears to represent the continuation of a generalized architec-
tural tradition with a long and documented history extending back to the Neolithic (Perrot
1984, 89). In the Chalcolithic period there is evidence, at a number of sites, ofa preference for a
more specialized style of house, the broad room. 11 The appearance, then, ofa second, radically
contrasting tradition of curvilinear architecture in the EB I represents something of a departure
from the preceding period. 12 This category of oval, sausage-shaped, or round buildings is not to
THE APSlDAL HOUSE 3
be confused with a general group of vaguely curvilinear (non-rectilinear) structures which defy
classification. The evidence for a true curvilinear building tradition in the EB I period comes
from a large number of complete house plans found at several sites.
The peculiar shape of an apsidal structure, a kind of hybrid, a compromise between
a curvilinear and a rectangular plan , implies purposeful planning and skilful execution.
The repetition of such a distinctive shape at a number of contemporary sites would indi-
cate the existence of a true architectural tradition. However, the obvious lack of uniformity
in the very few exemplars of this type, as well as important stratigraphic and structural
considerations, do little to support the existence of an apsidal tradition of architecture in the
EB I period.
THE SITES
Megiddo
The large mound ofMegiddo is the site of one of the more extensively exposed EB I occupations.
Of particular interest to this discussion are Stages IV and V and possibly some features of
Stratum XX on the tell. The architecture of Stratum XIX, dated perhaps late in the EB I, is
represented by the remains of two rectangular temples with a forecourt enclosed by a tern enos
wall. The plans of these temples were not completely recovered but they appear to have been
broadrooms. 13 All the extant walls of these structures, excepting the tern enos wall, are
rectilinear with sharply defined corners (Loud 1948, Text, Fig. '390, upper). The correlation
between this EB I level and Stages VII-IV is unsure but Stratum XIX is certainly later than
Stratum XX, which may, in part, be dated to the EB I horizon.
A number of round or curvilinear structures, attributed to Stratum XX on the tell, have
been referred to as dating to the EB I Horizon (Dunand 1973, 224) but this ascription is
uncertain. The pottery published from this stratum includes Neolithic, Chalcolithic and EB I
forms, and the excavation report does not allow for an accurate reconstruction of the
stratigraphy, nor for the precise provenance of specific vessels within these buildings. Thus we
remain with the possibility that some of these curvilinear structures may belong to the EB I
occupation of the site.
Although the architecture of the Megiddo Stages has generated much discussion, it has not
been adequately reported. The sole documentation published is in an aerial photograph
(Engberg and Shipton 1934, Fig 2; Fig. 3; PI. I) 14 which is unfortunately not accompanied by
ground plan and lacks a description. The most prominent structure, in Stage IV (Fig. 2a) , has a
basically apsidal plan, but only one external corner was constructed. ls It is this building which
was the prototype (rom which other struCtures, supposedly apsidal in plan, were identified. In
the aerial photograph there is a strong suggestion that one or several of the structures visible,
including the apsidal house, may have been builtin successive phases. 16 Figure 2 represents an
attempt to decipher construction phases solely on the visual evidence. If the interpretation it
offers is correct then the curvilinear wall of the apse may well have originally belonged to a
different building,I7 perhaps one analogous to those curvilinear structu res of Stratum XX. To
the right 'S of this house are two wall fragments of curvilinear aspect (indicated by large, widely
spaced dots), which may have been part of a single circular structure. In Figure 2e an additional
curvilinear wall was built abutting the bedrock,l' and yet another wall fragment (Fig. 2b ) was
interpreted, by the excavators, as part of the rectilinear building attached to the smaller
outcropping of bedrock.'o However, their interpretation does not seem acceptable , because
4 PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
there is the sugges tion in the photo, of several distinct building phases characterized by both
rectilinear and curvilinear architectural features. 21
To th e right of this building is a rather small rectangular structure (Fig. 3d) built with
sharply defined corners. Joined to it on its long sides are what seem to be two stone fences,
possibly later constructions .
A small rectangular structure (Fig. 2C) is clearly visible on the Stage V terrace." It is
noteworthy for the construction of its corners ; rounded outside and sharply angled within.
Within its walls are lines of stone constructions, perhaps benches, internal partitions or
remnants of an earlier structure, all distinctly rectangular.
With no clear understanding of the stratigraphy of this excavation, it is impossible to draw
any firm concl usions as to the sequence of the appearance of the different structures nor can one
understand which of them may have been contemporary. What does seem clear is that there is a
somewhat complicated history of construction within these two stages.
The obvious differences in the types of structures which have been excavated at Megiddo of
the EB I Horizon suggests the existence of at least two styles of building. A rectangular tradition
is evident in the temples of Stratum XIX and in the house of Stage V, as well as in portions of the
buildings of Stage IV. Curvilinear wall segments, in Stage IV and perhaps in Stratum XX ,
some appearing in plan to be portions of geometrically true shapes , suggest the influences of a
second architectural tradition . The apsidal building of Stage IV is the often cited prototype of
this style of architecture. If, as is suggested here (see Fig. 223 ) , the house was constructed by
joining remnants of one type of structure with a unit of another type, then the most important
example of apsidal construction may be understood as somewhat fortuitous, significantly
weakening the argument for a tradition of true apsidal construction.
Yiflahel
Level II at Yiftahel is an early, perhaps one of the earliest, manifestations of the EB I (Braun,
forthcoming) , in northern Israel. 24 More than twenty-four complete or partially preserved
curvilinear structures, a sizeable portion ofa village, in an area covering more than 2400 sq. m .,
have been uncovered to date. Virtually no straight walls were found, suggesting a determined
avoidance of rectangular building techniques and shapes and indicating the total domination of
a curvilinear tradition of architecture.
Three distinctive house plans have been observed at Yiftahel (Figs. 3, 4, Plates 2,3). A
circular dwelling, slightly irregular in plan is, at Yiftahel, so far a unique find,lS but it is
paralleled at sites in the Lebanon as well as other sites within the region (see below). Oval plans
were generally reserved for smaller houses measuring up to eight m. in length and there appear
to be numerous fragments of such dwellings; all are remarkable for their geometrically regular
shapes. 26 A third type of plan is best described as sausage-shaped, with two parallel walls joined
to form apses at either end . The sausage-shaped form was reserved for larger houses , two of
which exceed 16 m. in overall outside length. 27
At Yiftahel the open spaces of the flat floor of the valley seem to have permitted the careful
planning of the shapes of the dwellings and encouraged, at least in some instances, the
construction of large buildings. 2s The evenly laid, double row stone foundations, and the
symmetry of these houses, attest to a strong and well-developed tradition of curvilinear
architecture.
Floors of these structures were generally earthen but in several instances curved ends of
houses were paved with flattish stones. Internal dividing walls were found in some of the larger
structures and , interestingly enough, when preserved beyond the length of a few stones, they
were noti ceably curvilinear.
THE APSIOAL HOUSE
5
Up to four occupational phases have been observed at Yiftahel but because of the very
compressed stratigraphy of the site it is not possible to determine whether any particular house
plan may reflect stratigraphical divisions or whether the different types of houses were
contemporary. What is certain is that there exists at this site abundant evidence for a wholly
curvilinear style of building which, so far as may be understood to date, is exclusive.
Beth Shean
A house claimed to be of 'apsidal fonn ' (Fig. 5) was discovered in Level XVI in the deep
sounding of the tell of Beth Shean. There is a somewhat detailed description of this completely
mud-brick structure of'fairly straight' walls (Fitzgerald 1934, 126-27, PI. III, Fig. I; Fitzgerald
1934,5-13) . Its plan was not included in the original publication but appeared, more recently in
a doctoral dissertation (Bonn 1976, 102) . Although defined as apsidal, the exterior aspect of its
peripheral wall does not meet any of the criteria for that type. In fact the house is somewhat
irregular in plan with an outer wall of varying thickness. There are no external corners but the
ends are, externally, markedly curvilinear. The three internal corners of the larger room give it a
rectangular aspect but the fourth 'corner' is far too rounded to be labelled as such. The smaller
room , identified as the apse of the house, is rounded not only in its end but on one side. One of
the corners of this room is slightly acute but sharply defined; another is quite rounded .
Because of the irregular aspect of this building it is impossible to classify its plan. If the
criterion for any classification is the external face of the peripheral wall (Fig. 6A, 6c), then it may
be considered to be more closely akin to sausage-shaped structures found at other sites.'" If,
however, the internal shape of the peripheral wall determines the classification, then the
building, with only one true corner, is unique.
It is contended here that the mere juxtaposition of true corners and a curvilinear wall ,
unless in the configuration of a ' partial' rectangle with a rounded end, does not constitute an
apsidal plan. Thus the Level XVI house of Beth Shean cannot be categorized as apsidal nor for
that matter can it be precisely defined. It is, in short, one ofa class of buildings of miscellaneous
sbapes which probably owe more to their external environments (available space and building
density) than to architectural traditions. The location of this structure, on the edge of the tell,
probably in a built-up area where space must have been at a premium, seems to enhance the
likelihood of this interpretation.
Attributed to this same level at Beth Shean are a variety of structures described thus by
their excavator: 'Other curved walls and a stone foundation similar in plan appeared just to the
north of the house; further north were two straight walls running parallel about 3.30 m. apart'
(Fitzgerald 1934, 127)]0
Additional levels of the tell which may be attributed to the EB I Horizon, show some
evidence, often very fragmentary, of generalized architectural traditions .3 ! In Level XVIII
there are rectilinear walls; in Level XVII curvilinear walls appear along with fragmentary
structures (not described by the excavators); in Levels XV and XIV the buildings are
predominantly rectangular with a few curved walls; and in Level XIII" three well-built
rectangular rooms form part of a large structure of composite plan.
The buildings of the early levels of Beth Shean seem to show the same sort of bifurcation in
architectural traditions as that known from Megiddo, with evidence of both rectangular and
curvilinear styles. The sequence seems to be quite clear, with rectangular structures appearing
in the earliest level, followed by curvilinear constructions in the succeeding periods. By Level
XIII, the end of the EB I or the EB II, the vogue for building curvilinear structures, appears to
have run its course at Beth Shean.
6 PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
l\1eser
The earliest occupation at Meser, Stratum III , is represented by a rectangular house (Dothan
1957,2 I, Fig. 2), reconstructed by the excavator as a two chambered broad room. This stratum
is assigned to the Ghassulian-Chalcolithic Horizon on the basis of ceramic parallels but also
includes bowls of Grey Burnished Ware ."
In Stratum II, probably dated to the EB I Horizon , there are partial remains of three
dwellings of curvilinear aspect (Fig. 6). Their plans have all been assumed , by the excavator,
to be apsidal (Dothan 195 7; 1959a). However, in the light of the rece nt discoveries of
wholly curvilinear buildings, the suggested apsidal reconstructions , appear to be untenable.
Indeed the only evidence for any possible corner in all three buildings is a line of three
smallish stones in house B I, which could be reconstructed equally as a portion of an internal
divider.
Several features of these houses which suggest great affinities with the dwellings at Yiftahel
include the stubby, almost curvilinear cross walls in houses BI and B14,34 and a stone pavement
in house B 14 (Dothan 1959a, 17). If the suggested restoration of these houses as curvilinear is
co rrect then another stone pavement, a 'courtyard' between these houses, can be better
understood as a possible floor of house B I. Thus it seems that the architecture of Meser II is
more likely to be curvilinear than apsidal.
The succeeding occupation of Level I is also dated to the EB I period. 3s The architectural
remains consist of a broad room and an additional chamber with sharply defined corners.
Obviously this house, clearly constructed above the remains of curvilinear house B I, represents
a change in the concept of domicile construction and harks back to a tradition with roots in the
Chalcolithic period.
Jericho
The most recent excavations at the tell of Jericho, conducted by K . Kenyon , have produced
evidence of occupation in the EB I (PU ) in Squares E III-IV, phases P, Q, 0 and N (Fig. 7) . In
phase Q, the earliest, an irregularly shaped mud-brick structure with rounded end and single
extant rounded corner at its opposite end was found . Described as ' massive' (Hennessy 1967,
44; Ken yon 1981, 322), and often cited as evidence for a tradition of apsidal construction, this
building is neither of unusual proportions nor apsidal in plan.
The exact original shape of this house is not totally clear from its extant remains, and so its
reconstruction is open to some degree of interpretation. The shape of its rounded wall is crucial
to its classification. I t (Wall ZB ) is curvilinear but not semi-circular, and the suggestion is made
here that its form was deliberately distorted asymmetrically so as to veer away from an adjacent
terrace wall (ZA), in order to create a corridor wide enough to permit the passage ofa person .36
It is further contended here that the shape of this house plan is not apsidal, but more nearly
rectangular with rounded comers. Reinforcing this observation is the stub of a wall (unlabelled)
under Wall ZG, a continuation of Wall ZB, which abuts thejuncture of walls ZC and ZB on the
north. It indicates the overall rectangular form of the building, which is emphasized by the
shape of the true corner it forms of what must have been a second room.
In later phases, 0 and N (Kenyon 1981,323-25, Plate 314) Ihe rounded end and long sides
of the 'apsidal' structure were re-used (Walls ZB and ZC), and a new wall, ZN, replaced the
earlier end wall (ZD), thus creating a small and more regularly shaped rectangular room, with
its north-west and north-east Corners rounded, tbe south-east 'corner' curvilinear and tbe
south-west corner incomplete. In phase 0 other walls are rectilinear and form either sharp or
curving comers. Of note is the tiny room formed by walls ZL, ZE and ZN with its curved wall.
THE APSIDAL HOUSE 7
In phase N, the latest of the EB I sequence, another partially excavated rectangular structure,
with trul y massi ve walls and rounded corners, appears.
Garstang ( 1935, 152-53) dated Level V (Fig. 8) of his excavations at] ericho to the EB Age,
identifying this stratum as that preceding the construction of the first fortification wall. Recently
P. Bienkowski ( 1986,3) has suggested that portions of Level VII also should be dated to the PU
period , especially the structures with curved or rounded walls (Garstang 1935, Plate XXV).
The structures of Level VII are quite fragmentary ; those of Level V, better preserved, are
described as .. . 'a system of round and rounded buildings' (Garstang 1935, (53).
Structure 175 is formed by an irregular parabola abutting a composite rec tilinear
structure. Its irregular shape and small size suggest its function as a storeroom rather than
dwelling. A similar structure was discovered by Ken yon ( 1981 , Plate 314b, formed by Walls ZL ,
ZE, and ZN).
Clearly visible in Garstang's plan are several small circular stru ctures , designated as
granaries (Gars tang 1948, Plate XI, 193, Plate Xlb ). The larger has enough ground space to be
a small dwelling and is paralleled at a number of sites. In the succeeding levels all the
constructions are rectilinear (Garstang 1935, Plate XXIV a) .
In summarizing the evidence for architectural traditions at]ericho in the EB I Horizon ,
limitations of available space and a lengthy and co ntinuous occupation appear to be major
factors in planning. New structures were made to utilize the remaining port ions of abandoned or
of partially destroyed buildings , or to conform to the available space between existing houses. 37
There is evidence of curvilinear structures, but whether the largest are domiciles or storage
facilities is uncertain. Other houses, perhaps contemporary, conform to generalized rectilinear
traditions but suggest no standardization.
Sidon- Dakennan
] ust south of the Lebanese port of Sidon, some 2,500 sq . m. of a late fourth millennium B.C.
occupation were revealed at Dakerman (Saidah (979). In this considerable exposure twenty-
three separate, curvilinear structures were distinguished , twelve of which had complete or
wholly res torable ground plans (Figs. 3,9). While many of these houses may have been
contemporary (de Contenson 1982,83), the intersecting lines of several fragmentary structures,
when restored , indicate the existence of at least two building phases (Saidah 1979, Fig. 2). As at
Yiftahel there are no rectilinear walls in those parts of the site excavated, and the evidence
suggests that this style of architecture was an important, or even dominant, element of this
culture.
Two types of dwellings, curvilinear and sausage-shaped, were found at Dakerman. Floors
were commonly earthen; exceptions were stone pavements in the curved ends of house number
two. The excellent state of preservation of the inward sloping walls of several buildings at
Dakerman (especially numbers [ , 5,6, and 7) show them to be remains of well-constructed,
roofed, permanent habitations .
Byblos
The largest continuous horizontal exposure of any site, in the region und er discussion , is [hat at
Byblos. The occupation of the Eneolithique Recent (Dunand [973)38 is found in four to seven
successive layers representing a lenghthy time span,39 which, at least in its later phases , was
partly contemporary with the Chalcolithic and EB [ofIsrael and]ordan. 4o Dunand recognized
within these layers several house plans. Although square, rectangular and oblong'! were
considered the common types; circular and apsidal structures were also observed to have
8 PALESТINE EXPLORAТION QUARTERLY
ТЛВLЕ. 1 CURVILINEAR ARCНITECТURE, ВУ SITE
Megiddo ХХ +
Megiddo Stage[У +
Yi!'tahe! н + + + + + +
Beth Shean ХУН
, +
Beth Shean ХУ[ + +
Beth Shean ХУ +
Beth Shean Х[У +
Meser Н + + +
Jericho V +
Sidon-Dakerman [ + + + +
Bybtos Еаг!у ER + + + ?
Bybtos Late ER + + + +
Rosh Hanniqra [[ +
Те! Тео V + + + +
Те! Тео ТУ +
Khorvat Ауос 5 -f
Beth Ha-emeq +
Beth Yerah ХУ +
Beth Yerah Bahat Ехс +
Pithat ha- Yarmuk +
Еп Shadud [ +
Sarid Reservoir +
Те! Qishyon +
Jenin +
Munhata [ +
Tell Um Hammad [/ , +
Tell Esh-Shuneh Ш +
МааЬагос Lower +
J еЬе! Mutawwaq +
Lod +
Azor с + +
Pa!mahim Quarгy [ +
Serabit е! Khadim +
Ghassu! Sq .A-[ +
appeared 'тоге rarely'. Dunand (197З,217) considered that there тау Ьауе Ьееп some [огт о[
evo!ution оС house types within this lengthy period, Ьш Ье confessed to being ипаЫе to
document it in the stratigraphy.
What is clear Сгот the stratigraphy is that the earlies! occupation and ргоЬаЫу the ffiOS!
comple!e sequence оС the ER, is found in 5ta!ions 14, 15, and 46 (Dunand 1973,215-16,227,
321). In the early levels ofthe ER in these stations the dominant architectural Согт is rectilinear
(most often rectangular), with corners in тапу instances deliberately rounded outside, and
occasionally also rounded within (Fig. 10) . Curvilinear architecture is also in evidence in а
питЬег оС wall fragments (see ТаЫе 2), as well as in а completely preserved elliptical house
plan (Dunand 1973,229; maison 46-18; Pl.], а). This structure is remarkable Сог its 'j?;ravel'
ТНЕ APS!DAL HO U SE 9
TABLE 2 FREQUE~CY OF CURVILINEAR T YP ES , ВУ Srт E
Level
St.ge
Stratum
SITE Inst.l. Absolute· Likely Possi ble T OTAL
Megiddo ХХ '2 ОГ т о г е 2
Megiddo St.ge IV
Yift.hel II 7 10 3 20
Beth She.n ХУII 2
Beth She.n ХУ!
, '2
'2
О Г т о ге
О Т т оге 2
Beth Shean ХУ I ОГ тоге
Meser 11 3 3
Jericho V 2
Sidon- Dakerman ER (II) 11 12 23
Byblos Early ER 2 5 16 23
Byblns Late ER 10 19 22 51
Rosh H anniqra 11 3 3
Те! Теп V 2 3
Те! Тео IV '2 от тоге 2
Khorvat A vot 5
Beth H a-emeq 2 2
Beth Yerah ХУ
Beth Yerah Bahat Ехс 2
Pithat ha- Y. rmuk 3 3
Еп Shadud 1
Sarid Reservoir '2 о т т о ге 2
Т е!Qishyon
Jenin
Munhata I
ТеН Um H ammad 1/2 2 3 5
ТеН Esh-Shuneh III
Maabarot Lower 1 О Т тоге
• Beca use much ofthe data is incomp lete, it is пос always possibIe [О determine the comp lete plan оС each house. The
thret: categories rep resent the state ofp r eseгvatio n ofindividual s Cru ctu res. Included in rhe likely ca tegory а ге those
buildings which а г е weJl preseгved eno ugh [ О suggest а reconstruction ofthe entire ground plan. Those structures
[00 frag mcnta ry Го г this ca tcgory а ге includ cd in the possibIc ca tcgory .
•• D ry built in thc тап пег со тт о п {о arid zones.
*** Not including arid zone construction .
[0 PALEST[NE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
('gravier') floors and what appear to be curvilinear wall fragments , within' 2 which may have
been internal dividers .
The later phases of ER occupation (when the settlement spread beyond the original
nucleus ) do not seem to be marked by any substantial change in the architectural traditions .
Both rectilinear and curvilinear types of building are in evidence (Fig. I I ), although circular
house plans seem to be a later innovation (Dunand 1973, PlansJ, b, c, d, houses 14-37, 14-38,
14-41, 13-4, 18-1,4-1 ). A structure of 'apsidal' plan (Fig. 12), from which Dunand ( 1973, Fig.
146) apparently extrapolated in order to suggest the reco nstruction of additional curvilinear
wall fragments as apsidal (Dunand 1973,213, 216,220), is found in Station 14. As an example of
true apsidal architecture, this one, almost completely preserved, building is not very convinc-
ing. 43 It was, in fact , originally a rectangular room to which a curvilinear wall was appended
(Fig. 12) . Thus even if this apsidal designation is correct, it seems obvious that the shape of this
structure is not the result of any conscious planning effort but rather that it is due to the
juxtaposition of two structures , built according to different traditions , which appear to have
existed side by side.
Indeed two distinct contemporary and long-lived architectural traditions, rectilinear and
curvilinear, are associated with Byblos in the ER Horizon . The rectilinear tradition is little more
than a very generalized type of co nstruction , apparently with its roots in the Neolithic period
(Dunand 1973, Ch. I-V) , while the curvilinear tradition of house building," seemingly an
innovation of the early phases of the ER Horizon, appears to be associated with a more specific
style of house construction.
Rosh-Hanniqra
Evidence of an EB I occupation at the tell ofRosh-Hanniqra was uncovered in a limited probe
into Stratum II (Tadmor and Prausnitz 1959, 79, Fig. 4). Despite a claim by the excavators that
the buildings of this level are apsidal, it is obvious from the plan that their interpretation, based
on some curvilinear wall fragments in confusingjuxtaposition, is highly questionable. Figure 13
is an attempt to make some sense of the lines of stones which are apparently wall foundations .
Tel Teo
A very recent discovery in the Huleh Valley at Tel Teo (Eisenberg, forthcoming a; forth-
coming b) uncovered an EB I occupation, with evidence of two separate construction phases.
The latter, very poorly preserved, was represented by only a fragmentary wall of curvilinear
aspect. However, the preceding occupation was better represented, with evidence of three
separate dwelling units for two of which ground plans could be reconstructed (Fig. 14). The
most complete house had a sausage-shaped plan, curvilinear internal dividing walls and was
paved on one rounded end; the other two were apparently fragments of houses similar in plan.
Nowhere was there any indication of rectilinear structures within the EB I levels. The date of
these levels, based on pottery parallels with Yiftahel II , including bowls of Wright's ([958)
Type [, Grey Burnished Ware, is some time early in the EB I Horizon.
Khorvat A vot
N ear the modern village of Avivim in Upper Galilee a small section of curvilinear wall (Fig. (5)
was found in the earliest level of occupation, on the western terrace of Khorvat Avot (Braun
198[ , (07)45 On the evidence of some few fragments of Grey Burnished bowls and other
ceramic parallels, this occupation appears to be contemporary to that at Tel Teo.
Beth Ha-Emeq
Near Kibbutz Beth Ha-emeq, on the eastern edge of the Plain of Acre, A. Kempinski and
R. Frankel, of the University of Tel Aviv, uncovered an occupation dated to the transitional
THE APSlDAL HOUSE I I
EB I-EB II period . Building II (Fig. 16), the better preserved , is actually a series of wall
fragments , several of which are not connected, but which are so arranged as to suggest that they
may, at some time, have formed a coherent structure . Kempinski (forthcoming ) has designated
the plan formed by these walls as apsidal. An alternate interpretation (Fig. I6b) suggests that
these wall fragments are portions of buildings originating in different occupational phases 46 A
second structure, 20, represented by a curvilinear wall segment ending on one side in a thicker,
straight section of wall, seems to also be two fragmentary buildings joined together.
The existence of curvilinear wall fragments , possibly as independent of the rectilinear
structures , suggests that this type of architecture may have, at some time in the EB I , been a
significant building style at Beth Ha-emeq, although the evidence is too fragmentary to confirm
this . In a later occupational phase a rectilinear structure was erected. What is eminently clear is
that the apsidal house shape was not the result of deliberate planning but rather it was the
juxtaposition ofa later building with an earlier architectural feature.
Beth Yerah
At Tell Beth Yerah a number of excavations have unearthed evidence of a series of EB I
occupations, some of which have been published in abbreviated form (Hestrin 1975).
Mr Pesah Bar-Adon , on behalf of the Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums ,
excavated in the south and south-east parts of the mound . In the latter area, in a sounding in
which sixteen strata were revealed, virgin soil was reached in Level XVI (Bar-Adon , undated).
Level XV, the earliest with architectural remains , was dated by the presence of Grey Burnished
Ware, to the EB I period. In this level a partially preserved mud-brick wall, somewhat more
than one half of a slightly irregular parabola, was uncovered. 47 Several parallel cross walls,
more or less perpendicular to the parabolic wall, indicate the structure was divided internally .
Only one end of this building was excavated, and so its complete shape, apsidal, oval or even
irregular, is unknown.
In another area of the tell Mr D. Bahat ( 1977; personal communication) of the Israel
Department of Antiquities and Museums, uncovered a number of EB I occupational levels in
compressed and often disturbed stratigraphy. Several partial structures were discerned which
include two curvilinear, well-built, stone wall foundations (Fig. 17), one of which is of a
semi-circular structure almost four metres in diameter, and which has an entrance-way marked
by a door socket. The function of these buildings is open to interpretation; they may be small
houses or a lternately large storage chambers. No Grey Burnished Ware was associated with this
level.
Excavations by the Oriental Institute at Beth Yerah uncovered a small silo or storage bin
built of mud-brick (Esse 1984, 326-27) 2.5 m. in diameter. It was dated by pottery, including
Grey Burnished Ware, to the EB I period. A similar construction, as well as a contemporary
rectilinear architectural fragment, were found in more recent excavations by Amiran and
Cohen ( 1977) in an EB I Stratum (IX), the second earliest of this horizon uncovered.
In summarizing the evidence from this site it would appear that the curvilinear structure of
Bar-Adon's excavation and the silo from the Oriental Institute's, on the basis of the ceramic
evidence, are more or less contemporary and represent an early and probably sparse occupation
of the site in the EB I. Evidence for actual curvilinear house construction is limited to the
parabolic structure of Bar-Adon's excavation and, perhaps, the larger circular building
unearthed by Bahat. Other information suggests that buildings were, at least in the later stages
of the EB I, rectilinear (Eisenberg, personal communication). Silos of circular plan appear to be
found throughout the period.
12 PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
Pi/hal Ha- Yarmuk
On the north bank of the Yarmuk River Gorge soundings were made at a large site dated to the
EB I Period (Epstein Ig85). A number of building levels were isolated by the excavators,
G . Epstein and E. Eisenberg, in the compressed stratigraphy. No complete plans of houses were
recovered but two kinds of construction, rectilinear and curvilinear, are indicated on the plan.
Segments of curvilinear walls appear to be portions of oval or sausage-shaped houses, and
circular silos are also known (Fig. [8). The rectangular structures have sharply defined corners.
The stratigraphy in one sector of the site suggests that the rectilinear buildings preceded
the curvilinear dwellings . The date of the occupational layers at the site is somewhat
problematical although the presence of Grey Burnished 'Ware makes it certain that it was, at
least in part, contemporary with the early EB I.
Tel Qasis
The earliest architectural features found at this site in the wes[ernJezreel Valley date to the EB I
and are apparently contemporary with En Shadud (Bernick & Greenberg Ig87 , 2 1,23, Fig. [5).
They include one sharply angled corner, a rectangular end of a construction with two corners
rounded without and angled within, and a curvilinear wall fragment, all of which are
contemporary. Other walls, perhaps rectilinear but too fragmentary for positive identification ,
belong to a second construction phase within this period.
EnShadud
Excavations at En Shadud in theJezreel Valley (Braun [g85a, 67-76) uncovered, in a limited
area, two strata of the EB I period, both demonstrably later than Yiftahel II. Level II, the
earlier, is characterized by rectangular architecture with elements of construction typical of this
period. Level I was, in part, grafted onto surviving portions of the earlier, rectangular buildings.
In one instance a large, either elliptical or sausage-shaped, structure was erected (Fig. Ig). Its
well defined entrance, pillar bases and possible bench made it a kind of variant broadroom,
perhaps the amalgamation of two architectural traditions, curvilinear, and rectangular-
broadroom .
Sarid Reservoir
Some 300m. to the west of the En Shadud excavations, A. Raban, of Haifa University, briefly
excavated at the site of Kibbutz Sarid reservoir (Raban 1977). In very badly bulldozer-
disturbed occupation levels fragmentary walls of curvilinear and rectilinear aspect were
observed . Pottery recovered from the site included EB I and EB II types.
Tel Qishyon
Near the western slopes of Mt. Tabor at Tel Qishyon (Arnon Ig82) a free-standing, circular
building, some 4.0 m. in diameter, was discovered in association with a number of rectilinear
houses . Another smaller, circular foundation, 2.60 m. in diameter (presumably the remains ofa
silo) was found within one of these latter structures. The occupation is dated, on the evidence of
red and Grey Burnished wares, to the EB I period.
Jenin
In the Jezreel Valley city of Jenin a limited sounding on the western portions of the tell
uncovered evidence of an Early Bronze I occupation (Glock Ig77; personal communication),
THE APSIDAL HOUSE
roughly contemporary with En Shadud (Braun 1985a, 100-01) . Originally assumed to have
been a portion of an apsidal structure (Glock (977 ) is a small section of a well-built, stone
foundation of a curvilinear wall. There is no sign of a corner and hence it is possible to
reconstruct the house as sausage-shaped, similar to that at En Shadud (Braun 1985a, Fig. 45) .
Grey burnished Ware is associated with this occupation.
Munhala
Level I at the Jordan Valley site of Munhata , assigned to the EB I on the basis of associated
Grey Burnished Ware, was only poorly preserved . Wall fragments, rectilinear and curvilinear,
of double rows offield stones, suggested to the excavators (Perrot 1963,563; Perrot and Zori
1977, 874) the possibility of oval house plans.
Tell Umm Hammad Esh-Sharqiya
On the eastern side oftheJordan Valley Rift, S. Helms ( 1984; (986) sounded the substantial site
of Tell Umm Hammad Esh-Sharqiya 48 The results of the 1982 season indicate three major
occupational stages, with a greater number of construction phases. The oldest architecture"
[Stage IhJ is dated by the presence of an early type of Grey Burnished Ware to the EB I, and
may well be closely contemporary with Yiftahel (Braun, forthcoming ). No complete house
plans were recovered because of the severely restricted limits of the sounding, but in Stage I a
number of curvilinear walls are visible (Helms 1984, Fig. 8, 41 ), along with other architectural
fragments which are too limited to be categorized (Fig. 20).
Tell Esh-Shuneh
In a small sounding at theJordan Valley site of Tell Esh-Shuneh, two strata of the EB I Horizon
were uncovered by H . de Contenson (1961, Fig. (8) . In Level II, the earlier, Grey Burnished
Bowls were found in association with a wall fragment of rectilinear aspect, but which is too
incomplete to be categorized. In the succeeding level a noticeable curvilinear wall was
uncovered. Although much of the pottery of these two occupations is similar, Grey Burnished
Ware was absent from the later level. More recently, Gustavson Gaube ( 1985) has sounded
some 75 sq. m . of the site. The results of one season show a very incomplete pottery assemblage
of the EB I,so and a number of obviously rectilinear walls.
Jebel Mulawwaq
Surveying and excavations at the site ofJebel Mutawwaq on the Wadi Zerqa inJordan suggests
the existence ofa walled town containing some 300 to 400 oval houses (Hanbury-Tenison (985 ),
and dated to the horizon ofEB J awa. Sl Construction is oflarge slabs and field stones, lacking the
precision and evidence of packing between stones which is typical of foundations of solid walls
(Fig. 21 ). There is a suggestion atJebel Mutawwaq that the stones may have formed enclosures
PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
used to support rather flimsy superstructures , a type of construction often associated with arid
zones. Structural features found in these houses suggest, as in the elliptical structure of En
Shadud I, affinities with rectangular broad rooms .
Jawa
At Jawa in the Black Desert of Eastern Jordan, in occupational deposits which are contem-
porary with the middle phases ofUmm Hammad , Stage 1/ 2 (Helms 1986, 35), the excavator
posits an urban-like center in which a number of dwelling units have been identified (Helms
1981, Ch . 14). They are all amorphously curvilinear in plan and appear to owe little to any
architectural tradition, although, taken as a group, they do appear to have derived from some
common inspiration. Construction techniques and household appurtenances attest to some
probable sharing of ideas with the more westerly contemporary sites. Regular features are stone
pillar bases, door sockets, internal benches and sunken floor levels.
Lad
In a limited sounding at Lod, Y. Kaplan found evidence of two occupational levels dated to the
EB I period (Kaplan 1977,58). In the lower level a mud-brick wall associated with an earthen
floor was reported 52 In the upper level a curvilinear wall of stones , described as 'half of a circle'
was revealed. No plan of this building has been published, but it is clearly visible in a photo
(Kaplan 1977, Hebrew Plate Vb) as a geometrically accurate, slightly less than semi-circular
stone foundation. Its size can not be accurately judged from only the photographic evidence, but
it seems as ifit may be large enough to have been a dwelling rather than a storage facility .
Ai [EI Tell}
The earliest Phases (I and II ) of occupation at Ai have been dated, by Callaway ( 1972 , 30-33;
1980, 55-57 ) to the EB Ib while the first walled town is dated by him to an EB Ie period. 53
Callaway ( 1980, 81 ) has identified one house of Phase III (Mn in site G) as ' rounded ' or
'elliptical', relating it to the half round towers abutting the city wall. He has then described these
buildings as part of a larger phenomenon of'apsidal architectural styles in the EB Age'. 54 House
Mn (Fig. 22 ) is , in fact, a clearly rectangular building with two corners which are angular within
and rounded externally.
Tel Apheq
Stone foundations of a large rectangular building with sharply angular internal corners,
gracefully rounded without, have been unearthed on the south-west slope of Tel Apheq
(Kokhavi and Beck 1985). Dated to the EB I-II transitional period , this outsized, possibly
public structure, may be one of the last remnants of a tradition of curvilinear construction.
Contemporary dwellings at the site are rectilinear broadrooms.
Azor
At Azor, a southern suburb of Tel Aviv, there is evidence for an EB I occupation (Gophna 1974,
115-19). M. Dothan ( 1958, 272 ) reported an apsidal construction of this period but nothing
more of this find is published. In an adjacent area, Installation C, D. Ussishkin (in Perrot 1961 ,
19-20) uncovered a slightly sunken circular structure.
Palmahim Quarry
In a sounding at a quarry site at Palmahim, south of Tel Aviv, evidence of two EB I strata was
unearthed (Gophna 1974, 47-48). The earlier, Stratum II, was represented only by pits. In
THE APSIDAL HOUSE 15
Stratum I two contemporary fragmentary structures, one curvilinear, the other rectilinear were
found (Fig. 23 ).
Tel Halif
A number of excavations at Tel Halif, in the vicinity of Kibbutz Lahav have uncovered remains
of the EB I period. D Alon ( 1974; Tel Halif 1977), 55 in a small sounding, encountered evidence
of two strata. The earlier is described as having curvilinear architecture; the later level is
characterized by rectilinear forms . In another sounding to the east of the kibbutz a rectangular
structure with curved corners was partially unearthed (D . Alon, personal communication).
Serobit el Khadim
Near Serabit el Khadim in the Sinai Peninsula, two curvilinear structures, one an almost
complete oval (Fig. 24), were uncovered at a site of either Chalcolithic or EB I date.5 6 Although
technically beyond the limits of the region under discussion , it seems, on the basis of pottery
parallels, that the settlement may well have been occupied by Canaanites.
SUMMARY
Apsidal Architecture
A review of the architectural evidence from sites of the Late Cha1colithic-EB I Horizon in
Lebanon, Israel , and Jordan will show evidence of only two truly apsidal houses, with a third
possible candidate for this category incomplete in plan. Of the former, the best preserved
structure is that of Stage IV at Megiddo. In its final aspect it was virtually apsidal but it seems
that it may well have been built piecemeal from curvilinear and rectilinear fragments. The
second example, the apsidal house at Byblos, assuredly was constructed in this manner, with its
curved wall an addition to a rectangular structure. The third candidate, building I I at Beth
Ha-Emeq , may latterly have been apsidal in plan but was also an aggregate of rectilinear and
curvilinear walls. Given the lack of a body of corroborative evidence for apsidal construction,
and in the face of so many contra-indications for the interpretation of incomplete structures as of
this type, it is no longer possible to postulate the existence of the apsidal house as a traditional
style of construction and a hallmark of the EB I. Indeed, now brought into serious question are
all those theories which advocate, in this period, foreign connections based on the supposed
existence of this tradition of house construction.
Curvilinear House Construction of the EB I-A Tradition
Wholly curvilinear buildings , found at Byblos, Dakerman, Tel Teo, Yiftahel, Tel Qishyon and
Jericho indicate a coherent pattern of house construction associated with specific chronological
and regional parameters which truly deserve the appellation ' tradition'. Emphasis is placed on
this new building style as a tradition not only because of the repetition of these distinctively
shaped buildings at a number of related sites, but also because of their apposition to the
well-documented tradition of rectangular construction of the Cha1colithic period and the late
EB I (see below). Although the ultimate origins of these curvilinear buildings remain unknown,
their earliest appearance in this region, at Byblos, is coincidental with the beginning of the
Eneolithique Recent, and curvilinear structures may be traced there throughout the entire
period. Later this building style seems to have spread southward, sometime late in the period
(contemporary to the early EB I ). The ultimate extent of this tradition of construction is
unknown but it seems likely that it was a somewhat widespread phenomenon also associated
16 PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
with the northern EB I culture orIsrael and Transjordan (Braun, forthcoming) . Tables I and 2
illustrate the dispersion and frequency of these house types by site. 57 Of interest is what appears
to be a secondary influence, a ripple effect, which this tradition may have exerted on
construction of domestic buildings in the later EB l. This is seen in the appearance of rounded
corners on buildings at a number of sites in both the north and south .58
Another particu larly probl ematic aspect of this tradition is the apparent exclusivity of this
style of architecture at Dakerman, Yiftahel , and perhaps also at Tel Teo, Tel Qishyon, and
Meser (where excavated areas are severely limited) . It would appear to be quite appropriate to
conclude that this very strong building tradition is evidence of the arrival of some distinct ethnic
group ," not closely associated with the indigenous populations of Lebanon , Israel , andJordan ,
in the Chalcolithic period. There are, however, a number of anomalies which need explaining
before such an equation may be advanced.
The appearance of curvilinear buildings at Byblos , sometime early in the ER (= Chalcoli-
thic) period, apparently as a full-blown style of house construction, alongside more traditional
rectangular structures is well documented .60 The excavation reports do not, however, inform us
of any other distinctive fea tures of material culture associated exclusively with these buildings,
nor is there evide nce to corroborate the idea of associating this new tradition of architecture with
any distinct group of newcomers settling at Byb los . Nor is there any indication from whence
came such radically different type building conceptions at the beginning of the ER.
Even more puzzling is the appearance of this style of architecture, to the exclusion of
rectilinear forms , at sites to the south dating perhaps considerably later (see note 40). Certainly
the links between Byblos and Dakerman are evident,61 but the connections with sites further to
the south are less well understood. Given the architectural traditions of the Lebanese Littoral in
the ER period the existence of pockets of occupation, in which curvilinear architecture was the
dominant form, in contemporary Northern Israel and Transjordan , could hardly be fortuitous.
There is no real evidence for the origins of this tradition there nor do these type buildings belong
to the indigenous cultural traditions of the region in the period immediately preceding the EB I
(see note 12 ). Thus the existence of curvilinear buildings in contemporary contexts in Northern
Israel and Transjordan must somehow be linked to what happens immediately to the north.
The differences between the material cultures of these two regions (the Lebanese Littoral and
Northern Israel , and Transjordan) are, indeed, remarkable, especially in pottery traditions 62
and burial customs (Braun, forthcoming ). The nature of the links between these cultural
spheres is something of an enigma, given their proximity and the lack of serious physical
barriers between them. Certain factors were obviously conducive to cultural exchange, yet it
seems as if this was, to a great extent, a highly selective process in this period.
At EB I sites in Northern Israel and Transjordan there is a notably high correlation
between the appearance of curvilinear architecture and Esdraelon Ware (Table 3)' It would
seem to be an appropriate assumption that these two distinctive attributes of material culture
are somehow related, perhaps to an incursion of a new ethnic group into the region. 63 There are,
however, some very important exceptions to this correlation. they are the lack of Grey
Burnished Ware on sites of the Lebanese Littoral'" and at Jericho - gaps which virtually
preclude these aspects from being very closely related . On the basis of our present knowledge it
seems then that the coincidental appearance of Grey Burnished Pottery and Curvilinear
Architecture are both indicative of the early EB I culture in Northern Israel and Transjordan
but that they should be understood as two separate , and perhaps only loosely related, aspects of
a larger phenomenon which brought about major cultural changes. These changes are those
which led archaeologists to distinguish the new EB I culture from that of the preceding
Chalcolithic Horizon.
ТНЕ APSIDAL HOUSE 17
ТЛВLЕ з ТНЕ ASSOCIATION OF СВ WЛRЕ ВУ ТУРЕ· AND ARC НITECТURAL STYLE
Level
Stage GB ware Types 1-4
Stratum U nspecified + Curvilin ear + Rectilinear +
SПЕ Instal. Not Found (о) Fragmentary (.) Fragmentary (. )
Megiddo XIX 3 +
Megiddo Stage IУ 3 + +
Yiftahel II + (. )
Beth Shean XVII 3 (. ) ?
Beth Shean XV I 3 +
Beth Shean XV + (. ) +
Beth Shean XIV о (. ) +
M esser II (. )
j ericho V о + +
Sidon-Dakerman II о +
BybIos Early ER о + +
BybIos Late ER о + +
Rosh Hanniqra II + (. )
Те l Тео V +
Теl Тео IV (.)
Khorvat Avot 5 3 (.)
Beth Ha-emeq + (. ) +
Beth Yerah XV + (' )
Beth Yerah Bahat Ехс ? (.)
Pithat ha-Yarmuk + (. ) +
En Shadud 3 + +
Теl Qishyon + + +
j enin + (' )
Munhata 1 + (О)
ТеlUm Hammad 1/2 (.) (О)
ТеН Esh-Shuneh III о ( О) (.)
Maabarot Lower + (О ) ( О)
j ebel Mutawwaq о +
Azor С о +
Palmahim Quarry 1 (О ) ?
Serabit еl Khadim о +
• Wrighr '958, *4'
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This article represents the fruits of research conducted for my work at the Israel Department of Antiquities
and Museums ( lOAM ). The conclusions offered here are entirely my own, but [hey could not have been
reached , nor cou ld this work have been carried out, without the help of numerous colleagues who have
alTered encouragement, advice, and criticism - all warmly welcome. To those who have made available
THE APSIDAL HOUSE 19
unpublished material special thanks are due for their generosity. They are: Mr D. Alan (lOAM ) for
information on Tel Halif; Mr D. Bahat (Regional Archaeologist for Jerusalem, lOAM) for information on
his work at Tel Beth Yerah and for providing a plan for publication; Mr E. Eisenberg (Senior Excavating
Archaeologist, lOAM) for information on Tell Teo and for providing a plan for publica-tion; Dr C. Epstein
(lOAM) for making available information on Pithat ha-Yarmuk in advance of publication; Professor A.
Glock (Bir Zeit University) for making available information on Tell Jenin; Dr J . Hanbury-Tenison
(formerly of Magdalen College, Oxford) for allowing me to review a report onJebei Mutawwaq in advance
of its publication; and Dr A. Kempinski (Tel Aviv University) for allowing me to review the report on Beth
Ha-emeq prior to its publication and to reproduce the plan of the structures here.
The following people have contributed to this paper: Ms T. Mazzola (Architect and Artist, lOAM)
drew or fe-drew all the plans presented here and offered invaluable information on building techniques;
Ms E. Salomon (Volunteer, lOAM) helped to prepare the bibliography; Ms L. Taylor (Librarian and
Editor) formerly of IDAlVI) was a patient reader and corrected early versions of the manuscript; Mr A.
Eytan (former Director IDAM) . provided expertise and valuable comments concerning the unpublished
Megiddo Stages material and graciously gave his permission to publish the Yiftahel plans and pho{Qs; Mr
j. Larson (Museum Archivist, Oriental Institute, University of Chicago) was instrumental in procuring
the photo of the Megiddo Stages for re-publication; Dr Ann Bonn (Research Assistant, Beth Shan Project,
the University :M useum, University of Pennsylvania) brought her doctorate to my attention; Mr D. Bahat
(Regional Arhaeologist for Jerusalem, lOAM) and the family of the late Mr P. Bar-Adon gave permission
to review the notes from the Beth Yerah excavations; Professor M. Kochavi (Tel Aviv University) read an
earlier version of the manuscript and offered comments; Mr Baruch Brandl (Senior Researcher, IDAM)
offered incisive comments on portions of the manuscript; tvlr M. Louhivuori (Hebrew University)
provided helpful comments and criticisms; Dr D. Esse (The Oriental Institute, University of Chicago)
helped with the proof-reading and offered valid criticisms; an unknown reader of an earlier and different
version helped with proof-reading and provided several incisive comments; and Ms C. Greenberg (former
Assistant to the Director, lOAM) helpd with the typing of the manscript in its early stages. Most of all I
wish to express gratitude to David Braun (Decatur Ga.) for his excellent editing abilities and his
encouragement in this work.
NOTES
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Megiddo
2. YiCtahel
3. Beth Sbean
-4. Meser
5. jericho
6. Sidon-Dakerman
... .vt 7. 8уЫоз
8. Ro,h Hanniqra
9. Теl Тео
10. Kh.orvat Avot
11 . Beth Ha-Emeq
12. Beth УегаЬ
13. Pitbat Ha-Yarmuk
14. Еп Shadud/Sarld
15. Теl Qishyon
16. Jenin
17. Мuпhаtа
18. Те1l Umm Hammad
19. Те1l Esb-Shuneh
~O 20. Maabarot
21 . Jebel Muta\VWaq
22. Jawa
23. Lod
24. Ai
25. Apheq
26. Azor
27. Palmahim
28 . Те! Halif
14 29. Serabit еl Khadim
4 1• •
• ~6
30. Т. Ghassul
о 15km.
t::::::.ooj
'У ~
PALESТINE EXPLORAТION QUARTERLY
YIFTAHEL
::
" .,.. .
о 10т
,
SIDON-DAKERMAN
........ ... .. ,.
о 10т
,====---'
Fig. З . (А) The Early Bronze 1 village ас Yiftahel. After an aerial photo,
IDAM. (В) The Late Chalcolithic village а! Sidon-Dakerman. After Saidah
'979, Figure 2
ТНЕ APS!DAL HOUSE
\i
,~.....-
--- с
O'===_.....3m
Fig. 4. Houses fTOffi Yiftahel П. (л) Sausage-shaped;
(В ) Circular; (с) Оуа!
n
U
I
о
с
о 4m
I
Fig.5. The ' apsidal' house ofBeth Shan XVI. After Вопп 1976,
102. ( л ) The earlier phase; ( В ) The later phase; ( с ) The exterior line
ofthe peripheral wall; (D) The interior line ofthe peripheral waJl
PALESТINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
3°
о 3т
=~_
,=1 ..
Fig. б . Plans ofthe house ofMesser Н . (л) The do"ed line is the excavator's
suggested reconstruction. The lightly shaded агеа is а suggested reconstruc tion .
The dark shaded areas are assigned, Ьу the excavator, [Q Strашm HI . After Dothan
' 959, Figure 2. (В) Part оСа curvilinear house. After Dothan ' 959, Figure 4
в а с
о
!
2т
:
Fig. 7. The 'apsidal' house оГКепуоп ' . Proto- Urbain levels atJ ericho. After Кепуоп '98" Plates З' зЬ
з '4. ( л ) ТЬе earliest phase; ( В ) ТЬе later phases Р and Q; (с) ТЬе la tes t phase, N
THE APS I DAL HOUSE
+ +
o 4m
o ~
0 Cl
o~o
o a 0
at}
0
oJ) D Q
fj 6
00
Ood'
o 0
o 3.5m
'=====--
o 2m
!
fi;=:
1" ,
.
В С D Е Fig. 1 [ . Curvilinear houses ofthe
'8,') О-
А
ER аl BybIos. M ler Dunand 1973·
' , ,\
, ,: ~ ,
( А ) PI .j ,b., 51. 14, по. з 8
О
,~ >
" \' ", ', _... . 11
11
1\ ,
1\
( В ) PI.] ,b., 51. 14, по. 41
\~ : :~. \ ..... \ ~' ( с ) PI.] ,c., SI. 13, по. 4
--' (D) PI.],d., SI. 18, по . 1
( Е ) PI.],d., SI. 4, по. 1
F G Н J К (F) PI.],a., SI. 14, square 9/ 16
( с ) PI.],b. , SI. 14, по . з6
" ( Н ) PI. j,c., SI . 12 , по. 4
~)
') 1 ( "
,)
(1) PI.j,b., 51. 15, square 10/9
(J) PI.],b., SI. 15, square 7/ 10
( К) PI.] ,b., 51. 15, square 10/8
о 6m
ТНЕ APS!DAL HOUSE 33
.,
.. :....... .. : ..... : : :. ..
о 3m
'==-
о 2m
'=,=~-,
PALESТINE EXPLORAТION QUARTERLY
34
/ ---------\1:
...... - - - - - - - - -
{
\
'--- ---~'
о
I I
4т .
о 2m
0,'===~ __ ~.
ТНЕ APSIDAL HOUSE 35
"-
"- "-
"- "- .....
.....
.....
+. . . ..... .....
"-
2Q +~
14ffi ~.~
, I D '50 ,\
"-
"- I \
--
\ \
\ \ 11
+I \
\ \
\ \
+ + ~ --- ---
("
\
,---
190
,-
7
I I
_ ..::1-- - )
О 2.5 т
+
+~11
.....
I \
\
.....
+
,3
в
\\ --~
\ , 1-
7
Fig. 16. The ЕВ 1 structures at Beth Ha-emeq. (л) The plan ofthe buildings
as understood Ьу the excavator; (В) А suggested interpretation ofthe phases of
construction (the shaded areas)
( Re produced here Ьу kind permission oC the excavator, А . Kempinski .)
36 PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
o 2m
,=I=~_'
ol===-.....1m
THE APSlDAL HOUSE 37
I
/'
...- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -" Fig. 19. The elliptical house
of En Shadud I. Af1er Mazzola
I
...- - - - - - - - - - - - '\ in Braun Ig85a, Figure 28b
I
/ I
I I
I
\
I
\
o o
\ \
\ '\
'\
o 2m
!
Cfl_ _fl
O,=~~2m
о 3m
'= =---"
ТНЕ APSIDAL HO U SE 39
~ ,
'_ . _ . _ . _ . _ . _ . _ . _ . _ . _ . ...i
\
I
I
I
/
-- --------- --
о 2m
40 PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY
Plate 2. Aerial photo ofYiftahel. The majority of the curvilinear walls belong to the EB I levels; others
as well as the rectilinear structures visible either belong to a post yearly EB I occupation or to Neolithic
levels
(Reproduced here by kind permission oCthe brad Department of Antiquities and Museums )
PALESTINE EXPLORATION QUARTERLY