Navigation – Plan du site
Articles

Henri de Contenson’s archaeological fieldwork in the Eastern part of the Jordan Valley: a re-evaluation

Zeidan A. Kafafi
p. 69-82

Résumés

Suite à la reprise de travaux à Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh (Shuneh Nord) et aux fouilles conduites sur la rive orientale du Jourdain, à Pella, Abu Hamid, Ghassul et sur la rive occidentale à Tell Tsaf, cet article se propose de revoir la périodisation des trois sites de la Vallée du Jourdain, Shuneh, Abu Habil et Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh el-Tahta sondés par H. de Contenson en 1953. Ces établissements, au vu de la céramique et de quelques rares vestiges architecturaux, nous paraissent avoir été occupés pour la première fois à la période chalcolithique et Shuneh Nord l’être resté aussi au Bronze ancien.

Haut de page

Notes de l’auteur

Thanks are due to Dr. Geneviève Dollfus, Dr. Yorke Rowan and Dr. Khairieh ʿAmr for reading the manuscript, making the necessary remarks and editing the English language, to Mr. Yusef Al-Zu‘bi for arranging the plates and to Mr. Ali Omari for drawing the map.

Texte intégral

Introduction

  • 1 Contenson 1960a.
  • 2 Contenson 2004, p. 177.
  • 3 Mellaart 1962, map.

1In 1953 Henri de Contenson and James Mellaart started an archaeological survey in the area extending from the Yarmuk River in the north, to the plains of Moab in the south 1. The main aim of the survey was to sound and register archaeological sites threatened by demolishing due to the diversion of the Yarmuk River to the Tiberias Lake 2. In addition to the surveying operations, few sites were sounded, and only three of them, Tell esh-Shuneh, Tell Abu Habil and Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta are located in the eastern side of the Jordan Valley (fig. 1) 3.

Figure 1

Figure 1

map showing major IVth millennium sites in the Jordan Valley.

2During the last decades regular excavations have been re-started only at Tell esh-Shuneh, in the meantime, others were undertaken at contemporaneous sites also situated at the eastern side of the Jordan River, such as Tabaqat Fahil (Pella), Abu Hamid and Teleilat Ghassul. The results of the excavations conducted at sites located on the western part of the Valley such as Neve Ur, Tell Tsaf and Munhata are of great importance for re-evaluating the material culture published by Contenson.

3To study the excavated archaeological objects encountered by Contenson and Mellaart in 1953, we present first a brief discussion about the investigated sites.

Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh 4

  • 4 Map reference 207224.

4Tell esh-Shuneh el-Shamaliyyeh is located in the northern part of the eastern side of the Jordan Valley. It is situated on one of the main routes which connect northern Palestine and Jordan, a fact that probably contributed to its importance. The site overlooks the Wadi el-‘Arab at about 4 km southeast of the confluence of the Yarmuk and the Jordan Rivers, and is part of a large tell ca. 1 km long and 10 m high.

  • 5 Contenson 1960a, 1960b, 1960c.
  • 6 Contenson 1960b, p. 58.
  • 7 Contenson 2004, p. 178.
  • 8 Contenson 1960b, p. 58.

5The site was originally surveyed and sounded in 1953 by J. Mellaart and H. de Contenson 5. The test trench, excavated in three units, was carried down 4 m to bedrock, 19 layers belonging to six levels were recognized. Level I (Layers 19-17) was first dated from the Middle Chalcolithic 6, but this date has been reconsidered by the excavator and thought to belong to the Early Chalcolithic 7. Level II (Layers 15-14) was dated from the Late Chalcolithic. Both levels were separated by a sterile layer (Layer 16). Levels III (Layers 13-8), IV (Layers 7-4), and V (found only in Mellaart’s probe trench) were dated from the Early Bronze Ages I, II and III, respectively. Level VI (Layers 3-2) yielded objects of the Medieval Arabic period. This level is located under a disturbed layer (Layer 1) 8.

  • 9 Contenson 1960a, p. 20; 1960b, p. 69-75.
  • 10 Contenson 1960a, p. 25.
  • 11 Ibrahim et alii 1976, p. 49.

6Contenson noted that level I produced bow-rim jars and connected it with Jericho VIII, Beth Shan Pits and Stratum XVIII, Tell Abu Habil I, Murrabba‘at, ‘Amuq D, and the upper part of Ras Shamra IV 9. Level II was said to be contemporary with Beth Shan XVIII-XVI, Megiddo XIX and with Tell el-Far‘ah II 10. It should be noted that, during a visit to the site in 1975 by the Jordan Valley Survey team, no sherds of level I were found 11. By this time the tell was badly eroded and threatened by human activities.

  • 12 Gaube 1985; 1986.
  • 13 Baird & Philip 1992; Philip & Baird 1993.

7During the 1980s, Carrie Gustavson-Gaube excavated several test trenches at the site 12. The results of her work are presented below. Moreover, the site has been re-excavated by G. Philip and D. Baird during the early 1990s of the last century 13.

Tell Abu Habil 14

  • 14 Map reference 20451972.
  • 15 Glueck 1951, p. 275-276.
  • 16 Contenson 1960a, p. 31-49.
  • 17 Kafafi 1982.
  • 18 Contenson 2004, p. 177.

8Tell Abu Habil is located south of the Wadi el-Rayyan (el-Yabis). It was first explored by N. Glueck 15, and later sounded by Mellaart and Contenson in 1953 16. In 1975 it was again resurveyed by Ibrahim, Sauer and Yassine, whose Neolithic/Chalcolithic pottery sherds and flint tools were studied by myself 17. Contenson and Mellaart excavated two soundings. The excavated archaeological material was 2 m thick, containing a series of superimposed dwellings pits 18.

  • 19 Contenson 1960a, p. 35.
  • 20 Contenson 1960a, p. 37.
  • 21 Contenson 1960a, p. 44.

9In Trench II (3 x 2 m) bedrock was reached at a depth of ca. 2.5 m, and ten layers belonging to three levels were recognized. Level I (Layers 10-8) corresponds with Tell esh-Shuneh I, Jericho VIII, Beth Shan Pits and Stratum XVIII and Tell el-Far‘ah I. It was called by the excavator Middle Chalcolithic 19. Level II, called Middle Chalcolithic B, was called Ghassulian although no typical Ghassulian elements were found. The loop-handle with splayed attachment found here appears to be a survival from level I 20. Level III is also related to the Ghassulian Culture, or Middle Chalcolithic B, and Contenson considered it contemporary with level II 21.

Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh el-Tahta 22

  • 22 Map reference 20461861.
  • 23 Contenson 1964, p. 37.
  • 24 Glueck 1951, pl. 149.
  • 25 Contenson 1960a, p. 56; 1960b.

10During the 1953 survey conducted by J. Mellaart and H. de Contenson in the Yarmuk and the Jordan valleys, four sites in the Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh vicinity were identified and named as : Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh esh-Sharqi, Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Gharbi, Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh esh-Shemali and Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta. The last site is situated to the west of Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh el-Gharbi on a terrace among the “qattar hills” overlooking the Jordan River. The site has been assigned to the Late Chalcolithic and described as a Ghassulian site 23. However, Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta was first visited by N. Glueck who collected pottery sherds with herringbone incisions 24. This site was later sounded by Mellaart and Contenson who related the material excavated to the Chalcolithic period 25.

  • 26 Contenson 1960a, p. 49-50.
  • 27 Contenson 1960a, p. 56-57.

11Five layers were recognized, of which Layers 5 and 4 were found in a pit, while Layers 3, 2 and 1 covered the whole excavated area of the site 26. According to the excavators, the excavated pottery sherds and flint tools agree to date this settlement to the Middle and Late Chalcolithic periods (Ghassulian). This puts it on the same horizon as Tell esh-Shuneh II and Tell Abu Habil II-III levels 27. Unfortunately, the excavator did not publish the excavated archaeological material according to their stratigraphic sequences.

Period

Tell

esh-Shuneh

Tell

Abu Habil

Tell

es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta

Early Chalcolithic / Middle Chalcolithic

Level I

Level I

Middle Chalcolithic B

Level II + III

(Ghassulian)

Ghassulian

Late Chalcolithic

Level II

Ghassulian

Early Bronze Age I

Level III

Early Bronze Age II

Level IV

Early Bronze Age III

Level V

Islamic

(Ayyubid / Mamluk)

Level VI

Chronology

12The excavators of the sites Tell esh-Shuneh, Tell Abu Habil and Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta based their dating on the study of the excavated pottery. A parallel study of the recognized forms has been done. Unfortunately, not a single C14 date has been obtained from the three sites at that time as this scientific dating method was not in common use by archaeologists working in the Levant during the 1950s and 1960s.

Figure 2 : chronology of Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh as suggested by the excavators.

Period

Contenson

1953

Gustavson-Gaube

1984-1985

Philip and Baird

1991-1992

Early Bronze Age III

Shuneh V

Early Bronze Age II

Shuneh IV

Early Bronze Age I

Shuneh III

Curvilinear structures

Phase III

Early EBI

Area A: Loci 73, 23

Area D: Locus 66 = pit

Locus 42 = curvilinear wall

Late Chalcolithic

Shuneh II

Ghassulian+Esdraelon

Red-burnished Ware

Rectilinear Structures

Phase II

Chalco./Esdraelon

Area D, Locus 93 = mudbrick platform

Middle Chalcolithic

Gap (Layer 16)

Early Chalcolithic

Shuneh I (PNB)

Late Neolithic / Chalcolithic

Phase I

Chalco./PNB-related

Late Neolithic

  • 28 Garfinkel 1999.
  • 29 Garfinkel 1999, p. 104.
  • 30 Wright 1937; Contenson 1960a.

13During the last decades several archaeological excavations which produced levels dated from the VIth, Vth and IVth millennium bc have been conducted in the Jordan Valley. Based on the results of these excavations Y. Garfinkel 28 proposed three different sub-phases to the Chalcolithic: Early, Middle and Late. The phases are correlated with a number of sites and different fabrics. The Early Chalcolithic includes Jericho VIII/PNB and Wadi Rabah; the Middle Chalcolithic comprises Tell Beth Shan XVIII, Tell Tsaf, the lower levels at Teleilat Ghassul and the Qatifian Culture and the Late Chalcolithic contains the upper level at Ghassul, the Beersheba sites, ossuary burial caves in the coastal plain, the Golan Heights and the Hula Valley cultures 29. However, his understanding of the term Chalcolithic seems to be different than those offered until the end of the 1950s 30, which is as the following:

Term

Wright 1937; Albright 1949, Glueck 1951 and Contenson 1960a

Garfinkel 1999

Late Chalcolithic

Esdraeolon (Gray Burnished Ware)

Ghassul E-A

Beer Sheba’

Middle Chalcolithic

Ghassul-Beer Sheba’

Beth Shan XVIII

Beth Shan XVIII Ware

Qatifian Ware

Tel Tsaf

Tell esh-Shuneh 19-17, Tell Abu Habil, Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta, Ghassul Phases I-F

Early Chalcolithic

Yarmukian Jericho PNB/VIII

Jericho PNB/VIII

Wadi Rabah

  • 31 Braun 2004, p. 39-41.
  • 32 Braun 2004, p. 41.
  • 33 Fitzgerald 1934; 1935.
  • 34 Garfinkel 1999, p. 153-188.
  • 35 Kafafi 1998.
  • 36 Garfinkel 1999: photos 96-97; fig. 114.

14E. Braun 31 denied considering Beth Shan ware as a truly ware and to be used as an indicator for the Middle Chalcolithic as explained by Garfinkel. In addition, he declared that the term Middle Chalcolithic used by Garfinkel is not acceptable 32. To define, the Beth Shan XVIII pottery assemblage was encountered in the basal levels of the tell and the pits excavated under it 33. This pottery assemblage has been studied by Y. Garfinkel and he described it as all handmade, with a finish of poor quality compared to the Wadi Rabah pottery and decorated with applied and red/brownish paintings 34. In fact, it is clear that Beth Shan XVIII includes a mixture of wares. For example, pottery sherds related to the Ghrubba ware excavated at Abu Thawwab 35 are identical with those published by Y. Garfinkel from both Beth Shan XVIII and Tell Tsaf 36. This remark invites us to raise the question: is the Beth Shan XVIII pottery assemblage, as identified by Garfinkel, identical with the Ghrubba clay vessels industry?

  • 37 Garfinkel 1999.
  • 38 Lovell 2001.
  • 39 Dollfus & Kafafi 1993.

15The published pottery vessels from the three sites under discussion are dated from the Middle Chalcolithic by Y. Garfinkel 37. However, it should be mentioned that these sites are located in the middle and northern parts of the Jordan Valley. In this area, the Tell Abu Hamid site is the only site to produce a stratigraphical sequence from the late VIth millennium to the middle IVth millennium bc which was supported by C14 dates 38. It is very much obvious that Abu Hamid produced three different pottery assemblages, the earliest named as post-Yarmukian (lower levels), Wadi Rabah (middle levels) and the Ghassulian (upper levels) 39. Based on a parallel morphological study we think that the majority of the published pottery sherds from Tell esh-Shuneh North, Abu Habil and Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta are closer in date to the excavated pottery assemblage from Abu Hamid upper levels rather than to the ones of the middle or the lower levels.

  • 40 Dollfus & Kafafi 2001.
  • 41 Kerner 2001, p. 54, Table 3.9.
  • 42 Garfinkel 1999.

16Using the terms Early, Middle and Late for the Chalcolithic period seems a misleading one and more stratified pottery assemblages are still necessary to reach a sub-division of the Chalcolithic period 40. However, in my opinion, the Chalcolithic term should not exceed the pottery assemblages attributed to the Ghassulian/Beer Sheba’ culture. Though scholars, such as S. Kerner 41 and Y. Garfinkel 42, agree upon using the term Early Chalcolithic for the Wadi Rabah and Jericho PNB/VIII pottery assemblages, I would argue that the archaeological remains attributed to those pottery assemblages reflect in several ways a development from the preceding Pottery Neolithic assemblages. This might enforce our claim that scholars cannot decide on a sharp line which separates between the Late Neolithic and the beginning of the Chalcolithic. Several sites (Pella, Abu Hamid and Ghassul) showed a continuation and succession of occupation from the Late Pottery Neolithic through the Chalcolithic.

Pottery

Tell esh-Shuneh Pottery

17In order to ascribe a date for level I, other than an “Early” or “Middle Chalcolithic”, it is essential to take a closer look at the material.

18The pottery vessels from level I at Tell esh-Shuneh are handmade. The ware is crude and poorly fired and small inclusions are found; red slip or paint is used for decoration. One rim sherd in the collection is slightly burnished, while another has a red burnished slip covering the entire surface. Thumb intended bands or straight horizontal incisions made with fingernail are also found.

  • 43 Contenson 1960a, p. 16.

19Very few forms were distinguished within the sherds found in level I, but they include cups, bowls, hole-mouth jars, straight-necked jars and jars with swelling neck (bow-rim). Handles are large loop-handles with elongated attachment. They are occasionally decorated with painted vertical bands of red paint. Lug handles are also found. Bases are flat, with either a sharp join at the base and angular sharp, or with a smooth, curving join. They are sometimes decorated with a red slip outside, or a red burnished inside and outside; painted red bands or a white slip on the outer surface occurs 43.

  • 44 Fitzgerald 1934; 1935.
  • 45 De Vaux 1947; 1948; 1955; 1961.
  • 46 Droop 1935; Ben Dor 1936.
  • 47 Contenson 1960a.
  • 48 Contenson 1960b.
  • 49 Contenson 1960b.

20Parallels for these types have been found at Beth Shan Pits and Stratum XVIII 44, Tell el-Far‘ah 45, Jericho VIII 46 and Tell Abu Habil 47. Contenson reported that the earliest phase of occupation at Tell esh-Shuneh is related to the Early Chalcolithic (Layers 19-17) which yielded pottery sherds parallel to those excavated at Jericho VIII/PNB 48. He added that a gap of occupation (Layer 16) followed and separated it from the Late Chalcolithic phase (Layers 15-14) 49.

  • 50 Leonard 1992.
  • 51 Gustavson-Gaube 1985; 1986.

21In addition to the published information by Contenson, it has already been published that the excavations conducted by James Mellaart near the western edge of Tell esh-Shuneh did not show any archaeological evidence earlier than the EBI 50. Carrie Gustavson-Gaube who resumed the excavations in 1984 and 1985 at Tell esh-Shuneh came to the same conclusion as Contenson did. She connected the earlier phase of occupation with rectilinear multi-room structures and dated it from the PNB/Chalcolithic period. This, according to her, was developed into Early Bronze Age I 51. It must be noted that the excavated areas by Gustavson-Gaube (5 m x 5 m) and Mellaaart (undecided) were too small to come to a final conclusion.

Abu Habil Pottery

  • 52 Contenson 1960a, p. 45.

22Contenson’s use of the terms Early Chalcolithic or “Yarmukian” for Megiddo XX, part of Tell el-Farʿah North I, Mugharet Abu Usbaʿ and parts of Jericho IX and VIII 52 is no longer acceptable, in light of the Munhata, Pella, Abu Hamid and Teleilat Ghassul recent excavations.

  • 53 Contenson 1960a, p. 33.
  • 54 Contenson 1960a, p. 34.

23The pottery from levels I and II is similar to that found in level I at Tell esh-Shuneh. The ware is coarse, with small mineral inclusions 53. It is handmade, using the technique of coil construction. Decorations include thumb impressions and red slips. Very few forms occur in level I; they include bowls with a band of red paint over and inside the rim, hole-mouth jars, jars with a swelling neck (bow-rim), and pot-stands. Bases are either flat or concave. Some of the flat bases have mat impressions. Parallels for these forms occur at Tell esh-Shuneh I, Beth Shan Pits and Stratum XVIII, and Jericho VIII 54.

  • 55 Contenson 1960a, p. 37.

24Level II produced only bowls and jars. The bowls are painted with red paint around the rim, while the jars are hole-mouth jars or jars with short, everted necks. These can be paralleled with examples from Megiddo XX-XIX, Tell Fendi, Tell es-Sa‘idiyyeh el-Tahta, Tell el-Far‘ah I, Jericho VIII and Murabbaʿat 55.

Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh el-Tahta Pottery

  • 56 Contenson 1960a, fig. 32: 7 and 8.
  • 57 Contenson 1960a, fig. 32: 14, 17.
  • 58 Lovell et alii 2004, p. 264.

25As for Tell esh-Shuneh and Tell Abu Habil, the pottery vessels were handmade. Bowls, jars and pithoi are the main forms recognized in the excavated pottery assemblage. Some of the published sherds 56 may also have been used as cups. This is based on the parallel study of the published pottery from Tell esh-Shuneh and Tell Abu Habil. Moreover, the published bowls with a sharp lip 57 are typical with those called V-shaped bowls sometimes with a red painted band on the rim. This form is typical to those found at Abu Hamid in the upper levels (ca. 4200-3800) 58.

Pottery Forms

  • 59 Lovell 2001, p. 34.
  • 60 Ali 2005, fig. 33, 45.

26Several forms of clay pots were recognized amongst the assemblages excavated at the three sites under study. For example, the sites of Tell esh-Shuneh and es-Saʿidiyyeh yielded small cups (no 1-3) and V-shaped bowls (no 4-6) with a red-painted band on the rim similar to those excavated at Teleilat Ghassul and dated from the Late Chalcolithic 59. In addition, parallel cups and V-shaped bowls were encountered at Abu Hamid/upper levels 60.

  • 61 Kafafi 1982, fig. 10-12.

27During the Jordan Valley Survey in 1975, the collected pottery sherds assemblage from Abu Habil included spoons, V-Shaped bowls and jars and were considered to be parallel to the Jericho PNB/VIII and the Chalcolithic period 61. However, it should be noted that based on a parallel study with those excavated in stratigraphical contexts such as Abu Hamid, they should be dated from the Late Chalcolithic period.

28The most dominant form of the published pottery pots from the three sites published by Contenson is the jar type. Different forms were recognized and may be classified as the followings:

  1. Bow-rim Jars (no. 7-12): two types of jar belonging to this form were published by Contenson from the three sounded sites and are as follows:

    1. High-necked bow-rim jars (nos. 7-10);

    2. Short-necked bow-rim jars (nos. 11-12).

  2. Hole-mouth jars (no. 13-22):

    1. Simple hole-mouth jars (no. 13-15);

    2. Hole-mouth with a red painted band on the rim (no. 16-20);

    3. Hole-mouth jars with a red paint and rope-moldings (no. 21);

    4. Hole-mouth jars with fingernail impressions (no. 22).

  3. Globular jars (no. 23).

  4. Necked-Jars (no. 24-25).

  5. Pithoi/Large Jars (no. 26-28).

Architecture

  • 62 Contenson 1960a, p. 13, 20; fig. 18.
  • 63 Contenson 1960a, p. 14.
  • 64 Dollfus & Kafafi 1988 ; Dollfus et alii 1988.

29The published information from Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh discussing the excavated architectural remains is scanty (fig. 3). It includes a pit (Layer 19) dug into the virgin soil, which is dated from the Middle Chalcolithic and represents the earliest occupation of the site and a fragmentary wall dated from the Late Chalcolithic (Layer 14) 62. In the area located very close to the opening of the pit, there was a hearth measuring about 75 cm in diameter and walls made of round pebbles coated with clay. Additionally, a platform built of large flat unfired pebbles was found 63. This type of structure reminds us of what has been uncovered in the upper levels at Tell Abu Hamid, in the middle of the Jordan Valley and dated from the IVth millennium 64.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Chalcolithic architectural remains excavated at Tell esh-Shuneh (after Contenson 1960a : Fig 18)

  • 65 Contenson 1960a, p. 25-28.
  • 66 Gustavson-Gaube 1985 ; 1986.
  • 67 Baird & Philip 1992; Philip & Baird 1993.
  • 68 Contenson 1960a, p. 32.

30Contenson also published a fragmen-tary wall and a platform dated from the Early Bronze Age I and II period (Layers 13 and 7) which were uncovered at Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh 65. Several walls and floors were also uncovered at Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh during the archaeological excavations conducted by C. Gustavson-Gaube 66 and G. Philip and D. Baird 67. Unfortunately, due to the small size of the excavated area at Tell Abu Habil, only very little can be said about the architectural remains from the site. However, a pit dug into the virgin soil and filled up with ashes belonging to level I has been encountered. In addition, a very thick hard floor related to level III was reported 68.

Discussion

  • 69 Masson et alii 1934 ; Gophna & Sadeh 1989 ; Lovell 2001 ; Lovell et alii 2004 ; Ali 2005.

31First it has to be noted that after the archaeological fieldwork conducted by Contenson and Mellaart in 1953, archaeological excavations resumed at the site of Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh alone. Thus, it is obvious that our discussion is mainly focused on this site; in the meanwhile, we have only presented the results of the soundings of the other two sites, Tell es-Saʿidiyyeh el-Tahta and Abu Habil. However, the recent studies published from other sites such as Pella, Abu Hamid, Teleilat Ghassul and Tell Tsaf helped in the re-evaluation process of the published material from those sites 69. Based on the parallel study presented above, it has to be noted that the three sites were first established during the Chalcolithic period (the Contenson Late Chalcolithic) and Tell esh-Shuneh esh-Shamaliyyeh continued to be occupied during the Early Bronze Age I.

32Henri Contenson has to be greatly thanked for his work at the three studied sites for such a work opened doors for more studies of the Chalcolithic period in the south of the Levant. He is one of the pioneers in studying the early village communities in the Levant.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Ali (N.) 2005 The Development of Pottery Technology from the Late Sixth to the Fifth Millennium bc in Northern Jordan. Ethno- and archaeological Studies : Abu Hamid as a Key Site, BAR International Series 1422, Oxford.

Baird (D.) & G.  Philip 1992 “Preliminary Report on the First (1991) Season of Excavations at Tell esh-Shuna North”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 31, p. 461-480.

Baird (D.) & G.  Philip 1994 “Preliminary Report on theThird (1993) Season of Excavations at Tell esh-Shuna North”, Levant, 26, p. 111‑133.

Ben-Dor (I.) 1936 “Pottery of the Middle and Late Neolithic Periods”, dans J.  Garstang, I.  Ben-Dor & G.M.  Fitzgerald éd., Jericho: City and Necropolis. Report for the Sixth and Concluding Season 1936, II, Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, XXII.

Braun (E.) 2004 Early Beth Shan (Strata XIX-XIII): G. M. Fitzgerald’s deep cut on the Tell, Philadelphie, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, University Museum Monograph 121.

Contenson (H. de) 1960a “Three Soundings in the Jordan Valley”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 4-5, p. 12-99.

Contenson (H. de) 1960b “La chronologie du niveau le plus ancien de Tell esh-Shuna (Jordanie)”, Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Joseph de Beyrouth, 57, p. 55-77.

Contenson (H. de) 1960c “Tell esh-Shunah”, Revue Biblique, 68, p. 546-556.

Contenson (H. de) 1964 “The 1953 Survey in the Yarmuk and Jordan Valleys”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 8-9, p. 30-47.

Contenson (H. de) 2004 50 ans des tessons. Propos sur l’Archéologie Palestinienne, Paris.

Dollfus (G.) & Z.  Kafafi 1988 Abu Hamid, village du IVe millénaire de la vallée du Jourdain, Amman, Economic Press.

Dollfus (G.) & Z.  Kafafi 1993 “Recent Researches at Abu Hamid”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 27, p. 241-262.

Dollfus (G.) & Z.  Kafafi 2001 “Jordan in the Fourth Millennium”, dans F.  Khraysheh éd., Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan, VII, Amman, Department of Antiquities of Jordan, p. 163‑172.

Dollfus (G.) et alii 1988 “Abu Hamid, an Early Fourth Millennium Site in the Jordan Valley”, in A. N. Garrard & H.-G. Gebel éd., The Prehistory of Jordan. The State of Research in 1986, Part ii, BAR International Series 396 (ii), Oxford, p. 567‑601.

Droop (J. P.) 1935 “The Pottery of the Chalcolithic and Neolithic Levels”, dans J.  Garstang, J. P.  Droop & J.  Crowfoot éd., Jericho: City and Necropolis, Fifth Report, Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology, XXII, p. 169-173.

Fitzgerald (G.) 1934 “Excavations at Beth-Shan in 1933”, Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement, 66, p. 123-134.

Fitzgerald (G.) 1935 “The Earliest Pottery of Beth-Shan”, Museum Journal, 24, p. 5-7.

Garfinkel (Y.) 1999 Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant, Jerusalem, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Qedem, Monographs of the Institute of Archaeology, 39.

Glueck (N.) 1951 “Exploration in Eastern Palestine, Part I-II”, Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 25-28.

Gophna (R.) & S.  Sadeh 1989 “Excavations at Tell Tsaf: An Early Chalcolithic Site in the Jordan Valley”, Tel Aviv, 15/16, p. 3-36.

Gustavson-Gaube (K.) 1985 “Tell Esh-Shuna North 1984: A Preliminary Report”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 29, p. 43-87.

Gustavson-Gaube (K.) 1986 “Tell Esh-Shuna North 1985: A Preliminary Report”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 30, p. 65-114.

Ibrahim (M.), J. Sauer & K.  Yassine 1976 “The East Jordan Valley Survey, 1975”, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 222, p. 41-67.

Kafafi (Z.) 1982 The Neolithic of Jordan (East Bank), Unpublished Ph. D. submitted to the Freie Universität Berlin.

Kafafi (Z.) 1998 “Late Neolithic in Jordan”, dans D. O. Henry éd., The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan, British Archaeological Reports, 705, Oxford, p. 127-138.

Kerner (S.) 2001 Das Chalkolithikum in Jordanien. Die Entwicklung handwerklicher Spezialisierung im 6. bis 4. vorchristl. Jts. in der südlichen Levant, Rahden, Verlag Marie Leidorf.

Leonard (A.) 1992 “The Jordan Valley Survey, 1953: Some Unpublished Soundings conducted by James Mellaart”, Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 50.

Lovell (J. L.) 2001 The Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods in the Southern Levant. New Data from the Site of Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan, Monographs of the Sydney University, Teleilat Ghassul Project 1, BAR International Series 974, Oxford.

Lovell (J. L.), G.  Dollfus & Z.  Kafafi. 2004 “The Middle Phases at Abu Hamid”, dans F.  al-Khraysheh éd., Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan, VIII, Amman, Department of Antiquities of Jordan, p. 263-275.

Mallon (A.), R.  Koeppel & R.  Neuville 1934 Teleilat Ghassul I. Compte rendu des fouilles de l’Institut Pontifical 1929‑32, Rome, Biblical Institute Press.

Mellaart (J.) 1962 “Preliminary Report of the Archaeological Survey in the Yarmuk and Jordan Valley for the Point Four Irrigation Scheme”, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 6-7, p. 126-158.

Philip (G.) & D.  Baird 1993 “Preliminary Report on the Second (1992) Season of Excavations at Tell esh-Shuna North”, Levant, 25, p. 13-36 (with contribution by D. Rowan and T. Holden).

Vaux (R. de) 1947 “La première campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far‘ah, près Naplouse. Rapport Préliminaire”, Revue Biblique, 54, p. 394-433.

Vaux (R. de) 1948 “La seconde campagne de fouilles à Tell el-Far‘ah, près Naplouse. Rapport Préliminaire”, Revue Biblique, 55, p. 544-580.

Vaux (R. de) 1955 “Les Fouilles de Tell el-Far‘ah, près Naplouse. Cinquième Campagne, Rapport Préliminaire”, Revue Biblique, 62, p. 541-589.

Vaux (R. de) 1961 “Les Fouilles de Tell el-Far‘ah. Rapport Préliminaire sur les 7e, 8e, 9e Campagnes, 1958‑1960”, Revue Biblique, 68, p. 557-592.

Wright (G. E.) 1937 The Pottery of Palestine from the Earliest Times to the End of the Early Bronze Age, New Haven, American Schools of Oriental Research.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Contenson 1960a.

2 Contenson 2004, p. 177.

3 Mellaart 1962, map.

4 Map reference 207224.

5 Contenson 1960a, 1960b, 1960c.

6 Contenson 1960b, p. 58.

7 Contenson 2004, p. 178.

8 Contenson 1960b, p. 58.

9 Contenson 1960a, p. 20; 1960b, p. 69-75.

10 Contenson 1960a, p. 25.

11 Ibrahim et alii 1976, p. 49.

12 Gaube 1985; 1986.

13 Baird & Philip 1992; Philip & Baird 1993.

14 Map reference 20451972.

15 Glueck 1951, p. 275-276.

16 Contenson 1960a, p. 31-49.

17 Kafafi 1982.

18 Contenson 2004, p. 177.

19 Contenson 1960a, p. 35.

20 Contenson 1960a, p. 37.

21 Contenson 1960a, p. 44.

22 Map reference 20461861.

23 Contenson 1964, p. 37.

24 Glueck 1951, pl. 149.

25 Contenson 1960a, p. 56; 1960b.

26 Contenson 1960a, p. 49-50.

27 Contenson 1960a, p. 56-57.

28 Garfinkel 1999.

29 Garfinkel 1999, p. 104.

30 Wright 1937; Contenson 1960a.

31 Braun 2004, p. 39-41.

32 Braun 2004, p. 41.

33 Fitzgerald 1934; 1935.

34 Garfinkel 1999, p. 153-188.

35 Kafafi 1998.

36 Garfinkel 1999: photos 96-97; fig. 114.

37 Garfinkel 1999.

38 Lovell 2001.

39 Dollfus & Kafafi 1993.

40 Dollfus & Kafafi 2001.

41 Kerner 2001, p. 54, Table 3.9.

42 Garfinkel 1999.

43 Contenson 1960a, p. 16.

44 Fitzgerald 1934; 1935.

45 De Vaux 1947; 1948; 1955; 1961.

46 Droop 1935; Ben Dor 1936.

47 Contenson 1960a.

48 Contenson 1960b.

49 Contenson 1960b.

50 Leonard 1992.

51 Gustavson-Gaube 1985; 1986.

52 Contenson 1960a, p. 45.

53 Contenson 1960a, p. 33.

54 Contenson 1960a, p. 34.

55 Contenson 1960a, p. 37.

56 Contenson 1960a, fig. 32: 7 and 8.

57 Contenson 1960a, fig. 32: 14, 17.

58 Lovell et alii 2004, p. 264.

59 Lovell 2001, p. 34.

60 Ali 2005, fig. 33, 45.

61 Kafafi 1982, fig. 10-12.

62 Contenson 1960a, p. 13, 20; fig. 18.

63 Contenson 1960a, p. 14.

64 Dollfus & Kafafi 1988 ; Dollfus et alii 1988.

65 Contenson 1960a, p. 25-28.

66 Gustavson-Gaube 1985 ; 1986.

67 Baird & Philip 1992; Philip & Baird 1993.

68 Contenson 1960a, p. 32.

69 Masson et alii 1934 ; Gophna & Sadeh 1989 ; Lovell 2001 ; Lovell et alii 2004 ; Ali 2005.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1
Légende map showing major IVth millennium sites in the Jordan Valley.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/170/img-1.png
Fichier image/png, 256k
Titre Figure 3
Légende Chalcolithic architectural remains excavated at Tell esh-Shuneh (after Contenson 1960a : Fig 18)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/170/img-2.png
Fichier image/png, 90k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/170/img-3.png
Fichier image/png, 583k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/170/img-4.png
Fichier image/png, 536k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/syria/docannexe/image/170/img-5.png
Fichier image/png, 449k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Zeidan A. Kafafi, « Henri de Contenson’s archaeological fieldwork in the Eastern part of the Jordan Valley: a re-evaluation », Syria, 83 | 2006, 69-82.

Référence électronique

Zeidan A. Kafafi, « Henri de Contenson’s archaeological fieldwork in the Eastern part of the Jordan Valley: a re-evaluation », Syria [En ligne], 83 | 2006, mis en ligne le 01 juillet 2016, consulté le 26 novembre 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/syria/170 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/syria.170

Haut de page

Auteur

Zeidan A. Kafafi

Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology
Yarmouk University
Irbid, Jordan

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

© Presses IFPO

Haut de page
  • Logo IFPO
  • Logo CNRS - Institut des sciences humaines et sociales
  • Logo Maison Archéologie & Ethnologie
  • Logo ERIH PLUS | NSD
  • OpenEdition Journals