ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

SUPPLEMENT 42

ACROSS THE BORDER:

LATE BRONZE-IRON AGE RELATIONS
BETWEEN SYRIA AND ANATOLIA
Proceedings of a Symposium held
at the Research Center of Anatolian Studies,
Koç University, Istanbul
May 31–June 1, 2010
Edited by

K. Aslıhan YENER

PEETERS
LEUVEN – PARIS – WALPOLE, MA.
2013
 CONTENTS

Introduction: Imperial Demise and Forging Emergent Kingdoms . . . . . . 1

K. A. YENER

SECTION A:
EXCAVATIONS IN LEVANTINE TURKEY
AND LEVANTINE SYRIA

Chapter 1
New Excavations at Alalakh: The 14th–12th Centuries BC . . . . . . . . . 11
K. A. YENER

Chapter 2
The Late Bronze Age Fortresses at Alalakh: Architecture and Identity in
Mediterranean Exchange Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
M. AKAR

Chapter 3
Tayinat in the Early Iron Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
T. P. HARRISON

Chapter 4
Chatal Höyük in the Amuq: Material Culture and Architecture during the
Passage from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age . . . . . . . . . . . 89
M. PUCCI

Chapter 5
The Crisis of Qatna at the Beginning of the Late Bronze Age II and the Iron
Age II Settlement Revival. A Regional Trajectory towards the Collapse of the
Late Bronze Age Palace System in the Northern Levant . . . . . . . . . . . 113
D. MORANDI BONACOSSI

Chapter 6
Shedding New Light on the Elusive Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages at Tell
‘Acharneh (Syria) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
M. FORTIN and L. COOPER
vi CONTENTS

Chapter 7
Sabuniye: A Late Bronze-Iron Age Port Settlement on the Northeastern
Mediterranean Coast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
H. PAMIR

Chapter 8
A Re-evaluation of the Late Bronze to Early Iron Age Transitional Period:
Stratigraphic Sequence and Plain Ware of Tarsus-Gözlükule . . . . . . . . 195
S. YALÇIN

Chapter 9
Exploring Sirkeli Höyük in the Late Bronze Age and its Interregional Con-
nections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
E. KOZAL

Chapter 10
The Transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age at Tell Afis,
Syria (phases VII-III) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
F. VENTURI

SECTION B:
EXCAVATIONS IN EASTERN TURKEY
AND EASTERN SYRIA

Chapter 11
Across Assyria’s Northern Frontier: Tell Fekheriye at the End of the Late
Bronze Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
P. V. BARTL and D. BONATZ

Chapter 12
Between the Musku and the Aramaeans: The Early History of Guzana/Tell Halaf 293
M. NOVÁK

Chapter 13
Some Implications of Revised C14 and Dendrochronological Dating for the
“Late Bronze Levels” at Tille Höyük on the Euphrates . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
G. D. SUMMERS

Chapter 14
The Late Bronze Age to Early Iron Age Transition: A Perspective from the
Upper Tigris River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
T. MATNEY
 CONTENTS vii

Chapter 15
Neo-Hittite Melid: Continuity or Discontinuity? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349
M. FRANGIPANE and M. LIVERANI

Chapter 16
Pottery as an Indicator of Changing Interregional Relations in the Upper
Euphrates Valley. The Case of the Late Bronze-Iron Age Assemblages from
Arslantepe/Malatya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
F. MANUELLI

Chapter 17
New Excavations at the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age Site of Gre Amer on
the Garzan River, Batman Province . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
G. PULHAN and S. R. BLAYLOCK

SECTION C:
FUNERARY PRACTICES, TEXTS AND THE ARTS

Chapter 18
Funerary Practices and Society at the Late Bronze-Iron Age Transition.
A View from Tell Shiukh Fawqâni and Tell an-Nasriyah (Syria) . . . . . . . 423
A. TENU

Chapter 19
Working Ivory in Syria and Anatolia during the Late Bronze-Iron Age . . . 449
A. CAUBET

Chapter 20
Arts and Cross-Cultural Communication in the Early 1st Millennium:
The Syro-Anatolian Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465
S. MAZZONI

Chapter 21
The Luwian Inscriptions from the Temple of the Storm-God of Aleppo . . 493
J. D. HAWKINS

Chapter 22
Qadesh, Sea-Peoples, and Anatolian-Levantine Interactions. . . . . . . . . . 501
K. STROBEL

Chapter 23
An Amulet with the Names of Ramesses II from the Roman Baths at Ankara 539
H. PEKER
 CHAPTER 10
THE TRANSITION FROM THE LATE BRONZE AGE
TO THE EARLY IRON AGE AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA
(PHASES VII–III)

Fabrizio VENTURI

ABSTRACT

The Levant was involved in profound changes between the end of the 13th century BC
and the beginning of the 12th century BC; the fall of the Hittite Empire in north western
Syria and the withdrawal of Egyptian domination from Canaan created a sudden power
vacuum and gave rise to important changes in the material culture. The disintegration of
the city state system, the arrival of new populations such as the “Sea Peoples,” the settlement
of Aramaic tribes (in the case of Syria ), continuity and discontinuity in the reorganization
of societies; these are all topics linked to this much-debated period. The analysis of such
phenomena, made possible by abundant documentation from Cyprus and the cities of the
Philistine Pentapolis, has been given new evidence from the northern Levant, thanks to
increasing information from Cilicia, the Amuq, and new excavations on the Syrian coast.
To this documentation we can add the evidence from the site of Tell Afis, situated on the
north western Syrian plateau. The long stratigraphical sequence that was uncovered has
allowed us to define an extensive picture of the material culture and architecture of the site
on the eve of the changes which swept through the Levant at the end of the Late Bronze
Age. Furthermore, it enabled us to analyse the processes through which the site subsequently
developed a new urban and cultural model in the so-called “Dark Age.”

INTRODUCTION

The transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age in the Levant is marked
by the collapse of the Egyptian and Hittite empires, which dominated the political
scene during the 14th–13th centuries BC, and by the fall of city state administrative
and political systems, which led to a period of crisis called the “dark age.” A long tra-
dition of studies and debates focussing on this period has been devoted to regions
such as Cyprus and the southern Levant and it has been demonstrated that these
centuries were not as dark as previously believed, but rather an arc of time character-
ized by a wide-reaching dynamic of cultural interactions stimulated by the crisis of the
dominant powers.
228 F. VENTURI

In recent decades increasing research and the important archaeological and textual
discoveries coming from both the Turkish and Syrian sides shed new light on our
knowledge of the period and enable us to deal with this complicated issue from
a Northern Levant perspective as well. Tell Afis is one of the sites, which, thanks to
its uninterrupted stratigraphical sequence covering a span from the 13th to the 10th
century BC, allows an analysis of the cultural and urban development of a town on
the eve of the important transformations which took place at the end of Late Bronze
Age and the beginning of Early Iron Age in the Levant.
The site is situated in Syria in the district of Idlib, on the border of a fertile plateau,
called Jazr in the medieval period, 40 km from the Bab el Hawa pass and 60 km SW
of Aleppo.1 The Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age sequence has been investigated in
area N2 and E4, respectively on the eastern and western slopes of the acropolis (Fig. 1).
The results of area E4 will be presented here, summing up the findings of 23 years of
archaeological activity, already published in preceding articles, preliminary reports and
books3, and adding new unpublished information coming from the latest two cam-
paigns.

LATE BRONZE AGE II

Architecture

Three phases (VII–VI and Vb) can be ascribed to this period. In phase VII, the area
was occupied by residence F (Fig. 2), partly exposed in its western limits on a surface
of 450 sq. m. The building shows a coherent plan divided into distinct sectors. The
doors in the rooms were systematically set in the opposite corners, creating a bent-axis
circulation. The southern sector is composed of rooms F4-5-6-11. As the floors of
these loci have not yielded any material in situ, it is difficult to suggest any kind
of function. The F6 floor presents numerous re-pavings and burnt traces, so we can
therefore suggest some industrial activities. Even if badly damaged by later pits, Room
F11 is clearly a pillared room (7.5 x 5 m) divided into two parts on its longitudinal
axis by a row of wooden supports. The three bases preserved were made of a single flat

1
In the Seventies, together with Ebla/Tell Mardikh and Tell Tuqan, the site was part of a wide
excavation project directed by Prof. P. Matthiae. Since 1986, the site has been under the direction of
Prof. S. Mazzoni.
2
Affanni 2005.
3
The excavation in area E4 started in 1988 and since 1992 has been conducted under my direction.
Since 2004 the work has been accomplished with the co-direction of Barbara Chiti, who is also respon-
sible for the CAD rendering of the plans of phases VII-IV-III. The most recent preliminary reports on
the area are in Chiti 2005; Pedrazzi 2002, 2005; Venturi 2002, 2005. A comprehensive presentation of
the excavation results is in Venturi 2007. About the LB II/EIA sequence in area E4, see also Venturi
2008b, 2010.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 229

roughly cut stone (75 ≈ 50 ≈ 40 cm) sunken into the floor. The northern sector was
the most important area of the building and has its main space in room F8 (8 ≈ 4.5 m),
equipped with a low bench set against its southern wall. From this locus it was pos-
sible to reach the kitchen F3 through the narrow vestibule F7, and the small second-
ary rooms F1-2 to the west. Kitchen F3 was equipped with a tannur, and a horse-
shoe-shaped hearth. Some vessels and grinding stones lay near its eastern wall. Rooms
1-2 display high-quality architecture with heavily plastered floors and walls. These two
loci lack materials in situ, but in the south eastern corner of room F2, a cuneiform
tablet in the Hittite language was found in 2008. A third door in room F8 opens
towards the north into F12, the excavation of which was accomplished during the
2009 campaign. Unfortunately the western part of this narrow space (5 ≈ 2.5 m) has
been almost completely lost owing to a rectangular pit from phase Vb. In any case, the
eastern part was well-preserved and contained a big storage jar, a shallow plate, a bur-
nished one-handled lentoid asymmetrical pilgrim flask, and four cuneiform tablets;
three in local crude reddish clay and one made of fine greenish clay of the same type
as the one found in F2. This tablet, like the F2 one, was written in the Hittite lan-
guage. The excavation of room F13 in 2010 revealed four more badly damaged tab-
lets, one of these again, written in Hittite. The scattered arrangement of these texts
suggests that they belong to a more numerous corpus located elsewhere in the building
and testify to its public function.4
Residence F was intentionally abandoned, its walls razed and the rooms filled. With
phase VI, the area was occupied by an open-air industrial complex. The only dwelling,
consisting of a single rectangular room, was arranged just above room F12 of build-
ing F, but the majority of the area was occupied by sunken firing installations
(Figs. 3-4) and pits. The lack of any waste material residues makes it difficult to iden-
tify the functions of these productive equipment. Structure 9002 (Fig. 4) was an oval
pit (4 ≈ 2.30 ≈ 2.30) lined with mud bricks. The vitrification of the inner coating and
the burnt wooden elements found in the filling suggest that it was a combustion
chamber. Despite evidence of intensive use, this occupation must have occurred for
only a short period; we presume that these installations could have been functional
for the building of the residences of the following important urban period represented
by phase Vb.
This phase is now exposed over about 800 sq. m and testifies to a complete rebuild-
ing of the area with changes in the urban plan (Fig. 5). The surface previously occu-
pied by building F was divided into two distinct blocks by a paved street C, along
which smaller residences abutted. Even if smaller in size, these residences do not show

4
The other six tablets made of local clay found in rooms F12-13 were basically administrative texts
written in Akkadian. The whole corpus of texts from building F has been published in Archi-Venturi
2012, p. 47.
230 F. VENTURI

any loss in building technique. In particular, residence A is delimited by 2 m thick

walls and is characterized by the use of large squared stones for door frames and stair-
cases. The plan consisted of a wide central room A1 accessible from a bent-axis vesti-
bule A6 and a group of secondary rooms surrounding the main central space. Room
A1 was divided into two parts by a wooden structure and was probably the reception
room. The secondary rooms, A2-A7, had a storage function and they contained all the
pottery in situ. The southern building B, despite its northern 3-metre-thick wall, has
a more domestic aspect. The main space is represented by the broad room B1 divided
into two parts by a row of six stone pillar bases. The dimensions (8.50 ≈ 6.50 m) of
the room are slightly bigger than those of F11 in phase VII, but the clearest difference
is represented by the pillars, which are now made of ashlar rectangular blocks
(65 ≈ 40 cm), 100-120 cm high, laid directly on the floor. They divided the space
into two distinct sections of different sizes; the larger western part was plastered, while
on the contrary, the eastern part was stone-paved.5 Even if a door on street C was set
towards the NE, B1 was accessible only through rooms B2–B6. It was certainly the
real focus of the house; as a matter of fact, the majority of the material was arranged
in its western part, where many activities took place (storage, food transformation and
cooking). Room B5, equipped with three tannurs, was probably a kitchen.

The Pottery6

The three analyzed phases show a homogeneous pottery assemblage without

remarkable changes from one period to another, from which we can highlight some
well-identifiable features. The pottery industry shows a strong standardisation of forms
and pottery types. In phase Vb, the mass-produced local plain ware makes up 84% of
the total selected diagnostic sherds. Imported pottery is completely lacking and the
presence of painted pottery is negligible. The most ubiquitous fabric in common ware
shows a prevalent reddish-yellow surface colour (Munsell soil charts 7.5YR6/6 or
5YR6/8). Cross-sections have an inner very pale brown (10YR7/4) colour and greyish
core. The clay is composed of a high percentage of black and white mineral inclusions,
and surface-finishing, such as burnishing or slip are very rare.
Distinctive for the period is the high proportion of shallow bowls with rounded or
small, flat base. The high standardisation of the production led to a great simplifica-
tion of rim-types, which are simple, bevelled or outwardly thickened (Figs 7.1–11).
The same type of clay was also used for kraters which frequently display rectangular
or triangular flaring rim (Figs. 7.12–14, 16), but the thick flat rims with inner projec-
tion are also well attested (Fig. 7.15). When preserved, the body of the kraters shows

5
For a discussion on pillar buildings in the Levant, see Venturi 2008a.
6
All the pottery presented in this article is drawn by Sergio Martelli.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 231

a gently curved profile and a ring base (Figs. 7.12–13). Other distinctive forms are the
one-handled fusiform jar (Figs. 8.1–3) and a krater-jar, 60–80 cm tall, with a straight-
sided profile, small flat base, and a low carination (Figs. 8.4–5). Also typical of the
three Late Bronze Age phases is the use of pot marks on the big storage jars (Fig. 9).
Even if the pottery production of Tell Afis appears to be completely local, it shares
some trends with the Anatolian milieu of the 14th–13th centuries BC. The high per-
centage of common poorly finished pottery, the incidence of shallow bowls in the
total amount of the corpus, and the lack of fine or imported wares also characterized
the so-called drab ware production during the last part of the Hittite period in many
central Anatolian and Cilician sites. Our site lacks some of the typical Hittite diagnos-
tic open shapes, such as the plate with stepped rim or the bowl with thickened inward
rim, but the most prevalent bevelled or thickened outward rim (Figs. 7.4–8) are also
common in Hattusha,7 Tille Höyük,8 and Gordion.9 Moreover, among the forms
which are an expression of local tradition, some shapes resemble Anatolian types. The
examples of one-handled fusiform jars with narrow neck and pointed base collected in
phase Vb (Figs. 8.1–3)10 have good parallels from Hattusha,11 Tarsus ,12 Tille Höyük,13
and Gordion.14 The form is attested also in Alalakh level II and Emar,15 that is, in
Mukish and Ashtata, which were under Hittite control during the 13th century BC.
H. Genz suggests a possible Hittite origin for these two samples.16 The southernmost
examples come from Late Bronze Age levels in Tell Kazel.17
Complete or almost complete krater-jars with a low carination in phase Vb come
from rooms A7 (Fig. 8.4) and B1 (Fig. 8.5), but rim sherds related to this form
(Figs. 8.6–10), flaring rectangular or outwardly-thickened with inner projection are
widespread on floors and destruction layers of this phase, testifying to common use
during this period. Good parallels come from the 13th/early-12th century BC contexts
in Tell Fray, Malatya III, and Tell Kazel.18 This type of jar became typical in the

7
Müller-Karpe 1988, figs. 33–34; Parzinger and Sanz 1992, fig. 19 (types 5.1–2), figs. 26.17, 58.2,
6, 10–13.
8
Summers 1993, pp. 47–48, fig. 43.4–7.
9
Voigt and Henrickson 2000, p. 344, figs. 17.9.4–6, 10–13.
10
Fig. 8.1 was found in the open area just north of residence A (Pedrazzi 2007, type 7–2–3,
fig. 3.45.a). Fig. 8.2 was collected in pit 9502, cut into the open space just west of the SW outer wall
of building B. Fig. 8.3 comes from area N1, the step trench excavated on the eastern slope of the
acropolis. It belongs to phase VIIb which corresponds stratigraphically to phase Vb of area E4.
11
Müller-Karpe 1988, p. 31, type K2, fig. 3.2; Parzinger and Sanz 1992, figs. 10.18, 13.5.
12
Goldman 1956, fig. 322.1192.
13
Summers 1993, fig. 54.2.
14
Voigt and Henrickson 2000, fig. 17.11.
15
Woolley 1955, pl. CXI, type 39; Caubet 1982, p. 73, fig. 31.
16
Genz 2006, p. 502.
17
Pedrazzi 2007, pp. 95–96, fig. 3.45b. See Pedrazzi 2010, pp. 55–56 for a different opinion on the
origin of the Syrian one-handle fusiform jars.
18
Pfälzner 1995, fig. 183a; Pecorella 1975, p. 100, fig. 10.3; Capet 2003, p. 113, fig. 48a.
232 F. VENTURI

Hittite imperial period and the same shapes and rims are known in Ali≥ar Hüyük,19
Ku≥akli,20 and Hattusha.21
The big storage jars from the three Late Bronze Age II phases at Tell Afis were
frequently incised with marks. These signs were made before firing and were generally
placed on the shoulder of the vessel, apart from the jar in fig. 9.1. The range of mark-
types used at Tell Afis has counterparts in several Anatolian sites.22 The crossed shield
(Fig. 9.1) seems to be a rough version of Kinet Höyük type nos. 34.23 It is also well-
known in central Anatolia during the Hittite imperial period. In Alaca Höyük as in
Kinet Höyük, it is used on bowls,24 while in Ku≥akli25 it appears on vessels morpho-
logically similar to the krater-jars of Tell Afis.26 The triangle, divided in two parts by
a vertical line (Fig. 9.2), has its best comparison in Hattusha, Alaca Höyük, and
Tarsus .27 It is the only sign in Tell Afis associated with a krater-jar vessel and in this
case, the relationship between vessel form and sign is particularly useful in defining
a possible link between the Tell Afis production and that of Anatolia. The trident-
shaped mark (Figs. 9.3, 5–6) was incised in Hattusha on jars or below vertical han-
dles.28 It is also well-known in Cilicia; it appears in Kinet Höyük phase 15 but is
more common in phase 14.29 In Tarsus30 we find both the sharp (Figs. 9.3, 6) and
the rounded version (Fig. 9.5).
A bronze lugged axe (Fig. 6) discovered beneath the floor of the pillared room B1,
buried there before the construction of the building, could have an Anatolian origin.
The shape is common in north central Anatolia,31 but no comparable examples have
been found in Syria.32
The most important evidence related to Anatolian links between the Idlib region
and the Hittite homeland is obviously represented by the three cuneiform tablets in
the Hittite language found in building F. Following the translation by A. Archi, two
letters were sent by a “lord of the country” to the local governor, who in the second

19
Fischer 1963, figs. 11.14, 12.7.
20
Müller-Karpe 2001, p. 329, figs. 12.2–3.
21
Müller-Karpe 1988, fig. 15 (T1r), 16–17 (T2k); Parzinger and Sanz 1992, figs. 3.6–9, 19.17,
24.21–23, 28.1.
22
For fig. 9.5, see also Pedrazzi 2005, p. 59, fig. 45.8.
23
Gates 2001, fig. 6.
24
Ko≥ay 1951, figs. 1–20.
25
Müller-Karpe 1998, p. 114, fig. 15.8, p. 159, fig. 39; 2001, p. 332, fig. 12.2–3.
26
Some scholars suggest that this mark could have a relationship with the Hittite hieroglyph “king”
Müller-Karpe 2001, p. 332.
27
Seidl 1972, p. 76, fig. 23, B36; Ko≥ay 1944: p. 54, pl. XXXIX; Goldman 1956, fig. 318.1136.
28
Seidl 1972, p. 76, fig. 23, B30–33.
29
Types 21–23, 14th–13th centuries BC see Gates 2001, fig. 6, nos. 21–23.
30
Goldman 1956, p. 204, figs. 318.1132, 319.1150.
31
Erkanal 1977, type I, figs. 1.11, 2.13–14, type III, fig. 2.23.
32
A similar axe was found in the destruction level of Hama phase E. Even if it comes from an Iron
II context, a Late Bronze Age Anatolian provenience is suggested cf. Riis and Buhl 1990, p. 114, fig. 53,
nos. 319.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 233

letter bears a Semitic name, Ashmakh-ya (TA.09.E.203). But most important is the
text of the first letter (TA.08.E.1) in which the sender informs the official in charge
of Afis that he has had to delay his departure because the queen, after reaching him,
fell ill. He thinks, however, that he will reach Izziya in three days from the moment
in which his letter is sent. From Hittite sources, we know that the town of Izziya must
be located in Cilicia33 and is related to vows carried out by a queen, probably
Puduhepa. A. Archi also argues that the queen mentioned in the Afis texts could be
the wife of Hattushili III and therefore, the Tell Afis tablet dates to the reign of this
king. The sender, following Archi’s hypothesis, could have been residing in Alalakh,
the most important governor’s seat, which was situated halfway between Tell Afis and
Cilicia.34
Even if these texts confirm the political links between Tell Afis, Kizzuwatna,
Mukish, and the great king of Hatti in the mid-13th century BC, it is more difficult
to establish a direct connection between this political scenario and the production
choices of the Tell Afis potters during phases VII–VI and Vb. With the aim of verify-
ing the antecedents to this production at the site, during the 2009 campaign we
opened a trench below room F4. We then identified our phase VIII. Statigraphically,
it lies between the top of the Middle Bronze Age fortification and the construction of
building F. It is divided into three sub-phases for a total thickness of less than one
metre. The structures are basically of a domestic nature: a horse-shoe-shaped hearth
and stone banquettes set on uneven, low-quality floors. The study of the materials is
still at a preliminary stage, but we can already underline some important points. The
phase VIII pottery horizon appears to be completely different from the following
phases, starting with shapes (Fig. 10); bowls have mainly rounded or pointed, inwardly
thickened rims; kraters have rectangular, often grooved rims; jars have grooved or
pinched rims; decoration is mainly impressed, incised or combed, and above all, the
clay has a completely different aspect. Common wares show higher firing and have
a pinkish to light red core and external pale yellow surface. Finer classes have homog-
enous pale yellow colour. In other words, these forms and fabrics are more familiar to
the local Middle Bronze Age35 or to 16th–15th BC Inner Syrian contexts, such as the
middle Euphrates sites Tell Hadidi,36 Tell Munbaqa,37 or El Qitar.38 We can suggest

33
M. Forlanini has proposed an identification with Issos, the place of Alexander’s battle, the modern
Kinet Höyük Forlanini 1988, p. 147.
34
Archi-Venturi 2012, p. 45–46.
35
For the bowls with inward thickened rim (fig. 10.1–7), see Mazzoni 1998, figs. 21.2, 3, 11–12
(Tell Afis); Fiorentino 2006, fig. 34 (Tell Tuqan). For the closed bowl of fig. 10.10, see Matthiae 1989,
fig. 51.1 (Tell Mardikh/Ebla).
36
Dornemann 1981, cfr. TA fig. 10.16 with figs 4.12–13, 5.6; TA fig. 10.17 with fig. 6.8; TA
fig. 10.8 with figs 14.18, 21.
37
De Feyter 1989, cfr. TA fig. 10.5, 7 with figs. 6.15–16.
38
McClellan 1985, cf. TA fig. 10.15 with fig. 4.P; TA fig. 10.9 with fig. 4.N, TA fig. 10.12 with
fig. 5.D, 6.D; Mc Clellan 1986: Tell Afis figs. 10.1–7 with fig. 7.
234 F. VENTURI

two different hypotheses; a chronological gap between phases VIII and VII or a strong
continuity of Late Bronze I tradition in the site until phase VII. In both cases, the
massive production of pottery with external reddish yellow surface and its typical
forms must be considered a phenomenon limited to phases VII–VI–Vb and basically
attributable to the 13th century BC.

THE EARLY IRON AGE

The Architecture

The Late Bronze Age sequence ended with the destruction of the Vb buildings, an
event which could be ascribed to the general picture of instability, which affected the
Levant at the beginning of the 12th century BC. Although the area underwent complete
reconstruction, phase IV preserved some patterns of the previous urban organisation
(Fig. 11), such as the same street C, lined by two new houses. However, the architec-
ture shows a completely different appearance. The high-quality Late Bronze Age resi-
dences are now replaced by domestic units equipped with benches, ovens, and other
domestic furniture. A change in storage methods is testified by the use of circular
sunken silos employed in considerable numbers, inside the domestic units, and in com-
munal wide-open areas, used not only for storage purposes, but also as dumps (Fig. 13).
Phase III documents a further step in the urban development of the area, which
regained a coherent urban layout (Fig. 12). The two houses were razed and then com-
pletely rebuilt. The ancient street C was still in use, but the construction of the south-
ern unit made it a narrow passage,1.5 m wide. Towards the north and south, the wide
yards were overlapped by new domestic units divided by parallel streets with SW-NE
orientation. The disappearance of the communal yards and the close arrangement of
the urban space led to the abandonment of the silos as storage facilities.

The Pottery

The events which brought about the dramatic end of phase Vb did not lead to
a complete change in the material culture of the site. As in architecture, we do not
see a total break in the local tradition. In particular, in cooking and storage ware there
is a clear continuity in shapes, which evolved from previous forms. The Early Iron Age
carinated cooking pot with thick rim and rounded base (Fig. 14.2) and the big storage
jars (Fig. 14.4) are clearly inspired by Late Bronze Age models (Figs. 14.1, 3). How-
ever, at the same time we have some significant changes. The one-handle fusiform jars
and the krater-jars completely disappear and, even if the big pithoi derive from their
Late Bronze Age predecessors, the practice of marking them with distinctive signs
went out of use.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 235

Undoubtedly the most striking difference between the Late Bronze Age and Early
Iron Age cultural horizons is represented by the appearance of the new Aegean-inspired
Mycenaean IIIC:1 and local monochrome painted pottery. Mycenaean IIIC: 1 is
a fine ware with a pink (5YR7/3) or very pale brown (10YR7/4) colour. The vessels
are smoothed and sometimes slipped (5Y8/3 pale yellow), but never burnished, giving
the surface and the painting a matt aspect.
The most common shape is represented by the deep bell-shaped bowl, decorated
during phase IV with few geometric motifs. The single or double wavy line
(Fig. 15.4–7), the monochrome black decoration with reserved bands (Figs. 15.1–2)
and the tricurved arch39 are stylistically linked to the White Painted Wheelmade III/
Proto White Painted ware in Cyprus,40 and to the Aegean LH IIIC middle-late,41 dat-
ing phase IV to a period between the end of the 12th and the first half of the 11th cen-
tury BC. However, the style of the decoration, together with the shape of deep bowls
characterized by an accentuated s-profile and everted rim, find their best counterpart
in the Amuq production, as we know from the Swift-phase N42 and the recent excava-
tions in field I in Tell Tayinat.43 Rarer, but belonging perfectly to this period is the
shallow angular bowl with strap handles, decorated with horizontal bands (Fig. 15.3).44
During phase III, the presence of deep bowls diminishes and the decorations become
simpler, executed with horizontal bands.
Mycenaean IIIC: 1 ware is clearly distinguishable from the local painted ware.
The clay of the latter is coarser and includes chaff, a temper little-used previously.
Nevertheless, the rough aspect of the clay is compensated by an accurate surface
treatment, due to the introduction of stroke-burnishing. Painting is always mono-
chrome red. Black painting or bichrome (Fig. 16.1) appear only at the end of phase
III. The most common motifs used in Tell Afis are the horizontal wavy line
(Fig. 16.14), the zig-zag (Fig. 16.6), and the hatched triangles, antithetic (Figs. 16.5,
11) or arranged in rows (Figs. 16.8, 12). Rims of bowls and kraters are frequently
decorated with dots or lines (Figs. 16.3, 9–10, 16). The commonest decoration for
vertical handles consists of vertical lines which divide into antithetical tails, single or
double (Figs. 16.7, 16). The Tell Afis motifs fall within the typological range of the
Hama and Amuq N repertoire.45 The decoration of handles with antithetical tails is

39
Pedrazzi 2002, fig. 24.2.
40
Karageorghis and Demas 1985, pl. CCXII.5030, 5483; Mountjoy 2005b, p. 173, figs. 19.14–15;
174, fig. 20.18, p. 175, fig. 21.28.
41
Mountjoy 1999, figs. 58.440–441, 238.601, 473.13.
42
Swift 1958, figs. 19–21.
43
Janeway 2008, fig. 4.1; Harrison 2010, figs. 4.7, 9.
44
In Cyprus and Greece , this form became popular in the LCIIIA-B/LHIIIC early-middle (Mount-
joy 1999, fig. 97.213; Mountjoy 2005b, fig. 9.39). In the Northern Levant, it is attested in Mycenaean
IIIC: 1 contexts in Tarsus (Mountjoy 2005a, fig. 15) and Ras Ibn Hani (Bounni et al. 1979, p. 249,
fig. 25).
45
Riis 1948, figs. 130A.3, 10, 11, 17, 48, 50, 81; Swift 1958, figs. 23–24; Harrison 2010, fig. 5.4.
236 F. VENTURI

also attested in Tarsus46 and was particularly appreciated in the Dodecanese Islands
during the 12th–11th centuries BC.47 In particular, the band encircling the lower part
of the handle of fig. 16.7 has exact parallels in Rhodes in LHIIIC middle.48
The affirmation of Mycenaean IIIC:1 and the local painted pottery concerns mainly
table ware and even if their incidence in the total amount of sherds is not striking
(they represent respectively 4% and 11% of the whole corpus), the introduction of
new forms, such as the Mycenaean IIIC:1 deep bell shaped bowls, the shallow bowls
with ring base (Figs. 16.3, 9–10)49 and the amphoroid kraters (Figs. 16.6, 14, 16),
caused a decrease in the massive production of common tableware shapes; the inci-
dence of shallow bowls with rounded base and hemispherical bowls diminishes drasti-
cally from 30% to 10%, whereas the incidence of other classes such as storage or
cooking ware remains basically unaltered.

CONCLUSIONS

A general overview of the area E4 sequence shows the cultural continuity of the site
from a diachronical perspective. The close overlapping of architectural phases and the
persistence of local features in the urban layout and material culture are clear evidence
of the strong roots of the local social and cultural framework. Nevertheless, the
destruction which occurred at the end of phase Vb divides the sequence into two dif-
ferent periods represented by phases VII–VI–Vb for Late Bronze Age II and IV–III
for Early Iron Age with their own specific features; two distinct snapshots of a society
in evolution through the historical events affecting the region in this troubled period.
During 13th century BC, Tell Afis was a well-developed urban centre characterized
by sophisticated architecture. The low-quality fabric of the pottery, the marked stand-
ardization of forms and the cuneiform texts show the existence of a complex economy
and a centralised administrative system. Judging by the contexts of the two texts in
Hittite found in building F, the local governor of Tell Afis was under the direct con-
trol of a Hittite authority: the “lord of the country” who resided in Alalakh.50 There-
fore the textual evidence seems to indicate that neither Karkemish nor Aleppo were
the controlling powers in the region as might be suggested for a mid-13th century BC
political scenario.51 Rather they seem to outline a diplomatic axis towards Kizzuwatna
and Mukish. Control of the Tell Afis region certainly had strategic implications. The

46
Goldman 1956, fig. 391.
47
Mountjoy 1998, p. 54, fig. 10; Mountjoy 1999, fig. 463.15.
48
Mountjoy 1999, fig. 437.263.
49
The diffusion of this type of ring-based shallow bowls, decorated with horizontal bands and with
simple rim decorated with dot or lines is also testified in the Amuq (Swift 1958, fig. 18) and Hama (Riis
1948, figs. 101, 130.86, 87, 89, 101).
50
Archi-Venturi 2012, p. 47.
51
Klengel 2001, p. 265.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 237

Jazr was one of the transit points towards the inner Syrian provinces and was, like the
Amuq, a fertile plan important for the supply of cereals. Therefore Hittite interest in
stable control of the region is perfectly understandable.
More difficult is defining a correlation between the Hittite political role in the
region and those elements in the Tell Afis material culture, which seem to be linked to
the Anatolian plateau. We know that after the Shuppiluliuma I and Murshili II cam-
paigns, the Hittites controlled the North Syrian provinces. However, the textual evi-
dence shows that the central power appeared disinterested in an effective annexation
of the conquered territories; apart from Aleppo and Karkemish, it limited its control
over them, installing what G. M. Beckman called “a thin layer of imperial bureaucracy.”52
The correlation between Hittite expansion and the diffusion of their material culture
inside the empire’s borders is an issue still subject to debate, and for provincial sites is
complicated by the difficulty in understanding how and at which level the local tradi-
tions of the periphery interacted with the central power strategies. The paucity of
Anatolian elements in the material culture of sites such as Ugarit and Emar confirms
that Hittites did not feel it necessary to impose their cultural model on the conquered
Syrian provinces.53 However, a quite different situation occurred in areas closer to the
Hittite homeland, such as Kizzuwatna or Mukish, directly controlled by the Great
King through governors.54 C. Glatz suggests that in the territories from Cilicia to the
Euphrates, Hittite central power established an intermediate form of external control
which led to local processes of adoption of imperial cultural elements.55
Despite its southern position, Tell Afis was probably affected by a similar political
status, and the hypothesis that some elements in material culture could have been
influenced by this relationship can not be completely rejected. Moreover, it must be
underlined that the presence of these elements at Tell Afis is restricted to phases VII–
VI–Vb; they appeared for the first time in building F and in connection with its
textual evidence, and disappeared after the destruction of the Vb residences at the end
of Late Bronze Age.56
At the beginning of the Early Iron Age, phase IV shows a fully-developed architec-
tural tradition, even if only with a rural dimension; the intensive use of silos indicates
the persistence of a solid agro-pastoral economy which had evidently felt little
effect of the problems which led to the end of the phase Vb residences. However, the

52
Beckman 1992, p. 49.
53
Genz 2006, p. 505.
54
Concerning the diffusion of drab ware in the peripheral sites, see Goldman 1956, pp. 204–205
(Tarsus ); Gates 2006 (Kinet Höyük); Symington 2001 (Kilise Tepe); Summers 1993, pp. 47–48 (Tille
Höyük) and Henrickson 1995 (Gordion).
55
Glatz 2009, pp. 140–141.
56
Tell Afis has also presented two biconvex seals from Iron Age I–II contexts in areas G and N,
which could however be related to the same Late Bronze Age II political context see Archi 1998,
pp. 367–368; Cecchini 2002, p. 50, fig. 33.1.
238 F. VENTURI

appearance at the beginning of the Iron Age of Aegeanized pottery also places Tell
Afis in the complex discussion about the Sea Peoples, their origins and the role they
played in the fall of the Late Bronze Age system. The idea that the collapse in the
Northern Levant happened for internal reasons and that we must suggest substantial
continuity for the southern provinces, formerly under Hittite control, is now widely
accepted. The style of the reliefs in the Ain Dara and Aleppo temples,57 and the men-
tion of King Kuzi Teshub in the Lidar Höyük bullae confirm this hypothesis.58 On
the other hand, the strong appearance in the Northern Levant of locally-produced
Aegeanized pottery at the beginning of the 12th century BC does not fit well into this
reconstruction and must be further understood. If this phenomenon appears fuzzier
on Cyprus and on the Syro-Lebanese coast, where a stronger link with the Mediter-
ranean commercial network kept alive the taste for Mycenaean products until the end
of 13th century BC, a clear break is particularly evident at Tell Afis, and in Cilician
sites such as Tarsus59 and Kinet Höyük,60 where the Aegeanized Mycenaean IIIC: 1
and the local derivative class overlapped the monochrome drab ware production.
Although during XII-XI centuries BC, Tell Afis preserved the older Late Bronze Age
II trend in cooking and storage activities, the radical change in forms and decoration
of table ware reflects modifications to the local daily habits in terms of consumption
of food and libation. This must consequently be interpreted as a relevant change in
the local social framework.61
Leaving aside the complex issue regarding the origins of these new elements in the
material culture, what seems clear once again following the Tell Afis evidence is the close
link between NW Syria, Cilicia, and the Amuq. The exchange of information between
these regions must have been facilitated by the same channels existing at the time of
Hittite control of the southern provinces. However, particularly interesting in this
sense is the figure of Taita, the king responsible for the inscriptions found in the
storm-god temple in Aleppo.62 If the Taita mentioned in the inscriptions found near

57
Mazzoni 1997, pp. 298–301; Kohlmeyer 2008, pp. 122–124.
58
Kuzi Teshub was the successor of Talmi Teshub, the king of Karkemish, a contemporary of the
last Hittite king Shuppiluliuma II. Therefore his kingdom should be placed in the mid-12th century BC
(Hawkins 1988).
59
Between phases LBIIa and LBIIb see Goldman 1956, pp. 203–207.
60
Gates 2010, pp. 66–70.
61
It must however be emphasised that the Tell Afis excavations have not revealed the wide spectrum
of discontinuity in material culture found, for example, in the “Philistine” sites. Apart from pottery, few
other elements in the Tell Afis Early Iron Age phases can be convincingly considered clear evidence of
the presence of new people in the site. In phases IV-III, the typical EIA cylindrical loomweights were
commonly used. These simple objects made of crude clay appear in the Levant at the very beginning of
EIA and testify to the adoption of new weaving techniques (Cecchini 2000), often related to the incom-
ing Sea People (see for example Stager 1995: p. 346, pl. 6). The three bronze violin-bow fibulae found
in phase IV also appear in the Eastern Mediterranean at the beginning of EIA, frequently associated with
the Sea People’s movements (Venturi 2005, p. 75, fig. 54.7; Venturi 2008b, p. 370, fig. 7.9).
62
Gonnella et al. 2005.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 239

Hama63 can be identified with the same Taita in Aleppo, it should suggest the exist-
ence in the 11th–10th centuries BC of a powerful kingdom extending from the Amuq
to Hama, with a possible capital in Kunulua/Tell Tayinat. If we accept such a possi-
bility, then we must also accept that the affirmation of this political entity and the
spread of Aegeanized elements in the Northern Levant chronologically and geograph-
ically overlapped.64
All those issues rest on a preliminary interpretation and await further developments
in the research; nevertheless, beyond the difficulty of establishing historical processes,
the evidence coming from Tell Afis shows how the different regions in the north-
eastern corner of the Mediterranean between the 13th and 10th centuries BC were
strictly related by common or similar trends in material culture, foreshadowing close
relationships and exchanges of cultural information – complex dynamics which can
best be analysed and understood through a trans-regional approach, to be developed,
as the title of this symposium properly suggests, “across the border.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY
AFFANNI, G.
2005 “Area N1: le fortificazioni del Ferro I,” in Tell Afis (Siria) 2002–2004, edited
by S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXVII: 85–89.
ARCHI, A.
1998 “A Biconvex Seal from Tell Afis,” in Scavi sull’acropoli 1988-1992. The 1988–
1992 Excavations on the Acropolis, edited by S. M. Cecchini, S. Mazzoni,
pp. 367–69. Pisa: edizioni ETS.
ARCHI, A. and VENTURI, F.
2012 “Hittites at Tell Afis. I. New Evidence of Cultural Links between Syria and
Anatolia through Analysis of Late Bronze Age II Tell Afis Material Culture II.
The Cuneiform Tablets,” Orientalia 81: 1–55.
BECKMAN, G. M.
1992 “Hittite Administration in Syria in the Light of the Texts from Khattusha,
Ugarit and Emar,” Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 25: 41–49.
BOUNNI, A., LAGARCE, J., LAGARCE, E., SALIBY, N. and BADRE, L.
1979 “Rapport préliminaire sur la deuxième campagne de fouilles (1977) à Ibn Hani
(Syrie),” Syria 56: 217–291.
CAPET, E.
2003 “Tell Kazel (Syrie), Rapport préliminaire sur les 9–17 campagnes de fouilles
(1993–2001) du Musée de l’Université Américaine de Beyrouth, chantier II,”
Berytus 47: 63–118.

63
Taita is cited in the two funerary stelae found in Meharde and Sheizar see Jasink 1995, pp. 103–
105; Hawkins 2000, pp. 365–367.
64
A possible correlation between the figure of Taita and the cultural processes in the Northern
Levant at the beginning of the Early Iron Age is further emphasised by the recent new reading by Profes-
sor D. Hawkins of the toponym Padasatini in the inscription Aleppo 6 related to this king, with Palistin
see Hawkins 2009, pp. 169–172.
240 F. VENTURI

CAUBET, A.
1982 “La céramique, in Meskéné-Emar. Dix ans de travaux 1972–1982,” edited by
D. Beyer, pp. 71–86. Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations.
CECCHINI, S. M.
2000 “The Textile Industry in Northern Syria during the Iron Age According to the
Evidence of the Tell Afis Excavations,” in Essays on Syria in the Iron Age,
Ancient Near Eastern Studies, suppl. 7, edited by G. Bunnens, pp. 211–234.
Louvain Paris, Sterling, Virginia.
2002 “Area N: presentazione e cronologia,” in Tell Afis (Siria) 2000–2001, edited by
S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXV: 47–53.
CHITI, B.
2005 “Area E4b nord: Bronzo Tardo II-Ferro I,” in Tell Afis (Siria) 2002–2004,
edited by S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXVII: 62–69.
DE FEYTER, T.
1989 “The Aussenstadt Settlement of Munbaqa, Syria,” in To the Euphrates and Beyond:
Archaeological Studies in Honour of M.N. van Loon, edited by O. M. C. Haex,
H. H. Curvers, P. M. M. G. Akkermans, pp. 237–256. Rotterdam; Brookfield:
A. A. Balkema.
DORNEMANN, R. H.
1981 “The Late Bronze Age Pottery Tradition at Tell Hadidi, Syria ,” Bulletin of the
American School of Oriental Research 241: 29–48.
ERKANAL, H.
1977 Die Äxte und Beile des 2. Jahrtausends in Zentralanatolien, Prähistorische Bronze-
funde 9, Band 8. Munich: C.H. Beck.
FIORENTINO, R.
2006 “Le campagne 1978, 1981 e 1986. La ceramica,” in Tell Tuqan. Ricerche arche-
ologiche nella regione del Maath (Siria), edited by F. Baffi, pp. 51–111. Lecce:
Congedo Editore.
FISCHER, F.
1963 Die hethitische Keramik von Bogazkoy. Berlin: Gebr. Mann.
FORLANINI, M.
1988 “La regione del Tauro nei testi hittiti,” Vicino Oriente 7: 129–169.
GATES, M. H.
2001 “Potmarks at Kinet Höyük and the Hittite Ceramic Industry,” in La Cilicie:
espaces et pouvoir locaux (2e millenaire av. J.C. 4e siècle ap. J.C.). Actes de la
table ronde Internationale d’Istanbul 2-5 novembre 1999, edited by É. Jean,
A. M. Dinçol, S. Durugönül, pp. 137–158. Institut Français d’ Études Ana-
toliennes G. Dumézil. Istanbul-Paris: De Boccard.
2006 “Dating the Hittite Levels at Kinet Höyük: a Revised Chronology,” in Struc-
turing and Dating in Hittite Archaeology, BYZAS 4 edited by D. P. Mielke,
U. D. Schoop, J. Seeher, pp. 293-309. Istanbul.
2010 “Potters and Consumers in Cilicia and the Amuq During the “Age of Transfor-
mations” (13th–10th Centuries BC),” in Societies in Transition. Evolutionary
Processes in the Northern Levant between Late Bronze Age II and Early Iron Age,
Studi e testi orientali 9, Serie Archeologica 2, edited by F. Venturi, pp. 65–81.
Bologna: CLUEB.
GENZ, H.
2006 “Hetitische Präsenz im Spätbronzezeitlichen Syrien: Die archäeologische
Evidenz,” Baghdader Mitteilungen 37: 499–509.
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 241

GLATZ, C.
2009 “Empire as network: Spheres of material interaction in Late Bronze Age Anato-
lia,” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28: 127–141.
GOLDMAN, H.
1956 Excavations at Gözlu Kule, Tarsus . Vol. 2. The Neolithic through the Bronze
Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
GONNELLA, J., KHAYYATA, W. and KOHLMEYER, K.
2005 Die Zitadelle von Aleppo und der Tempel des Wettergottes. Münster: Rhema.
HARRISON, T. P.
2010 “The Late Bronze/Early Iron Age Transition in the North Orontes Valley,” in
Societies in Transition. Evolutionary Processes in the Northern Levant between
Late Bronze Age II and Early Iron Age, papers presented on the occasion of the 20th
anniversary of the new excavation in Tell Afis, Bologna, 15th november 2007,
Studi e testi orientali 9, Serie Archeologica 2, edited by F. Venturi, pp. 83–102.
Bologna: CLUEB.
HAWKINS, J. D.
1988 “Kuzi Teshub and the “Great Kings” of Karkemish,” Anatolian Studies 38:
99–108.
2000 Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
2009 “Cilicia, the Amuq and Aleppo: New Light in a Dark Age,” Near Eastern
Archaeology 72: 164–173.
HENRICKSON, R. C.
1995 “Hittite Pottery and Potters: the View from Late Bronze Age Gordion,” Bibli-
cal Archaeologist 58(2): 82–90.
JANEWAY, B.
2008 “The Nature and Extent of Aegean Contact at Tell Ta‘yinat and Vicinity in the
Early Iron Age: Evidence of the Sea Peoples?” Scripta Mediterranea 27–28:
123–146.
JASINK, A. M.
1995 Gli stati neo-ittiti. Analisi delle fonti scritte e sintesi storica, Studia Mediterranea 10.
Pavia: G. Iuculano.
KARAGEORGHIS, V. and DEMAS, M.
1985 Excavations at Kition V. The Pre-Phoenician Levels, Department of Antiquities
Cyprus. Nicosia: Zavallis Press.
KLENGEL H.
2001 “Einige Bemerkungen zur hethitischen Herraschaftsordnung in Syrien,” in
Akten des IV Internationalen Kongresses für Hethitologie. Würzburg, 4-8 Oktober
1999, Studien zu den Bogazköy Texten 45, edited by G. Wilhelm, pp. 255–
271. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
KOHLMEYER, K.
2008 “Zur Datierung der skulpturen von ‘Ain Dara,” in Fundstellen. Gesammelte
Schriften zur Archäologie und Geschichte Altvorderasiens ad honorem Hartmut
Kühne, edited by D. Bonatz, R. M. Czichon, F. J. Kreppner, pp. 119–130.
Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
KO≤AY, H.
1944 Ausgrabungen von Alaca Höyük, ein Vorbericht über die im Auftrage der Türki-
schen Geschichtskommission im Sommer 1936 durchgeführten Forschungen und
Entdeckungen. TTKY Vol. 2a. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu basımevi.
1951 Alaca Höyük Kazisi 1937–39. Ilk Rapor/Les Fouilles d’Alaca Höyük. Rapport
Préliminaire 1937–39. TTKY Vol. 5. Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu basımevi.
242 F. VENTURI

MATTHIAE, P.
1989 Un impero ritrovato. Dai Primi scavi alle ultime scoperte. Torino: Giulio Einaudi
Editore.
MAZZONI, S.
1997 “L’arte siro-hittita nel suo contesto archeologico,” Contributi e Materiali di
Archeologia Orientale VII: 287–327.
1998 “Area E1. Late Chalcolitic, Early, Middle and Late Bronze I Ages. Materials
and Chronology,” in Scavi sull’acropoli 1988-1992. The 1988-1992 Excavations
on the Acropolis, edited by S. M. Cecchini, S. Mazzoni, pp. 9–100. Pisa:
Edizioni ETS.
MCCLELLAN, T. L.
1985 “The Second Season of the Australian Excavations at el-Qitar, 1983–84,” Abr
Nahrain 23: 315–324.
1986 “El-Qitar: Third Season of Excavation 1984–85,” Abr Nahrain 24: 83–106.
MOUNTJOY, P. A.
1998 “The East Aegean-West Anatolian Interface in the Late Bronze Age: Mycenae-
ans and the Kingdom of Ahhiyawa ,” Anatolian Studies 48: 33–68.
1999 Regional Mycenaean Decorated Pottery. Rahden: Verlag Marie Leidorf.
2005a “The Mycenaean Pottery from the 1934–1939 Excavations at Tarsus ,” in Field
Seasons 2001–2003 of the Tarsus–Gözlükule. Interdisciplinary Research Project,
edited by A. Özyar, pp. 83–134. Istanbul: Ege Yayınları.
2005b “The End of the Bronze Age at Enkomi Cyprus: the problem of Level IIIB,”
British School of Athens 100: 125–214.
MÜLLER- KARPE, A.
1988 Hethitische Töpferei der Oberstadt von Khattusha. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis Spät-
grobreichszeitlicher Keramik und Töpferbetriebe unter Zugrundelegung der
Grabungsergebnisse von 1978–82 in Bogazköy. Marburg/Lahn: Hitzeroth.
1998 “Untersuchungen in Ku≥akli 1997,” Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesell-
schaft zu Berlin 130: 93–174.
2001 “Untersuchungen in Ku≥akli 2000,” Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesell-
schaft zu Berlin 133: 225–249.
PARZINGER, H. and SANZ, R.
1992 Die Oberstadt von Khattusha. Hethitische Keramik aus dem Zentralen Tempel-
viertel. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag.
PECORELLA, P. E.
1975 Rapporto preliminare delle campagne 63–68. Il livello imperiale eteo e quelli neo
etei, Orientis Antiqui Collectio XII. Roma: Centro per le antichità e la storia
dell’arte del Vicino Oriente.
PEDRAZZI, T.
2002 “Area E: l’occupazione del Bronzo Tardo II-Ferro I. Il settore nord,” in Tell
Afis – Siria 2002–2004, edited by S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXV:
33–38.
2005 “Lo scavo dell’area E4a: Bronzo Tardo II-Ferro I,” in Tell Afis – Siria 2002–
2004, edited by S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXVIII: 56–60.
2007 Le giare da conservazione e trasporto del Levante. Uno studio archeologico
dell’economia fra Bronzo Tardo II e Ferro I (1400–900 a.C. ca.). Pisa: Edizioni
ETS.
2010 “Globalisation Versus Regionalism: LBII/Iron I Transition in Coastal Syria
from the Storage Jars Point of View,” in Societies in Transition. Evolutionary
Processes in the Northern Levant between Late Bronze Age II and Early Iron Age,
 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 243

papers presented on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the new excavation in
Tell Afis, Bologna, 15th november 2007, Studi e testi orientali 9, Serie Archeo-
logica 2, edited by F. Venturi, pp. 53–64. Bologna: CLUEB.
PFÄLZNER, P.
1995 Mittanische und Mittelassyrische Keramik. Eine Chronologische, Funktionale und
Produktionsökonomische Analyse (Berichte der Ausgrabung Tall Sehikh Hamad,
Dur-katlimmu). Berlin: Reimer.
RIIS, P. J.
1948 Les cimetières à crémation. Hama. Fouilles et Recherches de la Fondation Carlsberg
1931–1938. II, 3 (=NS I). Copenhague: 1. Kommission hos Gyldendalske
Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag.
RIIS, P. J. and BUHL M. L.
1990 Hama. Les objets de la période dite syro-hittite (âge du fer). Copenhague:
Nationalmuseet.
SEIDL, U.
1972 Gefässmarken von Bogazköy, Wissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der Deut-
schen Orient-Gesellschaft 88. Berlin: Gebrüder Mann.
STAGER, L. E.
1995 “The Impact of the Sea People in Canaan (1185–1050 BCE),” in The Archaeol-
ogy of Society in the Holy Land, edited by T. E. Levy, pp. 333-348. London.
SUMMERS, G. D.
1993 Tille Höyük 4. The Late Bronze Age and the Iron Age Transition. London: Brit-
ish Institute of Archaeology at Ankara.
SWIFT, G. F. Jr.
1958 “The Pottery of the ‘Amuq Phase K to O and Its Historical Relations” (unpub-
lished Ph.D. Dissertation). Chicago: University of Chicago.
SYMINGTON, D.
2001 “Hittites at Kilise Tepe,” in La Cilicie: espaces et pouvoir locaux (2e millenaire
av. J.C. 4e siècle ap. J.C.). Actes de la table ronde Internationale d’Istanbul
2-5 novembre 1999, edited by É. Jean, A. M. Dinçol, S. Durugönül, pp. 167–
184. Institut Français d’ Études Anatoliennes G. Dumézil. Istanbul-Paris: De
Boccard.
VENTURI, F.
2002 “Area E: l’occupazione del Bronzo Tardo II-Ferro I. Il settore Sud,” in Tell Afis
(Siria) 2000–2001, edited by S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente XXV: 29–32.
2005 Tell Afis. L’Area E4b sud: Bronzo Tardo II-Ferro I, in Tell Afis (Siria) 2002–
2004, edited by S. Mazzoni, Egitto e Vicino Oriente, XXVIII: 69–76.
2007 L’età delle trasformazioni in Siria (XIII-X sec. a.C.). Nuovi contributi dallo
scavo di Tell Afis, Studi e testi orientali 8, Serie Archeologica 1. Bologna:
CLUEB.
2008a “Eléments de continuité dans l’architecture domestique du Levant à travers
l’âge obscur; le cas des maisons aux piliers,” in Proceedings of the 4th Interna-
tional Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, 29th march – 3rd
april 2004, edited by H. Kühne, R. M. Czichon, R. Janoscha Kreppner,
pp. 587–600. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
2008b “The Sea People in the Levant: a North-Syrian Perspective,” in Proceedings of
the 5th International Congress of the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, edited
by J. M. Cordoba, M. Molist, M. C. Perez, I. Rubio, S. Martinez, pp. 365–
382. Vol. III. Madrid: Publications Service of the Universidad Autonoma of
Madrid.
244 F. VENTURI

2010 “Cultural Breakdown or Evolution? The Impact of Changes in 12th B.C. Tell
Afis,” in Societies in Transition. Evolutionary Processes in the Northern Levant
between Late Bronze Age II and Early Iron Age, papers presented on the occasion of
the 20th anniversary of the new excavation in Tell Afis, Bologna, 15th november
2007, Studi e testi orientali 9, Serie Archeologica 2, edited by F. Venturi,
pp. 1–27. Bologna: CLUEB.
VOIGT, M. M. and HENRICKSON, R. C.
2000 “The Early Iron Age at Gordion: The Evidence from the Yassihöyük Strati-
graphic Sequence,” in The Sea People and Their World: a Reassessment, edited
by E. Oren, pp. 327–360. Philadelphia: The University Museum; University
of Pennsylvania .
WOOLLEY, C. L.
1955 Alalakh. An Account of the Excavations at Tell Atchana in the Hatay, 1937–49.
Oxford: The Society of Antiquaries.
THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 245

Fig. 1 Tell Afis and the excavated areas.

246 F. VENTURI

Fig. 2 Building F (phase VII).

Fig. 3 Kiln 7977 (phase VI).

THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 247

Fig. 4 Structure 9002 (phase VI).

248 F. VENTURI

Fig. 5 The buildings of phase Vb.

THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 249

Fig. 6 The bronze lugged axe

TA.07.E.530/A (phase VI).
250 F. VENTURI

Fig. 7 Shallow bowls (nos. 1-11) and kraters (nos. 12-16).

 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 251

Fig. 8 Fusiform jars (nos. 1-3) and krater-jars (nos. 4-10).

252 F. VENTURI

Fig. 9 Potmarks on storage jars: phase VII (nos. 1), VI (nos. 2-3), Vb (nos. 4-6).
THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 253

Fig. 10 The pottery of phase VIII.

254 F. VENTURI

Fig. 11 Phase IV.

THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 255

Fig. 12 Phase III.

256 F. VENTURI

Fig. 13 Silos and pits in phase IV.

 THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 257

Fig. 14 Continuity in storage and cooking ware shapes

between Late Bronze Age II (nos. 1, 3) and Early Iron Age (nos. 2, 4).
258 F. VENTURI

Fig. 15 The Mycenaean IIIC:1 deep bell-shaped bowls (phase IV).

THE TRANSITION AT TELL AFIS, SYRIA (PHASES VII-III) 259

Fig. 16 The local painted monochrome pottery:

phase III (nos. 1-7), phase IV (nos. 8-17).