Thesis Writing, the Final Christmas, and Other Tales from Jerusalem

So our fall semester has come and gone like a whirlwind (and once again we have not blogged in a timely manner) and Christmas time is upon us again, our third and final Christmas here in Israel. This semester was certainly our favorite in terms of our job here on JUC’s campus. Lots of factors combined to make this a really enjoyable semester for us but some of the biggest were the staff, which was a little different this time around, and this semester’s student body (if any of you guys read this, know that you have blessed us immeasurably and we won’t forget you!). So, as always we were busy with work, but this semester we have been focusing heavily on archaeology. Mandy has been working tirelessly to help the students pass Dr. Barkay’s archaeology exam and we have both been working a lot on our theses. Now that the semester has ended and the students are have mostly all gone home, we are trying to spend a lot of time on our papers, but before we really start drowning in our respective oceans of archaeological facts and figures, we thought we would pause and catch you up on what we are now spending every non-work related second on.

My (Justin) thesis centers around a small pottery vessel from the Iron Age II that has been found at nearly every major archaeological site in Israel. The Iron Age II, ca. 1000–586 B.C.E., the time period when the bulk of ancient Palestine was ruled by the of the kings of Israel, from David through the final rulers of the Divided Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. The vessel in question is a juglet, a “little jug,” known to Syro-Palestinian archaeologists as a “black juglet.” The black juglet is unique enough in the repertoire of Iron Age II pottery to be its own type because it has a very distinct shape, or rather a group of shapes typical to it, and because it is most commonly colored black! The black variety of this juglet is usually made of grayish clay with a thin coating of black clay on its surface (like paint, but known to ceramicists as a “slip”). The vessel is almost always hand-burnished, that is polished, with vertical strokes made by the potter with a tool such as a shell, piece of pottery, or a smooth stone. Even though the vessel is called a “black juglet” it comes in red, brown, or a plain buff color, but more important than its color is its shape and typical vertical burnishing lines.

The black juglet has been recognized and discussed by archaeologists since the early twentieth century, but no one in the past hundred years has ever done a study specifically on this kind of juglet. So my work represents the first synthesis and analysis of the black juglets! This is very exciting and also a little intimidating. I only hope I do the topic justice and write something useful for people to use in future work. 

 

So, here is what I am actually trying to do. The black juglets are pretty small, ranging in height from ca. 10 centimeters (3.9 inches) to ca. 7.5 centimeters (2.9 inches). In addition to this they also have a thin neck to limit how much liquid comes out of them. Because of these factors, it is generally accepted that the juglets were used for holding an expensive commodity, maybe perfumed oil. Okay, so basically we know what the juglets held, but here’s where the questions come in. What were the contexts in which the juglets were used? They have been found mostly in tombs; so where they actually burial gifts for the deceased, or were they used to anoint the body prior to burial and then left in the tomb? The second most common context is people’s houses, but not in royal houses it seems. They have also been found in military outposts and places of worship. What does this tell us? There are very few of them in Jerusalem, the capital of ancient Judah, but there are a lot of them in other places in the south such as Lachish whose black juglets may have been made in the vicinity of Jerusalem (based on an analysis of the clay)! Another issue that I am trying to understand is the chronology of the juglets’ morphology, their form or shape. The little black juglet stayed in vogue for about 400 years and they change styles at least twice over this time. Older scholarly works tend to date the juglets based on certain forms, for example, the juglet with a long neck is older than the one with the shorter neck, but this is not always so clear. I hope to bring some clarity to this issue if possible. Another question is the black on the black juglet. Why were some black and some red or brown? Did people like the black kinds better? Were they more (or less) expensive? How was the black color created, was it the clay itself, was it the way it was fired, did it require a certain kind of technology to create? All these issues pave the way for the anthropological questions that are very hard to answer, but nevertheless, have to be addressed as they will help us better understand the people who made and used this kind of juglet, which is the goal of any archaeological study.

Mandy’s thesis is entitled “A Study of Late Hellenistic and Early Roman Glass in Jerusalem from Excavated Sites: Understanding Local Production and the Economic Status of the Population from the Time of the Hasmoneans to Hadrian.” I (Mandy) got the idea to study this topic after turning in a rather substantial paper on glass for my Spring 2011 Archaeology class. I had been considering a topic centering on archaeology of the 1^st Temple Period or earlier, but I wasn’t happy with the original topic I had picked. When I did this study in the spring, I fell in love with glass studies, and decided that, at the risk of looking inconsistent or flighty, I would ask my professor if I could change topics. Since he had already seen my spring paper, he agreed that it would be a good choice for me.   

Western (i.e. European) glass studies have existed for a very long time, mostly because of glass that came out of the Roman Empire, as well as advancements during the Medieval period and the Renaissance, in Venice, Germany, and England. Eastern glass studies, however, is a relatively new topic for scholars; it has only been researched in this country for about 40 years. This is a little odd, since it is universally accepted that the invention of glassblowing most likely took place in the eastern Mediterranean (i.e. in or near the modern area of Israel) in the 1^st century C.E.  Since this country is so important to understanding the transition from molded glass to blown glass, it makes being on the cusp of the beginnings of research very exciting! Glass has been published from over 140 sites in Israel, and probably about 20-30 sites in Jerusalem alone (including the only discovery in this country of a 1^st century glass factory to date, found in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City).

Jerusalem is incredibly important for glass studies in the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman periods (i.e. 2^nd century B.C.E. – 2^nd century C.E.), yet no one has done a synthesis of the glass from Jerusalem to understand key types, as well as anthropological implications, such as the economy of the people at the end of the Second Temple Period, basically between the birth of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem, in 70 C.E. That’s where I come in!

Through my research, I hope to put together the glass finds in Jerusalem from this time period, to better understand social relations (for instance, glass from burials versus glass from sites and why the differences in the assemblages… or acceptance of new wares into society), local and international business relations (including the interaction of primary with secondary glass factories, local production, and understanding possible imported glass or “luxury wares”), and the economy of Jerusalem in the Second Temple Period. 

I’ve been able to use all of my research from the Spring semester, and throughout the fall, I have compiled a catalogue of data showing glass finds from 39 sites around Israel, to understand Jerusalem glass in its geographical context. Over the winter break, my focus will be to finish synthesizing the catalogue of data from glass published from Jerusalem excavations, and throughout the spring, I will work to analyze all of the data to pull together my conclusions. With lots of hard work, and prayer from friends and family, my goal is to finish the thesis in May! I’m working quite a bit with my second reader, Dr. Ruth E. Jackson-Tal of Hebrew University, who is the leading researcher in Early Roman glass studies at this time. She is giving me lots of encouragement and advice, and we are working with pieces of glass she has published from various sites.  It is so helpful to handle the glass from these periods to better understand the fabric, technology, beauty, and functionality of the vessels!

So there you have it! We are both working hard on our theses with the goal of finishing by May, or at least having things completed enough that we can finish at home. We are both working with wonderful people at the Hebrew University who are guiding us as we go along, and of course we have the help of our primary reader and advisor, Dr. Barkay. We’ve decorated for Christmas and are trying to keep in the spirit of things, but really are looking toward going home in the summer. Thoughts of spending next Christmas at home are keeping us going this holiday season as we devote most of our time to our big papers.

We wish you, our family and friends, a very Merry Christmas! Thank you all so much for your prayers and support. We ask that you would continue to keep us in prayer as we strive to finish up. By the way, we have uploaded three new photo albums to catch you up on some of things that we have been doing since our last entry. Blessings everyone!