Area Pal.: The Judean Palace-Fort (Chapter 14 in the Lachish final Excavation Report)

CHAPTER 14

AREA PAL.: THE JUDEAN PALACE-FORT

David Ussishkin

INTRODUCTION

Extensive excavations were carried out by the British expedition in the Judean Palace-Fort complex. The superimposed Residency of Level I was uncovered first (Lachish III: 131-141, Pls. 22, 119-120).The structure was found in a good state of preservation (see especially Fig. 14.75), but was subsequently dismantled to allow further excavation. The building was removed in its entirety, except for the monumental threshold at the entrance to Hall K, a stone column base of the portico leading to Hall O/Q, the stone bases for the columns of the portico entrance leading to Hall U, and the northern column base of the same portico. As the builders of the Residency had cleared most of the debris of the Palace C superstructure in order to prepare a solid podium, the British excavation’s removal of the remains of the Residency left solely the Judean Palace-Fort’s foundation podium. The huge foundation podium stands today, its upper surface marked by the floors of Palace C, but the remains of the huge walls of the superstructure whichone might have expected to find are entirely absent (Figs. 14.1; 14.2).

The situation is slightly different at the northern end of the structure. The Level I Residency was not as long as the underlying podium of the Judean Palace-Fort, and hence, the area at the northern end of Podium A (as well as that at the southern end of Podium B) remained outside the Residency (see Lachish III: Pl. 119). The northern part of Podium A was used by the builders of the Residency as a convenient source of building stone. Most of the podium walls in the area were robbed out, including a large part of the northern exterior wall of Podium A (W 250). The British excavated the constructional fills in this partof Podium A down to the top of the underlying stratum, and discerned the lines of the podium walls in the robbers’ trenches left in the constructional fills (Lachish III: 79-83, 116-117, Pls. 19:4-5, 110). In Tufnell’swords, ‘Much of the material which had formed the cross walls had been removed... and it was only the line of the filled-in trenches which revealed their position’ (Lachish III: 79). The lines of the missing wallswere recorded and published (Lachish III: Pl. 110). It should be noted that these walls cannot be traced anymore today, and hence, that the plan of the building presented here (Fig. 14.8) portrays them on the basis of the earlier plan.

Very little work was carried out by the British expedition on the Palace-Fort podium apart from the work at the north end of Podium A (Lachish III: 78-85). The structural remains were not properly recorded, except for the Palace C floor remains (Lachish III: Pl. 118). Significantly, a probe trench was also cutoutside the podium on its western side, at the junction of Podia A and B (Fig. 14.14).

In contrast, much work was carried out in the annexes. The southern, preserved half of the Northern Annexed Building was excavated (Lachish III: 83, 115-116, Pl. 110) and interpreted as either chariot-

USSISHKIN: AREA PAL.: THE JUDEAN PALACE-FORT

768 769


768 769

Fig. 14.1: Air photo of the Judean Palace-Fort in 1981 with Area D in the foreground; from the south-east.

Fig. 14.2: The podium of the Palace-Fort in 1973; from the south-east.

houses or storerooms. The Southern Annexed Building of Level IV, labelled the ‘government storehouse’, and the superimposed western half of the Level III building, labelled Building 1034, were also uncovered (Starkey 1937b: 237-238, Pl. VI:1; Lachish III: 53, 61, 78: Fig. 4, 80-83, 104 (Locus [K.15:1034]), 113 (Locus [K.15:1034]), Pls. 16:4, 6, 115). The constructional fill of the Southern Annexed Building wasalso partly excavated, and a number of important Late Bronze Age finds were uncovered. To the east ofthe podium, the British uncovered a row of Level II units along Wall 200 of Podium C, and the Level III horizon was reached beneath the Level II units. The entrance platform and monumental staircase of Palace C were uncovered (Lachish III: 84-85, Pls. 116-117), the lime floor of the courtyard was exposed (LachishIII: 151-158, Pls. 115-116), and the destruction debris of Palace C at the western end of the courtyard was studied, sections of which were recorded and published (Lachish III: Pl. 117). Many Level I pits were found to have cut into the Level II units and into the courtyard floor.

Further investigation of the Palace-Fort complex was one of the first undertakings of the renewedexcavations. The ruins of the complex crown the centre of the site, and it was obvious that it would be difficult to comprehend Judean Lachish without a thorough study of its largest and central buildingcomplex. During the 1973 and 1974 seasons the top surface of the Palace-Fort was cleared afresh, various soundings were cut into the foundations and constructional fills, and a general survey of the structuralremains was carried out. The work at this early stage was executed under the supervision of C. Clamer as part of Area P. The Northern Annexed Building was studied in later years, when the underlying Bronze Age remains were excavated, also as part of Area P. The constructional fills supporting Podium B on thewestern side were investigated as part of Area S under the supervision of G. Barkay. In 1980 the Southern Annexed Building and parts of the courtyard were investigated as Area D under the supervision of Y. Dagan (see Fig. 14.1). In 1987 the south-western part of the courtyard was investigated as part of Area D under the supervision of O. Zimhoni and J. Woodhead. In 1993 the staircase leading to the Palace-Fort and the constructional fill on the western side, at the junction of Podia A and B (Locus 5410), were studiedafresh by Y. Dagan as part of the preparation to turn the site into a national park.

THE STRATIGRAPHY AND HISTORY OF THE COMPOUND

A clear picture of the complex and its history has been obtained from the systematic studies carried out through the years. While the renewed excavations were able to confirm most of Starkey and his colleagues’basic conclusions regarding the character and history of the Palace-Fort and the other parts of the complex, a number of other conclusions had to be modified. The present remains of the Palace-Fort are merely theraised foundations of the structure, impressively high stone walls for the outer and inner foundations. These walls rose to the floor level of the building, and the spaces between the foundation walls were filledwith soil, resulting in a large, rectangular block or podium, as it was termed by the British expedition.

Starkey discerned in the podium three elements, built in three successive phases, which he termed Podia A-C (Figs. 14.3; 14.4). The three podia, according to Starkey, represent three successive palaces, labelled Palaces A-C. Palace A was erected on the earliest podium, Podium A, and the larger and later Palace B was built on Podium B, incorporating the earlier Palace A within it — alternatively, Palace A was demolished and the newly built Palace B extended above Podia A and B — and the largest and latest Palace C was constructed over all three podia. Palaces A, B and C were assigned to Levels V, IV and III, respectively.

LACHISH, VOLUME II, CHAPTER 14 USSISHKIN: AREA PAL.: THE JUDEAN PALACE-FORT

770 771

This stratigraphic concept, in particular the assumption that Podium A represents an earlier stage in the history of the Palace-Fort (Palace A), has been generally accepted by staff members of the renewed excavations (e.g. G. Barkay and O. Zimhoni). In my opinion, however, Podium A was built together with Podium B as an integral part of Palace B. Hence, Palace A never existed. This view forms the basis for this report and is detailed below.

Podium A is structurally separate from adjoining Podium B and indeed must have been constructed (technically) earlier than Podium B (Figs. 14.3; 14.8). This is indicated by several data. First, a thick wall (W 205), similar to its three external walls, extends along Podium A’s southern side. Second, Podium B does not have a thick external wall along its northern side, indicating that it was built against the already standing Podium A. Third, Podium A was constructed with boulders of hard limestone, while Podium B was constructed with nari-limestone. Fourth, the bottom of Podium A at its southern corners is set deeper than the adjoining, northern corners of Podium B. Finally, the junction of the south-western corner of Podium A and the north-western corner of Podium B, uncovered by the British expedition (Fig. 14.14) and recleared by the renewed excavations (Locus 5410), are poorly aligned, and the western walls of the respective podia extend at slightly contrary angles, indicating that they were not built concurrently.

The conclusion that Podium B is later than Podium A only in the technical sense, and that in fact both form parts of a single building scheme, is based on three arguments.

1) Podium A is founded on structural remains of Level V (see below), while Podium B/Palace B was built at the same time as the Enclosure Wall and the fortifications of the city at the beginning of LevelIV (see Ussishkin, Chapter 3). If indeed Podium A were stratigraphically earlier than Podium B it would follow that Podium A would represent a separate level which was recognized nowhere else, a level later than Level V and earlier than Level IV. (Indeed this is what I concluded initially, labelling it ‘Level V, later phase’ [see Preliminary Report I: 28-31]). If such were the case one would have to assume that Podium A/Palace A, a kind of fort, was built as an independent entity, or that it was somehow incorporated into the existing settlement of Level V. However, not a single floor or pottery sherd can be assigned to thistheoretical level/phase, and there is no additional evidence, direct or indirect, which might support the existence of such a building phase.

2) If Podium A and Palace A were constructed as a part of Level V and Podium B and Palace B added later in Level IV, it would follow that after the destruction of the Level V settlement, or of a stratigraphically isolated Palace A, the architects and builders of the royal Judean stronghold of Level IV would have constructed their central governmental complex so as to accommodate the isolated structure/standing ruin in the centre of the site. Alternatively, if Palace A was still standing, they would have planned so as to incorporate it into the far larger complex. In either case, they would have been forced to harmonize the orientation, concept, construction style and floor levels of the new building with those of the old, whichseems unlikely.

3) If Palace A had been built as an isolated fortified structure, one would expect it to be advantageouslysituated near the upper periphery of the mound or at the highest point of the summit in the centre of the site, but this is not the case. As shown below, the Late Bronze Age acropolis, situated to the east of Podia A and B, must have risen to a considerable height prior to the construction of Palace B. Podia A and B were not founded at the highest point of the summit. At the time of construction of Palace B the surface of the summit nearby was considerably lowered, and the debris was taken to be used in the constructional fillsof its foundations.


770 771

772 773

Fig. 14.3: Schematic plan of the Palace B compound.

772 773

Fig. 14.4: Schematic plan of the Palace C compound.

These difficulties are solved by the proposal that Podium A, together with Podium B, formed anintegral part of the construction of Palace B. If so, a large edifice was built upon a raised substructureat one time and according to a single overall plan. The variance between Podia A and B, then, must be explained differently. It is suggested that Podium A was intentionally constructed as a separate unit, that its foundations were set deeper and that it was constructed with blocks cut of harder limestone because it carried a more substantial, better built wing of the Palace-Fort than that erected on Podium B. This wing also contained the entrance to the edifice and may have risen higher than its adjacent units. The principleof constructing a complex from two separate units which adjoin one another, rather than as a single, homogeneous edifice, can be observed in other roughly contemporary structures, e.g. the Stratum IVAinner city-gate and city wall at Tel Megiddo, and the gate and city wall of the enclosure at Tel Jezreel.

In summary, it seems that two palace compounds were erected, the latter superimposed on the former. The earlier, Palace B, was built in Level IV (Fig. 14.3). The Palace-Fort proper was constructed upon two adjoining, contemporary podia, A and B. To the Palace-Fort were added two annexes on its northern and southern sides. The later palace compound, Palace C, was built in Level III on the three adjoining podia, A, B and C. (Fig. 14.4). On the eastern side of the new Palace-Fort complex a large enclosed courtyard was added, and the Southern Annexed Building was rebuilt, enlarged and equipped with a gate to the compound. Following the destruction of Palace C at the end of Level III, the ruined building site seems to have remained deserted throughout Level II. Only when the Residency of Level I was constructed did its builders clear the remaining walls and rubble of the superstructure, thereby uncovering the level platform on which to build their own monumental edifice. As a result, nothing remains today of the superstructureof the Judean Palace-Fort except patches of its floors.

LEVEL V: THE UNDERLYING REMAINS

Flimsy remains of Level V, characterized by red-slipped, irregularly burnished pottery, were consistently uncovered beneath the lowest courses of the northern part of Podium A and the Northern Annexed Building (Fig. 14.5) and above the remains of Level VI. While excavating Podium A the British team noticed,

that the earliest Iron Age podium... was founded directly on the ruins of the Ramesside building.... The only sign of intermediate occupation was a series of grain pits cut down from the level on which the foundations of Palace A were placed. Some actually ran under the walls. The filling of one pit wassealed in by a thin layer of builders’ rubbish, and had so obviously sunk after the building operations that it must have been in use very shortly before, but the contents did not provide any distinctive sherds (Lachish III: 79).

The renewed excavations added complementary data. Several pits (Loci 3222, 3230, 3488, 5004, 5006) dug into earlier debris (Fig. 14.7) were uncovered beneath the Northern Annexed Building. Walls 259 and 260 in Squares H-J/8 represent a hut of this period (Fig. 14.6), and Walls 227 and 230 of Locus 3027 Upper in Square K/7 represents another (Fig. 14.17). Wall 227, the lower course of which is clumsily built of relatively large stones, its upper part of bricks, passes over the ruined, eastern external wall of the Level VI temple (W 288). A large, well-cut stone slab, evidently one of the missing slabs of the temple staircase (see Ussishkin, Chapter 6; Fig. 6.31; 6.32), is incorporated into the wall. This serves as an indication that various architectural elements of the temple, such as the stone staircases, were removed at


774 775


774 775

Fig.

14.

5: L

evel

V re

mai

ns b

enea

th P

odiu

m A

and

the

Nor

ther

n A

nnex

ed B

uild

ing.

this stage. It is thus possible that the pits dug into the debris of the temple above the two central column bases (Ussishkin, Chapter 6, Fig. 6.13; Locus 3226) belong in fact to Level V.

Hardly any Level V remains were uncovered beneath the fills supporting the southern part of PodiumB and beneath the foundations of the Southern Annexed Building. Several pits detected by the British in a sounding at the south-western corner of the courtyard date, according to the reconstruction presented here, to Level IV, and hence, are discussed below.


776 777

Fig. 14.6: Level V Walls 259 (foreground) and 260 (background) in Squares H-J/8; from the north. In the centre, the stone-built bottom of Level VI(?) Pit 3077A cuts into the debris filling Level P-4 Room 3156.

Fig. 14.7: Beginning of work in Sq. E/7, beneath the floor of Hall [L.11:1052]; from the west.Note Level IV Wall 282 (at right), stone-filled Level V(?) Pit 3222 (centre), and tabunof Level P-2 Unit 3371 (at back).

LEVEL IV: THE PALACE B COMPOUND (Fig. 14.3)

PODIUM A (Figs. 14.8-14.13)

Podium A was erected above the Middle Bronze Age palace and the Level VI temple (Ussishkin, Chapters 4 and 6, respectively). The surface in the area was not even, and the builders of Podium A did not level it prior to beginning the construction of the foundations, which accounts for the difference in base elevation of the various foundation walls: The base of the outer northern wall (W 250) was laid at ca. 267.09 m.; the outer eastern wall (W 201) in its northern section at ca. 269.25 m.; and the outer southern wall (W 205) at the south-eastern corner (Locus 3017) at ca. 269.10 m., the latter standing to a height of ca. 3 m. The foundations of the outer western wall (W 203) were reached by Starkey in a sounding near the south-western corner of Podium A (Fig. 14.14; Lachish III: 79, Pl. 19:1-2), where the foundation wall stood to a height of ca. 7 m. Elevations of this wall were not published, and its bottom was not reached in the renewed excavations (Locus 5410). Nevertheless, it can be estimated that the base of the wall lay at ca. 265 m., since the elevation of the Palace-Fort floor at this point is ca. 272 m. Thus, the base of the south-westerncorner was laid ca. 4 m. lower than that of the south-eastern corner. The renewed excavations revealed a shallow foundation trench cut into the debris of the Middle Bronze Age palace for the outer northern wall (W 250; Locus 3062; Figs 4.3; 4.32), and the foundations of the outer walls were probably laid in a similar fashion. On the other hand, the inner foundation walls were laid directly upon the earlier debris without a foundation trench, as was revealed in Locus 3022 where the lowest courses of inner foundation walls W 214 and W 215 were exposed (Fig. 14.17).

Podium A is nearly square, its exterior walls measuring 32.10 m. (north), 31.75 m. (west), 32.12 m. (south) and 31.45 m. (east). The exterior walls were constructed mostly of meticulously hewn and laid hard limestone blocks. The best preserved part of the walls is at the south-western corner (Fig. 14.14). The width of the exterior western and northern walls (W 203, W 250) is 2.25-2.35 m., while the exterior eastern wall (Figs. 14.15; 14.16) is only 1.93 m. wide. The width of the exterior southern wall (W 205) is unknown. The inner foundation walls, which were not bonded to the outer foundation walls, are narrower and constructed of smaller stones.

Assuming that the interior foundation walls were constructed to bear the weight of the walls of the superstructure, the palace wing which stood on Podium A would have had a symmetrical ground plan (Figs. 14.3; 14.8). There was a large rectangular unit, probably an open court, oriented along the north-south axis in the centre of the building. This court was flanked by three small units on each of its longersides. They were surrounded by large rectangular units along all external walls of the podium/palace wing. A smaller unit on the eastern side (Loci 3025, 3034) probably served as the entrance room, as it faces the entrance porch (see below). The long rectangular unit along the southern side must have contained a doorway leading to the southern wing of the palace erected upon Podium B.

The constructional fill between the foundation walls of the podium was investigated in three places(Loci 3039, 3075, 3022). A good picture of its character was obtained in Locus 3022. The northern half of Podium A had been completely excavated by Starkey, and the edge of the excavated area (see Lachish III: Pl. 19:4) was easily discernible when digging was renewed in 1973 (Fig. 14.15). The renewed excavation recleared the section in the fill of Room [K.12:1055] (Locus 3022), between Walls 214 and 215, downto the bottom of the podium (Fig. 14.17; see also section drawing in Fig. 6.3). The section shows how


776 777

778 779Fig. 14.8: The Palace-Fort: Podia A, B and C. Note that the extant column bases and stone thresholds of the Level I Residency are also shown.

778 779Fig. 14.9: Schematic plan showing the lines of the section drawings in Figs. 14.10-14.13.

780 781

Fig.

14.

10: L

ongi

tudi

nal S

ectio

n A

-A.

780 781

Fig.

14.

11: C

ross

Sec

tion

B-B

. The

sect

ion

in L

achi

sh II

I: Pl

. 117

: B-B

is in

clud

ed.


783

Fig.

14.

12: C

ross

Sec

tion

C-C

. The

sect

ion

in L

achi

sh II

I: Pl

. 117

: A-B

is in

clud

ed, b

ut m

irror

ed.

Fig.

14.

13: C

ross

Sec

tion

D-D

.

the debris layers of the fill were laid nearly horizontally one on top of the other between the flankingfoundation walls of the unit. The bottom of the fill rests at the same elevation as the bottom of the flankingfoundation walls above the remains of the underlying Level V Unit 3027 Upper. The fill consisted ofmound debris containing brick material. Most of the pottery from the fill dates to the Late Bronze Age,with a small number of red-slipped, irregularly burnished fragments of Level V.

PODIUM B (Figs. 14.8-14.13)

The width and height of Podium B are similar to those of Podium A, and its foundations were laid in a similar manner. Since it abuts Podium A, Podium B has no encasing wall on its northern side and thus, has thick exterior foundation walls on only three sides (Fig. 14.8).


783Fig. 14.14: Western point of junction between Podia A and B, as exposed by the British expedition (from Lachish III: Pl. 19:1).


784 785

Fig. 14.15: North-eastern part of Podium A; from the south-west.

Fig. 14.16: Eastern edge of Podium A; from the south. Note Podium C Wall 200 (at right) and south-eastern corner of Podium A (in foreground).

The foundations of Podium B at its northern end were laid at a slightly higher elevation than those of adjoining Podium A. In the trench exposing the western junction between Podia A and B (Fig. 14.14) Starkey noted that ‘the base of Palace B is a metre or so above the base of Palace A’ (Lachish III: 79), namely ca. 266 m. (the renewed excavation did not reach the bottom of the walls at this point, Locus 5410). In Locus 3017 the base of the eastern exterior wall of Podium B (W 202) lay at 269.16 m., ca. 10 cm. higher than that of Podium A at this point. At the southern end of Podium B data regarding the foundations were uncovered at two points. In Locus 4706 (Fig. 14.41) the base of the southern outer wall (W 247), apparently also set on a Late Bronze Age building, lay at 264.73 m. In a trial cut near the south-western corner (Area S, Loci 5504, 5520, 5527; see Fig. 9.17) the base of the western outer wall (W 204) was so deeply set that it was not reached, although excavation was carried out down to 261.33 m., i.e. ca. 11 m. beneath the floor level of the Palace-Fort (ca. 272 m.) and ca. 8 m. lower than the base of Podium B atthe north-eastern corner (see above). Apparently, the foundations of Podium B were laid directly on the uneven surface left by the ruins of the earlier levels. Thus the height of the foundation walls beneath floorlevel differs significantly in various parts of the structure.

Some error in measurement was apparently made when the outer southern and western walls (W 247, W 204) of Podium B were constructed (Fig. 14.8). As a result, these walls are not properly oriented and do not meet at a right angle as was almost certainly planned. The western foundation wall (W 204) becomes thicker towards the south-western corner, while at its northern end it does not join Podium A exactly at


784 785

Fig. 14.17: Section in foundation fill of Podium A (Locus 3022); from the north. Note Wall 214 (right), Wall 215(left) and Level V Walls 227 and 230 (foreground).

its corner (Fig. 14.14). Podium B is 44.10 m. long on its eastern side and 44.90 m. long on its western; its width at the northern end is 32.02 m. and 33.40 m. at the southern. The eastern exterior foundation wall (W 202) is 2.60-2.70 m. thick; the southern (W 247) is 3.35-3.45 m. thick; and the western (W 204) is 2.70 m. near its north-western corner and 3.50 m. near its south-western corner. As in Podium A, the eastern foundation wall of Podium B is somewhat narrower than the other two.

The outer foundation walls of Podium B are built primarily of nari-stone. Pieces of carbonized wood, identified as olive and lentisk (see Liphschitz, Chapter 32, Section A), were found in the hollowsbetween the stones of the lower courses of the western foundation wall (Area S, Locus 5504), indicating that wooden beams were systematically placed in the foundations in order to strengthen them. The south-western corner of Podium B (Fig. 14.18) is constructed of roughly hammer-dressed blocks cut of hard limestone. Nearly rectangular and comparatively large, these stones stand out both in quality and superior workmanship from the masonry of the rest of the outer foundation walls of Podium B (see Horowitz, Chapter 36, Section C). They are laid in a typical Iron Age header-stretcher arrangement. The corner was built so as to strengthen the walls, which, as noted above, stood at this point to a considerable height. An apparently similar corner, though much less distinctive and constructed of smaller stones, was built at the south-eastern corner of Podium B (Fig. 14.42), now mostly hidden by debris and by the Podium C wall.

Some inner foundation walls of Podium B were also investigated (e.g. Fig. 14.19), especially at the north-eastern corner (Locus 3017), where the base of inner foundation Wall 206 was unearthed (Figs. 14.20; 14.21). These interior foundation walls were constructed of smaller stones than the outer foundation walls. Nevertheless, Wall 206 was structurally bonded to the outer wall (W 202), although its base lay ca. 50 cm. above that of Wall 202. The base of Wall 206 was reinforced by a buttress or ledge extending along its length and about 60 cm. high and 40 cm. wide.

Both the outer and inner foundation walls of Podium B are thicker than those of Podium A. The inner foundation walls of Podium B are generally 2.00-2.50 m. wide. If each foundation wall carried a corresponding (partly brick-built?) wall of the superstructure, and if the thickness of the foundations indicates the height of the superimposed walls, then the building topping Podium B would have risen higher than that topping Podium A. However, as explained above, Podium A may well have carried a more important, better built, and possibly higher rising wing of the edifice. As can be seen in the partiallyrecovered ground plan, the building was divided into rectangular (mostly long and narrow) rooms oriented to the two axes of the structure. Wall 242 apparently transects the structure, dividing it in two. There is no indication in the ground plan of a central ceremonial unit. As in Podium A, nothing is preserved of the superstructure, and the preserved floor sections belong to Palace C.

Four deep probes were made in the constructional fills of Podium B, two in the northern corners(Locus 3017, see Figs. 14.20-14.22; Locus 3005, Figs. 14.23; 14.24) and two (Loci 3026, 3037) in the southern part of the podium. As in the case of Podium A, the debris from the probes contained large numbers of Late Bronze Age sherds, but also some Level V pottery characterized by red-slipped, irregularly burnished sherds. Significantly, in Locus 3026 Level V ware was concentrated in the lowerpart of the fill and Late Bronze Age pottery at a higher level. This reverse stratigraphy indicates thatLevel V debris lying on the mound surface at the time was first excavated and dumped in the foundations,after which the underlying Late Bronze Age debris was brought and dumped over the Level V debris. In Locus 3037 the fill also contained dark grey, ashy material, slag and fragments of clay bellows, evidentlyoriginating from a furnace of an earlier level.

LACHISH, VOLUME II, CHAPTER 14

786 787


786 787

Fig. 14.18: South-western corner of Podium B; from the south-west. Note Enclosure Wall 70 to the left of the Podium.

Fig. 14.19: South-western part of Podium B in 1973; from the north-east. Note Area S in background.


788 789

Fig. 14.20: Eastern part of Podium B; from the north-west. Note Locus 3017 in foreground.

Fig. 14.21: Wall 206, with Rooms 3009 and 3011 to its left and Trench 3017 to its right; from the north-east.


788 789

Fig. 14.22: Trench beneath the foundations of Podia A and B (Locus 3033); from the north-west. Note Wall 202 at left, Wall 206 at right, and Wall 205 in foreground.

Fig. 14.23: Trench 3005 at the north-western corner of Podium B; from the south. Note Wall 204 of Podium B at left and Wall 205 of Podium A at centre.

THE ENTRANCE PORCH

The entrance to Palace B was apparently located at the eastern side of Podium A (Fig. 14.25), at the same place where the entrance porch of Palace C was later constructed. The earlier entrance porch is presently partly covered by the Podium C wall (W 200) and by the later entrance porch, but it can be reconstructed to a large degree. The northern edge of the earlier entrance porch was exposed in Trench 3187 (Figs. 14.26; 14.27). The superimposed northern wall of the later porch (W 9515) extends along a slightly more southerly line and at a slightly different angle, so that the line of the earlier northern porch wall (W 9514) and its corner with the eastern earlier porch wall (W 9516) are not hidden from view. A large part of the later, superimposed porch is now missing, and hence, most of the eastern part of the earlier porch is now exposed. The northern and eastern faces of the earlier porch were built of large, roughly shaped blocks of hard limestone, while smaller stones were incorporated into the core of the structure. The southern part of the earlier porch is covered by the later staircase. It may be assumed that the earlier staircase is located beneath that of the later structure, but no part of it can be seen today.

The earlier entrance porch must have adjoined Wall 201, the eastern exterior wall of Podium A (Fig. 14.25). The earlier porch was exposed at the bottom of superimposed Unit 3174 of Palace C, located between Wall 201 and Wall 200 of Podium C. The part of the porch wall which can be observed in the northern part of Unit 3174, probably the southern face of Wall 9514, indeed adjoins Wall 201. Further


790 791

Fig. 14.24: Trench 3005 at the north-western corner of Podium B; from the west. Note Wall 211 at right.

south, however, it appears that an open space was left between the eastern wall of the earlier porch (W 9516) and Wall 201. To the north and east of this apparently open space the porch walls are of the same thickness, ca. 5 m.

The top surface of the preserved eastern part of the earlier porch is flat and lies at roughly the sameelevation as the top of the western part of the earlier porch at the bottom of Unit 3174. It may be that this surface represents the original level of the porch, which formed here a kind of platform. It is not clear how such a platform, at 269.20-269.50 m., was adapted to the staircase, which assumedly rose to a considerable height to enable access to the Palace B floor, which must have lain at ca. 271.80 m. (as estimated fromthe elevations of walls and Palace C floors at the western part of Podium A; see Fig. 14.8), that is,ca. 1.5 m. higher.

THE RAMPARTS

It appears that Podium A was not encased by ramparts at the time of its construction as was Podium B (see below). The entrance porch along the eastern side of Podium A and the annexed building adjoining its northern side indicate that no ramparts were built along its eastern and northern sides. No rampart can be discerned today along the western side of Podium A, except near its south-western corner (Locus 5410), where the edge of the rampart supporting the western side of Podium B overlaps the adjoining corner. Whether a rampart initially supported the southern side of Podium A, assuming for the moment that Podium A was built earlier than Podium B, apparently cannot be determined, since the builders of Podium B would have simply removed the rampart to enable the construction of an adjoining Podium. At firstglance, the fact that Podium A apparently had no rampart, while Podium B had massive ramparts on its southern and western sides, seems to be an argument against the two podia being built contemporaneously as part of a unified building scheme. However, the difficulty is not actually that Podium A has no rampartsand that Podium B does. The key is that the southern and western sides of Podium B have ramparts (see below), while Podium A and the eastern side of Podium B have (minimal or) no ramparts. The reason for these ramparts can be seen in the fact that the south-western corner of Podium B could not be reached, despite excavating some 11 metres below the level of the palace floors. Hence, it may be suggested thatonly here did the walls of the podium (A or B) reach such a height that the builders felt that reinforcement was necessary.

The western and southern sides of Podium B are encased by massive, sloping constructional fills thatform an artificial ramp. This constructional fill was already noted by Starkey (1933:192-193, Pls. III, VI;1937b:235; Lachish III: 56, 103, 149, caption of Pl. 16:3). On the western side the constructional fills wereexamined by Starkey at the juncture of Podia A and B (Fig. 14.14) and by the renewed excavations in Area S (Locus 5410). The fills on the western side of Podium B showed a uniform character, consisting of mounddebris containing mainly Late Bronze Age pottery, nearly all of Level VI, but also some indicative Level V-IV sherds (see Zimhoni, Chapter 25). At some points diagonal layers could be discerned, indicating that the fill was dumped against the exterior podia walls. The fill laid against the south-western corner ofPodium A and that laid against Podium B appear to be the same, an indication that they were dumped at the same time.

The fills near the south-western corner of Podium B were examined in Area S, and are described indetail by Barkay and Ussishkin in Chapter 9. Here they shall only be briefly surveyed. The upper layers at


790 791


792 793

Fig. 14.25: Plan (1) and schematic representation (2) of the north-eastern end of Podium A and the entrance platform.

1.


792 793

2.


794 795

Fig. 14.26: North-eastern corners of Podia A and C and remains of respective ascending platforms; from the north. Note Locus 3187 in foreground.

Fig. 14.27: North-eastern corners of Podia A and C and remains of respective ascending platforms; from the north-east.

this point had already been cleared by Starkey (Lachish III: 149). As mentioned, the constructional fill waslaid in diagonal layers against the podium wall (W 204) and consisted of mound debris containing mainly Level VI, but also some Level V-IV, pottery. In Locus 5504 (Figs. 9.11; 9.18; 14.8) Iron Age pottery was more frequent in the lower layers of the fill, while Late Bronze Age pottery was typical of the upper layers, aclear case of reverse stratigraphy. The deeply founded Enclosure Wall (W 27, W 70), which extended from the south-western corner Podium B, was largely embedded in the fills and also served to support them. Ata distance of ca. 16 m. from and parallel to the podium wall extended Wall 33, a massive brick wall (Fig. 9.11). Wall 33 joined Enclosure Wall 27, and it is clear that they were constructed as elements of a single plan. The southern end of Wall 33 was uncovered in Area S, but its northern extent is not clear. Wall 33, 3.70 m. wide and 3.70 m. high, was built of bricks, its faces were left unplastered, and it was covered in its entirety by the constructional fills. It was built to support the fills laid against the western side of thepodium, as was Wall 7051, constructed east of the podium for the same purpose (see below). The surface of the rampart sloped from the podium wall towards the Main City Wall and was covered with a thick layer of plaster. Large segments of the plastered rampart (W 74), which nearly reached the city wall, were uncovered in Area S. The plastered surface was preserved above the top of Wall 33, indicating that the wall was preserved in its entirety. Significantly, no remains of drainage channels were found at the bottom ofthe plastered rampart, and it is unclear how the builders dealt with rainwater falling on its surface.

On the southern side of Podium B were dumped massive constructional fills, now mostly coveredby the houses of Levels IV and III. The fills here probably created a sloping rampart as on the westernside. Starkey examined these fills, particularly in Locus [K.16:1031], which produced many significantfinds. In the renewed excavations these fills were studied mainly in connection with the Southern AnnexedBuilding, in particular in Locus 4706, a sounding at the corner of Podium B and the Southern Annexed Building (Figs. 14.8; 14.41). Diagonal layers of fill consisting of mound debris were exposed down to thebase of the exterior Podium B wall (W 247).

On the eastern side the constructional fills were excavated as part of Area D, but will be discussedin the present chapter (Fig. 14.28). Unlike the western and southern sides, where the surface of the fillswas sloped, creating a rampart, the surface of the fill on the eastern side was roughly level, due to thetopographical situation, and also, it is maintained here, due to the massive clearing activities carried out in the area (see below). Hence the surface to the east of the Level IV Palace-Fort formed a kind of piazza in front of the entrances to the edifice and its annexes (Fig. 14.3), a forerunner of the courtyard built inLevel III.

In Squares T-U/12 was uncovered Wall 7051, a massive brick wall oriented north to south (Fig. 14.29). In Square T/12 this wall ends in a corner with brick Wall 7077, oriented east to west. Wall 7077 reaches the western baulk of Square T/11. Both walls are ca. 1 m. wide. Wall 7051 stands to a height of 1 m., while Wall 7077 is ca. 1.25 m. high at its eastern end but becomes progressively lower towards its western end. Neither wall is plastered. Their foundation trenches cut into the Late Bronze Age remains (see Ussishkin, Chapter 7). The foundation trench of Wall 7051 cuts into Level VI Silo 7085 and the overlying brick debris, which can be observed in the southern baulk of Square U/12, visible in the upper right corner of the photograph in Fig. 14.29 (see also section in Fig. 7.3). The construction of Wall 7077 also cut into Level VI Walls 7074 and 7076 of Unit 7059 (see Figs. 7.1; 7.23-7.24). Walls 7051 and 7077 were buried by the constructional fills of Podium B, and it appears that they were built to support the constructionalfill on the eastern side of the podium. It can be assumed that Wall 7077 continued westward beyond the


794 795


796 797

Fig.

14.

28: S

outh

-wes

tern

par

t of t

he c

ourty

ard

(Are

a D

), in

clud

ing

rem

ains

vis

ible

in L

achi

sh II

I: 78

, Fig

. 4.

edge of Square T/11, joining Wall 202, the eastern exterior wall of Podium B. Wall 7051 is functionally parallel to brick Wall 33 to the west of Podium B (see above).

In their sounding at the south-western corner of the courtyard, the British uncovered rooms [K.15:2002-2003] of a structure dating to the Late Bronze Age (Squares V-W/12 in Fig. 14.28; Lachish III: 77-78, 80-81, Pl. 16:6; see also Ussishkin, Chapter 7 and Fig. 7.4). It seems quite possible that the easternmost brick wall found by the British is actually later than the Late Bronze Age building, and could actually be the southward continuation of Wall 7051.1

Two pits, Nos. 7029 and 7030, cut into the Level IV fills near Wall 7051 were uncovered in Square U/12(Fig. 14.30; also section in Fig. 7.3). As they are sealed by the superimposed Level III fills they must dateto Level IV. Two more pits, one of them found filled with stones, cut into the brickwork of Wall 7077(Figs. 7.21-7.22; 7.24).


796 797

Fig. 14.29: Brick Wall 7051, which supported the constructional fill of Podium B (Level IV) inSquare U/12; from the north. Note foundation trench in section to the right of the wall.

1 The difference in axis and orientation between the two walls in Fig. 14.28 might be explained by inaccuracies in coordinating the old and new site plans, or by inaccuracies in the plan of the British expedition.

Also in the sounding of the British expedition mentioned above were uncovered a number of pits cutting into the brick walls of the Late Bronze Age building: ‘After the disuse of the building, several pits [K.15:2001:A-G], were cut through the walls from an Iron Age occupation level...’ (Lachish III: 78). While three of the pits contained pottery dating to the end of the Late Bronze Age, two contained red-slipped, irregularly burnished sherds, indicating that in fact the pits date to no earlier than Level V. If indeed the eastern brick wall of what the British called Room [K.15:2002] is a continuation of Level IV Wall 7051, as suggested above, then at least Pit [K.15:2001:E] must be assigned to Level IV. As all these pits are alike, and are similar in character to the Level IV pits discussed above, it may be suggested that they should be assigned to Level IV. If so, they apparently represent some activity in the piazza at the time of Palace B.

The western edge of Area D (Squares T-U/11) is situated a short distance from the eastern wall of the Palace-Fort, i.e. Wall 200 of Podium C. In order to obtain two sections perpendicular to Wall 200, the northern half of Square U/11 was extended to Wall 200, thus clarifying the stratigraphy of the constructional fills of Podia B and C (Figs. 14.31-14.32). Sections reaching the Podium B wall, of course,could not be obtained, due to the position of Wall 200. The Level IV fill was laid in roughly horizontallayers and was about 1 m. thick. A thin chalky layer marked its upper surface, in one area of which was found a concentration of stones (Fig. 14.33).


798 799

Fig. 14.30: Constructional fill of Podium B (LevelIV) in Square U/12 (Locus 7023); from the south. The two pits cut in the fill date toLevel IV. Note top of brick Wall 7051 at right. (Note that the board shows the locus number of the pit in the foreground.)


798 799

Fig. 14.31: Section in Squares U/10-11 exposing the bottom of Podium C Wall 200; from the east. Sandbags rest on Level III lime floor which islaid on the constructional fill (Locus 7007)of Podium C. Beneath Wall 200 appears the constructional fill of Podium B (Locus 7041),laid above Level VI layers (topped by stones) (Locus 7068).

Fig. 14.32: Probe cutting through the constructional fills of Podia B and C in Square U/11; fromthe east. At left, a sounding in the fill of Level IV Podium B (Locus 7041), topped by alayer of stones. In the section at back, the fill of Level III Podium C (Locus 7007). Notein background the sandbags resting on the Level III lime floor and Wall 200 of Podium C.(Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)

THE NORTHERN ANNEXED BUILDING

A building annexed to the northern wall of Podium A was excavated by the British expedition (Lachish III: 83, 115-116, Pl. 110). The preserved part of the building contained three long, parallel halls which were interpreted as storerooms, stables or chariot houses (Loci [K/L.11:1050], [L.11:1051], [L.11:1052]).

As indicated in the report of the excavation of Area P, the building apparently extended farther north, originally comprising six long units (Figs. 14.3; 14.34). The remains of Iron Age Wall 9501 (Figs. 14.10; 14.35; 14.36) were uncovered beside a kind of terrace in the line of the present surface.2 This wall, ca. 1.70 m. wide, was built of large stones on both faces with smaller stones in between. It was probably the northern exterior wall of the annex. Only the lower part of its eastern segment was preserved, and its western part, including the north-western corner of the building, was missing.

Assuming that Wall 9501 was the northern exterior wall of the annex, there is room to reconstruct three long halls in addition to those uncovered by Starkey. Hall [K/L.11:1050] is ca. 3.40 m. wide and Halls [L.11:1051] and [L.11:1052] are each some 4 m. wide. Between the latter hall and Wall 9501 there is exactly enough space for three halls of 4 m. each, plus two partition walls between them. It can be


800 801

Fig. 14.33: Section showing constructional fill of Podium B(Level IV, Locus 7041) in Squares U/10-11; from the east. Stones at bottom mark the top of the fill of PodiumB. Note Podium C Wall 200 in background.

2 This terrace line betrays the underlying northern end of the Middle Bronze Age palace


800 801

Fig.

14.

34: T

he N

orth

ern

Ann

exed

Bui

ldin

g.

safely assumed that the western wall of the annex was aligned with the western wall of the Palace-Fort, thereby enabling a reconstruction of the entire ground plan of the annex. According to this reconstruction, the building would have been square in plan and identical in size to Podium A. The southern wall of the annex must have been the same length as the northern wall of Podium A, i.e. 32.10 m., while its eastern side measures 32.15 m.

As the surface of the area sloped towards the north, constructional fills were dumped above theBronze Age remains in order to create a more even surface for the Level IV annex. These fills wereinvestigated in Loci 5119 and 5181, soundings next to the inner face of Wall 9501. The fills consistedof mound debris containing Bronze Age pottery, as well as sherds of Levels V and IV, similar to the fillsunderlying other parts of Palace B. In both soundings the fill reached the present surface of the mound atca. 266 m., which is ca. 2 m. lower than the preserved floors of the three southern units of the building.Further, a surface examination of the area where the north-western corner of the annex must have stood failed to reveal any related walls or stones, although the corner must have been massive due to the steep north-western slope. It must be assumed either that the northern part of the building was lower than its southern part (as reconstructed in the section in Fig. 14.10), or that large amounts of stone and earth were removed from the area in Levels II-I.

In the preserved southern part of the annex the eastern façade, which contains the entrances to the halls, is aligned with the eastern façade of Podium A, and the eastern façade of the northern part of the building certainly would have followed the same line. However, the preserved segment of the northern exterior wall (W 9501) extends some distance, more than 2 m., beyond the assumed line of the façade. A sounding (Locus 7033) was cut near the eastern edge of the preserved part of the wall (Fig. 14.37), but no further remains associated with the wall were uncovered. It is suggested that this wall originally extended eastward for another metre or so, and that its edge may have aligned with the eastern side of the entrance platform of Podium A, discussed above, in which case a kind of forecourt would have been created in front of the entrances to the halls of the annex, with Wall 9501 and the entrance platform flanking the forecourton the northern and southern sides, respectively.

The Northern Annexed Building must have been constructed when Podium A was already standing, and may have continued in use even after the destruction of Palace C. The question is, therefore, whether it was constructed as part of Palace B or Palace C. Tufnell thought that the building formed part of Palace B. Since its façade aligns with the façade of Podia A and B rather than with that of Podium C, and since the dimensions of its restored ground plan are identical to those of Podium A, it seems that her conclusion is correct.

THE SOUTHERN ANNEXED BUILDING (Fig. 14.38)

The Southern Annexed Building of Level IV was investigated by Starkey, who labelled it the ‘government storehouse’, while the overlying Southern Annexed Building of Level III he termed Building 1034 (Starkey 1937b:237-238, Pl. VI: Fig. 1; Lachish III: 53, 61, 78: Figs. 4, 80-83, 104: Locus [1034]; 113: Locus [1034]; Pls. 16:4, 6; 115).

The north-western corner of the so-called government storehouse (i.e. the Southern Annexed Building of Level IV) abuts the south-eastern corner of Podium B (Figs. 14.38; 14.39). The stratigraphic relationship between the structures is the key to the date of the government storehouse. Tufnell (Lachish III: 53, 80) implies


802


802

Fig. 14.35: Wall 9501, the northern exterior wall of the Northern Annexed Building; from the north. Note Area P and Podium A in background.

Fig. 14.36: Wall 9501, the northern exterior wall of the Northern Annexed Building; from the west. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)

Fig. 14.37: Locus 7033, a probe intended to expose the continuation of Wall 9501, the northern wall of the Northern Annexed Building; from the east. Wall in foreground is undated. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)


804 1.


804 Fig.

14.

38: T

he S

outh

ern

Ann

exed

Bui

ldin

g: (1

) As

unco

vere

d by

the

Brit

ish

expe

ditio

n, a

fter L

achi

sh II

I: Pl

. 115

; (2)

As

unco

vere

d in

the

rene

wed

ex

cava

tions

; the

pla

n in

clud

es re

mai

ns p

ublis

hed

in L

achi

sh II

I: Pl

s. 11

4-11

5.

2.missing pic

that the northern external wall of the government storehouse (which she mistakenly thought was connected to the Enclosure Wall stretching to the west of the Palace-Fort) underlies the southern foundation wall of Podium B. However, she did not explicitly state so, nor is such a stratigraphic superposition shown in any photograph or plan. In any case, if such were the case, it would mean that the Southern Annexed Building would belong to Level V. In order to better analyse the issue, the renewed excavations cut a probe trench (Locus 4706) at the juncture of the buildings, demonstrating that the western wall of the government storehouse (W 800) abuts the outer foundation wall of Podium B (W 247) and suggesting that both were built according to a unified plan (Fig. 14.41). Thus it is clear that the government storehouse belongs toLevel IV.

The government storehouse was erected on a podium, in which it resembles adjoining Palace B. Since this podium was built on sloping ground, its construction was not uniform on all four sides, as was observed in the four probe trenches (Loci 3622, 4706, 4710, 4712). The south-western corner, reaching farther down the slope than any other part of the structure, is the most strongly built. This corner was unearthed by Starkey (Fig. 14.39) and was shown in a published photograph (Lachish III: Pl. 16:4), but it was omitted from the plans (ibid.: 78, Fig. 4, Pl. 115). The renewed excavations recleared the corner (Locus 3622; Fig. 14.40), revealing that the brick foundation walls of the building rested on massive foundations built of large, roughly squared, hammer-dressed stones. The stone foundations were 1.00-1.30 m. thick, and, though excavation in Locus 3622 reached an 263.30 m., the base of the corner stone was not reached. The foundations were constructed over an earlier wall element which could not be fully differentiated due to the limited exposure of the narrow trench. These earlier walls may have been associated with a few red-slipped, irregularly burnished pottery fragments found nearby, and should be dated to Level V, or possibly even Level VI.

In Locus 4706 the northern section of the western foundation wall of the government storehouse (W 800) was uncovered (Fig. 14.41), where its base rested at 264.93 m., similar to the elevation of the base of adjoining Podium B. The wall rested above an earlier, thick brick wall, possibly a continuation of the massive Late Bronze Age building nearby, partly uncovered by Starkey (Loci [K.15:2002]-[K.15:2003]; see Fig. 14.28; also Ussishkin, Chapter 7 and Fig. 7.4). Wall 800 was constructed of well-laid bricks, and its outer face was plastered with a thick layer of clay or mud. In contrast to the southern corner of the wall, its northern section was not built on stone foundations.

The third trial trench (Locus 4712) was cut in the north-eastern corner of the structure (Fig. 14.38; also Lachish III: Pl. 115). The northern, outer wall of the building (W 801) rested upon Late Bronze Age debris at 267.10 m. Only a single course of the brick-constructed wall, which had no stone foundation, was preserved below the present surface of the mound. The eastern wall of the building shown on Starkey’s plan (W 821) was not detected in the renewed excavations.

No further remains of the government storehouse were discerned by Starkey or in the renewed excavations to the east of Wall 821, which, it may be assumed, served as the eastern exterior wall of the building. The fact that the eastern wall (W 821) is slightly narrower than the other external walls (W 800, W 801, W 802), but similar to that of the thick internal wall (W 824) which bisects the building, might be taken as an indication that another unit or units extended to the east of the preserved building, but this seems unlikely. Had it done so, one would have expected some remains of the eastern continuation of the structure to have been uncovered in the excavations.

Starkey discovered no floors in the building, stating that they apparently ‘rested on a mass of


806 807

constructional rubble consisting of town debris, which had been thrown in from north to south’ (1937b:237). In order to examine the constructional fill and floors, a fourth trial trench was cut inside the north-western corner of the building (Locus 4710; Fig. 14.42), confirming Starkey’s observations. It is clearthat the preserved remains of the building, consisting of only the raised foundation walls, are all sub floorlevel. Significantly, the top of the fill reached 267.20 m. in Locus 4710, and thus, the floor of the buildingmust have lain at a higher level yet. The fill consisted of mound debris similar to that of the fill of PodiumB and the surrounding constructional fill, and it contained large amounts of Late Bronze and Iron Agepottery. The red-slipped, irregularly burnished pottery recovered by the British (Lachish III: 80-83, Pl. 105) was one of the reasons that they assigned the structure to Level V, but it is now apparent that the pottery belongs to the foundation fill.

The ground plan of the government storehouse, which is similar to that of the overlying Level III annex (see below), can easily be restored (Fig. 14.3). The building comprised two rectangular units of equal size, demarcated by thick walls. The eastern unit is subdivided by two thinner walls into three long rooms. No inner walls were found in the western unit, but on the basis of the identical overlying Level III unit, it can be safely assumed that the western unit was similarly subdivided into three long rooms. Since the building was not preserved above its foundation walls, no entrances or floor were discovered. It maybe assumed, however, that the entrances to the two units were on the northern side, as were those of the overlying Level III annex.

As the structure is comprised of units of the same ground plan and measurements as those of the overlying Level III annex, it seems that the buildings would have served similar purposes. Since the superimposed Level III building appears to have served as horse stables (see below), it may be surmised that the similar structure of Level IV performed the same function.

LEVEL III: THE PALACE C COMPOUND

THE PALACE-FORT

In Level III the existing podium comprised of Podia A and B was enlarged to enable the construction of a larger building, Palace C. A massive foundation wall, 77.50 m. long and 3.40 m. thick (W 200), was added along the entire eastern side of the podium (Figs. 14.8; 14.16). At the south-eastern corner (Fig. 14.42), the foundations of the newly added wall rested at 267.40 m., much higher than those of Podium B at this point. The bottom of Wall 200 was also exposed in Square U/10 (Locus 7041), where it overlay the Level IV constructional fill, the top of which lay at 267.80 m. (Fig. 14.31). As the fill was probably laid againstthe lower part of the exterior wall of Podium B (W 202), it may be assumed that Podium C Wall 200 was laid at a higher level than the adjoining Podium B wall.

Palace C would have been constructed on the enlarged podium, now 75.55-76.65 m. long and 35.50-36.80 m. wide, thus covering an area of no less than ca. 2736 square metres. However, later preparations for the construction of the Residency cleared away all remains of the superstructure of Palace C, leaving only large segments of lime-plastered flooring, uncovered and recorded by Starkey (Lachish III: 83-84, Pl.118). These floor segments and the associated foundation walls were examined afresh during the courseof the renewed excavations. Evidently, with the construction of Palace C a radical change took place in


806 807

Fig. 14.39: Western end of the so-called government storehouse (i.e. the Southern Annexed Building of Level IV) and Building 1034, on 29 April 1937; from the south-west.

Fig. 14.40: South-western corner of the Southern Annexed Building (Walls 800 and 802) and Locus 3622; from the south-west.

Fig. 14.41: (1) Trench 4706; from the south-west. Note Wall 247 of Podium B at left and Wall 800 of the Level IV Southern Annexed Building at right; note further the remains of a British trench cut along the face of Wall 247. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.); (2) Section at the eastern side of Trench 4706.

Fig. 14.42: South-eastern corner of Podia B-C; Trench 4710 in foundation fill of the Southern Annexed Building;from the south-east.

the planning and structure of the Palace-Fort, although the location of the entrance remained the same. It is assumed here, as discussed above, that the inner walls of Podia A and B carried the walls of the Palace B superstructure. If this assumption is correct, then many walls of Podia A and B, found to have been covered by the remains of Palace C floors, must have been dismantled at this time. In a probe near the north-westerncorner of Podium B (Locus 3005), the lime floor of Palace C covered the debris-filled pits which indicatedwhere the stones of the southern exterior foundation wall (W 205) of Podium A had been quarried (Figs. 14.23; 14.24). It follows that Wall 205 must have been robbed out either following the destruction of Palace B or during the constructing of Palace C. In any case, the wall served no purpose at the time of Palace C. At the same time, numerous walls were added in different sections of the podia.

If the interior walls of Podia A and B serve as indicators for the ground plan of Palace B, then it lacked the central ceremonial component one would expect (Fig. 14.3). In Palace C, however, a large area in the southern part of Podium A and the northern part of Podium B was covered with the remains of lime-plaster flooring (Figs. 14.4; 14.43), perhaps indicating the existence of a ceremonial court adjoining the newmonumental entrance. In some spots more than a single layer of plaster could be discerned (Fig. 14.44). Significantly, in the southern part of the plastered area was cleared a stone step, or threshold, adjoining alime-plastered floor segment (Locus 3055; probably Starkey’s Floor Patch L) laid at a slightly higher levelthan the contemporary flooring remains to its north (Fig. 14.45). The difference in level had already beennoted by Tufnell, who suggested that ‘… the difference … would allow for a rise of two steps towards the main apartments’ (Lachish III: 84).

Changes were also made in the large Level IV unit which underlay Level III Loci 3025 and 3034


810 811

Fig. 14.43: Lime-plastered floor of Palace C on Podium A; from the south-west.


810 811

Fig. 14.44: Section showing layers of lime-plastered flooring of Palace C on Podium A in SquaresL-M/6-7; from the south.

Fig. 14.45: Palace C lime-plastered floor Segments 3055 on Podium B; from the east. NoteWall 830 in foreground.

(Fig. 14.25; see discussion under Locus 3025). The larger, square unit of Podium B was subdivided into smaller, rectangular rooms (Loci 3025, 3034) by the addition of a thick stone wall (W 216). Newly added Wall 216 joined Wall 217 at the southern edge of the unit, and the latter was thickened on its northern side, and a layer of debris separated Wall 216 and the underlying ‘bench’ (W 219) of Podium B (Fig. 14.46). As seen in the sounding in the southern part of Locus 3025 (Fig. 14.47), Wall 216 was based on a layer of bricks, perhaps laid as a soling above the earlier constructional fill.

Since the later Residency did not extend as far as the southern part of Podium B (labelled AG by Starkey), some poor remains of the Palace C superstructure were preserved in the area. The renewed excavations’ trench in the foundations of the podium in Locus 3026 (Fig. 14.8) revealed that Wall 222 probably belongs to Palace C, as its base was set relatively high (Fig. 14.48). The top layer of the fill in thislocus contained many pieces of carbonized wood, the charred remains of several, probably five, beams ofolive wood. These beams were laid side by side at the top of the fill, their ends lying on the stones of thenewly built foundation wall (W 222), apparently as a support for the floor. In situ remains of a few brickswere found on the foundation wall, and a few more were found near the corner of Walls 223 and 242. These groups of bricks, the only in situ bricks of the superstructure of Palace C, appear in Starkey’s plan as Floor Patches B, D and E (Lachish III: Pl. 118). Nearby, on the present surface south of Wall 248 (Locus 3041), were found heaps of partly burnt bricks which had collapsed from the walls. Finally, it should be mentioned that two square features, each built of relatively large, hammer-dressed stones and which appear to constitute a portion of the superstructure’s first course, were preserved on top of foundation Walls 222and 223 on both sides of the probe in Locus 3026 (Fig. 14.49). The western feature is 2.20 m. wide and 45 cm. high. Nothing is known about the nature of the structure above these stones.

Palace C was destroyed by a severe fire at the end of Level III. Starkey found a ‘thick carbon deposit’on the floors (Starkey 1937a:175) and burnt debris accumulated against the eastern and southern walls ofthe edifice. The pottery from the preserved floor sections and other surfaces of the podium consisted ofmany fragments of lmlk storage jars, including numerous stamped handles, but had been disturbed by the later construction of the Residency. When the surfaces were recleared during the course of the renewed excavations, many fragments of such storage jars and even a few impressed handles were still to be found. In Locus 3025 was discovered a cache of bowls, the only complete vessels found in the Palace-Fort. They were found in the northern part of the unit, smashed in the debris above the ‘bench’ and beneath the surface of the podium (Fig. 14.46), i.e. the floor level of Palace C. Typologically the bowls might best be assigned tothe assemblage of Level IV, i.e. to Palace B (see Fig. 25.42:1-27), but stratigraphically they seem to belong to Level III Palace C (see Locus 3025, below). Finally, brick material and burnt brick debris, remains of the destruction, were found in the long gap in extended Podium C (Locus 3174; Fig. 14.8), which Starkey had noted ‘was filled with burnt rubble, and particularly with burnt brick’ (Lachish III: 86).

THE ENTRANCE PORCH

The main, and probably sole, Palace C entrance was situated on its eastern side and led from the newly built lime-plastered courtyard. The staircase and porch leading from the courtyard to the raised floor level of thebuilding proper were investigated by the British expedition (Lachish III: 85-86, 118: Locus [L.13:1063]; Pls. 18, 117). Parts of the staircase and porch were examined anew by the renewed excavations and they were recleared entirely in 1993 as part of the preparations to turn Tel Lachish into a national park (Fig. 14.25).


812


812

Fig. 14.46: Stone bench at the northern part of Room 3025; from the south-east. Note Wall 216 of Level III at left.

Fig. 14.47: Trench at the southern part of Room 3025; from the north-east. Note Wall 201 at left, Wall 217 at centre and Wall 216 at right. Note also layer of bricks beneath Wall 216.


815

Fig. 14.48: Trench 3026; from the west. Note ash remains of wooden beams on Wall 222 at centre, and Wall 242 at left.

Fig. 14.49: Square stone features against Walls 222 and 223, with Trench 3026 between them; from the west.

The Palace C platform extends farther eastward than the earlier Palace B platform, and hence, is laid partially above the earlier, partially beside it (Locus 3201; see Figs. 14.26; 14.27). Significantly, the widthof the two platforms is very similar: The distance from the eastern face of the earlier platform (W 9516) to the eastern face of Podium B (W 201) is ca. 6 m., the same as the distance from the eastern face of the later platform to the face of Podium C Wall 200. As the length of the earlier podium is unknown, their lengths cannot be compared, but they could well have been the same.

The slabs for the stairs at the southern end of the platform were cut from soft limestone or chalk and thus deteriorated quickly. The British expedition uncovered remains of three superimposed sets of stairs, indicating that the worn steps had often been replaced. The lower steps of the latest stairway were uncovered in very good condition (Fig. 14.50), but were left exposed at the end of the British expedition, accounting for their pitiable condition when cleaned afresh in 1993 (Fig. 14.51). The work of the renewed excavations enabled the preparation of a more accurate ground plan of the platform and staircase (Fig. 14.25) than that published by Tufnell (Lachish III: Pl. 117).

An interesting constructional detail in the staircase should be mentioned. Most of its stone slabs, left uncovered at the close of the 1938 excavations, were subsequently removed by vandals, and in 1946 they were restored to their original positions by D.C. Baramki, Inspector of Antiquities. In his report to the Director of Antiquities, dated 27.7.1946, he wrote, ‘An interesting discovery was made while replacing the stones; the back of each slab was deeply notched at the back up to the point where the edge of the superimposed slab extended.’ The removal of the stones thus revealed the notches, a device apparently used by the builders in an attempt to position the slabs as accurately as possible.

Finally, Tufnell discovered a short inscription (see Lemaire, Chapter 29, Section A, Inscription XX-D) and graffiti engraved on a stone slab of one of the earlier staircases, which was left in position. In 1993the top of this staircase was uncovered, but the inscribed stone slab, not marked in the British excavation plans, was apparently never reached.

THE SOUTHERN ANNEXED BUILDING

The Southern Annexed Building of Palace C was rebuilt, enlarged towards the east and functionally expanded (Figs. 14.4; 14.38; 14.53). It too apparently consisted of units divided longitudinally into three sub-units, as in the earlier building. The new structure, however, consisted of four such similarly sized units. The two westernmost units were largely superimposed over the ground plan of their predecessor, while the two easternmost lie to the east of an intervening gate structure, which served as the main gate to the palace compound.

The western wing of the building, comprised of two units, was excavated by Starkey, who labelled it Building 1034 (see refs. related to the government storehouse, i.e. the Southern Annexed Building of Level IV, above). The stone walls of the new structure were based upon the brick walls of the so-called government storehouse (Figs. 14.39; 14.40; 14.42). Most of the walls uncovered by Starkey could still be traced in the renewed excavations, and a segment of a narrow stone partition wall (W 823) in the westernmost unit, unmarked on the plan of the British expedition, was also detected. Although the southern exterior wall of the building was not preserved, it can be safely reconstructed on the assumption that it stood flush with the southern exterior wall (W 802) of the underlying Level IV annex, which was preservednear the south-western corner.


815


817

Fig. 14.50: Palace C staircase in 1938; from the south-west (Lachish III: Pl. 18:2).

Fig. 14.51: Palace C staircase after being recleared in 1994; from the south-east.

In the northern wall an entrance leading into the central sub-unit of the westernmost unit was identified. The entrance was marked by larger, roughly shaped boulders forming jambs. The jambs restedon the bottom course of the stone wall, made of smaller stones, which also formed the threshold. The entrance can be observed in Lachish III (eastern jamb in Pl. 115, both jambs in Pl. 17:2), and in fact, one of the roughly shaped boulders of the left jamb, clearly visible in the photograph in Lachish III, can be identified in Fig. 14.42 between the corner of Podium C and the person standing next to it. The locationof the entrance shows that the units of the annex opened into the courtyard to the north. As was the case with its predecessor, no floors were detected in the Southern Annexed Building.

The central gate structure and the eastern wing of the Southern Annexed Building were uncovered in the renewed excavations in 1981 and 1993 (Fig. 14.1).3 Their remains lay partially exposed on the surface and must have been uncovered to some extent by Starkey. Very little was preserved of the eastern wing, and its reconstruction is largely conjectural. However, the central part of the building was moderately well preserved, and the main gate to the Palace C compound may be confidently reconstructed (Figs. 14.52; 14.53).

The gate occupies roughly the central portion of the Southern Annexed Building. It appears to have been of the six-chambered type, with a ground plan similar to that of the inner city-gate of Levels IV-III


817

Fig. 14.52: Area D at the end of the 1981 season; from the south-east.

3 In 1993 further excavation and some restoration work on the walls were carried out as part of the preparations to turn Lachish into a national park. A path enabling the visitor to enter the compound of the Judean Palace-Fort through its main gate has been planned (see Belkin, Appendix, Section A and Fig. 1).


818 819

Fig. 14.53: Reconstructed plan of the gate to the courtyard enclosure.

(Fig. 14.53). It is only slightly smaller (ca. 22.50 m. long and ca. 21 m. wide) than the inner city-gate (25 m. long and 24.50 m. wide), and both are nearly square. However, in contrast to the massive foundations of the inner city-gate, this gate has hardly any foundations at all.

The northern entry and the northern walls of the gate’s façade (Walls 810 and 814) align with the northern façade of Building 1034, in effect a continuation of the latter (W 801; see Fig. 14.54), and the gateway’s southern façade probably would have been flush with the southern façade of the annex. Thewidth of the Level IV annex, measured from its north-western to its south-western corner, is 23 m. Thus, the width of the Level III annex, and accordingly, the length of the gateway, are reconstructed as 23 m. As will be shown below, the internal division of the gateway into chambers of equal size suits perfectly the proposed measurements. On the other hand, the length of the gateway was quite possibly slightly less, since the southern exterior wall of the earlier Level IV building (Wall 802) was not exactly parallel to its northern exterior wall (Wall 801).


818 819

Fig. 14.54: Wall 810; from the east. Note Locus 4827 at right.

The northern gate portal, especially its western pier at the end of Wall 810, was the best preserved part of the gateway (Figs. 14.55-14.57). It retained two courses of stones, the upper constructed of large blocks purposely placed in the façade of the pier. The pier enables the reconstruction of the opposite, eastern pier, the poorly preserved end of Wall 814, and thus, the width of the gate passage. The bottom course of small stones of Wall 814 was only partially preserved, and the jamb of the pier was entirely missing (Figs. 14.58; 14.59). A segment of lime flooring was preserved near where the pier would havebeen (Fig. 14.58). Indeed, the entire gate passage was lime-plastered, as indicated by remnants in a number of places (Locus 4846).

Remains of two sleeper walls (W 811 and 815) flanking the gate passage were also uncovered (Figs.14.60; 14.61). Their junctures with the northern walls of the gate (W 810 and 814) were intact, indicating that the piers of the northern portal projected past the lines of the sleeper walls, narrowing the gate passage. Some parts of the second and third pairs of piers (Walls 812, 816, 817, 848) were also preserved (Fig. 14.62), and in a manner which apparently indicates that their façades would have been flush with thesleeper walls. A large, roughly squared stone block was found in situ on the sleeper wall near its junction (Fig. 14.61) with the second pier from the north in the eastern side of the gate (W 812). In the western side of the gate the junction of the central pier (W 848) and the sleeper wall (W 811) was well preserved (Figs. 14.63; 14.64). It may be assumed that the six chambers created by the four sets of piers were open facing the gate passage, the sleeper walls (Walls 811 and 815) serving as raised thresholds in the entrances to the chambers.

No outermost pair of piers were discerned, but as explained above, it is assumed that they would have been flush with the southern wall of the building.4 The width of the outer entrance was probably similar tothat of the inner entrance, i.e. ca. 4 m. Significantly, as the gate’s interior piers were flush with the sleeperwalls, the distance between them was greater than that between the gate’s outer piers, an arrangement similar to that in the Levels IV-III inner city-gate (Figs. 12.12; 12.18).

Very little remained of the eastern- and westernmost lateral walls of the gate. A few stones were uncovered that might indicate the line of its eastern wall, such as a concentration of stones (in Locus 4850) probably forming part of Wall 911 on the western side (Fig. 14.65). Nonetheless, it seems that the extant remains provide sufficient data to confidently reconstruct three chambers at each side of the gate passage(Fig. 14.53). A fourth chamber of similar size may be conjectured to have been situated on either side of the southern portal. Though practically nothing of them remains, they presumably would have formed towers which flanked a forecourt in front of the portal.

The reconstruction of the gateway to the palace compound seems to be reliable, although, admittedly, it is based on rather scant remains. The walls, which apparently ranged between 1.00-1.50 m. in width, would have been founded on one or more courses of small stones, which served as a bedding or foundation and were laid directly on the surface. The fact that the lime flooring in the gate area lay at practically thesame elevation as these sub-courses of small stones is another indication that the gate structure, like other parts of the building, had hardly any foundations. Most of the walls of the structure are represented solely by these lowermost sub-courses. The lower courses of the walls themselves were probably constructed of larger blocks, like those employed for the northernmost western pier (as well as for the entrance to the


820 821

4 Excavation in this area (Locus 8020; Fig. 14.85) uncovered several walls already partially exposed by the British. It seems, however, that all of them are earlier in date and unrelated to the Southern Annexed Building and its gate.


820 821

Fig. 14.55: Western pier of the northern portal of the gate; from the east. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)

Fig. 14.56: Western pier of the northern portal of the gate; from the south. Note Wall 811 in foreground. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)

Fig. 14.57: Western pier of the northern portal of the gate, with Locus 4827 in foreground; from the north. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)


822 823

Fig. 14.58: Remains of the eastern pier of the northern portal of the gate; from the east. Note segment of lime flooring in the gate passage at left.

Fig. 14.59: Segment of Wall 814 of the gate, adjoining segment of Sleeper Wall 815 at left; from the south. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)


822 823

Fig. 14.60: The gate passage (Locus 4846); from the south.

Fig. 14.61: Remains of Wall 815 of the gate; from the south. Note part of gate passage with preserved segment of lime flooringat left, and the junction of Walls 812 and 815 at right. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)


824 825

Fig. 14.62: Remains of Wall 816 of the gate; from the south.

Fig. 14.63: Junction between Walls 811 and 848 (Locus 4849); from the south.


824 825

Fig. 14.64: Junction between Walls 811 and 848 (Locus 4849); from the west.

Fig. 14.65: Remains of Wall 911, the enclosing wall of the gate on the western side, and adjoining segment of lime floor (Locus 4850); from the south.

westernmost unit of the Southern Annexed Building, discussed above). No direct evidence is available about the upper part of the superstructure, but comparison with other such gate structures suggests that it may have been built of brick.

At this point should be mentioned the space between the restored westernmost wall of the gate (W 911) and the wall which presumably extended along and above Level IV Wall 821, i.e. the eastern wall of the structure’s western units. As it seems, a hall ca. 19 m. long and 4 m. wide was situated in this area. Excavation in the north of this area (Locus 4850 in Square X/15; Fig. 14.66) uncovered a circle of stones, an installation of indeterminate nature, perhaps a column base. It resembles the features which may perhaps be column bases of Level VI, uncovered in the cella of the Level VI temple in Area P (Locus 3153 in Square J/7) and Area D (Locus 7039 in Square T/13) (see Ussishkin, Chapters 6 and 7, respectively). Hence, the feature in Locus 4850, situated beneath the floor level of the Level III annex, perhaps shouldbe dated to Level VI.

Hardly anything remains of the eastern wing of the Level III annex. A sounding in Square AA/21 (Locus 4803), located along the projected line of Wall 802, the southern exterior wall of the annex, yielded no trace of the expected structure. Similarly, three soundings (Loci 4818, 4824, 4828) along the line of the northern external wall (W 814) showed that the wall had been entirely destroyed (Fig. 14.67). A square feature comprised of large worked stones (W 827) was also uncovered (Fig. 14.68). It originally abutted the northern face of Wall 814, now completely missing at this point. The function of the feature is not clear. During excavation of the building in 1981, a similar feature was discovered beside its external wall, to the west of the gate, and it appeared that this feature was constructed in parallel with Wall 827 (Preliminary Report II: 151, Fig. 24). In 1987, however, it became clear that the second feature, assumed at the time to be a buttress, is in fact a wall dating to Level I (Wall 7064 in Square W/14; see Fig. 14.28).


826 827

Fig. 14.66: Square X/15 (Locus 4850); from the south. Note the stone installation. (Note that the locus number shown on the board is obsolete.)


826 827

Fig. 14.67: Trench 4818; from the south.

Fig. 14.68: Wall 827; from the south.

The eastern exterior wall of the Level III building is restored in continuation of the extant segment of the eastern courtyard wall (W 813), to be discussed below (see restored plan in Fig. 14.4). Restoring the wall of the building along this line enables the restoration of two units—similar in size to those of the building’s western wing—between the gate and the eastern edge of the building. If this restoration is correct, the Southern Annexed Building of Level III would have contained four units, two along its western side and two along its eastern, with the gate in the centre. In addition, a much narrower unit would have been located between the gate and the units of the western wing. As indicated by the doorway in the westernmost unit, the entryways to the units were almost certainly located on the northern side of the structure, facing the courtyard.

To conclude the discussion of the Southern Annexed Building, the approach road should be addressed. It appears that the gateway’s location in the centre of the building is by no means accidental. The street leading in a straight line up from the city-gate reached the area immediately in front of the gateway (Figs. 2.9; 12.37). There must have been a small piazza at this point, where one turned 45° northward in order to enter the compound. Some remains of the lime-plastered road leading to the gate were uncovered by the British expedition (see Fig. 14.38; Lachish III: 94-95, 110-111, Loci [J.16/K.16:1014], [K.17:1020], [K.16:1021], [J.16:1022]; Pls.114-115), two plastered floor segments extending up to the southern wall ofthe structure were found near the gateway’s south-western corner (Loci [J.16/K.14:1014], [J.16:1022]), and a segment of drain was found beneath the plastered road.

THE COURTYARD OF THE COMPOUND

As part of the construction of Level III Palace C, a large courtyard was built in front of the Palace-Fort and its annexes (Fig. 14.4). The courtyard was apparently enclosed on its eastern and northern sides by a stone wall. A segment of the eastern wall (W 813), which was exposed on the surface, was identified during therenewed excavations in Squares T-U/24 (Figs. 14.38; 14.69; also visible in air photograph in Fig. 14.1). The wall was preserved for a length of ca. 9 m. Nearly 2 m. thick, the wall consists of one course of large stones on each of its faces, the space between probably having been filled with smaller stones. A probe wascut on either side of the wall (Locus 4808; Fig. 14.70), enabling the verification of the suggestion that itsfoundations penetrate no deeper. No flooring remains were discovered on either side of the wall, perhapsindicating that the preserved remains comprised sub-floor foundations.

The north-eastern corner of the courtyard’s wall was apparently discovered during Aharoni’s excavations in the area of the Solar Shrine. Although he did not know to what the corner belonged, he suggested that ‘it may be associated with the planning of the citadel area’ (Lachish V: 12, 41, Pls. 58-59). Since the ground sloped at this point towards the outer periphery of the mound, the corner was constructed as a retaining wall and faced with relatively large stones. Aharoni’s team traced the northern wall for about 5 m. and the eastern wall for more than 18 m. from the corner. A paved surface adjoined the walls’ exteriors, or in Aharoni’s words, there were ‘several pavements made of pebbles and small sherds’ (Lachish V: 12, Pl. 4:3). Further, traces of a terrace and a line of stones marking the position of a wall visible on the present surface may mark the line of the northern wall of the courtyard enclosure. Finally, it must be noted that the eastern wall segment described above (W 813) and the north-eastern corner, both apparently forming parts of the courtyard wall, do not align exactly (see Fig. 14.4). At any rate, it seems that the wall must have contained deviations, perhaps resulting from mistakes in measuring the line of the eastern wall. It is


828 829


828 829

Fig. 14.69: Wall 813, a segment of the eastern enclosing wall of the courtyard; from the south-east. Note courtyard and the Palace-Fort in background.

Fig. 14.70: Trench 4808 on either side of Wall 813, the enclosing wall of the courtyard; from the east.

assumed here that it joined the extant eastern end of Level IV Wall 9501, the northern exterior wall of the Northern Annexed Building (see above).

Starkey uncovered the lime-plastered courtyard, the flooring of which was largely destroyed whenmany pits were cut into it in Level I (Lachish III: 151-158, Pls. 115-116). Segments of the lime-plastered floors, particularly near the Palace-Fort, are still preserved, and the renewed excavations exposed segmentsof it in the south-western corner of the courtyard (see Fig. 14.28: Loci 7005 in Square V/14; 7007 in Squares U/11-12; 7011 in Squares T/11-12; 7038 in Square W/14). Significantly, more than one layer ofplastering was uncovered in several places, indicating that the floor of the courtyard was renewed fromtime to time (Fig. 14.71).

Clearly, the builders intended to create a level courtyard. As the pre-construction surface was not entirely flat, they filled in the lower areas with debris. Thus in Square V/14 the Level III plastered floor(Locus 7005) was laid nearly level with the tops of underlying Walls 7045 and 7115 of the MB I cult place (see Figs. 7.8; 7.13). In Squares U/11-12 (Locus 7007), in comparison, considerable constructional fill, ca.1.2 m. thick, was laid above the earlier Level IV fill (Locus 7041), forming a soling for the Level III floor,and at the same time supporting the lower part of Wall 200 of Palace C (Figs. 7.3; 14.31; 14.32).


830 831

Fig. 14.71: Courtyard floor in Square T/11 (Locus 7011), showing layers of lime flooring; from theeast. Note Podium C Wall 200 in background.

NOTES ON THE PALACE-FORT COMPLEX

THE FUNCTION OF THE ANNEXES AND THE COURTYARD

The Southern Annexed Buildings of Palaces B and C resemble the so-called stable compounds at Tel Megiddo (Lamon and Shipton 1939:32-47) and the structure labelled the storehouse at Tel Beer-Sheba (Herzog 1973:23-30). All three contain rectangular units, each divided into three sub-units. The internal measurements of the units at Tel Lachish are ca. 20.35×10 m., nearly identical to the units of Building 364 in the northern complex at Tel Megiddo, the internal measurements of which are 20×9 m. The internal measurements of the units in the southern compound at Tel Megiddo are slightly greater, ca. 26.6×10.5 m., while the units in the Tel Beer-Sheba structure are slightly smaller. Neither Lachish structure, i.e. the Level IV and III Southern Annexed Buildings, was preserved above its foundations, but it may be assumed that they should be restored similarly to the buildings at Tel Megiddo and Tel Beer-Sheba. Based on the partly preserved foundation walls, one may conclude that two rows of pillars would have separated each unit into three sub-units. Low partition walls containing stone mangers probably extended between the pillars. The lateral sub-units would have been stone-paved, the central unit lime plastered, and the entrance would have led into the central sub-unit.

The Megiddo buildings were identified by the excavators, Guy, Lamon and Shipton, as horsestables (Guy 1931:37-42; Lamon and Shipton 1939:32-47). This suggestion was contested by Pritchard (1970), Aharoni (1973:14-15), Herzog (1973; 1992), who interpreted the building at Tel Beer-Sheba as a storehouse, Fritz (1977) and Herr (1988), who suggested identifying them as market-places. Yadin (1976) and Holladay (1986) sided with the Megiddo excavators, presenting detailed argumentation for the identification of the Megiddo and Beer-Sheba buildings as stables, and their views are adopted here as thebasis for assuming that the Southern Annexes of both Palaces B and C functioned as horse stables.

With the limited data available, it is difficult to calculate exactly the number of horses kept in eachstabling unit at Lachish. Lamon and Shipton (1939:43) calculated that each unit in Building 364 at Megiddo could have stabled 24 horses, determined according to the number of pillars in the unit, assuming that each pillar and its adjoining manger marked a stall for one horse. In the building in Tel Beer-Sheba, however, the distance between the pillars, and hence the stalls, are somewhat smaller. On the basis of comparison with the Tel Megiddo and Tel Beer-Sheba units, it appears that each unit at Lachish could have stabled some 25 horses.

The stable complexes from the various sites may be divided into two categories: 1) those which are located near the city-gate and do not adjoin a courtyard, such as the northern complex at Megiddo and that at Tel Beer-Sheba (also relevant is the stable with a different ground plan near the city-gate at Tel Miqne, ancient Ekron, surveyed by Naveh [1958:90-94] and reconstructed by Yadin [1976]); 2) those located far from the city-gate and adjoining a large courtyard, such as the southern complex at Megiddo and the Palace C Southern Annexed Building at Lachish. In following Lamon and Shipton (1939:35), the complexes not adjoining a courtyard may have housed cavalry horses, which were taken out of the city regularly for training, while those adjacent to a courtyard may have housed chariotry units, in which case the spacious courtyard would have served as a training and parading ground. Thus, a small cavalry unit comprising ca. 50 horses could have been stationed in the Palace B compound of Level IV Lachish, while the stabling area of the Level III, Palace C compound was expanded twofold and adapted for a chariotry garrison of


830 831

ca. 100 horses. Assuming that two horses were employed to pull one chariot during this period, a unit of 50 chariots would have been stationed at Level III Lachish.

Holladay (1986:154-156) has suggested that since the liquid wastes excreted by horses contain small amounts of phosphoric anhydrite, much of the phosphorous derivative of urine and manure would seep through the floor of the stables and increase the phosphorus element in the underlying soil. In light ofHolladay’s suggestion, the phosphorus enrichment of the soil in and around the compound was examined. In 1980, 20 samples were taken by A. Krumholz from a few centimetres below the surface at selected points in the annexes, the courtyard and outside the compound (Fig. 14.72), and for comparison, two samples were collected from the area outside the mound. The samples were analysed by the Department of Soils and Water of the Volcanic Institute of Agricultural Research, directed by Dr. B. Akiri (Table 14.1).

TABLE 14.1: PHOSPHORUS CONTENT IN THE PALACE-FORT COMPOUND SOILS

Sample No.* Depth** Location of sample Phosphorus %

1 3 cm. Northern Annexed Building, Hall [K/L.11:1050] 0.19

2 3 cm. Northern Annexed Building, Hall [L.11:1051] 0.14

3 4 cm. Northern Annexed Building, Hall [L.11:1052] 0.256

4 4 cm. Paved courtyard 0.21

5 5 cm. Paved courtyard 0.23

6 Surface Paved courtyard 0.27

7 Surface Southern Annexed Building, Level IV, north of Locus 3622 0.23

8 5 cm. Southern Annexed Building, Level III, Locus 4850 0.20

9 5 cm. Southern Annexed Building, Level III, Locus 4850 0.187

10 5 cm. Chamber of gateway, Level III, Locus 4850 0.167

11 3 cm. Passage of gateway, Level III 0.19

12 3 cm. Chamber of gateway, Level III, Locus 4815 0.208

13 5 cm. Southern Annexed Building, Level III 0.21



16 3 cm. East of Southern Annexed Building 0.21


18 3 cm. East of paved courtyard 0.23

19 3 cm. East of Southern Annexed Building 0.206

20 Surface South of Podium B 0.22

21 Soil sample from area around Tel Lachish 0.20

22 Soil sample from area around Tel Lachish 0.19

* See Fig. 14.72 for sample locations.** Depth refers to the depth below the present surface from which the samples were extracted.


832 833


832 833

Fig. 14.72: Plan of Palace-Fort compound showing provenience of soil for phosphorus analysis (see Table 14.1).

The soil in the vicinity of Lachish (but not that of the mound; see below) is dark brown grumous soil (i.e. vertic aluvi soil) that would normally contain 0.05-0.1% phosphorus. All the samples tested showed much higher phosphorus readings, most between 0.187-0.23%. Two samples, from the Northern Annexed Building (No. 2) and the gateway (No. 10), showed lower phosphorus readings, and two, from the Northern Annexed Building (No. 3) and the courtyard (No. 6), showed higher readings. Significantly, neither thefour samples taken from near the compound (Nos. 16, 18-20; 0.206-0.23%) nor the two samples taken from outside the mound (Nos. 21-22; 0.19% and 0.20%) differed substantially from the samples of the compound itself. Thus, it seems that meaningful differences in the phosphorus content of the soil from the different parts of the compound cannot be distinguished. It may be that the soil of Tel Lachish and its immediate vicinity is rich in phosphorus due to the prolonged presence of people and their livestock. Hence, the soil analyses contributed no data that might aid in determining the function of the annexes.5

THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE MOUND SUMMIT

The Judean Palace-Fort is the most massive and impressive building known from the Iron Age in the Land of Israel, in spite of the fact that its superstructure is now completely lacking. Crowning the centre of the site, it dominates its immediate surroundings (see Colour Pl. I:1; also reconstruction of the Level III city in Fig. 3.1). The mound, nestled among the surrounding hills, is scarcely discernible from afar. Nonetheless, the Palace-Fort, situated on the mound’s most prominent heights, provides a magnificent view towards theeast, north and west, while it is blocked towards the south by higher ground at the south-western corner of the mound. On a clear day one can see as far as the Hebron hills to the east and the Coastal Plain to the west. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that the present-day visitor to the site stands at the level of the palace’s ground floor, but this fortress-like monument would have risen to a considerable height andwould have been far more prominent and impressive than it is today.

It seems, however, that the prominent position of the Palace-Fort on the summit of Tel Lachish is largely, or at least partly, due to massive earth-moving operations as part of the construction of Palace B, carried out with the initiation of Level IV. This can be ascertained through an examination of the data, partial though it may be, concerning the elevation of the Bronze Age levels. These data allow the reconstruction of the surface of the centre of the site at the end of Level VI, thus providing some idea of the summit as it would have appeared to the architects of Palace B prior to its construction.6 To this purpose, the elevations presented in Table 14.2, indicated as Points 1-22 on the plan in Fig. 14.73, shall be utilized. Unless otherwise indicated, all elevations mark the uppermost preserved surface of the respective level.


834

5 It may be noted that the same strategy was successfully applied in the Urartian citadel in Bastam. The soil in the suspected stable indeed included a higher percentage of phosphorus (Kroll 1989). The Bastam citadel is a single period site, and hence, its soil was affected during a relatively short period of time, an important factor in the success of the tests.

6 The idea of analyzing the topographical data of Tel Lachish in order to understand better its history and development came to me from Tel Megiddo, where such a study was carried out by Jennifer Peersmann and Norma Franklin (in preparation).


834 Fig. 14.73: Plan showing Elevation Points 1-22, used to reconstruct the surface of the site at the end of Level VI (see Table 14.2).

TABLE 14.2: MOUND ELEVATIONS UPON INITIATION OF LEVEL IV MONUMENTAL BUILDING ACTIVITY

No. Area Period/Level Square Feature(s)* Elev. (m.)

1 D (Fig. 7.1) MB I V/14 Locus 7010 and Wall 7115 267.502 D (Fig. 7.1) EB III U/14 Locus 7070 and Wall 7118 265.403 D (Fig. 7.1) MB I U/13 Wall 7078 267.504 D (Fig. 7.1) VI U/11 Concentration of stones in Locus 7068 267.465 D (Fig. 7.1) VI T/11 Locus 7059 Upper and Wall 7075 268.306 P (Fig. 4.9) MB I/P-6 J/7 Locus 5203 266.557 P (Fig. 4.17) MB II/P-4 G/9 Wall 370 268.078 P (Figs. 6.1; 6.2) Level VI H/7 Wall 256 268.169 P (Figs. 6.1) Level VI F/7 Wall 300 268.1510 P (Figs. 5.17) Level VI(?) B/8 Locus 5197 264.5011 P (Figs. 6.1) VI E/6 Wall 313 267.3012 P (Figs. 4.9; 4.17) MB II/P-5 C/5 Wall 339 265.2013 P (Figs. 6.1; 6.2) VI H/4 Wall 283 267.3514 P (Figs. 5.7; 6.1) VI K/1 Floor 3203 265.5015 Pal. (Figs. 14.8; 14.28) VI O/9 Locus 3017, bottom of Wall 205 of

Podium A269.10

16 Pal. (Figs. 14.8; 14.28) VI O/3 Locus 5410, bottom of Wall 203 of Podium A

ca. 265.00

17 Pal. (Figs. 14.8; 14.28) VI V-W/3 (Square D/2 of Area S local grid)

Loci 5504, 5520, 5527, bottom of Wall 204 of Podium B

< 261.33

18 Pal. (Figs. 14.8; 14.38:2; 14.14:2)

VI X/9 Locus 4706, bottom of Wall 247 of Podium B

266.73

19 Pal. (Figs. 14.38:2) VI BB/10 Locus 3622, bottom of Wall 800 of Southern Annexed Building

< 263.30

20 S (Fig. 8.35) VI C/9-11 Wall 75 ca. 259.5021 GE (Fig. 12.7) VI F/3 Wall 560 256.0022 Aharoni’s excavation

(see Lachish V: Pl.61 )VI Square B/23 of Area

Pal. local grid; see Fig. 14.4

Locus 54 264.20

* Elevation Points 15-19 are considered representative of the Level VI surface, on the assumption that the walls of Palace B were based on Level VI surfaces.

Analysis of the elevations yields the following picture of the surface of the summit at the end of Level VI (Fig. 14.73):• There was a sharp incline from the western to the eastern edge of the Palace-Fort. At the northern end

of Podium B the incline may be observed in the difference between Point 14 (265.50 m.), Point 13 (267.35 m.) and Point 8 (268.16 m.). At the southern end of Podium B the incline can be observed in the differences between Point 20, near the western periphery of the site, Point 17 and Point 5, which


836 837

yield a slope of from 259.50 m. through < 261.33 m. to ca. 268.30 m., an increase of nearly 9 m. The same incline can be seen at the southern edge of the Palace-Fort, from Point 19 near the south-western corner of the Southern Annexed Building at < 263.30 m. to Point 18 near the south-eastern corner of Podium B at 266.73 m. South of Podium B a similar south-west to north-east incline can be seen, beginning at Point 21 (256.00 m.) in Area GE, where the Bronze Age gate must be situated beneath the Levels IV-III inner city-gate, to Point 19 (< 263.30 m.).

• There was a sharp decline towards the north in the area extending to the north of Podium A. From Point 8 (268.16 m.) the surface declined through Point 11 (267.30 m.) to Point 10 (264.50 m.), beneath the northern edge of the Northern Annexed Building.

• A short distance to the east of Podium B, Level VI is missing altogether, and pre-Level VI remains lie immediately beneath the level of the Palace-Fort courtyard. At Points 1 and 3 MB I remains lie at elevation 267.50 m. Near the north-eastern corner of Podium A, MB II remains reach the Palace-Fort courtyard floor surface at Point 7 (268.07 m.).

• Stratified EB III remains lie directly beneath the courtyard at Point 2 (265.40 m.)• At Point 22, at the north-eastern corner of the Palace C courtyard, Level VI remains were found at

264.20 m., showing that the Level VI surface was already declining eastward at this point, as part of the decline towards the eastern periphery of the site.

• The MB I surface in the area of the central part of the Palace-Fort courtyard declined towards the north-west, from Points 1 and 3 (267.50 m.) to Point 6 (266.55 m.).

• Finally, it should be added that Walls 7071 and 9510 in Area D were constructed as terraces, indicating that the surface inclined from the west to the east in this area during the MB-LB Ages (see Ussishkin, Chapter 7 and Figs. 7.1; 7.2).

The data lead to the conclusion that the Level VI surface faced by the architects of Level IV ascended from the raised western periphery of the site towards its centre, continued to rise in the area of the Palace C courtyard, then began to decline towards the eastern side of the site. It would appear that the surface in the area of the courtyard was artificially lowered to the level of the courtyard floor at some date laterthan Level VI, accounting for the fact that MB I and MB II layers were uncovered immediately beneath the surface. One may assume that the missing levels, particularly the MB II city levels, Level VII and Level VI, originally existed above the extant MB I remains in the central courtyard area, as is the case in other areas of the site.

This reconstruction suggests that the summit of the Level VI mound, the acropolis, had been situated in the area of the centre of the later Palace-Fort courtyard. The high elevation of the stratified EB IIIremains in this area, and the fact that the MB I remains decline from the centre towards the north-west, suggest that the mound’s summit was located in the same area prior to Level VI as well.

It appears that the architects of the Level IV fortified city decided to build their central building,Palace B, not on the highest point of the summit, i.e. on the site of the Late Bronze Age acropolis, but to its west, on ground sloping from the acropolis towards the western side of the site. As the new edificewas erected on sloping ground its foundations are not of uniform character or height, and were planned according to the surface gradients. In a huge earth moving operation the acropolis was lowered, and the edifice erected at its side became the highest and most prominent element on the summit. The huge quantityof debris removed from the acropolis, mostly Late Bronze Age debris, was employed as constructional fill


836 837

for the podium of the new building and for the ramparts surrounding it. Surplus debris was taken to the new city-gate complex built at the same time and used as material for constructional fills in that structure.

THE DIMENSIONS OF THE COMPLEX

Coordinated planning making ample use of the square module is very much in evidence in the ground plans of both the Palace B and Palace C compounds (Fig. 14.74). Podium A and the Northern Annexed Building are square in plan and identical in size, their external sides measuring 31.45-32.15 m. For the sake of convenience, it shall be assumed that the plan of these buildings is based on a length measurement of 31.50 m.

The distance from the northern wall of the compound (i.e. the northern wall of the Northern Annexed Building) to the southern end of Podium B is approximately the same as that from the western wall of the Palace-Fort to the eastern wall of the compound, from which it may be concluded that the planners of Palace C intended the entire complex to be square in plan. The distorted orientation of the southern and western external walls of Podium B, perhaps caused by surveying errors on the part of the builders, should be taken into account when assessing the measurements. Hence the east-west dimension of the complex should be taken from the western wall of Podium A, yielding a distance of 105.87 m. (32.12 m. for the width of Podia A-B plus 73.75 m. from Podia A-B to the eastern wall of the compound). The north-south measurement should be taken along the eastern side of the Palace-Fort. As the eastern wall of Podium B is 44.10 m. long, the total distance is about 107.70 m. (32.15 + 31.45 + 44.10).

Podium B is bisected by east-west Wall 242 (Fig. 14.8). The inner measurements of the resultant northern sub-division is square in plan, employing the southern exterior wall of Podium A (W 205) as the northern wall of this sub-division, since Podium B has no northern exterior wall. The length and width of the sub-division are ca. 26.70 m. Incidentally, the internal length and width of Podium A are very similar, ca. 27.50. It seems that the inner space in Podium A is slightly larger than that of the northern sub-division of Podium B due to the greater thickness of the walls surrounding the latter (ca. 2.60-2.70 m. in Podium B vs. ca. 2.25 m. in Podium A). This apparently indicates that the structures were planned based upon their external measurements. Finally, the gateway to the compound, according to the reconstruction presented above, measures approximately 21-22 by 22.50 m., again very nearly square.

The architects of Palace B as well as those of Palace C probably used the cubit, the standard linear measurement unit in ancient Israel (Scott 1958; 1970:346-349), which had been in use in the country since the Early Bronze Age (de Miroschedji 2001), as the basis for their calculations. Two different cubits, known as the long cubit and the short cubit, were employed at this time. Their exact lengths are problematic, but for the sake of argument, it may be assumed that the longer cubit was about 52.5 cm., the shorter about 45 cm. Strangely enough, the measurements of the four nearly square structures discussed above would fit a system based on either type of cubit. The lengths of Podium A and the Northern AnnexedBuilding (each ca. 31.50 m.) equal 60 longer or 70 shorter cubits. The length and width of the northern sub-division of Podium B equals 50 longer or 60 shorter cubits. The dimensions of the compound are 105.87 by 107.70 m.; 200 longer cubits equal 105 m. while 240 shorter cubits equal 108 m. The width of the compound gateway, 21 m., equals 40 longer cubits, and its length, 22.50 m., equals 50 shorter cubits.

In summary, it seems that the plan of the Palace C compound (partly in continuation of the Palace B compound) was based on four squares based on the longer cubit, one of 200 by 200 cubits (overall


838


838

Fig. 14.74: Schematic plan of the Palace C compound showing dimensions in metres, long cubits (l.c.) and short cubits (s.c.).

dimensions), two of 60 by 60 (Podium A and the Northern Annexed Building) and one of 40 by 40 (the gateway). Alternatively, there could have been one square of 240 by 240 shorter cubits, two of 70 by 70 shorter cubits and one of 50 by 50 shorter cubits. Another possibility has been argued by Barkay (1979; see also Barkay and Ussishkin, Chapter 9), who suggests that the plan of the earlier Podium A was based on the longer cubit, while that of Podium B was calculated according to the shorter cubit. In his opinion this constitutes an indication that Podium B is later in date than Podium A, as the shorter cubit was adopted in ancient Israel at a slightly later date than the longer cubit, and was then used concurrently with the latter.

THE LEVEL I RESIDENCY

The Level I Residency was excavated by the British expedition (Lachish III: 131-141, Pls. 22, 23:1-2, 119). Its builders cleared the debris of the Palace C superstructure, enabling the construction of the Residency upon the solid, even basis of the Palace C podium. The structure was found by the British expedition in a good state of preservation (Fig. 14.75), but was later completely removed (Starkey 1935:203), except for two stone bases and two thresholds left in position on the earlier podium (see Palace C plan in Fig. 14.8).


840 841

Fig. 14.75: Air photograph of the Residency, taken on 18 July 1934; from the north-east.

The Residency was shorter than the underlying Palace C podium, and its northern edge extended across the centre of Podium A (see Lachish III: Pl. 119). The northern section of Podium A thus became a convenient stone quarry for the Residency architects. As observed by the British expedition, the robbing of the walls created trenches, which were then filled with debris. The central part of the podium’s northernexterior wall (W 250) was completely removed, and the resulting trench (Locus 3062) contained Level I sherds, indicating clearly what had occurred.

Wall 205, the southern exterior wall of Podium A, was also further robbed of its stones. As discussed above, excavation in Locus 3005 indicated that at least the westernmost part of the wall was destroyed already in Level III, apparently when Palace C was constructed. However, it seems that the remainder of the wall was destroyed in Level I. The sounding near the north-eastern corner of Podium B (Loci 3003 and 3017) revealed how the robbers’ trench was refilled: Brick debris was dumped from above, creatinga conical heap, the sloping layers of which could still be distinguished (Figs. 14.76; 14.77). Evidence of the quarrying was also observed in Locus 3248, in the central part of the wall (see below). Significantly,the debris used to refill the robbed out southern encasing wall (W 205) in Soundings 3003/3017 and 3248was characterized by burnt brick material, i.e. the destruction debris of Palace C which had been cleared away by the builders of Level I. Again, Level I pottery sherds found in the soundings indicate the date of the stone quarrying.


840 841

Fig. 14.76: Locus 3017 and traces of the robbers’ trench which destroyed Wall 205 (Locus 3003); from the south-east.

The western portico of the Residency, between Courtyard P and Hall U, contained two square, stepped, stone pillar bases, the southern of which still stands in situ, while the northern one has been removed from Tel Lachish (see below). Each of these monolithic bases rested upon a corresponding square sub-base built of rough stones. They are visible in Sounding 3130, in which the western side of the northern sub-base was exposed (Fig. 14.78), and in Trench 3248 (Figs. 14.79; 14.80). These sub-bases, constructed flush with the lime-plastered floor of Palace C, were embedded in the fill of a large pit, partly excavated in Trench 3248. The fill occupies the space of the missing central segment of Podium A’s southern exteriorwall (W 205), which had been robbed of its stones either in Level III (see above) or during the construction of Level I. The fill of the pit, laid in sloping layers (Figs. 14.81; 14.82) and composed, perhaps, partlyof debris dumped by the robbers of the earlier wall, contained many Level I sherds, thus fixing its date.Since the fill antedates the construction of the portico’s sub-bases, it is clear that some activity tookplace here in an earlier phase of Level I, prior to the construction of the Residency. This indication fitsInge’s observation, made at the time of the British excavation, regarding the Level I pits dug to the east of the Palace-Fort: ‘C.H. Inge noted in a field report dated February, 1938, that most of the grain pitsappeared to have been dug before the builders of the Residency undertook the demolition of Palace C’ (Lachish III: 151).

The chronological data derived from Pit 3248 can be added to the evidence recovered by Starkey regarding the attribution of the Residency to Level I. First, he found that the eastern wall of the Residency


842 843

Fig. 14.77: Robbers’ trench cutting through Wall 205 (Locus 3003); from the south. Note conical traces in the section, indicating fill dumped back into the trench. (Note that the locus number shown on theboard is obsolete.)

overlay the destruction debris of the Level II rooms built to the east of the Palace-Fort (Lachish III: 105, 118, 131). Special mention was made of Room [L.12:1065], destroyed by fire at the end of Level II,which ‘was covered and almost filled with a quantity of large stones on which the north-east corner of theResidency was founded.’ Second, ‘The sherds found below the Residency,’ namely ‘between palace and Residency floor levels,’ included pottery fragments typical of Level I. It is thus clear that the Residencydates to Level I. Hence, Aharoni’s suggestion (Lachish V: 33-40) that the Residency was constructed as an Assyrian palace in Level II is stratigraphically impossible.

The threshold of the doorway leading to Hall K of the Residency was recleared during the renewed excavations (Locus 3046; Fig. 14.83). It was built of beautifully cut limestone slabs, some of which were wantonly removed from their position after the 1973 excavation season, apparently by clandestine diggers who assumed that the slabs covered a rich tomb. The reclearing revealed how the walls of the Residency were built above the Judean remains. The edges of the threshold were laid over two parallel Podium B foundation walls (W 243, W 249), and the centre of the threshold lay above the floor ofPalace C, constituted of small stones and well preserved between Walls 243 and 249. A thick layer of pottery fragments, predominantly sherds of lmlk storage jars, served as a kind of soling under the threshold slabs.


842 843

Fig. 14.78: Trench 3130 and Level I stone sub-base for the northern column base; from the west.

844 845

Fig. 14.79: Southern column base and sub-base, and northern stone sub-base, situated at portico leading from Courtyard P into Room U of Level I Residency; from the north-east (cf. Lachish III: Pl. 22:6). Note Trench 3248 in foreground.

Fig. 14.80: Southern column base of the portico leading from Courtyard P into Room U of Level I Residency; from the south. Note combed stone-dressing and graffiti on base.

844 845

Fig. 14.81: Drawing of west section of Trench 3248. Note layers of fill in the Level I pit.

Fig. 14.82: East section of Trench 3248. Note layers of fill in the Level I pit.

Finally, it should be reported that in 1982 a column from the Residency was erected alongside one of the main walkways of the Tel Aviv University campus (Fig. 14.84). The work was carried out under the supervision of Sariel Shalev. The elements of the column belong to the two-columned portico between Courtyard P and Hall U (Lachish III: 132, Pl. 22:4, 6-7), discussed above. The northern square, stepped stone pillar base, found in situ, as well as the rounded base of the column found on its southern counterpart, had been removed by Starkey to the grounds of the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem, which now serves as a municipal park. Three stone drums, apparently those uncovered in secondary use in Room AE of the Residency (Lachish III: 132, Fig. 11: Drums A-C; Pl. 22:7), had been left by the British expedition at the foot of the mound near the south-western corner, from where they were later removed to a private garden in Moshav Lachish. All these elements were brought to Tel Aviv, while two other drums reported in Lachish III could no longer be located. The Israel Antiquities Authority, however, provided a drum of similar size and appearance from Tul Karem (Rockefeller Museum Reg. No. I.5590), which was incorporated into the restored column as the second drum from the bottom. Two cylinders of cement were added, which are easily recognizable, but do not spoil the harmony of the original column. Thus this important and unique column, the earliest of its kind in the Land of Israel, could be partially restored.


846 847

Fig. 14.83: Entrance threshold to Hall K of the Level I Residency, with Locus 3046 in front; from the south. Note Wall 243 at right and Wall 249 at left.

LOCI AND LISTS OF FINDS

Locus [K/L.11:1050] Squares G/4-10 Levels IV-III Fig. 14.34The southernmost unit of the Northern Annexed Building, previously excavated by the British. See Lachish III: 115, Pl. 110.

Locus [L.11:1051] Squares F/4-10 Levels IV-III Fig. 14.34A unit of the Northern Annexed Building, excavated previously by the British (Lachish III: 116, Pl. 110). Recleared in the renewed excavations as Locus 3192.


846 847

Fig. 14.84: Column from Level I Residency restored at the Tel Aviv University campus.

Locus [L.11:1052] Squares E/4-10 Levels IV-III Fig. 14.34

A unit of the Northern Annexed Building, excavated previously by the British. See Lachish III: 116, Pl. 110.

Locus 3003 Squares O/8-9 Fills of Level I Fig. 14.8

A robbers’ trench created when the stones of Wall 205, the southern exterior wall of Podium A, were removed. The debris filling the robbers’ trench contained brick material, including one complete brick,and it differed in character and colour from the packed constructional fill of Podium B (see Locus 3017).The fill in the lower part of the robbers’ trench had been dumped from a single point, as a conical heapof debris with sloping layers was visible (Figs. 14.76; 14.77). The pottery included indicative LB, Levels V-IV and Level III sherds, including fragments of lmlk storage jars and Level I storage jars.

No remains of the Palace C floor were found by Starkey (Lachish III: Pl. 118) or in the renewedexcavations. Hence, stratigraphically it cannot be determined whether the stones of Wall 205 were removed in Level III or in Level I, but on the basis of the pottery, it apparently occurred in Level I.

Finds: 1 unbaked clay stopper.

Locus 3005 Squares O-P/4-5 Fills of Levels IV-III; Floor of Level III Fig. 14.8

A 5×2.5 m. trench at the north-western corner of Podium B, between the southern exterior wall of Podium A (W 205), the western exterior wall of Podium B (W 204) and Wall 211.7 A floor, made of a thicklayer of limestone chips covered by a layer of plaster, extended at the present surface (Fig. 14.24). The floor, a segment of which was discerned by Starkey (Segment M in Lachish III: Pl. 118), dates to PalaceC. Layers of fill were excavated beneath the floor down to 268.67 m. The fill was composed of browndebris, including brick debris, which contained bones and a few MB, and many Level VI and Levels V-IV sherds.

The upper part of Wall 205 is now missing, its present top reaching 270.75 m. The plastered floor ofPalace C passed above it at 271.85 m., the space between them filled with debris, indicating that the stonesof Wall 205 had been robbed before the Palace C floor was laid. This stratigraphic superposition is seenat the northern section of the trench (Fig. 14.23).

Finds: Pottery of Level VI (Fig. 20.38). Pottery of Levels V-IV (Fig. 25.40:15-22): 3 bowls; 2 kraters; 2 storage jars; 1 holemouth jar.Northwest Anatolian Grey Ware krater fragment; List No. 5.Cypriot pottery fragments: White Slip II (2); Base Ring I-II (4). 22 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 polisher of unspecified stone.1 worked sheep astragalus (Fig. 33.23:5).Fish bones: Nile perch (2); sea basses (1).

Locus 3009 Squares P-Q/8-9 Level III Figs. 14.8; 14.21

A trench in the northern end of a long, narrow unit of Podium B, between Wall 208 at the eastern side,

7 In Preliminary Report I: Fig. 7, Wall 211 is mistakenly marked as Wall 205.


848 849

Wall 206 at the northern side and Wall 213 at the western side. The western edge of the trench had been disturbed by a modern pit (Fig. 14.21). Immediately beneath the surface was a floor which extended to thesouth of the trench, apparently the northern part of Floor Segment J discerned by Starkey (Lachish III: Pl. 118). The flooring had a number of layers: The upper, plaster layer overlay the edge of Wall 208. Beneathit was a makeup of small stones laid above a layer, ca. 20 cm. thick, of white plaster mixed with small stones. Charcoal pieces and pottery fragments were found in the makeup of the floor. Level III pottery,including fragments and handles of lmlk storage jars, were found in the debris above the floor. Excavationstopped at 271.34 m., where the bottom of the floor was discerned above a fill of loose soil.

Finds: Wood samples: olive (1).

Locus 3011 Square P/9 Fills of Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.21

A small unit in Podium B between Walls 202, 206, 208 and 209. No remains of flooring were discernedat a level beneath that of the tops of the walls, and the unit seems to have been too small to have formed a separate room. Excavation continued from the surface at 272.20 m. to elevation 271.02 m., in a fill whichcontained brick material and pottery. The pottery included LB indicative fragments and a few indicative Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: Pottery of Levels V-IV (Fig. 25.40:23-25): 3 bowls. 1 broken, cylindrical clay object.1 silver swivel of a seal amulet (Figs. 28.17:6; 28.32:4).

Locus 3017 Squares O-P/8-9 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.8; 14.20; 14.21

A 6×3.30 m. trench at the north-eastern corner of Podium B, between the southern exterior wall of Podium A (Wall 205), the eastern exterior wall of Podium B (Wall 202) and Wall 206. The Palace C floorcould not be traced. Excavation in the constructional fill of Podium B continued to the bases of the threewalls and was stopped at 268.19 m. For further excavation carried out in the eastern part of the trench, see Locus 3033.

The fill contained brick material, ash, bones and pottery, mostly Level VI and Levels V-IV sherds. Thesection of the western edge of the trench, which cuts through the fill, reveals a pit (probably of Level I),discerned during the excavation of the fill (see Locus 3003).

Finds: Pottery of Level VI (Fig. 20.39).Pottery of Level V (Fig. 25.40:1-6): 5 bowls; 1 jug. Myc. IIIA2 stirrup jar fragment; List No. 75 (Figs. 22.6:8; 22.15:12).2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 limestone, upper or lower millstone.1 flint, large geometric sickle segment; 1 flint plain blade.1 geological sample, quartz. Identification of material: Table 36.17:17.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (4).Fish bones: unidentified (1).

Locus 3022 Square K/7 Fills of Level IV; debris of Level III Fig. 14.8

Reclearing section and excavation at the edge of the British trench in Room [K.12:1055] of Podium A (see


848 849

Lachish III: 116, Pls. 19:4 and 110). The recleared section extended across the room between Walls 214 and 215, from the surface down to Level VI remains (Fig. 14.17; also Fig. 6.3). The foundations of Walls 214 and 215 rested at ca. 268.20 m. For excavation beneath this elevation see Loci 3027 Upper and Lower (in Area P; Ussishkin, Chapter 6).

Excavation was conducted in the constructional fill of Podium A and in material which had beenwashed from the surface of the podium since the end of the British excavations, some of which possibly originates from the Palace C floor. Concentrations of pottery fragments near the bases of Walls 214 and215 may well have been left there by the British.

The lime-plastered floor of Palace C lay at the top of Podium A near the present surface (Fig. 14.17).Beneath it the constructional fill of Podium A was composed of brick debris laid in horizontal layers. Thefill contained ashes and pottery: 1 EB fragment, many LB indicative fragments and several Levels V-IVred-burnished sherds. A concentration of broken, burnt bricks can be seen in the centre of the section.

Finds: Inscription XXIII; see Lemaire, Chapter 29, Section A.Hieratic Inscription IV; see Sweeney, Chapter 24, Section B.Pottery (Fig. 25.40:26-27): 2 bowls.Myc. IIIA2 piriform squat jar fragment; List No. 5 (Fig. 22.1:4). Myc. IIIB animal figurine fragment;

List No. 93 (Figs. 22.7:9; 22.16:5).4 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 clay body sherd reused as lid.1 suspended, dolostone weight (Fig. 28.9:1).4 flint, large geometric sickle segments (Fig. 31.5:6).Mollusc shells: Nile River shell: Aspatharia rubens (1); Glycymeris violacescens (4).

Locus 3025 Squares L-M/9-10 Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.25; 14.46-14.47

A small room of Palace C.8 Previously, in Palace B, this unit had formed part of a larger unit together with Locus 3034, which was demarcated by Walls 201, 218, 225 and 217. Wall 219, the top of which was lower than the other walls, was built along Wall 218 and formed a kind of bench. With the construction of Palace C, Wall 216 was added, dividing the earlier unit into two, Loci 3025 and 3034, and the segment of Wall 217 facing Room 3025 (between Walls 201 and 216) was thickened. The foundations of Wall 216 and the addition to Wall 217 were laid at a higher elevation, the northern end of Wall 216 being founded above debris which was laid on top of what may have been a bench, Wall 219 (Figs. 14.46-14.47).

No floors were discerned. The upper part of the fill consisted of loose soil and contained sherds. It wasexcavated to ca. 270.10 m., lower than the foundations of the walls added in Palace C. Further excavation continued solely in the southern part of the unit, where a layer of horizontally laid bricks underlay the filldiscussed above (but apparently not in the northern part of the unit) (Fig. 14.47). The bricks continued, as a kind of soling, immediately beneath Wall 216 and the added part of Wall 217.

A thin layer of soil separated the bricks and the foundations of the walls. It is difficult to establishwhether the brick layer formed part of the original fill of the unit, or whether it was added later as a kindof soling for the walls. The first possibility is more likely, as the brick layer was laid beyond the edges

8 In Preliminary Report I: 30, 38 and Figs. 7-8 this locus is described as two separate loci, Nos. 3019 and 3025, assigned to Levels IV and III, respectively.


850 851

of the walls, and since they are not oriented to the lines of the walls. Excavation continued beneath the bricks in the fill debris down to 269.70 m. The fills contained indicative LB pottery fragments and someLevels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

On and above the stone bench (W 219) was a thick layer of debris which nearly reached the present surface of the podium (between 270.70-271.10 m.). It contained pieces of plaster, probably from a wall facing, and a concentration of bowls. The stratigraphic context of the bowl cache is ambiguous, contrary to earlier conclusions (Preliminary Report I: 38). It could be a cache dating to immediately before the destruction of Palace C, but could also date to Palace B. The latter possibility is supported by (a) the fact that the Palace C floor segments found on Podium A are at a higher level, and (b) the fact that the bottomof Palace C Wall 216 crosses over the bench (W 219) at a relatively high level, with a thick layer of debris separating them. It thus seems stratigraphically possible that the debris resting on the bench is earlier than Wall 216. The possible attribution of the bowl cache to Level IV is also supported by the typological observations of Zimhoni (Chapter 25).

Finds: Pottery (Fig. 25.42:1-27): 26 bowls; 1 cooking-pot.1 limestone stopper (Fig. 28.2:5).1 iron armour scale (Figs. 27.24:7; 27.25:6).1 cylindrical, beachrock pestle.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (4).Fish bones: unidentified (1).

Locus 3026 Squares U-V/8-9 Fills of Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.48-14.49A trench in Podium B demarcated on three sides by Walls 222, 242 and 223. Wall 222 was probably an addition of Palace C, as its base rested at a higher elevation on the constructional fill. Palace C brickswere found in situ on this wall, and to the west of the locus at the corner of Walls 223 and 242 (the bricks are marked by the British as floor Segments B, D and E; Lachish III: Pl. 118). The top layer of the fillcontained many pieces of carbonized wood, the remains of several (probably five) beams of olive wood.These beams were laid side by side at the top of the fill, apparently as a support for the floor, with theirends lying on the stones of the newly built Wall 222 (Fig. 14.48). The constructional fill beneath the burntbeams was excavated to 269.49 m. It consisted of light brown, relatively loose soil and contained brick material, bones and sherds. The fills contained indicative LB and Levels V-IV pottery. Significantly, moreLevels V-IV pottery appeared in the lower layers of the fills, a clear case of inverted stratigraphy.

Finds: Pottery of Levels V-IV (Fig. 25.41): 10 bowls; 1 krater; 4 cooking-pots; 1 jug; 2 storage jars. Cypriot pottery fragments: White Slip II (1); Base Ring I-II (4).1 broken, cylindrical clay object.1 tiny fragment of an upper or lower, basalt millstone.1 retouched, Canaanean flint blade (Fig. 31.1:4). 1 flint, large geometric segment.Samples of 4 wooden beams supporting the floor: olive.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (6).Fish bones: sea basses (2).

Locus 3027 Upper Squares J-K/7 Level V Figs. 14.5; 14.17Remains of a hut(?), including stone Walls 227 and 230, a surface with pottery at ca. 268.20 m. and a pit.


850 851

The pottery included many indicative LB sherds and some Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: 1 broken, cylindrical clay object.Animal bones: bos (7); caprine (11).

Locus 3033 Squares O-P/9 Level VI(?) Figs. 14.8; 14.22A 3×2 m. trench cut at the eastern end of Locus 3017 in order to examine the nature of the layers beneath the north-eastern corner of Podium B, i.e. beneath the level of the foundations of Walls 205, 202 and 206. The upper debris layer consisted of brick material. A lime-plastered floor was uncovered at 268.08 m.,upon which charcoal pieces and many sherds were found. A round pit(?) extending beyond the edges of the trench had been cut in the floor. It was cleared down to 267.75 m. and was filled with reddish-brownbrick material and charcoal pieces similar in nature to the debris of the MB II palace uncovered nearby in Area P. The pottery consisted solely of many small LB indicative sherds.

Finds: Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (2).Wood samples: terebinth (1).

Locus 3034 Squares L-M/9 Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.25A small room of Palace C. Previously, in Palace B, this unit had formed part of a larger unit together with Locus 3025 (see above). The tops of the walls at the southern part of the room are now missing. The debris filling the room was cleared down to 270.63 m., to about the elevation of the top of Wall 219, the benchat the northern end of the room. The upper layer of debris included loose, light greyish soil and contained much pottery (especially above Wall 219). Beneath it the soil was slightly more compact, containing less pottery. No floors were discerned.

The south-eastern part of the trench was further deepened. Its debris, probably originating in the destruction of Palace C, contained brick material, ashes and sherds.

Finds: 1 light limestone drill cap(?). Wood samples: olive (1).Food remains: olive pits (1 sample).

Locus 3037 Squares T/8-9 Fills of Level IV Fig. 14.8A 2.00×2.00 m. trench between Walls 241 and 242 near their corners with Wall 208. Walls 208 and 241 were hardly visible at the level of the present surface. Near the north-western corner of the trench a segment of floor(?) was exposed, composed of small stones above a layer of plaster, apparently alreadydiscerned by Starkey (Segment C in Lachish III: Pl. 118). Beneath the plaster was a layer of soil ca. 10 cm. thick, and beneath it, down to 270.10 m., the fill consisted of dark grey, very loose, ashy material. Itcontained many sherds, bones, fragments of moulds(?) and slag(?), indicating that the fill had been broughtfrom an industrial area. Further below, down to 269.65 m., the fill was composed of brown debris andbrick material.

Finds: Pottery of Level V (Fig. 25.40:7-14): 3 bowls; 3 cooking-pots; 1 jug; 1 storage jar.1 basalt bowl.1 upper or lower, limestone millstone.1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (1).


852 853

Locus 3039 Squares N/9-10 Fill of Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.25A 1.70×1.80 m. trench in Podium A between Walls 217, 201 and 210. The upper layer of the fill (beneathpresent surface at 271.09 m.) contained loose, light brown soil with many sherds. Beneath it (between elevations 270.67 m. and 270.36 m.) was a layer of brick debris, including many fallen bricks, especially at the south-eastern corner. Beneath it, down to the bottom of the trench at 270.11 m., was a layer of loose soil and sherds.

The foundations of Wall 210 were deeply set near Wall 201, where they reached the bottom of the trench, but set only one course beneath the surface at the western side of the trench. It is clear that Wall 210 was a Palace C addition. Therefore, the debris in the trench, including fallen bricks and brick debris, may have been disturbed during the construction of Palace C. The pottery included many indicative LB and Levels V-IV sherds.

Finds: Pottery (Fig. 25.42:28-37): 2 bowls; 2 kraters; 2 cooking-pots; 1 cooking-jug; 1 jug; 1 juglet; 1 storage jar.1 spherical, quartzite-chert bead (Figs. 28.19:10; 28.33:5).Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (1).

Locus 3041 Squares V-W/8-9 Level III Fig. 14.8The surface of the south-eastern corner of Podium B. Surface clearing was carried out here in continuation of the British work (Area AG in Lachish III: Pl. 118). The present surface slopes southward, towards the exterior wall of the podium (W 247). Wall 248 cannot be seen in this area, as at least its upper part was not preserved. Clearing exposed grey soil with pottery fragments, fallen stones and many fallen bricks. The shape of many bricks, all apparently belonging to Palace C, could still be discerned. The pottery included LB and Levels V-IV indicative sherds and several fragments of Level III lmlk storage jars.

Locus 3046 Squares R/7-8 Level III Figs. 14.8; 14.83A floor segment of a Palace C room, bordered on the eastern side by Wall 243 and on the western by Wall249 (Fig. 14.83). On the southern side the continuation of the floor and the upper parts of these wallswere missing. On the northern side the floor continued beneath a threshold of the Level I Residency (thenorthern entrance to Room K; cf. Lachish III: Pl. 119). This floor segment had been discerned by Starkey(Segment X on Lachish III: Pl. 118) but was not properly excavated. Following the 1973 excavation season clandestine diggers removed the stone slabs of the threshold, apparently assuming that they formed the cover stones of a tomb.

The tops of the flanking walls were slightly higher than the floor, which consisted of a hard layerof limestone chips and was covered by a thick layer of debris and pottery which reached the elevation of the tops of the walls. The edges of the Level I threshold, as well as the two adjoining slabs containing the sockets for the door hinges, rested directly on the stones of Walls 243 and 249. The central part of the threshold lay on the layer of debris covering the Palace C floor. The pottery included some fragments ofLevel III lmlk storage jars and of Level I storage jars.

Finds: Stamped handle, Type S Ib, Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 43; stamped handle, four-winged stamp, inscription blurred, List No. 58.1 disc-shaped, limestone spinning whorl.2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 lump of white crystalline gypsum. Identification of material: Table 36.17:13.


852 853

Locus 3055 Squares Q/5-6 Level III Figs. 14.8; 14.45Clearing of a Level III floor segment (British floor segment L) at 272.25 m., which is superimposed uponWall 236 of Podium B and apparently on Wall 830 (Fig. 14.45).

Locus 3062 Square H/7 Level I Figs. 4.2; 14.8Robbers’ trench (originally the foundation trench) of Wall 250, the northern exterior wall of Level IV Podium A. The debris filling the trench contained LB, Level III and, significantly, several Level I sherds,indicating the date of the wall’s destruction.

Finds: 1 upper or lower, flint millstone.

Locus 3075 Squares K-L/5-6 Fills of Level IV Fig. 14.8A unit in Podium A between Walls 233, 214, 207 and 232. Excavation was carried out in the constructional fill from the surface at 270.46 m. down to 269.70 m.

Locus 3082 Square K/9 Fills of Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.25Clearing of the upper layers of debris and constructional fill at the southern end of Room [L.12:1057] ofPodium A, previously excavated by the British (see Lachish III: 116, Pls. 19:4, 110). Excavation started from a sloping surface created at the edge of the British trench by erosion since 1938 (Fig. 14.15). The pottery included indicative LB fragments and a few indicative Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: 1 broken, cylindrical clay object.1 flint, large geometric sickle blank.1 bronze arrowhead.

Locus 3111 Squares H-J/7 Fills of Level IV; debris of Level III Fig. 14.8Clearing the surface left at the end of the British excavation in Locus [K.11/L.12:1058], the northernmost unit of Podium A (see Lachish III: 117, Pl. 110), immediately above the Level VI remains.

Locus 3124 Square J/6 Level I Fig. 4.3A large pit (marked only in the section) cut into the debris of the cella of the Level VI temple (Locus 3153; Figs. 6.1; 6.2). It was filled with loose debris and stones along with a small number of sherds. The potterydates from LB to Level I.

Finds: Myc. IIIA2 amphoroid krater, List No. 49 (Figs. 22.4:4; 22.15:1).Gold foil pieces.

Locus 3129 Squares O-P/6 Levels III, I Fig. 14.8A probe trench adjoining the southern side of the southern column base of the portico of the Level I Residency. Excavation was stopped at 270.88 m. The pottery included indicative LB sherds and several indicative Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Locus 3130 Squares N-O/5-6 Levels III, I Figs. 14.8; 14.78A probe adjoining the western side of the stone basis of the northern column base of the Level I Residency


854 855

portico. Excavation reached 270.81 m. The pottery included LB sherds, burnished Levels V-IV fragments and fragments of a Level III lmlk storage jar.

Locus 3174 Squares L-H/10 Level III Figs. 14.8; 14.25-14.26A long unit at the northern part of Podium C. The Podium C wall (W 200) narrowed at its northern end, leaving an open space between it and Wall 201, the eastern exterior wall of Podium A. This space was apparently not filled with any constructional fill. At the northern part of the unit, its bottom was formed bythe stones of the earlier platform of Palace B (apparently Walls 9514 and 9516). The edges of the platform, i.e. the southern edge of Wall 9514 and the western edge of Wall 9516, indicate that an open space was left between the platform and the eastern exterior wall of the palace podium (Wall 201) at the time of Palace B. The debris filling the unit, already partly cleared by the British (Lachish III: 86), contained many burntbricks, possibly the destruction debris of Palace C. One or two flimsy walls built across the southern halfof the unit at a higher level may belong to Palace C or to Level I (W 9517). The pottery included indicative LB sherds, some indicative Level III sherds, including fragments of lmlk storage jars, and numerous indicative Level I sherds.

Finds: 2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.

Locus 3187 Squares G-H/10-11 Fills of Levels IV-III Figs. 14.8; 14.26-14.27A trench cut at the corner of the eastern end of Wall 251, the northern edge of Wall 200 of Podium C and the northern edge of the Palace B platform (W 9514). The trench revealed that Wall 200 was based on the earlier, Palace B platform (W 9514). The trench, excavated to 268.38 m., reached debris of the MB palace, on which the Levels IV-III walls were based. The top edge of a brick wall and remains of a pit were discerned.

Finds: 1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.Fish bones: unidentified (1).

Locus 3192 Square F/8 Level IV (finds unstratified) Fig. 14.34Exposing the remains of the lime-plastered floor of Hall [L.11:1051] of the Northern Annexed Building,previously excavated by the British (Lachish III: 116, Pl. 110), and excavation of the floor makeup. Thefloor was established directly on the debris of the MB palace, the LB remains having been previouslyremoved by the builders of the Palace-Fort. The pottery included some LB sherds, red-burnished Levels V-IV sherds and many indicative Level I fragments.

Finds: Attic pottery (Fig. 30.9:4): 1 base.

Locus 3201 Squares H-K/12 Levels III, I Figs. 14.8; 14.25-14.27Cleaning the Palace C entrance platform, previously excavated by the British (Lachish III: Pls. 116-117).

Finds: 1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 3209 Square E/6 Level IA stone-lined pit (unmarked in the plans) cut into cobbled Floor 3206 in the annex of the Level VI temple (Fig. 6.1). It was found immediately beneath the surface and was filled with stones. The pit had nearly


854 855

vertical sides and a flat bottom at 266.92 m. The pottery included some LB and some indicative Level Isherds.

Finds: Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 amphoroid krater fragment; List No. 46 (Fig. 22.4:1).Animal bones: bos (1); caprine (2).

Locus 3222 Square E/7 Level V(?) Figs. 14.5; 14.7A round, stone-lined pit, apparently located beneath Hall [L.11:1052] of the Northern Annexed Building. The pit cut into Level P-2 Unit 3371 and its eastern wall (W 304). It penetrated to the Level P-4 horizon, and a stone slab of the ‘three stone slabs installation’ (Locus 5082) rested at the bottom of the pit, reached at 266.60 m. The pit was filled with stones (Fig. 14.7), and Iron Age sherds were found at its bottom. Note: a broken, cylindrical clay object registered as found in Level P-4 Locus 5082 should probably be assigned to this locus.

Finds: Wood samples: olive (2).Fish bones: sea basses (1); tilapias (1); unidentified (1).Animal bones: bos (4); caprine (20); bird (3).

Locus 3230 Squares F/6-7 Level V Fig. 14.5A round pit beneath the Northern Annexed Building and cut into the debris and floor of Level P-1Unit 3171. The fill of the pit contained brick debris, limestone flakes and some sherds, including LevelV sherds.

Locus 3241 Squares H/4-6 Fills of Level IV Fig. 14.8Excavation and removal of the stone foundations at the north-western corner of the northern exterior wall of Podium A (Wall 250) (see a picture of wall segment in Lachish III: Pl. 19:7). The stones rested on a layer of packed clay and a fair amount of pebbles.

Locus 3248 Square O/6 Level I Figs. 14.8; 14.79; 14.81-14.82A probe trench adjoining the Level I column bases of the portico leading from Courtyard P into Room U of the Residency. The square stone base of each column rested on a soling of stones, secured in the fill of aLevel I pit cut into the constructional fill of Podium B (Figs. 14.79; 14.81-14.82). Diagonal layers of fillwere visible in the baulks of the trench. Excavation reached 269.95 m. The pottery in the fill containedpredominantly fragments of Level I storage jars.

Finds: Stamped handle; inscription blurred (Type H Ia or S Ib); Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 50.Animal bones: bos (2); caprine (7)

Locus 3488 Squares F-G/6 Level V Fig. 14.5A shallow pit beneath Wall 281 of the Northern Annexed Building, cutting through Level VI Wall 303 down to 267.06 m. It contained some LB and Level V sherds.

Finds: Animal bones: bos (1); caprine (6).


856 857

Locus 3622 Squares AA-BB/10 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.38; 14.40A trench cut at the massive corner between the western (W 800) and southern (W 802) exterior walls of the Southern Annexed Building. Excavation started at the surface left at the end of the British excavations and was stopped at 263.30 m. without reaching the bottom of Walls 800 and 802. The walls were founded above earlier wall remains, which could not be properly understood, as the trench was too narrow. The pottery included 1 EB holemouth rim, indicative LB sherds and Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: Myc. IIIB1 jug fragment; List No. 63 (Figs. 22.5:8; 22.15:8). Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 jug fragment; List No. 65 (Figs. 22.5:10; 22.15:9).Northwest Anatolian Grey Ware krater fragment; List No. 4.1 broken, cylindrical clay object.1 vein quartz scale weight.1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 4706 Square X/9 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.38; 14.41A trench at the corner of the southern exterior wall of Podium B (Wall 247) and the western exterior wall of the Level IV Southern Annexed Building (Wall 800). The trench reached 266.40 m., exposing the foundations of both walls. The constructional fill of the podium was uncovered, laid against its southernwall in diagonal layers. The pottery included 1 EB holemouth rim, many Level VI fragments, and a few Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: Level VI pottery (Fig. 20.40). 8 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 bronze armour scale (Figs. 27.24:1; 27.25:1).1 Chalcolithic, flint, backed sickle blade.2 flint, large geometric sickle segments (Figs. 31.2:4; 31.5:5).

Locus 4710 Squares X-Y/10 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.38; 14.41A trench cut at the corner of Walls 800 and 801, the exterior walls the Level IV Southern Annexed Building. The probe cut through the constructional fill, from the surface left at the end of the Britishexcavation down to 265.95 m. The pottery included indicative LB fragments and several Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.Analyses: Grain size of mudbricks from Wall 801: Rosen, Chapter 36, Section E, Table 36.6:33-36.

Finds: Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 amphoroid krater fragment; List No. 48 (Fig. 22.4:3).1 cylindrical clay object. 1 vein quartz ‘toy’ pebble.1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 4712 Square X/14 Fills of Level IV Fig. 14.38A trench, divided into two small squares, cut where it is assumed brick Walls 801 and 821 would have cornered. The area had been uncovered by the British, and no remains of the walls were discerned. Renewed excavation in the eastern square in what seemed to be disturbed LB debris, containing some pottery, reached 266.46 m. Surprisingly, a few complete LB vessels were found (Fig. 20.41:1-4). A pit


856 857

was discerned in the debris. In the western square the eastern edge of Wall 801, consisting of only a single course of bricks, was uncovered.

Note: The northern edge of this locus, excavated in 1977, overlaps Locus 7038 in Square W/14, excavated in 1987.

Finds: Pottery (Fig. 20.41:1-4): 3 bowls, 1 Cypriot white-shaved juglet. 1 low cylindrical bead of black stone. 2 ostrich eggshell pieces.1 suspended weight(?) of soft limestone.1 calcite-alabaster, composite vessel fragment (Fig. 23.5:16).1 upper millstone fragment of beach-rock.Wood samples: Euphrates poplar (1).

Locus 4803 Square AA/21 Levels VI-I Fig. 14.38A trench cut along what was assumed to be the line of the southern exterior wall of the Level III Southern Annexed Building. No remains of the wall were exposed. Excavation started at the present surface at 267.09 m. The southern half of the square was deepened to 265.92 m. Remains of destruction debris encountered roughly at this level seem to belong to Level VI. What might be a living surface(?) and a pit(?) were encountered. The pottery included many indicative LB sherds and 1 Levels V-IV red-burnished rim.

Finds: Plaque figurine, legs; List No. 7 (Figs. 23.53:7; 23.56:7).Cypriot pottery fragments: Base Ring I-II (2). 1 barrel-shaped, pale red, quartz bead with white spots (Fig. 28.19:11).1 Chalcolithic, flint, backed sickle blade.3 flint, large geometric sickle segments; 1 flint, large geometric sickle blank.

Locus 4808 Squares T/23-25 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.70Small trenches cut on either side of the eastern enclosing wall of the courtyard (Wall 813). Excavation reached 266.66 m. in the eastern trench and 266.78 m. in the western, below the base of the wall. The lime floor of the courtyard was not preserved. The pottery included many indicative LB sherds.

Finds: 2 flint, large geometric sickle segments.

Locus 4811 Squares W/18-20 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53Clearing the remains of Wall 814 near and a short distance beyond the eastern side of the gate entrance. The wall was partly preserved near the entrance, but its eastward continuation was missing altogether. Excavation near the wall reached 267.25 m. The pottery included many indicative Level VI sherds.

Finds: 1 oblate, light blue faience bead (Fig. 28.19:12).1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (1); Red Sea shell: Cypraea pantherina (1).

Locus 4815 Squares W-X/19 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53Excavation in the area of the inner, eastern gate chamber. The squares were laid out according to the architecture rather than the grid, so that two baulks were left across the chamber. Excavation uncovered


858 859

the remains of the gate’s walls, reaching the bottom of the walls at 267.12 m. at the south-eastern side and 267.29 m. at the north-western. The debris included ashy material and stray stones. The pottery, apparently from the underlying constructional fill, included many indicative LB sherds.

The baulks were excavated when restoration work began in 1993, exposing the concealed segments of Walls 812 and 815.

Finds: Myc. IIIA1(?) medium pithoid jar(?) fragment; List No. 30 (Fig. 22.2:16).Mullusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (1).

Locus 4818 Squares W-X/20-21 Level VI(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.67A trench aimed at uncovering remains of Wall 814 which, it was assumed, had probably lain at this point. Excavation, which reached 267.22 m., revealed only a concentration of stones, not on the assumed line of the wall.

Locus 4824 Squares W-X/21 Level III(?) Fig. 14.38A trench cut in order to find the eastward continuation of Wall 814. No remains of the wall or of thesouthern edge of the stone ‘buttress’ (W 827), which, it was assumed, would have joined Wall 814, were detected. A large stone partly exposed at the eastern baulk of the trench may have belonged to a north-south wall. Excavation started at 267.33 m. and ended (in the southern part of the trench) at 266.15 m. The debris contained burnt bricks and some LB, Levels V-IV and Level III pottery fragments.

Finds: Myc. IIIA2(?) piriform vessel fragment; List No. 37 (Fig. 22.3:3).1 broken, cylindrical clay object.

Locus 4827 Squares W/15-17 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.54Uncovering the remains of Wall 810 and the area immediately inside it. Excavation reached 267.11 m. near the gate entrance and 267.13 m. in Square W/15. Remains of a floor consisting of crushed lime andadjoining Wall 810 was uncovered in Square W/16 at 267.23 m. The pottery included indicative Level VI sherds and several Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 stirrup jar fragment; List No. 80 (Fig. 22.6:13).1 multi-faceted, flint slingstone; Chapter 27, Section B, List No. 48.2 flint, large geometric sickle segments.

Locus 4828 Square W/22 Level III(?) Fig. 14.38A trench cut in order to trace the eastward continuation of Wall 814 and the projected north-south wall between the restored eastern units of the building. Neither wall was detected, except for one large stone which could have belonged to the north-south wall. Excavation started at 267.23 m. and stopped at 266.70 m. Some LB and Levels V-IV pottery fragments were recovered.

Finds: Cypriot pottery fragments: White Slip II (2).1 sandstone palette(?) (flat pebble).1 sandstone polisher.


858 859

Locus 4830 Squares X-Y/17-18 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.58Clearing of surface debris in the area of the gate’s inner entrance, between the piers at the edges of Walls 810 and 814. A baulk along the entrance between Squares W/17-18, where Polygon 13 was placed, was not excavated. A floor segment, consisting of crushed lime, probably the floor of the gate passage, wasfound at 267.48 m. near and inside the eastern pier (Fig. 14.58). The edge of the eastern pier was not found, though the area was excavated to 267.19 m. The edge of the western pier, i.e. the left jamb of the entrance, was preserved, and the area around it was excavated to the elevation of the bottom of the wall at 267.11 m. (Fig. 14.55).

Further excavation was carried out in 1993 when restoration work was begun in the gate. The baulk was excavated, and Polygon 13 was removed. A course of small stones marked what was probably the bottom edge of the eastern pier, i.e. the right jamb of the entrance.

The pottery included many indicative Level VI sherds and a few Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: Myc. IIIB/C female figurine fragment; List No. 90 (Figs. 22.7:6; 22.16:2).1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 4841 Squares X-Y/19-20 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.62Clearing surface debris in the area of the central, eastern chamber of the gate. What may be a floorwas discerned at the north-western corner of the chamber at 267.15 m. The pottery included indicative Level VI pottery, apparently originating in the underlying constructional fill, and some fragments oflmlk storage jars.

The baulks were excavated when restoration work started in 1993, revealing further sections of Walls 812, 815 and 816.

Finds: Myc. IIIA2 open vessel fragment; List No. 112 (Fig. 22.9:2).2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 clay body sherd reused as stopper (Fig. 28.1:30).1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 4843 Squares Y-Z/19-20 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.62Clearing surface debris in the south-eastern part of the gate, to the south of Wall 816. The baulks were excavated and further sections of Walls 815 and 816 exposed when restoration work began in 1993. A few LB sherds were recovered.

Finds: Stamped handle, Type H Ib; Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 25.

Locus 4846 Squares Y-Z/17-18 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.60-14.61Clearings in the northern part of the gate passage. The debris, containing a few stones and bricks, was excavated to the elevation of the bottom of the walls. Segments of lime flooring perhaps belonging to thesame were uncovered along the eastern side of the gate passage, near Wall 815 (Fig. 14.61), and in the western side, along the northern part of Wall 811.

Further excavation took place when restoration work was started in 1993. The portions of Wall 811 which had been covered by baulks were exposed.

The pottery included many LB sherds and a few Level I sherds.


860 861

Finds: 1 asymmetrical bowl fragment. Stamped handle, Type H Ib; Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 23.Lids: 1 clay, reused body sherd; 1 limy flint (Fig. 28.2:30).1 doughnut-shaped, unbaked clay loom weight (Fig. 28.11:12).1 limestone(?) slingstone(?); Chapter 27, Section B, List No. 49.

Locus 4849 Squares Y-Z/17 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.63-14.64A trench clearing the debris around the southern preserved edge of Walls 811 and 848, the second, western pier of the gate. Excavation was carried out from the surface at 267.29 m. down to 266.35 m., lower than the bottom of the walls.

The trench was further extended on the southern side when restoration work began in 1993. The pottery included indicative Level VI sherds and a few Level III sherds.

Locus 4850 Squares X-Z/15-17 Level III(?) Figs. 14.38; 14.53; 14.65-14.66Clearing surface debris in the general area of the western part of the gate, as well as the area of the assumed narrow unit to the west of the gate, i.e. between Walls 811, 810 and 821. Hardly any traces of the anticipated walls were detected. A concentration of stones (Wall 911) in Square Y/16 (Fig. 14.65) could be an installation or remnants of the exterior, western wall of the gate. A circle of stones in Square X/15 (Fig. 14.66) may have been a stone installation or an earlier(?) column base. Brick material and burnt bricks were observed in the debris. The pottery included many indicative Level VI sherds, which originated in the underlying fills, and a few indicative Level III sherds.

Finds: Level VI pottery (Fig. 20.42).Stamped handle, Type H Ib; Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 26.Clay figurines: solid bird(?) head; List No. 23 (Fig. 28.37:8).1 iron ploughshare(?) (Fig. 28.15:7).1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 4856 Squares X-Y/14 Levels VI and earlier, Fills of IV-III Fig. 14.38Excavation of surface debris in the eastern chamber of the Level IV Southern Annexed Building. No remains of its anticipated eastern, exterior brick wall (W 821) could be traced. The British excavation had reached the Level VI surface, and the renewed excavations penetrated Level VI debris. The pottery included LB and burnished Levels V-IV indicative sherds.

Finds: Pottery (Fig. 20.41:5-19). Myc. IIIA2-IIIB cup fragment; List No. 185.Cypriot pottery fragments: Base Ring I-II (2); White Shaved (1).1 low cylindrical, light blue faience bead.1 bronze awl (Fig. 23.15:5).

Locus 4857 Squares BB/11-12 Level III(?) Fig. 14.38Clearing of surface debris and exposure of both faces of preserved segment of Wall 802. Some EB, MB, LB and Levels V-III pottery fragments were recovered.

Finds: Fish bones: sea basses (1).


860 861

Locus 5001 Squares S/15-16 Level ISounding (not marked in the plans) in a Level I structure, previously uncovered by the British (Locus [L/M.14:41,42,43]; see Lachish III: 152, Pl. 116), located in the central part of the courtyard.

Finds: Stamped handle, four-winged emblem; Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 54.1 biconical, 1 spherical and 2 doughnut-shaped, clay loom weights.1 flat-bottomed, flint slingstone; Chapter 27, Section B, List No. 50.1 limestone drill cap(?).

Locus 5003 Square E/9 Level IA round pit (unmarked in the plans), dug down beside and below the foundation of Wall 9511 of the Northern Annexed Building and into the Level P-4 debris of Room 5010, reaching ca. 267.00 m. It seems to belong to Level I on the basis of the pottery evidence. The pottery included some LB and Levels V-IV burnished sherds and several indicative Level I sherds.

Finds: Attic pottery: 1 bowl fragment (Fig. 30.8:1).Animal bones: caprine (3); dog (3).

Locus 5004 Square F/9 Level V(?) Fig. 14.5A round pit beneath the Northern Annexed Building, dug into Level P-4 debris to ca. 266.63 m. It largely ruined brick Wall 371 and a doorway located in it which had enabled passage between Level P-4 palace Rooms 5000 and 5010 (see Fig. 4.17). The pit contained MB, LB, and Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds, but no later pottery, hence its tentative attribution to Level V.

Finds: 1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.

Locus 5006 Square F/8 Level V Fig. 14.5A round pit beneath Hall [L.11:1051] of the Northern Annexed Building. The pit, ca. 1.30 m. in diameter, cuts into Level P-4 brick Wall 370 and the debris of adjoining Room 5023 (see Fig. 4.17). It contained LB and indicative Levels V-IV sherds.

Finds: Neolithic pottery (Fig. 15.1:1): 1 bowl fragment. 1 fabricated (vs. recycled), baked clay spindle whorl fragment (Fig. 28.10:7).

Locus 5007 Square F/8 Level I(?)A pit (unmarked in the plans) cutting into Level IV Wall 282 of the Northern Annexed Building. Three stone blocks which apparently had been removed from the wall were found at the bottom of the pit. The pit contained some LB and Levels V-IV sherds.

Locus 5119 Upper Square B/9 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.34-14.36Constructional fills beneath the restored hall in the northern end of the Northern Annexed Building, besideWall 9501. Excavation was carried out from the surface at ca. 266.00 m. to below the constructional fillsat ca. 265.00-264.50 m. Beneath the constructional fills, at ca. 264.40 m., lay a living surface and stonewalls probably dating to Levels P-2–P-1 (see Ussishkin, Chapter 5, Area P, Locus 5119 Lower).


862 863

Finds: Myc. IIIA2 squat jar fragment; List No. 57 (Fig. 22.5:2). Myc. IIIB lentoid flask fragment; List No. 89 (a second fragment of this vessel was uncovered in Locus 5181 in the adjoining square). 2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.Clay figurine, head of animal; List No. 15 (Fig. 23.54:7).1 rim fragment of a Chalcolithic/EB I, V-shaped, basalt bowl (Fig. 23.3:1).1 flint hammerstone(?) (pebble) (Fig. 28.8:6).Millstones: 1 basalt, lower, tiny fragment; 1 basalt, upper or lower; 1 bifacial, basalt millstone(?) (Fig.

28.5:10).1 calcite-alabaster jug with duck-shaped handle (Fig. 23.5:17).1 bronze needle.1 flint adze (Fig. 31.6:1).12 flint, large geometric sickle segments. 2 flint, large geometric sickle blanks.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (3).Fish bones: tilapias (1); unidentified (2).

Locus 5181 Square B/8 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.34-14.36Constructional fills beneath the restored hall in the northern end of the Northern Annexed Building, besideWall 9501. Excavation started from the surface at ca. 265.40-265.80 m. It was difficult to delineate thebottom of the fill, probably at ca. 265.00-264.50 m. It lay upon a living surface, probably dating to LevelsP-2–P-1, represented by stone Wall 2021 extending along the southern part of the square and a large pit cutting into it (see Ussishkin, Chapter 5, Area P, Locus 5197). The constructional fill contained in the mainLevel VI pottery and, in its upper part, some Levels V-IV sherds.

Finds: Hieratic Inscription VII. See Sweeney, Chapter 24, Section B. Pottery (Fig. 20.43). Myc. IIIA2 closed vessel fragment; List No. 12 (Figs. 22.1:11; 22.14:2). Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 piriform

vessel fragment; List No. 39 (Fig. 22.3:5). Myc. IIIB lentoid flask fragment; List No. 89 (a secondfragment of the same vessel was uncovered in Locus 5119 in the adjoining square) (Figs. 22.7:5; 22.15:15). Myc. IIIB(?) small bowl or cup fragment; List No. 120 (Fig. 22.9:10). Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 closed vessel fragment; List No. 172.

6 broken, cylindrical clay objects.Clay figurine, hollow spout; List No. 28 (Fig. 23.54:9).1 spheroid, flint slingstone; Chapter 27, Section B, List No. 51.1 limestone flywheel or digging-stick weight.Millstones: 2 basalt, upper or lower; 1 basalt, lower, small fragment; 1 basalt, upper, fragment;

1 unspecified stone, upper or lower.4 flint, large geometric sickle segments. 1 flint, large geometric sickle blank.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (6).Fish bones: Nile perch (1).

Locus 5410 Squares O-P/2-3 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.8; 14.14Reclearing and expanding of the trench excavated by the British at the junction of the exterior walls (W 203 and W 204) of Podia A and B (Lachish III: Pl. 19:1; reproduced here in Fig. 14.14), carried out in 1993. The trench cut through the constructional fills laid against the walls, but did not reach the bottom of


862 863

the walls. The sections at the edge of the trench were oriented perpendicularly to the walls and gave some idea of the nature of the fill, which consisted of mound debris and contained in the main LB pottery, nearlyall of Level VI, but also some Levels V-IV indicative sherds. The fill was uniform, and diagonal layersat some points indicated that it was dumped against the walls. The fill laid against the corner of Podium Aand that laid against Podium B are uniform and appear to have been dumped at the same time.

Finds: Neolithic pottery (Fig. 15.1:6): 1 fragment with knob. Pottery (Figs. 20.44; 20.45).Myc. III closed vessel fragment; List No. 181.29 broken, cylindrical clay objects.Lids: 1 clay, reused body sherd; 2 clay, reused bowl bases (Fig. 28.2:16-17, 25).1 sandstone flywheel/whorl (Figs. 28.9:9; 28.29:13).1 limestone digging-stick weight or flywheel, half.1 limestone chariot fitting (Figs. 23.15:12; 23.29:7).1 spherical and 1 flat bottomed, flint slingstones; Chapter 27, Section B, List Nos. 52-53.Bowls: 1 basalt, fragment; 1 limestone.1 rectangular, convex, sandstone pestle.1 small fragment of a lower millstone of beach-rock.

Locus 7000 Square W/13 Levels VI(?)-surface Figs. 7.1; 7.2; 14.28See Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Area D, Locus 7000.

Locus 7001 Square V/13 Fills of Level III, Level III Fig. 14.28Excavation of upper debris layer beneath the surface of the courtyard’s floor, uncovered by the British.The pottery included some LB sherds and 1 Level I sherd.

Finds: Stamped handle, Type H Ib; Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 24.Clay figurines: vessel fragment; List No. 72.

Locus 7005 Squares V-U/14 Level III Figs. 7.8; 7.13; 14.28Floor level surface and segments of the lime-plastered floor of the Palace C courtyard.

Finds: Myc. IIIB lentoid flask, 3 fragments; List No. 88 (Fig. 22.7:4).1 broken, cylindrical clay object.Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (3).

Locus 7007 Squares U/11-12 Fills of Level III Figs. 14.28; 14.31-14.32Reclearing of the lime floor of the courtyard, exposed previously by the British, and excavation of themakeup of the floor and the constructional fill down to the Palace B surface. The northern part of SquareU/11 was extended westward into the baulk in order to connect the locus with the face of Wall 200 of Podium C (Fig. 14.31). The lime floor, its surface well-preserved in both squares, consisted of a thick layerof lime at ca. 269.00 m. Further, thinner lime layers were visible in the constructional fill. A thin layer oflime, at level with the bottom of Wall 200 at ca. 267.80 m., marked the bottom of the fill, which thereforewas ca. 1.20 m. thick near Wall 200. A layer of stones laid at the top of the Level IV constructional fill inSquare U/11 (Locus 7041) probably dates to Level IV. The floor surface sloped eastward, while the bottom


864 865

surface was nearly horizontal. Hence, the fill was thicker near Wall 200, and became thinner farther awayfrom the podium wall. The fill contained Level VI and indicative Levels V-IV pottery sherds.

Finds: Pottery (Fig. 20.46). Myc. IIIA2-IIIB1 stirrup jar fragment; List No. 79 (Fig. 22.6:12).Cypriot pottery fragments: Base Ring I-II (3); Red Lustrous (1).1 broken, cylindrical clay object.1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.Fish bones: sea basses (1); unidentified (1).

Locus 7011 Squares T/11-12 Fills of Level III Figs. 14.28; 14.71Reclearing of the lime floor of the courtyard (Fig. 14.71), exposed previously by the British, andexcavation of the makeup of the floor and the constructional fill down to the Level IV Palace B surface. A thin, brown layer marked the bottom of the Level III fill. The side of a large, round pillar base(?) of hardlimestone was visible in the fill in the western edge of Square T/11 (see Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Fig. 7.24).The floor at the eastern end of Square T/12 was not preserved.

Finds: 1 limestone lid (Fig. 28.2:31).Fish bones: Nile perch (1); unidentified (3).

Locus 7023 Square U/12 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.28-14.30Brick Wall 7051, built to support the constructional fills of Podium B, extended across the square. Itsconstruction apparently destroyed a large Level VI silo (Area D, Locus 7085). On the eastern side of the wall, in the northern and southern baulks of the square, and on the western side of the wall at the southern baulk, a wide foundation trench cut for the wall in the brick debris was discerned (Fig. 14.29; also Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Fig. 7.3). The debris against both faces of the wall is partly Level VI debris of Silo 7085 and partly debris laid deliberately as constructional fill for Podium B. The top of the wall andthe fill lay at ca. 267.60 m. Two large pits (Loci 7029 and 7030) were cut in the fill during Level IV andseemed to be sealed beneath the floor of Palace C (Locus 7007) (Fig. 14.30). The pottery included a fewEB and MB and many indicative LB sherds, and only 2 indicative Levels IV-V sherds.

Finds: MB pottery (Fig. 16.6:1-6): 1 bowl; 1 pithos; 1 lamp; 2 goblets; 1 votive bowl. Myc. IIIB1 deep bowl fragment; List No. 114 (Figs. 22.9:4; 22.16:9).Cypriot pottery fragments: White Slip II (1); Base Ring I-II (3).1 calcite-alabaster jug, 2 rim fragments (a handle uncovered in Area D, Locus 7085 may belong to this jug) (Fig. 23.5:10-11).1 bronze toggle pin(?).1 bronze needle (Figs. 28.13:1; 28.30:8). 1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.Wood samples: jujube (1); kermes oak (6); olive (6); terebinth (7).Fish bones: Nile perch (1); tilapias (1); unidentified (3).Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (12).


864 865

Locus 7025 Upper Square T/12 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.28; 7.22

The corner of brick Walls 7051 and 7077 cut into Level VI debris and Unit 7025 Lower, also destroying a segment of earlier, undated stone Wall 7071 (see Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Fig. 7.22). A foundation trench for brick Wall 7077 was discerned in the Level VI unit. The Level IV constructional fill reached slightlyhigher than the top of Wall 7077, at ca. 268.00 m.

A pit was cut into the wall during a later phase of Level IV. It was not excavated, but a layer of stones laid at the top of the pit, sealing its fill, may have belonged to the constructional fill ofLevel III (Locus 7011).

Finds: Linear A Inscription LACH Za 1; see Finkelberg, Uchitel and Ussishkin, Chapter 24, Section E. 1 broken, cylindrical clay object. 1 bronze armour scale (Figs. 27.24:2; 27.25:2).1 flint slingstone; Chapter 27, Section B, List No. 54.1 retouched, flint blade.1 low cylindrical, white faience bead.2 bronze shaft fragments (Fig. 28.25:8-9).

Locus 7029 Square U/12 Level IV Figs. 14.28; 14.30

A pit cut into the brick debris forming the constructional fill of Level IV Podium B (Locus 7023). Thebottom of the pit was discerned at 266.56 m. It was filled with brick and ashy material and contained manyLevel VI and 2 Levels V-IV red-burnished pottery sherds.

Finds: Wood samples: jujube (1); olive (4).Animal bones: bos (6); caprine (10); equid (1); bird (1).

Locus 7030 Square U/12 Level IV Figs. 14.28; 14.30

A pit cut into the brick debris forming the constructional fill of Level IV Podium B (Locus 7023). Thebottom of the pit was discerned at 266.57 m. A layer of grey material, and above it some small stones, lay at the bottom of the pit. It contained many Level VI and 2 Levels V-IV red-burnished sherds.

Finds: Cypriot pottery fragments: White Slip II (1); Base Ring I-II (1). 1 broken, cylindrical clay object. 1 calcite-alabaster vessel base (Fig. 23.5:18).Wood samples: olive (1).Mollusc shells: Glycymeris violacescens (3).Fish bones: unidentified (1).

Locus 7033 Squares A/11-12 Levels IV-III Figs. 14.34; 14.37

A sounding beside the present eastern edge of Wall 9501, the northern exterior wall of the Northern Annexed Building, aimed at uncovering the eastward continuation of the wall. No further remains of Wall 9501 were found. The remains of a wall segment uncovered are apparently unrelated and earlier in date.

Finds: 2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 flint, large geometric sickle segment.


866 867

Locus 7037 Square T/11 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.28; 7.23Constructional fills of Podium B laid above a Level VI structure and beneath the Level III fill and floor(Locus 7011, above). Brick Wall 7077, which supported the constructional fills of Podium B, extends alongthe southern edge of the square (see Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Fig. 7.23). It lay in a foundation trench cutting into Level VI Unit 7059 Upper and its stone Walls 7074 and 7076. The tops of these walls mark the bottom of the constructional fill. The latter sloped towards Podium B: The top of Wall 7074 at the eastern part ofthe square lay at ca. 267.94 m., while that of Wall 7076 at the western edge of the square lay at ca. 267.60 m. The top of Level IV brick Wall 7077 slopes in the direction of Podium B, from 267.94 m. at the eastern end of the square to 267.64 m. at the western. The fill was composed of compact brick debris, its uppersurface at ca. 268.30 m. A few stones found at this elevation in the southern edge of the square may be related to the surface. The fill contained a few MB, mostly LB, and some Levels V-IV sherds.

Finds: EB pottery (Fig. 15.8:14): 1 jug base.1 rim fragment of a calcite-alabaster vessel (Fig. 28.4:2).2 flint, large geometric sickle segments; 1 flint, large geometric sickle blank.Mollusc shells: Red Sea shell: Clanculus pharaonis (1).Fish bones: Nile perch (1); sharks and rays (1); unidentified (1).

Locus 7038 Square W/14 Level III(?) Figs. 7.8; 7.13; 14.28Excavation of the floor surface of the Level III courtyard and the debris immediately above it in SquareW/14 and in the western part of the baulk between Squares W/14 and V/14. Segments of the lime-plastered floor of the courtyard were preserved in the northern half of the square and in the baulk, and are related to thesegment of the floor uncovered in Square V/14 (Locus 7005) (see Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Figs. 7.8; 7.13).An earlier phase of the lime-plastered floor was discerned in the north-western part of Square W/14.

Locus 7038 was excavated in 1987, its southern edge overlapping Locus 4712, excavated in 1981. Stone Wall 7064 extended along the eastern edge of the square. Uncovered already in 1981, it was thought at that time to be a buttress adjoining Wall 810 (see Preliminary Report II: 151). However, as its base rested at a higher elevation than the courtyard’s lime-plastered floor it apparently dates to Level I. Many LB anda few Level I sherds were recovered.

Finds: Cypriot pottery fragments: White Painted (1); White Slip II (1); Base Ring II (1).1 echinus fossil. 1 natural, quartz ‘collectible’.Wood samples: olive (1); terebinth (1).

Locus 7039 Square T/13 Level VI(?), III-I Figs. 7.1; 7.2; 14.28See discussion in Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Area D, Locus 7039.

Locus 7040 Square T/14 Level VI(?), surface Figs. 7.1; 7.2; 14.28See discussion in Ussishkin, Chapter 7, Area D, Locus 7039.

Locus 7041 Square U/11 Fills of Level IV, Level IV Figs. 14.28; 14.31-14.33Constructional fill of Podium B, excavated in this square and its extension adjoining the face of Wall 200of Level III Podium C. The fill, composed of compact brick debris, was laid above Level VI debris at ca.


866 867

267.20 m. Its roughly horizontal top, at ca. 267.80 m., was marked by a layer of stones (which may have belonged to the constructional fill of Level III [Locus 7007]). The bottom of Wall 200 was laid directly onthis fill. The fill contained Level VI pottery.

Finds: Hieratic Inscription X; see Sweeney, Chapter 24, Section B. Pottery (Fig. 20.47). 1 oblate, red-brown, glass(?) bead (Fig. 28.18:25). 1 body fragment of a calcite-alabaster vessel.Gold-foil pieces.Flint implements: 5 large geometric sickle segments; 1 retouched flake.Mollusc shells: Nile River shell: Aspatharia sp. (1); Glycymeris violacescens (5).Wood samples: terebinth (1).Food remains: wheat seeds (1 sample).Fish bones: sea breams (1); drums (1).

Locus 8020 Squares AA-BB/15-18 Unstratified Figs. 14.38; 14.85Further uncovering and examination of a number of walls (not shown in the plans) previously partly exposed in the British excavation. The work was carried out in 1993 to examine the possibility of the walls (or part of them) being associated with the approach road to the gate of the Palace-Fort courtyard. It appears that all walls in question are earlier in date.

Finds: Myc. IIIB cup fragment; List No. 182.1 nibbled, flint sickle segment.

Locus 8500 Squares X-AA/15-19 Fills of Level IV Figs. 14.28; 14.53Excavation of the top layers of the fills immediately beneath the area of the Level III gate to the Palace-Fortcourtyard, dumped in Level IV when the Southern Annexed Building was constructed. The fills consistedof mound debris and contained in the main LB pottery.

Finds: Pottery (Fig. 20.48).

Surface

Finds: Stamped handles: Type H Ib, from Area P, Chapter 29, Section B, List No. 37; Type H Ib, from Palace- Fort area, List No. 38; Type H Ib, from Palace-Fort area, List No. 39; Type S Ib, from the vicinity of the Palace-Fort, List No. 48; four-winged, from courtyard near Palace-Fort steps, List No. 55; four-winged, inscription blurred, found in Palace-Fort, List No. 57; four-winged, inscription blurred, found in Palace-Fort, List No. 59; private stamp, l§pn / >zr, from Area D dump, List No. 85 (Fig. 29.16:3).Clay object impressed on both sides (docket), found in Southern Annexed Building; Scarabs List No.

42 (Figs. 23.51:1; 23.52:1).Chalcolithic pottery (Fig. 15.1:9): 1 cornet fragment.EB pottery (Fig. 15.6:10): 1 platter fragment.2 broken, cylindrical clay objects.1 spheroid, flint slingstone; found in gate courtyard area; Chapter 27, Section B, List No. 55.


868 869

REFERENCES

Aharoni, Y., ed. 1973. Beer-sheba I: Excavations at Tel Beer-sheba, 1969-1971 Seasons. (Tel Aviv University, Publications of the Institute of Archaeology No. 2) Tel Aviv.

Barkay, G. 1979. The cubit of the Old Standard - archaeological consideration of a problem in biblical metrology. In: Sixth Archaeological Conference in Israel, Tel Aviv 14-15 March 1979. Jerusalem. p. 35. (Hebrew and English)

de Miroschedji, P. 2001. Notes on Early Bronze Age metrology and the birth of architecture in ancient Palestine. In: Wolff, S.R., ed. Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse. (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations No. 59) Chicago. pp. 465-491.

Fritz, V. 1977. Bestimmung und Herkunft des Pfeilerhauses in Israel. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 93:30-45.

Guy, P.L.O. 1931. New Light from Armageddon. (Oriental Institute Communications 9) Chicago.Herr, L.G. 1988. Tripartite pillared buildings and the market place in Iron Age Palestine. Bulletin of the

American Schools of Oriental Research 272:47-67.Herzog, Z. 1973. The storehouses. In: Aharoni, Y., ed. 1973. Beer-sheba I: Excavations at Tel Beer-sheba,

1969-1971 Seasons. (Tel Aviv University, Publications of the Institute of Archaeology No. 2) Tel Aviv. pp. 23-30.


868 869

Fig. 14.85: Earlier, undated walls beneath the gate of the Level III Palace C compound (Locus 8020).

Herzog, Z. 1992. Administrative structures in the Iron Age. In: Kempinski, A. and Reich, R., eds. The Architecture of Ancient Israel: From the Prehistoric to the Persian Periods. Jerusalem. pp. 223-230.

Holladay, J.S., Jr. 1986. The stables of ancient Israel. In: Geraty, L.T. and Herr, L.G., eds. The Archaeology of Jordan and Other Sites, Presented to Siegfried H. Horn. Berrien Springs, MI. pp. 103-166.

Kroll, S. 1989. Chemische Analysen - neue Evidenz für Pferdeställe in Urartu und Palästina. Istanbuler Mitteilungen 39:329-333.

Lachish III. Tufnell, O. 1953. Lachish III: The Iron Age. London.Lachish V. Aharoni, Y. et al. 1975. Investigations at Lachish: The Sanctuary and the Residency (Lachish V).

(Tel Aviv University, Publications of the Institute of Archaeology No. 4) Tel Aviv.Lamon, R.S. and Shipton, G.M. 1939. Megiddo I. Seasons of 1925-34. Strata I-V. (Oriental Institute

Publications 42) Chicago.Naveh, J. 1958. Khirbet al-Muqanna>-Ekron. An archaeological survey I, II. Israel Exploration Journal 8:87-

100, 165-170.Preliminary Report I. Ussishkin, D. 1978. Excavations at Tel Lachish - 1973-1977, preliminary report. Tel Aviv

5:1-97.Preliminary Report II. Ussishkin, D. et al. 1983. Excavations at Tel Lachish 1978-1983, second preliminary

report. Tel Aviv 10:97-185.Pritchard, J.B. 1970. The Megiddo stables: a reassessment. In: Sanders, J.A., ed. Near Eastern Archaeology in

the Twentieth Century: Essays in Honor of Nelson Glueck. Garden City, NY. pp. 268-276.Scott, R.B.Y. 1958. The Hebrew cubit. Journal of Biblical Literature 77:205-214.Scott, R.B.Y. 1970. Weights and measures of the Bible. In: Campbell, E.F., Jr. and Freedman, D.N., eds. The

Biblical Archaeologist Reader III. Garden City, NY. pp. 345-358.Starkey, J.L. 1933. A lecture delivered at the rooms of the Palestine Exploration Fund, on June 22nd, 1933.

Palestine Exploration Quarterly. pp. 190-199.Starkey, J.L. 1935. Excavations at Tell el Duweir 1934-1935. Palestine Exploration Quarterly. pp. 198-207.Starkey, J.L. 1937a. “Lachish as illustrating Bible history”. Palestine Exploration Quarterly. pp. 171-179.Starkey, J.L. 1937b. Excavations at Tell ed Duweir. Palestine Exploration Quarterly. pp. 228-241.Yadin, Y. 1976. The Megiddo stables. In: Cross, F.M., Lemke, W.E. and Miller, P.D., Jr., eds. Magnalia Dei:

The Mighty Acts of God - Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright. Garden City, NY. pp. 249-252.


870

Area Pal.: The Judean Palace-Fort (Chapter 14 in the Lachish final Excavation Report)

Documents