Reviews

TODD, I. A. (2013) Vasilikos Valley Project 12: The

Field Survey of the Vasilikos Valley. Volume III.
Human Settlement in the Vasilikos Valley. Studies
in Mediterranean Archaeology LXXI:12. Uppsala:
strms Frlag. ISBN 978-91-7081-251-4. Pp. xxx +
252; 19 figs, 207 pls (b/w) and 3 colour. Hardback
76.
Ever since 1976, the Vasilikos Valley Project (VVP) led
by Ian Todd has been surveying, excavating, and
recording in what has emerged as one of the most
archaeologically important areas of Cyprus, which
boasts a sequence of human occupation from the late
9th millennium BC down to the present day. Typical
of many projects of this nature, but with the added
complications of having had to undertake significant
amounts of rescue excavation the Bronze Age cemetery within Kalavasos village, the Early Chalcolithic
settlement of Kalavasos-Ayious, and parts of the
Late Bronze Age urban centre of Kalavasos-Ayios
Dhimitrios both the fieldwork itself and the final
publications have taken many years to complete.
Eight reports have now appeared and another four
are in preparation. The present volume is the final of
three devoted to the field survey of the valley. The
first, with the bulk of the survey data and a
summary of several excavations, was published in
2004 (VVP 9), while the study of the finds is in preparation (VVP 10). The tables of contents of both are
usefully summarized at the beginning of the current
volume ( pp. xxixxii) that nevertheless takes full
account of the other two in its aim to provide an
updated and analytic survey of the human settlement
history of the area in the light of modern scholarship.
Todd uses the short overview of the VVP presented
as Chapter 1 as an opportunity to reflect on changes in
the aims and methodology of the survey since the projects inception. Clear throughout the volume are the
consequences of necessary, but inevitably destructive,
economic development in the valley since the 1970s
(and especially in recent years), but also natural
events such as several disastrous forest fires in 2007,
even if the latter usefully removed much surface vegetation and improved archaeological visibility in some
areas (see pp. 133ff ). This underscores not just the fragility of the archaeological record but also the rapid
mutability of even its very recent editions.

Council for British Research in the Levant 2014

Published by Maney
DOI 10.1179/0075891414Z.00000000048

The book then serves two main functions. First, it

updates and corrects site information published in previous reports (see esp. the valuable 23-page Appendix I
at the end of the volume) while adding significantly to
the record of more recent settlements (including
modern villages), buildings, and others features that
were previously omitted or neglected (see below) but
whose significance is now recognized as integral to a
holistic landscape history extending down to the
modern day. Second, Todd weaves this information
into a critical narrative of the areas human history
in the light of ongoing academic debates about the
islands past, in particular our rapidly evolving knowledge of prehistoric chronology and social organization, metallurgy, and major social transitions.
Chapter 2 outlines the natural parameters for economic life in the valley and includes further thoughts on
geographical constraints already discussed in VVP 9,
as well as the likelihood of changing landforms
obscuring evidence for early occupation. Especially
notable is the substantial and important section (2.2)
summarizing evidence for mines, slag heaps (including
scientific analysis), and metallurgical activity at a
number of archaeological sites. Firm chronological
evidence for early mining activity remains elusive,
however. While there are very good reasons to
suppose that copper was being extracted by the
Middle Bronze Age (20001650 BC) onwards (see
also pp. 91, 956), definitive evidence only comes
from the Cypro-Archaic period (750475 BC) though
Todd believes that thereafter extraction was more or
less continuous until Late Roman times (see also
p. 106). Unfortunately, potentially significant parts
of the mining area lie within a military zone and
have never been surveyed intensively ( p. 19, also
p. 95). This section is also very useful for the history
of 20th-century mining (of silver and gold in addition
to copper), some of whose traces are rightly incorporated into the archaeological record as updated in this
volume. Also very useful is the survey ( pp. 2831) of
the areas clay sources and of pottery production, the
latter evident both for the Late Bronze Age at
Sanidha and the Late Roman period at Zygi. Todd
questions the oft-drawn connection between LBA
pottery production and metallurgy, suggesting this is
at best accidental [because of proximity of metal
and clay sources in the igneous zone] and not as

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

307

Reviews

direct as usually implied ( p. 30). He nicely follows up

this discussion of the more tangible, and sometimes
over-emphasized, staples of archaeological enquiry
(metal, pottery), with useful comments on the economic significant of olives (though this is very visible
in the archaeological record as early as the LBA
both at Ayios Dhimitrios and Tokhni-Oriti North
( pp. 323 and 120), carobs, and honey-production,
though little long-term diachronic evidence for the
latter two was detected.
Chapter 3 discusses specific site types. A short
section on the handful of Iron Age sanctuaries
one at Skourka in the mining area was probably connected with metallurgical production ( p. 356)
could perhaps have been placed elsewhere as the
chapter mainly deals with recent features recorded
for ethnographic purposes ( p. 37): water mills (catalogued and analysed by Jonathan Mitchell here and in
Appendix II, though the latter study largely dates
from 1981, with some updated observations); agricultural terraces (most difficult to date but cautiously
assumed to be mediaeval to modern by Todd in the
absence of firm evidence to the contrary, p. 38); field
shelters and animal folds; kilns and threshing floors;
but also less traditional features such as Kalavasos
Villages colonial-era police station or the valleys
industrial railway (a surviving sign from which features on the front cover). As with the survey of
modern villages presented in the chronological
survey in Chapter 4 ( pp. 112ff), this reminds us of
the evolving nature of regional surveys. These now
embrace a much wider conception of landscape
history and human lifeways, but also make a vital contribution towards their documentation. At the same
time, here and throughout the volume, the author is
very honest in stating where ethnographic or archival
work has not been undertaken, and in signalling
areas requiring future research.
Chapter 4 encapsulates the 10,000 years of human
history in the Vasilikos Valley, providing a detailed
update of the settlement picture in the light of
modern scholarship. This is particularly useful for
early prehistory which, like the Universe, is still
expanding and rapidly making even quite recent publications out of date, including those of the VVP. Space
does not permit a detailed commentary on his analysis
but some key insights can be flagged here. For the prehistoric period, this includes the likelihood that the
earliest occupation evidence from the key site of
Tenta belongs to the beginning of Cypro-PPNB with
further phases in evidence throughout this period,
but also at other sites in the survey area. There is
still a gap as elsewhere on the island between

308

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

the Late Aceramic Neolithic (which may not extend

as late as the Khirokitia phase of the latter) and the
Ceramic Neolithic. The latter period is widely represented but evidence suggests that society was not
fully sedentary, with the possibility of seasonal transhumance. Continuity with the Early Chalcolithic
seems assured, with long-term occupation (or at least
repeated reuse) of sites such as Pamboules which has
benefitted from recent re-excavation.
The Early Bronze Age remains problematic. While
the absence of Philia material need not be surprising
in itself, the recent unambiguous confirmation of an
Early Cypriot phase in the adjacent MaroniPsematismenos area will help to expand, and certainly
speculate further upon, the limited evidence for EBA
occupation in the VVP area. This may well be why
the succeeding Middle Bronze Age 93 sites with
material dated to this period seems so much more
busy by contrast, while the problem of dating Red
Polished pottery from surface sherds alone also probably masks the first century or more of the LBA as
well (rather than representing a reduction in settlement, p. 92). For the mature LBA, suggestively represented by much the same site distribution as the
MBA apart from the conspicuous shift of the most
archaeologically visible centre from Kalavasos
Village to Ayios Dhimitrios, Todd is cautious about
the role of metals in the development of the valley.
However he also questions the complete economic
centralization of the valley at Ayios Dhimitrios or
that it was necessarily the seat of a state (though see
p. 129 for another view). The suggestion that it
might instead have been mining town with a local
governor extracting taxes from the surrounding area
( p. 95) should be read in the light of Peltenburg and
Iacovous recent paper on the political structure of
the island in this period in the 2012 Parallel Lives conference volume (cited in the bibliography).
As elsewhere on the island, the period between the
end of the BA and the Cypro-Archaic period
remains very dark in terms of settlement numbers,
whatever else was going on in the major coastal
centres whether nascent or actual city-kingdoms
by these times which are much better lit by excavated data. While Todd accepts the general picture
of limited occupation, he is nonetheless cautious
about directly linking activities in the valley or
rather their absence to developments at the major
city-kingdoms of Amathus and Kition, in one of
whose territories the area was located in later times
at least. Furthermore, he uses the considerable increase
in Cypro-Archaic sites 83, that is 57% of the VVP
total, have produced material of this period, though

Reviews

as with the RP-sites of the Bronze Age they are very

hard to sub-divide chronologically to suggest that
the apparent absence of earlier Cypro-Geometric
sites is probably more apparent than real ( p. 100).
By the same token, one wonders whether the CyproClassical period was actually marked by such a
sharp decline in settlement, with numbers only reviving in the later Hellenistic and Roman periods to
enjoy something of the Late Antique floruit ( p. 102).
As for previous periods, Todd tends to read the
survey data straight, but he does note that the apparent prosperity of the Late Roman Period is thrown into
sharper relief by excavated evidence from the settlement of Kalavasos-Kopetra. Would survey data of
earlier periods be interpreted so baldly if we had excavated material from all these dark centuries? Todds
reading of the material confirms the traditional view
of the adverse impact of Arab raiding from the mid7th century AD and subsequent decline or extinction
of village life, even if the loss of archaeological visibility (in the form of survey material) remains extremely difficult to square with other sources of
evidence for ongoing occupation throughout the
Middle Ages.
Todd continues this chapter with a useful series of
comparisons with other surveys in Cyprus
( pp. 12231), though unfortunately the definitive publication of the Troodos Archaeological and
Environmental Survey Project in 2013 was not available for inclusion here. Here, the author is somewhat
pessimistic (though not as much as others, such as
Cherry cited on p. 122) about the ability to compare
datasets from different regions of the island. This is
not helped by the fact that survey data from closely
adjacent areas (such as the Maroni Valley) has not
been fully published, making it difficult to identify
substantive diachronic differences in regional settlement development (rather than simply in the archaeological record). Further, the updates provided in
Appendix I are a strong reminder that published
survey data cannot be regarded as a static record. In
this regard, the fact that the publication programme
of the VVP is still a work in progress has turned a
necessity into a virtue, as the completed set of
volumes will be far more current than if they had
appeared together sooner and within a shorter time
period. Hopefully, all this data can be presented in a
digital format that will allow not only easier comparison with other surveys, but also its regular updating in
line with new discoveries. While the high production
values of this volume are admirable, one cannot but
wonder if a costly printed format is ultimately the
best way to disseminate such material, especially as a

web-based production (or at least supplement) would

have allowed the more than 200 b/w images to be published in colour (and at a larger scale).
Early on in the volume the author somewhat ruefully
observes of the scale of construction in the valley, that
the ubiquitous solitude, so valued by the field surveyor,
is now rapidly disappearing (p. xxvii). The differences
between the two colour maps of the area published in
1963 and 1999 are a stark visual reflection of this.
Dotted throughout the text are various comments critical of reckless modern developments, as much because
of their impact on the natural environment as on the
archaeological (and more recent) heritage. Field survey
has evolved to become much more than a neutral
recording of (sometimes arbitrarily chosen) site types
within an equally neutral landscape in the manner
beloved of 70s processualists. Much of the value, and
certainly the individuality, of this volume lies in the
fact that it represents the authors long-term scholarly
and indeed personal commitment to the areas archaeology, in a way almost impossible to achieve today (even
by local archaeologists). Although by no means the
final summa of all archaeological knowledge of this
part of Cyprus, it certainly provides a vital and, moreover, reflective tool for its ongoing study, especially
given the authors confidence in the archaeological
riches of the valley that still await discovery (p. xxviii).
Thomas Kiely
The British Museum

NEHM Lala, MILIK, J. T. and SAUPIN, R. (2012) Atlas

archologique et pigraphique de Ptra, fasicule I,
De Bab as-Siq au Wadi al-Farasah. Paris: Acadmie
des inscriptions et belles-lettres. ISBN: 978-287754-286-9. Pp. 266; 51 plates. Hardcover 50.
This is the first of the three much awaited monumental
volumes of a catalogue of all the rock-cut monuments
and inscriptions of Petra, the Nabataean capital, magnificently produced in large format with extensive
colour photographs. This extremely useful volume
covers the areas at the entrance of the Siq (the
narrow chasm leading into the site) and along it to
the Khasneh, from there to the Main Theatre, along
al-Khubtah (the mountainside with the main classical
tombs on it) as far as the Tomb of Sextius Florentinus,
and Wadi al-Farasa (with the Soldier Tomb, etc.).
Thus, it includes all the major classical-style rock-cut
monuments (except ed-Deir) and sets them in the
context of the surrounding more numerous non-classical tombs, triclinia, niches, betyls, and inscriptions.
These are marked on four large loose plans with

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

309

Reviews

detailed symbols, which are defined at the beginning of

the volume. The cartographic work was done by the
late Ren Saupin.
The catalogue of monuments is followed by the
inscriptions and, finally, an analysis of the evidence
within each topographical area. The structure and
numbering system has ensured that, despite the large
amount of material involved, it is relatively easy to
follow. Fortunately, the numbering system of
Brnnow and von Domaszewski (1904) has been
retained for the tombs, which are followed by other
rock-cut monuments, such as triclinia and betyls, numbered only by Dalman (1908; 1912) (and prefixed with
1 or 10), and finally additional monuments. Each
entry includes a photograph of the monument, its
type, map co-ordinates, brief description, and bibliography. The descriptions include translations or
synopses of the observations of earlier scholars
which will be especially useful to readers more fluent
in French than in German, or without ready access
to Die Provincia Arabia or the volumes by Dalman.
Floor plans, largely of the more monumental tombs,
are included from earlier publications. The dimensions
of most of the other interiors, based on those in
I. Sachets unpublished thesis of 2006, are approximate
to 0.51.0 m. For most other tombs, the width of the
facade is not given and the photographs lack a scale,
but some sense of the relative sizes of the facades is
given by the topographical views at the end which
also provide the context of the monuments, especially
the facade-tombs. The catalogue of inscriptions
benefits from Nehms knowledge of Nabataean epigraphy, with discussion, a photograph, drawing, transcription, and translation of each, utilizing the records
of J.T. Milik, which she has augmented. It is incredibly
useful to have a comprehensive and up-to-date presentation of them all together. Extensive indexes cover the
different numbering systems, including those in the
unpublished theses of M.-J. Roche and D. Tarrier
whose work on betyls and banqueting rooms, respectively, is mentioned. There are also extensive indexes on
each aspect of and numbering systems for the
inscriptions.
Much information can be gleaned from the highquality photographs of the monuments methodically
presented both individually and together. For
example, the panoramic views reveal the extent to
which the topography, natural flaws in the stone, and
the cleavage planes influenced the positioning of the
tomb facades. Weak fissures across the rock were
avoided ( pl. XXIV). Damaged examples show how
the cleavage plane was followed (e.g. p. 47 no. 73,
p. 48 no. 76, p. 91 no. 800). The photographs also

310

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

reveal other details, such as the order in which the

three facades to the north at the top of the Main
Theatre were carved, moving north along the gorge,
from 164 to 165 to 166 ( p. 62), with each cut into
the stone left beside the earlier facade, with their orientation following the natural crevice ( pl. XXIX). The
photographs also reveal the extent to which inset
stone was used for details and repairs to faulty stone,
and the number of variations from the basic design
of each of the standard non-classical tomb faade
types.
Given Nehms expertise on Nabataean epigraphy,
it is particularly useful to have her assessments of the
dates of the inscriptions in the light of access to a
larger corpus than the Abb Starcky had when he formulated his judgements. Many Nabataean letter forms
are now found to have a wider chronological range
than previously thought, making it harder to date
the inscriptions if they lack any other chronological
information. I had hoped that it would have become
easier. This has implications for the overall chronology
of the monuments and our understanding of the development of Petra, as does recent archaeological work.
In view of the extent to which this volume will be
used for years to come, some of the chronological
issues raised should be mentioned here in some detail.
The earliest dated triclinium remains the Ashlah
Triclinium ( p. 33 no. 21), but it is still not possible
from the letter forms to determine whether it dates
to 96/95 or 62/61 BC ( p. 163 MP3). The palaeography
is an insufficient basis to provide a terminus ante quem
for the carving of tombs from inscriptions inside them,
such as the nefeshes in Tomb 825 ( pp. 19899
MP69092) or the tombstones found in the
Renaissance Tomb ( p. 73 no. 229) in 2003
( pp. 18687 nos. 136.1136.2). Similar problems
remain with narrowing the date of the bilingual
inscription of the 1st century BC or AD situated opposite the Obelisk Tomb (no. 35) and Bab es-Siq
Triclinium (no. 34) and referring to the construction
of a tomb or memorial by Abdomanchos
( pp. 16465 MP5). As this was not only for him, but
also for his children and grandchildren, it was presumably a substantial structure which was probably a
tomb, regardless of whether or not the monument
mentioned is the Obelisk Tomb and/or the Bab esSiq Triclinium (which I agree is problematic). Other
important issues are raised in the discussion of inscriptions, such as the issue of whether the form of his name
(with Abd) implies that Malichus I or II was deified,
like Obodas I a possibility increased by the evidence
suggesting the deification of some Nabataean queens
(McKenzie et al. 2013a: 203).

Reviews

In antiquity, as part of the construction project

installing the current paving of the Siq and pressure
water-pipes on its north side, a dam was constructed
at the entrance to the Siq, covering the north group
of the nefeshes that mention Rekem (the Nabataean
name of Petra). As Starcky had dated these palaeographically to the second half of the 1st century AD, Peter
Parr had used this as a terminus post quem for the Siq
paving and water system. However, pottery excavated
prior to the modern concreting of the Siq, indicates
that it was paved and the north water-pipes installed
towards the end of the 1st century BC (summarized
pp. 12728 B24, pp. 16567 MP 611, pp. 21013).
As Nehm notes, John Healey has observed that
there is nothing to rule out an earlier date than AD
50100 (Healey in Parr 2008: 86 n. 1).
The clearance of the Siq revealed that the niche with
Doric frieze and eye idol there ( p. 109, no. 1146) stood
on a tall rock-cut pedestal which starts below the level
of the paved roadway (Wenning in Mouton and
Schmid 2013: 345, fig. 3a and b). Thus, it was
carved before the paving, which provides a terminus
ante quem of the end of the first century BC, whereas
Nehm ( p. 109) gives a terminus post quem of the
end of the first century BC based on Parrs comments
(Parr 2008: 83). I had attributed this niche, along
with the Lion Triclinium, to a group D which I had
thought was probably contemporary with group C
(McKenzie 1990: 50). There is no doubt now that
no. 1146 is earlier than the Siq paving and, based on
the date of that, carved before the end of the first
century BC. As no. 1146 is much more weathered
than the Lion Triclinium, it is possible that they do
not both belong in the same group, so I would not
yet suggest a 1st-century BC date for the Lion
Triclinium as well.
The construction of the north water-pipe system at
the end of the 1st century BC provides a terminus
ante quem for the tomb facades into which the pipe
is cut. These include Double Pylon Tombs (with two
rows of crowsteps) no. 826 and three-sided no. 824,
Hegr Tomb 825 which was carved after them (contra
p. 97), and as the two-sided Hegr Tomb 64.1 (opposite
the Khasneh) with a more complex design with dwarf
pilasters in the attic (a feature not attested at Hegra
until AD 63/64). Thus, by the end of the first century
BC non-classical tomb types with either a row of crowsteps or pairs of staircases had developed (Double
Pylon and Hegr Tombs), and classical architectural
features used include pediments, Doric friezes, and
dwarf pilasters. The Double Pylon tomb-blocks, like
those carved free from the rock before the entrance
to the Siq (no. 7), might be dated to the 2nd or 1st

century BC ( pp. 3031) making them the earliest

tomb type in Petra (Mouton and Renel in Mouton
and Schmid 2013: 13560). Although Tomb 9
( pp. 3031) is also carved in three dimensions its
elements are classical, with an inset classical cornice,
and engaged half- and quarter-columns (with
missing capitals) on a pedestal.
The discovery of tomb facades below the modern
ground level in front of the Khasneh in 2003 was too
late for Nehm to insert them with full entries
( p. 44). Their importance and implications have not
generally been appreciated. The one on the axis of
the Khasneh is a Gable Tomb carved before the
tomb beside it (to its south), which was probably a
Hegr Tomb. These tombs were carved before the
Khasneh and before the Siq was paved. It has
escaped scholarly notice that this Gable Tomb
means that some simple classical tombs were carved
before more complex classical ones such as the
Khasneh. When working on The Architecture of
Petra I used the evidence available at the time (up to
1989), and suggested an overall development from
complex to simple in the classical monuments in the
treatment of decorative details. However, there is
now more information, which, it is important to
note, gives a more nuanced picture of the evolution
of the classical facades. There was in fact an initial
development of simple to complex, which was then followed by simplification of details and later, especially
after the Roman annexation of Arabia in AD 106, by
the appearance of new elements.
Similarly, there have been changes in our picture of
the evolution of Nabataean pottery. After some initial
developments, Schmids Dekorphase 1 (decorative
phase 1) of painted Nabataean fine ware began
earlier than previously thought, while phase 3c lasted
longer, because there is now more evidence from
earlier and later periods than he had with which to
work a point he makes himself (Schmid in
McKenzie et al. 2013b: 208 Table 18.1, pp. 20910;
Renel 2013). This comes from work at other sites
and in Petra city centre, especially by the French
near the Qasr el-Bint where stratified deposits from
the 4th century BC through to the 5th century AD
have been excavated (Graf in Mouton and Schmid
2013: 3551; Renel and Mouton in Mouton and
Schmid 2013: 5775). This new picture of the earlier
and later development of Nabataean pottery should
be kept in mind so that, when using any dates for
monuments based on ceramic chronology, it should
be remembered that examples of the different
Dekorphasen will overlap, sometimes being found in
later levels in diminishing amounts.

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

311

Reviews

Excavations in front of the Khasneh dated its construction to the end of the 1st century BC or beginning
of the 1st century AD. The paving in front, associated
with the monumental staircase to it, was probably
part of the same construction project as paving the
Siq at the end of the 1st century BC. The Khasneh
belongs to group A (the monuments with finely
carved floral capitals), with the Qasr el-Bint. The
pre-existing structures on a different orientation to
the Qasr el Bint were levelled around the mid-1st
century BC for the construction of its complex
(Mouton et al. 2008: 69), while recent work still indicates that the Temple of the Winged Lions was probably built in the first quarter of the 1st century AD
(Christopher Tuttle, personal communication, 1 June
2014). Thus, it is highly unlikely that the Khasneh
could date as late as the mid-1st century AD, as
implied by Nehm from Parrs comments ( p. 215),
although earlier she suggests just after the beginning
of the 1st century AD ( p. 44).
Nehm considers that the letter forms of the
masons marks on the Main Theatre, previously
used to date it to the 1st century AD, are not specific
to any one period ( p. 61 no. 161, p. 199 MP
693733, pp. 21718, 227). This does mean that its
date can no longer be based on the palaeography,
but does not have the serious implications for the
date of the rock-cut facades in group B that she
assumes. Like Tholbecq (in press), she has not realized that because the Soldier Tomb (no. 239) has
been dated as a result of archaeological excavations
in its forecourt by Schmid and his team ( pp. 7477),
it now provides the best indication of the group B
facades beyond Wadi Farasa, which also include the
Urn Tomb (no. 772) and the Silk Tomb (no. 770).
Schmid has dated the construction of the Soldier
Tomb and the adjoining complex, with Triclinium
235, to the third quarter of the 1st century AD,
based on ceramic evidence (Schmid in van der
Meijden and Schmid 2012: 186). Nehm accepts a
date in the second half of the 1st century AD for
them ( p. 225), but treats the chronology of the Silk
Tomb (no. 770) and the Urn Tomb (no. 772)
( p. 8788, 227) independently of that of the Soldier
Tomb, and dates them to the first half of the 1st
century AD, when they should be approximately contemporary with it. However, we still need to keep in
mind the fact that the date of the Soldier Tomb is
dependent on the pottery, and also that some monuments in group B might be slightly earlier or later,
depending on how long it lasted.
Nehm has dated the Renaissance Tomb (no. 229)
to a little after the mid-1st century AD or later

312

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

( pp. 73, 225). It has been given a terminus ante quem

of the last quarter of the 1st century AD ( p. 73)
because the vast majority of the pottery from the
tomb chamber, including all of it from under the
slabs, was of Schmids Dekorphase 3b. As acknowledged by Schmid himself, Dekorphase 3b ceased
around AD 100, but plus or minus 20 years (Schmid
in McKenzie et al. 2013b: 208 table 18.1 and p. 210;
personal communication, 30 May 2014). Thus,
although the ceramic evidence raises the issue of
whether the Renaissance Tomb was carved as late as
the 2nd century AD or how far into it, there are still
questions as to whether this occurred as early as the
mid-1st century AD.
As Nehm also accepts the attribution of the
Renaissance Tomb to the same group (F) as the
Tomb of Sextius Florentinus (no. 763) ( pp. 84,
22728), she suggests that a mid-1st century AD date
for the former would confirm the possibility that the
latter was carved in the Augustan period (27 BCAD
14), which Freyberger had suggested on stylistic
grounds ( p. 84), i.e. that a second-hand tomb was
used to bury the Roman governor of Arabia, who
died c. AD 126130, and his burial inscription ( p. 197
MP682) was added to the facade. However,
Freybergers early imperial dating of the temples at
Khirbet et-Tannur and Khirbet edh-Dharieh has
been disproven since by more recent archaeological
research and excavations which date them to the first
half of the 2nd century AD (McKenzie et al. 2013a:
4245 with references, 234). Although the Tomb of
Sextius Florentinus and the Renaissance Tomb have
related details, they are not identical (unlike, for
example, those on the Urn Tomb and Soldier Tomb,
which are very close to each other). The Renaissance
Tomb is unfinished and was less carefully carved,
with a roughly cut chamber and with graves only in
the floor (no loculi). Thus, the date for the Tomb of
Sextius Florentinus provided by its inscription
should not yet be rejected as an indication of when
the whole tomb was carved, especially as there is
now more evidence of monumental construction in
the city after the Roman conquest of Arabia in AD
106 (McKenzie et al. 2013a: 204 with references).
The Small Temple was erected for the Roman imperial
cult by 106114, and the Temenos Gate is of similar
date to it (both have identical floral pilaster capitals).
The monumental exedra for imperial statues was
built in front of the Qasr el-Bint by c. AD 165169
(Renel in Tholbecq 2013: 2122). This accords with
the evidence for the construction of the Nabataean
temples at Khirbet et-Tannur and Khirbet edhDharieh, 70 km north of Petra, in the first half of the

Reviews

2nd century AD, with their further development into

the 3rd century.
Nehm deduces that the Palace Tomb (no. 765) and
the Corinthian Tomb (no. 766) would date to the first
half of the 1st century AD because she assumes they
belong to a group (which, on p. 86, she assumes is E,
but no. 766 in fact belongs to C) which is later than
groups A and B but earlier than group F, in which she
has the Tomb of Sextius Florentinus dated to the mid1st century AD (pp. 22728). Consequently, Nehm has
compressed all of the main complex classical facades
into the 1st century AD, which obviously, if correct,
would have serious implications for our overall understanding of the development of Petra. However, given
the newly dated evidence for the erection of new monumental free-standing buildings after AD 106, it is possible
that some major facades could have been carved in that
period. An open mind should be kept about the date of
some of these, such as the Palace Tomb. We have a better
sense of the relative chronology of the classical facades
and approximate dates than of their absolute chronology.
When using this volume, the reader will need to keep in
mind archaeological discoveries made since its publication, especially those that might concern the dates of
the monuments and of the pottery on which these are
often based.
This is an essential volume for any library covering
Near Eastern or classical archaeology and architecture,
as it will be used for years to come, along with those by
Brnnow and von Domaszewski and by Dalman. As a
primary record of the monuments and of earlier work
on them, and for the discussion of the inscriptions, it
is superb. Thus, we look forward to the prompt appearance of the two remaining volumes. Nehm and all
those involved in the project are to be congratulated.
Judith McKenzie
University of Oxford

Bibliography
Brnnow, R. E. and von Domaszewski, A. 1904. Die Provincia Arabia I:
Petra. Strassburg: Trbner.
Dalman, G. 1908. Petra und seine Felsheiligtmer. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs.
1912. Neue Petra-Forschungen und das heilige Felsen von Jerusalem.
Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs.
McKenzie, J. S. 1990. The Architecture of Petra. British Academy
Monographs in Archaeology, vol. 1 (British School of Archaeology
in Jerusalem and British Institute at Amman). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
, Alexander, C. S., Barrett, D. G., Gilmour, B., Healey, J. F., O'Hea,
M., Schibille, N., Schmid, S. G., Wetterstrom, W. and Whitcher
Kansa, S. 2013a. The Nabataean Temple at Khirbet et-Tannur,
Jordan, Volume 1. Architecture and Religion. Annual of the
American Schools of Oriental Research 67. Boston: American
School of Oriental Research.
, Alexander, C. S., Barrett, D. G., Gilmour, B., Healey, J. F., O'Hea,
M., Schibille, N., Schmid, S. G., Wetterstrom, W. and Whitcher
Kansa, S. 2013b. The Nabataean Temple at Khirbet et-Tannur,
Jordan, Volume 2. Cultic Offerings, Vessels, and Other Specialist

Reports. Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research

68. Boston: American Schools of Oriental Research.
Mouton, M. and Schmid, S. G. (eds). 2013. Men on the Rocks, The
Formation of Nabataean Petra. Berlin: Logos Verlag.
, Renel, F. and Kropp, A. 2008. The Hellenistic levels under the
Temenos of the Qasr al-Bint at Petra. Annual of the Department
of Antiquities of Jordan 52: 5171.
Parr, P. J. 2008. Dating the hydraulic installations in the Siq at Petra.
Palestine Exploration Quarterly 140: 8186.
Renel, F. 2013. LAbandon du secteur du Qasr al-Bint Ptra: nouveaux
lments archologiques. Studies in the History and Archaeology of
Jordan 11: 34958.
Tholbecq, L. (ed.). 2013. Mission franaise De Ptra Wadi Ramm: le
sud Jordanien nabaten et arabe: Rapport des campagnes
archologiques 2012. Bruxelles: Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles.
in press (2014). Review of L. Nehm, Atlas, in Topoi 18.
van der Meijden, E. and Schmid, S. G. (eds.). 2012. Begleitbuch zur
Ausstellung PetraWunder in der Wste. Auf den Spuren von
J. L. Burckhardt alias Scheich Ibrahim. Basel: Schwabe.

ALPASS Peter (2013) The Religious Life of Nabataea.

Religions in the Graeco-Roman World, 175. Leiden;
Boston: Brill. ISBN 978-9-0041-9051-1. Pp. xvi +
256; 56 ill. Hardback. 134.
Ten years after J. Healeys The Religion of the
Nabataeans: A Conspectus (2001), what can a new synthesis on the same subject, published in the same collection, with the same editor offer the reader? This is
the question raised by the publication of this slightly
updated version of Peter Alpasss PhD thesis, defended
in 2011 at Durham University, under Ted Kaizers
supervision. Considering that previous approaches
gave too much attention to a united or systemic
reading of Nabataean religion an expression carefully avoided in this new book Alpass claims to
depart from Healeys work and tends to underline
the heterogeneity of religious expressions in the
Nabataean world. In doing so, he follows a general
trend that is widely observed in recent studies of
local pre-Roman religions, which aim at minimizing
the synthetic explanations for example, one may
think about the pseudo-pantheon of the Gallic divinities given in Caesars Gallic War that long obscured
the range of local religious expression, favouring
variety and fragmentation. The central question to
be tackled is whether we can discern any coherent religious system at play that is distinctive to the
Nabataean kingdom ( p. 8). This observation may be
relevant, but there is probably no need to emphasize
it heavily since the issue was already recognized by
J. Healey and J. Starcky before him. According to
Alpass, the keystone of the Nabataean Religious
Life should therefore be sought in regional identities,
which justify the books approach in dealing with separate geographical zones: Petra and its surroundings
(Chapter 2), Hegra (Chapter 3), the Negev desert
(Chapter 4), the Hauran (Chapter 5), and Three

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

313

Reviews

Sanctuaries in Central Nabataea, namely Kh. Dharih,

Kh. Tannur, and Dhat Ras (Chapter 6). Put in those
terms, and because of the disparity and unevenness
of the material, the question can only be answered in
the negative. If apparently logical, this approach may
then underestimate the fact that another dimension
of the Nabataean Kingdom is the mobility of its populations. Alpass is conscious of this aspect since he integrates Sia into his study because of its regional
significance, and because it was very likely used by
worshippers travelling from Nabataean territory
( p. 184), although the site did not belong to the
Nabataean territory for more than a few years.
However, the examples are numerous: one may think
for instance of the two dedications from Kh. Tannur
referring to Qos, the God of Hawara, which, as
F. Villeneuve recently suggested, might have been left
there by pilgrims from Hawara/Humayma
(Villeneuve in press). This mobility could actually
provide a useful analytical framework for the religious
practices extended to the Nabataean territory as a
whole.
Chapter 2, on Petras sacred places, is one of the
more developed sections of the book. It reflects
L. Nehms proposals differentiating public (here
understood as the temples), collective (the processional
ways, high-places, and rock-cut sanctuaries), and
private monuments (the triclinia, tombs, idol blocks,
and figurines). For instance, Alpass has certainly
rightly points out the weakness of the high-place as
a category and to underline the uncertainty of its collective use, but this is actually also true of the access
pathways whose processional character is certainly
overestimated. However, in the end, the conclusion is
weak: to underline the role and prominence of
water in Petras religious spaces is a truism, and to
evoke a deeper insight into the social patterns of
worship and an exhaustive model that remains actually rather vague, is no better ( p. 87). The understanding of Petras groups of worshippers has improved
recently thanks to Nehms study of the signatures distributed within the city; it establishes that no individual is attested in more than one sanctuary, which is
in itself a very important point but, because of the
scarcity of inscriptions, it fails to determine the
nature of the link ( professional or tribal) that ties
together the members of the religious associations,
the Obodas Chapel being the only exception where
the tie is clearly familial or tribal (Nehm 2013).
Alpass shows an excellent sense of synthesis
throughout his work and is often asking the right questions, as, for example in his Chapter 3 Hegra in
context: Nabataean towns in the Northern Hijaz.

314

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

Indeed, the use of data collected from Tayma,

Dedan, and Hegra is essential in reassessing Hegras
historical background, and this chapter provides one
of the first attempts to do so. Unfortunately, the
work is still in its infancy; the available evidence is
tenuous and thus limited in this study to a handful
of scattered inscriptions. Without a doubt the Saudi,
German, and French teams working in the area for
the last decade will establish a reliable chronological
framework for the occupation of the region and
provide the basic material studies that are currently
lacking. Unfortunately, we are far from achieving
that at present and elaborating on religion in Hegra
within that epistemological context appears therefore
to be an extremely difficult task. The same is true for
our comprehension of the religious life of Nabataean
Negev in Chapter 4. Similarly, in his conclusion to
the next chapter on the Hauran, the author recognizes
that the data raise important problems: very little
securely dated evidence, a study that is now restricted
to Bosra and its area, since it is now widely understood
that the northern Hauran did not belong to the
Nabataean Kingdom, and a variety of divinities set
apart from Dushara, that reflect a cultic and cultural
heterogeneity. This was already demonstrated by
D. Sourdel in his seminal Cultes du Hauran published
in Paris in 1952.
In other words, reading this book leaves a rather
mixed impression: Alpass exercises caution and
common sense that matches the numerous critical
lines of M.C.A. Macdonald, but his use of the data,
especially archaeological, lacks a bibliographical
update in a field that is rapidly changing some references have been hastily added before the submission of
the manuscript and are underutilized. In the end, it
does not allow radically different conclusions from
the ones drawn by previous scholars. A degree of
uncertainty in the chronological framework and
sources is also regrettable: Alpass claims to limit his
study to the Nabataean Kingdom, but repeatedly
refers to later sometimes much later sources,
for example, to the Roman phase of Petras pseudoGreat Temple or, in a very problematic way, to the
later phases of Kh. Dharih and Kh. Tannurs
temples, which underwent major post-annexation
developments that are widely used in the above-mentioned relevant chapter. At the end, the only
common denominators that finally emerge in the
books conclusion (Chapter 7) are rather disappointing: the aniconic tradition, ritual feasting, and
Dushara, although Alpass recognizes that the first
two elements are common to several Mediterranean
cultures, and that the worship of Dushara seems

Reviews

particularly emphasized outside Nabataea. Despite its

cleverness and diligence, the work is therefore not
entirely convincing. In my opinion, it would have
been more fruitful to concentrate on a specific,
poorly studied site similar to J. McKenzies recent
project on Kh. Tannur (see McKenzie et al. 2013)
with a more comprehensive analysis of basic data,
before starting to elaborate on this tentative renewed
synthesis. Similarly, G. Dalmans sketches published
more than a century ago are duplicated here again,
and the same is true for H.C. Butlers plans, even
though they should be used cautiously and systematically re-evaluated. It is a pity when academic peer
pressure results in scholarly publications that do not
fundamentally renew the debate. This is sometimes
encouraged by questionable editorial policies, though
considering the books price 134 Brills
Religions in the Graeco-Roman World series seems
to me a rather lucrative business.
Laurent Tholbecq
Universit Libre de Bruxelles

Bibliography
Healey, J. F. 2001. The Religions of the Nabataeans. A Conspectus.
Volume 136 of Religions in the Graeco-roman World. Lieden: Brill.
McKenzie, J., Alexander, C. S., Barrett, D. G., Gilmour, B., Healey,
J. F., O'Hea, M., Schibille, N., Schmid, S. G., Wetterstrom, W.
and Whitcher Kansa, S. 2013. The Nabataean Temple at Khirbet
et-Tannur, Jordan. Final Report on Nelson Gluecks 1937
Excavation, Vol. 1, Architecture and Religion, Vol. 2, Cultic offerings, Vessels, and other Specialist Reports. Boston: American
Schools of Oriental Research.
Nehm, L. 2013. The installation of social groups in Petra. In,
M. Mouton and S. Schmid (eds) Men on the Rocks: The
Formation of Nabataean Petra: 113127. Berlin: Logos Verlag.
Sourdel, D. 1952. Les Cultes du Hauran lpoque Romaine. Paris:
Geuthner.
Villeneuve, F. in press. Dharih and Tannur, centre of the Hasa valley or
stop on the main road? In, Schmid, S. (ed.) Central Places in Arabia
during the Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Common Trends and
Different Developments [Conference, Berlin, December 4th, 2009.].

DAVID L. KENNEDY, (2013) Settlement and Soldiers in

the Roman Near East. Variorium Collected Studies
Series CS 1032. Farnum, Surrey, Burlington and
Vermont: Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 9781409464365.
Pp. x + 288; 63 figs and 3 pls B/W. $165.00.
David Kennedy is well known to the readers of this
journal since the 1970s as one of the leaders in the
resurgence of scholarly interest in Roman Jordan. In
a career that now spans nearly 40 years and shows
no signs of slowing down, Kennedy has produced a
plethora of important publications on diverse aspects
on what long was, and to some degree still remains,
one of the least known provinces of the Roman
Empire. Few if any other scholars have, in fact, done
more to advance our knowledge of the wider Roman

Near East, the empires eastern frontier, and Roman

Arabia, especially the core of the province now
within modern Jordan.
The present collection in the Variorum series is a
small sample of 13 of Kennedys more influential
articles. Although, as the title of the volume suggests,
the main focus is on various kinds of settlements and
military topics from the Roman Levant, the collection
is also rather eclectic. A number of these articles
appeared in rather obscure publications. Thus, the
present collection will make these much more accessible, as they no doubt deserve. Kennedy introduces the
collection with a brief preface that places his own
research into the broader historiography of recent
research into the Roman Near East. The collected
articles are divided into three main parts: The
Roman Near East (2 articles), Settlement (3 articles),
and Soldiers (8 articles), all published between 1980
and 2006. A short section of addenda, in which
Kennedy briefly updates each article with subsequent
research, a list of additional references, and a useful
index complete the volume. Space does not permit a
full critique of all 13 articles here but this review will
focus on several of the more significant titles and at
least mention the other contributions.
Perhaps the most useful in terms of its broad appeal
is the very first paper, actually Kennedys review
article published in 2006 of Maurice Sartres The
Middle East under Rome, the 2005 English translation
and modified version of his original French monograph. Although theoretically a detailed review of
this important survey, Kennedy actually delivers far
more, in fact a tour de force of recent scholarship
about the Roman Near East set in a broader historiographical context. Thus, there is some treatment of
alternative views of the topic, such as Fergus Millars
argument for deep Hellenization of the region based
largely on documentary evidence and, as a counterpoint, Warwick Balls explicit and rather polemical
response to Millar (Millar 1994; Ball 2000).
Kennedy adds much useful bibliography either
unknown at the time to Sartre or published later. In
short, this article is an unparalleled introduction to a
field which has seen so much recent research.
A second title also with broad significance is
Demography, the Population of Syria, and the Census
of Q. Aemilius Secundus, originally published in 2006
in this journal. Ancient historians, lacking virtually any
reliable quantitative demographic evidence for the
ancient Mediterranean world, desperately grasp at a
few scraps of documentary evidence that purport to
offer such figures. In this article, Kennedy effectively
demolishes such attempts, even while acknowledging

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

315

Reviews

how critical such data need be, if we are ever to reconstruct such crucial topics as the nature of the ancient
economy. He is somewhat less pessimistic about reliance
on archaeological evidence, granted all its pitfalls, but in
the end retreats to a ballpark figure of three to four
million for Roman Syria. This indeed seems a reasonable
estimate to this reviewer. Kennedy nevertheless stresses
quite rightly that all recent regional surveys have underscored the greater scale and intensity of regional settlement in the Roman period compared with most other
historical periods.
The first article in the section devoted to
Settlement is The Identity of Roman Gerasa: an
Archaeological Approach, originally a 1997 conference paper published in 1999. This fascinating case
study must now be viewed in the context of
Kennedys subsequent monograph on Gerasa
(Kennedy 2007). The latter considers this Decapolis
city and its broader region from the perspective of
the influential synthesis of Horden and Purcells The
Corrupting Sea: a Study of Mediterranean History
(2000). The other contributions in this section in fact
deal with the wider landscape in northern Jordan:
The frontier of settlement in Roman Arabia: Gerasa
to Umm el-Jimal and beyond and Water supply
and use in the Southern Hauran, Jordan, published
in 2000 and 1995, respectively. The former study displays Kennedys considerable talents in exploiting
aerial photography much of which he has produced
himself during his career and underscores the
increasing evidence for intensification of the semiarid steppe under Roman rule. He expresses understandable frustration with the lack of closely datable
evidence to present a more nuanced picture of this
intensification, but the broad trend seems unmistakable. One may question his preferred explanation, i.e.
that the intensification of rural settlement probably
reflects the settlement of nomads, rather than an
expansion of sedentary population from the urban
centres farther west. However there is simply too
little evidence either way; both factors may of course
have played a key role in this process.
The third and final group of eight articles, Soldiers,
reflects both Kennedys wide geographical expertise,
ranging from Mesopotamia in the north (European
soldiers and the Severan Siege of Hatra) to southern
Jordan (Two Nabataean and Roman sites in southern
Jordan: Khirbet el-Qirana and Khirbet el-Khalde).
The former paper was originally published in the
acta of the first in a series of periodic conferences on
the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire which
Kennedy himself founded in 1986 while still at the
University of Sheffield. The latter paper reflects both

316

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

the potential and limits of what can be discerned

from these two key sites from aerial photography
and surface survey, but in the absence of stratigraphic
excavation.
Other titles in this section deal with the nuts and
bolts of the Roman army itself in this region, usually
based on reinterpretation of existing, but variously
interpreted, epigraphic evidence. One example deals
with the formation of an extraordinary command
(The special command of M. Valerius Lollianus),
which Kennedy prefers to date rather unconventionally to c. 123 AD as part of Hadrians reaction to
the so-called Parthian scare, rather than the more
conventional dating to Trajans Parthian War
(114117). Another (C. Velius Rufus) reconstructs a
notable military career in the late 1st century AD.
The piece titled Legio VI Ferrata: the Annexation
and Early Garrison of Arabia is the oldest publication
(1980) is this collection, yet it may still be read with
profit for a discerning analysis of the problematic
extant evidence of this vexed question. The broad conclusions it reaches are still quite sensible in the opinion
of this reviewer. The two remaining articles in this
section deal with other key topics: The military contribution of Syria to the Roman imperial army and
The construction of a vexillation from the army of
Syria.
What is not included should also be mentioned
when reviewing this volume. A glance at some of
Kennedys additional publications included in the supplemental bibliography at the end of the volume
underscores this point. More than a dozen additional
titles, some of great significance, are listed here. And
even these together with the 13 titles republished in
this collection comprise only a small minority of
Kennedys prodigious output. One could easily anticipate (and certainly hope for) one or even two more
such convenient collections of his work. However,
the present volume contains a nice slice of this great
scholars work.
S. Thomas Parker
North Carolina State University

Bibliography
Ball, W. 2000. Rome in the East: Transformation of an Empire. London:
Routledge.
Horden, P. and Purcell, N. 2000. The Corrupting Sea: A Study of
Mediterranean History. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kennedy, D. L. 2007. Gerasa and the Decapolis: A Virtual Island in
Northwest Jordan. London: Duckworth.
Millar, F. 1994. The Roman Near East, 31 BCAD 337. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.

YVONNE GERBER, MICHAEL D. GLASCOCK, LARRY G. HERR, GLORIA

LONDON, HECTOR NEFF, and BETHANY WALKER, edited by

Reviews

JAMES A. SAUER, and LARRY G. HERR (EDS.). (2012) Hesban

11. Typological and Technological Studies of the
Pottery remains from Tell Hesban and Vicinity.
Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.
ISBN: 978-0-943872-24-7. Pp. 816; 1 photograph.
Hardback $84.99.
Tell Hesban (Tal Hisban) is a natural hill occupied
from the Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age transition
and surmounted by the remains of a Mamluk-period
administrative town, which may have been connected
with the sugar cane trade of the Balqa district.
Situated 10 km north of the town of Madaba, in the
highlands of Transjordan, northeast of the Dead
Sea, Hesban lies in a region of deeply indented wadis
and hills to the north and west, and is bordered by
fertile plains to the south. First reported by Seetzen
in 1813, the archaeological site of Hesban was
visited by later 19th-century scholars drawn by its
association with the biblical Heshbon. This volume
is the 11th in a series that currently numbers 13 publications of the excavations at the site between 1968 and
1976, directed by Siegfried Horn and Lawrence Geraty
of Andrews University in Missouri. It was co-edited by
the late James Sauer, to whom it is also dedicated, a
scholar well known for his major contribution to
ceramic studies of the Iron Age and Classical periods
in Jordan, and in particular for his pioneering work
in giving the Islamic-period pottery serious scientific
attention (Sauer 1973). Sauer was the driving force
behind the establishment of a ceramic occupation
sequence at the site, and the appearance of Hesban
11 is an important addition to his work, enabling
specialists working with material culture from this
timeframe to access a large and important corpus
from central Jordan. This is significant when many
excavation projects of comparable size have yet to
reach full publication, and uncommon today when
most archaeological projects lack the resources to
tackle such large bodies of multi-period finds.
In a short introduction, Herr outlines the motivation behind the monograph and gives an appraisal
of the problems inherent in Sauers corpus. The
pottery chosen for the volume reflects the Iron Age
and Classical focus of the initial work at Hesban, testifying directly to Sauers expertise, as it includes diagnostic examples which he himself selected from
archaeological contexts from the early to mid-1970s
excavation seasons. The main consideration was the
vessel form, and in many cases the pottery derived
from unreliable strata, and located in the typology
solely on the basis of Sauers own experience and judgement. Pre-mediaeval phases at the site were heavily

disturbed by Mamluk-period construction, and most

of the Iron Age, Classical and Early Islamic pottery
presented here is from archaeological contexts
removed from the tell or from excavation squares contaminated by earlier or later material (see pp. 45,
17576, 508, 531). Nonetheless, this is an important
assemblage that is especially useful in the broad
chronological perspective it offers, reinforced here by
Gloria Londons petrographic study (Chapter 5), and
in the comprehensiveness of the pottery catalogue.
The authors of the individual ceramic chapters are
thorough in describing the archaeological provenance
of the pottery they present, commenting on the relative
contextual value of each group in the catalogue. In
Chapter 2, Herr presents the Iron Age to Hellenistic
pottery, drawing on extensive comparanda from
Jordan and Palestine published up to 1999, making
particular reference to the nearby site of Umayri
which produced a more reliable typo-chronology
than Hesban. In this way he adds considerable value
to the study, circumventing many of the limitations
inherent in the data. Impressive in its scope, this
chapter could nonetheless have benefitted from the
inclusion of some accompanying discussion, commenting on the significance of the material in relation
to current research themes in the Iron Age Levant.
The largest component of Hesban 11 is Chapter 3,
an exhaustive study by Gerber of Hellenistic, Roman,
and Byzantine pottery from Sauers excavations
which undoubtedly makes the volume an essential
tool for students and scholars of classical archaeology
in the southern Levant. Gerber discusses both the significance and limitations of the assemblage which
again derives principally from unstratified deposits,
while the more recent completion of this section is
reflected by the scope of the bibliography, which
draws on and makes use of recent well-published
sequences in Palestine. Gerbers work demonstrates
that the chronology for these time periods advanced
by Sauer in 1973 was largely correct, and she throws
significant new light on the important role which
regionalism played in Levantine artisanal and technological traditionsthe Tell Hesban pottery shows
close Palestinian connections, in contrast to nearby
Madaba, which demonstrates more obvious links
with the Nabataean material culture sphere. An
increasing trend towards such regional distribution patterns and influences is attested in the Late Roman and
Byzantine periods at the site, when, as at Jarash in
northern Jordan, on-site production features predominantly in the assemblage.
In Chapter 4, Walker documents the Islamic periods
at Hesban, continuing and refining the formative work

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

317

Reviews

by Sauer at the site. While highlighting the significance

of his corpus, she points out some of the methodological problems in using this material, compiled prior to
the refinements to regional typologies in intervening
decades, following Sauers early work in defining
Abbasid, Fatimid, and Ayyubid/Mamluk sequences.
It is now possible to identify pottery from the Fatimid
and Crusader eras, and Walker has investigated the
continuity or rupture of settlement at Hesban in the
16th century and later, suggesting that it was occupied
on a seasonal basis. A useful discussion informs the
text, assessing the merits or limitations of the chronology and of the sampled contexts, and a full bibliography is provided up to 2000. Walkers own
excavations here have concentrated on the Mamluk
period in particular, when Hesban was a regional governmental centre in an empire run from Cairo, but also
included the excavation of an Ottoman-period cemetery and the investigation of the surrounding region
(Walker 2001; LaBianca and Walker 2007). She has
added ceramic types to the catalogue, notably
Mould-decorated lead-glazed ware, which was well
represented and offers a material correlate for the presence at Hesban of Mamluk lites, given its rarity elsewhere in the Levant outside its probable place of
production in Jerusalem.
Chapter 5 reflects the importance given to the discussion of ceramic technology in the volume.
Londons petrographic study is ambitious, taking full
advantage of a corpus of pottery which provides a diachronic perspective on artisanal traditions covering
Sauers Iron 1 to Mamluk period divisions at
Hesban. Twelve main ware groups are identified
across the assemblage. The author presents a compelling discussion of the ceramic industry at the site
( pp. 73443), emphasising the contrasting tendencies
towards technical continuity and innovation, and
highlighting the skilled craftsmanship of potters who
successfully resolved complex technological problems
they encountered. London demonstrates that Islamicperiod potters sought the same solutions to problems
encountered in the production and use of vessels in
the first half of the 1st millennium BC, when the
addition of limestone tempering is dominant. In the
short final chapter, Glascock and Neff follow up on
Londons study with the results of the Instrumental
Neutron Activation Analysis of 99 ceramic samples
of Iron Age pottery from Tell Hesban and Umayri,
revealing most notably the high degree of inter-

318

Levant

2014

VOL.

46

NO.

regional exchange that took place in this part of the

southern Levant at that time.
The volume could, however, have been made accessible to a wider readership by the inclusion of an overarching discussion drawing together the results of the
specialist studies and taking advantage of the long
chronological coverage of the material, stretching as
it does for more than 2000 years. An explanation of
the social significance of the pottery at both site and
regional levels is lacking, and this might have permitted the reader to consult the work with more
ready reference to the other Hesban excavation monographs, such as the final publication on the Hellenistic
and Roman levels (Mitchel 1992). The readers experience is sometimes rendered difficult by layout problemsin particular the contents and figure lists are
presented as long unbroken lists of text, and are
rather hard to negotiate. The inclusion of at least a
small number of photographic plates could also have
facilitated the readers appreciation of the corpus,
and possibly mitigated the need to include such a
large number of black and white figures, although
these illustrations are clear and readily consultable in
the accompanying tables. Overall, Hesban 11 is an
exhaustive presentation of an important assemblage
of primary ceramic data, and it will be welcomed by
specialists and students of pottery throughout the
Levant. The comprehensive petrographic section and
the chapters on Classical and Islamic period ceramics
stand out in underlining the archaeological significance of Tell Hesban for a wider community of scholars, and go a long way in broaching the social
significance of the material in its respective historical
periods.
Stephen McPhillips
University of Copenhagen

Bibliography
LaBianca, . S. and Walker, B. J. 2007. Tall Hisban. Palimpsest of great
and little traditions of Transjordan and the Ancient Near East. In,
T. E. Levy, P. M. Daviau, R. W. Younker and M. Shaer (eds)
Crossing Jordan. North American Contributions to the
Archaeology of Jordan: 11120. Sheffield: Equinox Publishing.
Mitchel, L. A. 1992. Hellenistic and Roman Strata: A Study of the
Stratigraphy of Tell Hisban from the Second Century BC to the
Fourth Century AD. Berrien Springs: Andrews University.
Sauer, J. A. 1973. Hesbon Pottery 1971. A Preliminary Report on the
Pottery from the 1971 Excavations at Tell Hesban. Berrien
Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.
Walker, B. J. 2001. The Late Ottoman cemetery in Field L, Tall Hisban.
American Schools of Oriental Research 322: 119.