Version classiqueVersion mobile

Multidisciplinary approaches to food and foodways in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean

 | 
Sylvie Yona Waksman

Cyprus and the Levant

The impact of the Crusades on ceramic production and use in the southern Levant

Continuity or change?

Edna J. Stern, Sylvie Yona Waksman et Anastasia Shapiro

Résumé

The goal of this multidisciplinary study was to determine whether there was continuity or change in ceramic production and consumption in the southern Levant between the Fatimid and the Crusader periods, in relation to the arrival of new populations having different cultural backgrounds and dietary habits. It combines the results of our previous studies with new chemical and petrographic analyses, in order to examine the productions of local pottery workshops, their typological repertoire and their markets. The results detail the developments that occurred in the local pottery production with the establishment of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.

Texte intégral

Introduction

1The Fatimid Empire stood at the center of a global maritime trading network during the 11th century. The Fatimid Caliphs were very wealthy, and their capital Cairo was one of the most important economic and cultural centers in the Islamic world. The Fatimid coastal towns in the southern Levant were fairly prosperous and participated in the flourishing land and sea trade oriented towards the Islamic world (Lev 2012). This came to an end in the late 11th century with the Crusader conquest and the establishment of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. In addition to political change, there was a shift in most social, economic and cultural domains when the Europeans, known as the “Franks”, settled in the Levant. The newcomers resided in the coastal towns and cities, as well as in the rural agricultural hinterland, living in coexistence with the local inhabitants (Phillips 1995, pp. 113‑119). The opening of the maritime trade routes between western Europe and the Levant together with a shift of the land trade routes towards the Crusader harbors brought economic prosperity and created a Mediterranean cosmopolitan culture in the port cities (Jacoby 2007).

2Naturally, the changes in population and culture would be expected to be manifested in many different ways and would be mirrored in the material culture. For example, one would expect different cooking and eating habits. In comparing two contemporary manuscript illustrations, one in the “Arsenal Bible” from Acre dated to 1250-12541 with one in “Maqamat Al‑Hariri” from Baghdad dated to 1237,2 it may be clearly seen that the Muslims are represented sitting on the floor and eating from one large communal dish, while the Franks are shown sitting on chairs around a table with a few small bowls. These differences in dining customs should be reflected in the shapes of the pottery used for dining as well as for food preparation and storage.

3The production, distribution and utilization of local pottery within the geographical borders of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, both before and after its establishment, may hold information relative to the culinary choices and dining habits of the local population and of the newcomers. Within the POMEDOR project (People, pottery and food in the medieval Eastern Mediterranean) we attempted to investigate this subject. The research combined the results of our previous studies with new chemical and petrographic analyses. The earlier studies, carried out in 1996-1997 by Waksman and Stern, investigated the typology and archaeometry of Crusader pottery that had just been discovered in the large-scale excavations at Acre (Waksman et al. 1999; 2008; Stern & Waksman 2003). The productions of Acre and those later identified as coming from Beirut were defined, as were productions related to a type of glazed table ware imported from the Byzantine world (“Zeuxippus ware”). Further extensive research on the Acre production was conducted by Stern (1997; 2012; 2013) and Shapiro (2012; 2013). The Beirut productions were investigated by Waksman (2002; 2011; 2017) and others (François et al. 2003). While the Acre workshops were dated only to the Crusader period (12th-13th centuries), it appeared that Beirut workshops were functioning already in the Fatimid period (El‑Masri 1997-1998; Waksman 2011). Clues in relation to their development carrying on into the Crusader period (Waksman 2017, pp. 155-156) stimulated us to engage in further research into pottery production and distribution between the Fatimid and the Crusader periods in the region.

Research questions and methodology

4In this paper we concentrate on two main questions:

  • What more can be learned about the pottery workshops, their productions and their markets, and how they developed over time?
  • Can these developments be related to the arrival of new populations, and in general can the cultural identity of the medieval southern Levantine populations be traced in the ceramic evidence?
  • 3 Another category of pottery related to food, sugar wares, was also investigated, see Shapiro et al (...)

5To attempt to answer these questions, we investigated Fatimid and Crusader pottery types using petrographic and chemical analysis, with the goal of identifying workshops, defining their production both on archaeological and archaeometric grounds and better understanding the patterns of pottery distribution and consumption through time. We studied both production and utilization of kitchen and dining wares3 in order to discover clues and evidence related to the cultural identity of both the potters and the people who used this pottery.

6Petrographic analysis was carried out at the laboratory of the Israel Antiquities Authority, and chemical analysis was carried out by X-ray fluorescence (WD-XRF) using the analytical facilities of the Lyon laboratory (CNRS UMR 5138). Productions from pottery workshops were characterized using local reference material such as kiln furniture (kiln bars, tripod stilts) and pottery wasters (especially biscuit-fired, unfinished wares). We could rely on our previous studies on medieval pottery workshops in the area, especially those carried out on the material from Acre and Beirut, which provided a reference corpus to which we could compare the new data (Waksman 2002; 2011; Stern & Waksman 2003; Waksman et al. 2008; Shapiro 2012; 2013).

7The study focused on the region of the southern Levant (modern-day Israel), with sampling from sites located within the geographical borders of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. 198 samples of pottery vessels from eight excavated sites in Israel were chosen for chemical analysis, 110 of which were also subjected to petrographic analysis.

Sampled sites

  • 4 Only short summaries are given here, as extensive literature is available elsewhere.

8Eight sites in Israel were investigated in this study, of which some contained archeological remains from both the Fatimid and the Crusader periods (fig. 1). They include main cities and harbors,4 such as Acre and Jaffa, as well as rural settlements in the hinterland of Acre. Beirut, a main regional pottery provider in the Crusader period according to quantitative data available from Acre (Stern & Waksman 2003; Stern 1997, tabl. 1; 2012), was also investigated using previous studies (Waksman 2002; 2011).

Fig. 1 – Map of the southern Levant with locations of the sites mentioned in the text and the periods.

Fig. 1 – Map of the southern Levant with locations of the sites mentioned in the text and the periods.

9Beirut became a prosperous port city with a fairly good harbor following its conquest by the Fatimids in 994. After it was captured by the Franks in 1110 and came under their domination, it developed to an important maritime trade center with an excellent artificial harbor, exporting food stuffs and textiles from its fertile hinterland and commodities from inner Asia. Interestingly, the previous inhabitants continued to reside in the city, despite the change in rule. It remained in Frankish hands until 1291 (Pringle 1993, pp. 111‑112; Kassir 2010, pp. 59‑63; Jacoby 2016). Excavations in Beirut have unearthed remains of these periods (El‑Masri 1996-1997; François et al. 2003; Homsy 2009 and literature cited).

10The geographical locations of Acre and Jaffa resulted in their being important ports both in the Fatimid and the Crusader periods. During the Fatimid period, Jaffa served as the main port of the regional capital, Ramla, and later on as the main port of the Frankish capital, Jerusalem. Unlike the situation in Beirut, in Jaffa the Muslim population demolished and abandoned the city prior to its conquest by the Crusader armies in 1099 (Pringle 1993, p. 264‑267; Foran 2011, pp. 114‑118; Boas 2011). A large number of small and medium salvage excavations by the Israel Antiquities Authority have exposed various parts of the town (Peilstöcker 2006; 2011; Arbel 2009; 2017; Re’em 2010; Arbel & Rauchberger 2015).

11During the capture of the other important port, Acre, by the Franks (1104), some of the local inhabitants were killed and those remaining were allowed to either leave or stay if they agreed to pay an annual tax. The Genoese and Pisans were granted quarters and commercial privileges for their naval assistance in taking Acre. The Venetians were also granted a quarter and privileges and this also contributed to the city’s growing commercial importance. The port of Acre traded with Europe, the Muslim states and the Byzantine Empire, exporting goods from its agricultural hinterland or from farther east, importing goods as well, and serving as a depot for goods in transit (Jacoby 1998; 2005). It also became the capital of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in the 13th century (Pringle 2009, pp. 3‑35). Excavations by the Israel Antiquities Authority in Acre revealed remains from both the Fatimid and Crusader towns and their material culture (Syon & Tatcher 1998; Stern 2002; 2006; Stern & Syon, forthcoming).

12Excavations by Tel Aviv University have revealed the remains of the coastal town Apollonia/Arsur, including the Fatimid and Crusader periods. In the 13th century a Hospitaller castle was built there (Roll 2007; Tal & Roll 2011; Ayalon et al. 2013).

13Tiberias was a large urban center during the Fatimid period. Situated on the Damascus-Cairo road it was an important commercial, agricultural and production center (Cytryn-Silverman 2015, pp. 187‑188, 203‑209). From the end of the Fatimid period and with the Crusader conquest and consequent changes, it became a smaller town, serving as the capital of the Principality of Galilee and sending agricultural produce for export through the port of Acre (Pringle 1998, pp. 351‑353). Archaeological excavations unearthed parts of this site (Hirschfeld 2004; Stacey 2004; Hirschfeld & Gutfeld 2008; Stepansky 2004; Stern 2013).

  • 5 These two sites are presented in more detail in Shapiro et al., in this volume.

14Horbat Manot and el‑Kabri were excavated in rescue excavations by the IAA when roads were widened. They both revealed remains of sugar production.5 The Crusader name for Horbat Manot was “Manuet” or “Manueth”, and it is mentioned in several Crusader-period documents that mainly deal with land transactions, indicating Frankish presence at the site and that it was sold to the Hospitaller order in the early 13th century (Ellenblum 1998, pp. 199‑203; Stern 2001). El‑Kabri was also a large village in the Fatimid period, and was identified with the Frankish village of “Le Quiebre”, in the fief of Casal Imbert (Achziv), mentioned in 13th century documents (Smithline 2004; Frankel & Getzov 2012, site 67).

15Rescue excavations were also carried out at Horbat ‘Uza and Horbat Bet Zeneta, villages in the rural hinterland of Acre. The first was a Frankish village known as “La Hadia”, mentioned in three documents, one of 1178 referring to it as the village of a Frankish knight. A large building, erected in the 12th century, reconstructed and expanded in the 13th century, was exposed. Identified as a large farmhouse or manor, it appears to have been constructed by the Frankish settlers mentioned in the documents (Getzov et al. 2009, pp. 105‑116, 109; Stern 2015). The excavation of Horbat Bet Zeneta, known as “Zoenite” in 13th century Frankish documents, revealed poorly constructed houses of the 13th century built directly upon earlier Roman remains. Based on the finds and the architectural features, the excavations showed that this small village was inhabited by a non-Frankish indigenous population (Getzov 2000; Stern 2015).

Pottery workshops sampled

16Remains of two workshops were sampled for this study, one in Tiberias (fig. 2) and the other in Acre (fig. 3), and previous chemical analyses of material coming from kiln contexts excavated in Beirut were used (Waksman 2002; 2011; 2017; François et al. 2003). The latter show that various ceramic productions, dating from the Fatimid to the Crusader periods and corresponding to two distinct fabrics, can be attributed to the Beirut workshops. One is a buff calcareous fabric, used for table wares, and the other a red fabric used for both table wares, and common and cooking wares.

Fig. 2 – Tiberias production, Fatimid period, from a kiln context in Tiberias (LEV863-869) and from el‑Kabri (LEV733-734); Crusader period, from Tiberias (LEV861-862) (Ca – carbonate rock [chalk or decomposed limestone], Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Ba – basalt, Fo – foraminifera).

Fig. 2 – Tiberias production, Fatimid period, from a kiln context in Tiberias (LEV863-869) and from el‑Kabri (LEV733-734); Crusader period, from Tiberias (LEV861-862) (Ca – carbonate rock [chalk or decomposed limestone], Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Ba – basalt, Fo – foraminifera).

Fig. 3 – Acre production, Abbasid period, from a kiln context (LEV873-882) (Fo – foraminifera, Q – quartz).

Fig. 3 – Acre production, Abbasid period, from a kiln context (LEV873-882) (Fo – foraminifera, Q – quartz).
  • 6 Samples numbers in the Lyon laboratory are indicated, see also table 1 and 2.
  • 7 Two unpublished excavations in that area which also unearthed pottery production remains were cond (...)

17Remains of a pottery kiln in Tiberias were found in the excavation of a sewer trench (Stern 1995). It appears that the kiln collapsed either during or shortly after the firing stage, as biscuit-fired bowls (fig. 2: LEV866-867)6 and storage jars (fig. 2: LEV868-869) were found there, as well as kiln bars used as spacers (fig. 2: LEV863-865). The pottery found in the kiln was dated by typological considerations to the Late Abbasid and the Fatimid periods (10th-11th centuries). Located to the south of the Islamic city, this kiln was in close vicinity to other remains of pottery production (Oren 1971; Hartal 2009),7 indicating perhaps a cluster of ceramic workshops.

18In the modern city of Acre the debris of a pottery workshop was exposed in a salvage excavation, and included tripod stilts and wasters of s-shaped glazed bowls (fig. 3: LEV873-882; Stern 1998). Although no evidence of a pottery kiln was found, robber trenches dug into late Hellenistic and early Roman walls contained early Islamic pottery, suggesting that this workshop area was situated in the outskirts of the early Islamic city. These remains were dated to the 10th century (Abbasid period) according to the form of the bowls, but may have continued into the early 11th century (Fatimid period).

19Hypotheses concerning other potential workshops, in Jaffa and in Apollonia, were also considered. The first was based on finds in Jaffa Meraguza, which were initially interpreted as unfinished wares (fig. 10: LEV870-871; Arbel & Rauchberger 2015; Stern, forthcoming). The second was proposed due to the large number of bowls found in Apollonia, similar morphologically to the “Acre bowls” but differing in the color of their fabric and in their surface treatment (fig. 12: LEV771-774, associated with typical “Acre bowls” LEV767-770). Several Hospitaller complexes may have had their own pottery production, sharing the same models.

The workshops and their productions through time

Tiberias, Acre and Beirut workshops: Early Islamic/Fatimid calcareous glazed table ware

20The Early Islamic productions are characterized by a light buff calcareous fabric (fig. 2‑4). They all present very high calcium contents, as well as some variability in their chemical compositions, but may be differentiated especially on the basis of the titanium and zirconium contents (fig. 5, tabl. 2). Buff-firing raw materials appear to have been deliberately chosen by the potters, from the clay resources available in the vicinity of each workshop. Producing pottery in buff-colored fabric is a well-known Islamic tradition that began in the late 8th century in Abbasid Iraq and spread during the 9th century across a wide geographic range (Watson 2004, p. 171; Cytryn-Silverman 2010, pp. 109‑111).

Fig. 4 – Beirut production, Fatimid period, calcareous fabric, from el‑Kabri (LEV738), Horbat ‘Uza (LEV822-824) and Apollonia (LEV758-763) (Ca – carbonate rock [chalk or decomposed limestone], Q – quartz, Q(fe) – quartz with ferruginous coating).

Fig. 4 – Beirut production, Fatimid period, calcareous fabric, from el‑Kabri (LEV738), Horbat ‘Uza (LEV822-824) and Apollonia (LEV758-763) (Ca – carbonate rock [chalk or decomposed limestone], Q – quartz, Q(fe) – quartz with ferruginous coating).

Fig. 5 – Binary plot titanium / zirconium, showing how the glazed table wares produced in the Acre, Tiberias and Beirut workshops in the Early Islamic (EI) and Fatimid periods may be differentiated. The cross corresponds to the mean and standard deviation of Beirut buff wares reference group (after Waksman 2011).

Fig. 5 – Binary plot titanium / zirconium, showing how the glazed table wares produced in the Acre, Tiberias and Beirut workshops in the Early Islamic (EI) and Fatimid periods may be differentiated. The cross corresponds to the mean and standard deviation of Beirut buff wares reference group (after Waksman 2011).

Tabl. 1 – List of the samples analyzed and associated petrographic groups. CR: Crusader, EI: Early Islamic.

Tabl. 1 – List of the samples analyzed and associated petrographic groups. CR: Crusader, EI: Early Islamic.

Tabl. 1 (1/3)

Tabl. 2 – Chemical compositions of samples of Early Islamic, Fatimid and Crusader wares: new reference groups for Acre and Tiberias in the Early Islamic and Fatimid period, Acre wares lato sensu, Beirut and related wares. Major and minor elements are indicated in oxides weight %, trace elements in ppm (part per million); m: mean, σ: standard deviation, n: number of samples, l.q.: limits of quantification, n.d.: not determined; elements between brackets were not used in the multivariate statistics; data marked with an asterisk were not taken into account in the calculation of m and σ.

Tabl. 2 – Chemical compositions of samples of Early Islamic, Fatimid and Crusader wares: new reference groups for Acre and Tiberias in the Early Islamic and Fatimid period, Acre wares lato sensu, Beirut and related wares. Major and minor elements are indicated in oxides weight %, trace elements in ppm (part per million); m: mean, σ: standard deviation, n: number of samples, l.q.: limits of quantification, n.d.: not determined; elements between brackets were not used in the multivariate statistics; data marked with an asterisk were not taken into account in the calculation of m and σ.

Tabl. 2 (1/4)

  • 8 Further investigations are ongoing, as the tradition of turquoise glaze is related to the Islamic (...)

21The archaeometric study shows that glazed bowls produced at Tiberias and Beirut during the Fatimid period were found at the other sites. At el‑Kabri, painted wares (fig. 2: LEV733), monochrome wares (LEV732) and polychrome splashed sgraffito bowls (fig. 2: LEV734) produced at Tiberias were found. These types have deep roots in the traditions of Islamic pottery and were commonly found in consumption contexts in the southern Levant during the Fatimid period (Avissar 1996, pp. 81‑82; Stern & Stacey 2000, p. 174, fig. 3: 7; Stacey 2004, p. 117, fig. 5.25; Cytryn-Silverman 2010, pp. 109‑111). At el‑Kabri, Horbat ‘Uza and Apollonia, bowls and cups in Beirut calcareous fabric, in monochrome brown or turquoise8 glazed (fig. 4: el‑Kabri: LEV738; Horbat ‘Uza: LEV821-824) and brown painted versions (fig. 4: Apollonia: LEV758-763), were used during the Fatimid period and up to the early Crusader period (Stern 2012, pp. 96‑97; Arnon 2008, pp. 47‑48, type 264; Stern & Tatcher 2009, pp. 126‑128, fig. 3.18: 3‑10). Although it had been suggested that the painted version of these bowls was produced in Egypt (see discussion in Ayalon et al. 2013, p. 267), the chemical and petrographic analysis of the bowls show that they match reference samples from Beirut, and their lithology corresponds to the calcareous sequence of the Lower Cretaceous formations outcropping to the east of Beirut (François et al. 2003; Waksman 2011; Dubertret 1955). However, further research on a potential Egyptian origin is still ongoing (Waksman et al. 2017).

Beirut workshops: Fatimid-period red-fabric glazed table ware

22Chemical analyses showing that glazed bowls found in the Serçe Limanı shipwreck, securely dated to the early 11th century (Jenkins 1992), were produced in Beirut, enabled us to identify the early productions of Beirut workshops (Waksman 2011). These glazed bowls, which have a champlevé and incised decoration and a thick whitish slip covering the whole external surface, were manufactured together with monochrome sgraffito, slip-painted and splashed wares in the Fatimid period (Waksman 2011, p. 203, fig. 2). They have a red fabric very similar to that of contemporary cooking wares, as well as to later Beirut wares whose local production is attested archaeologically (El‑Masri 1997‑1998; François et al. 2003). As far as we know, the “Serçe Limanı” bowls are among the earliest red-fabric glazed bowls produced in the Beirut workshops. They overlapped for about a century the manufacture in Beirut of the buff, calcareous-fabric glazed vessels mentioned in the previous paragraph, which seems to have ceased by the first decades of the 12th century (but see Waksman, forthcoming; in this volume, n. 62, about a potential extension of this chronology). Beirut red-fabric glazed bowls continued to be produced at least until the early Mamluk period, as attested by finds from securely dated contexts on excavations in Israel. Concerning the “Serçe Limanı” bowls, there is a slight difference in form and decoration between the 11th century and the 12th century bowls; however, they both share the same general shape, decoration and external surface treatment: a thick layer of white slip (Avissar 1996, pp. 89, 90, type 30; Stern 2012, pp. 44‑47, pl. 4: 225‑227; Arnon 2008, p. 47, type 261; Stern & Tatcher 2009, pp. 124‑126, fig. 3.17; Stern & Stacey 2000, pp. 173‑174, fig. 3: 1‑5; Stacey 2004, p. 122, fig. 5.30). The early Crusader-period glazed bowls found in Horbat ‘Uza (fig. 6: LEV815-818) came from Beirut, as shown by chemical and petrographic analysis; some of them (fig. 6: LEV817-818) could represent a transitional form of Beirut sgraffito wares, between the “Serçe Limanı” Fatimid type and the “typical” Crusader type (see infra).

Fig. 6 – Beirut production, Fatimid-Early Crusader period, red fabric, from Horbat ‘Uza (LEV815-818), el‑Kabri (LEV728-731), Apollonia (LEV764-766) and Horbat ‘Uza (LEV902-904) (Q – quartz).

Fig. 6 – Beirut production, Fatimid-Early Crusader period, red fabric, from Horbat ‘Uza (LEV815-818), el‑Kabri (LEV728-731), Apollonia (LEV764-766) and Horbat ‘Uza (LEV902-904) (Q – quartz).

Beirut workshops: Fatimid and Crusader-period cooking ware

23During the Fatimid and Crusader periods, glazed cooking wares of open and closed globular shapes were used throughout the southern Levant (Avissar 1996, pp. 132‑136, 139‑142, types 5‑9, 13‑16; Stern & Stacey 2000, pp. 174‑175, fig. 3: 8‑10; Arnon 2008, pp. 46, 52, 53, types 751‑753, 772‑775; Stern 2012, pp. 41‑44, pl. 4.14‑4.17; Stern 2013, p. 190, fig. 12: 3‑5; Stacey 2004, p. 125, fig. 5.32: 14‑17), as well as at more distant sites such as Paphos in Cyprus (Gabrieli 2008; Gabrieli et al. 2001) and Kinet on the border between the Latin principality of Antioch and Cilicia Armenia (Redford et al. 2001, p. 119, fig. 30: 1‑3). Previous archaeometric studies of some of these cooking wares have shown that most of them were produced in Beirut (Waksman 2002; 2011; forthcoming; Waksman et al. 2008; see also Gabrieli et al., in this volume). Although these glazed cooking wares have been studied by us in the past, it was desired to learn more about the people who produced and used them in order to, at a later stage, learn more about cooking customs in this region and to establish whether there was an adaptation of new habits to existing vessels. Interestingly, the shape and glaze of these vessels did not change much despite the change in rule and in population during the time of transition between the Fatimid and the Crusader periods. In addition, as these cooking wares were very widespread, our intention was to check whether one or several competing workshops manufacturing wares similar to those produced in Beirut could be identified at the Levantine consumption sites.

24Samples for analyses were chosen from sites located in different geographical regions and having different chronological ranges (fig. 6‑7). In el‑Kabri, the vessels came from a context securely dated to the 11th century and included shallow open vessels (fig. 6: LEV728) and globular closed vessels (fig. 6: LEV729-731). Closed cooking pots were found in a stratum at Apollonia dated to the end of the 11th/early 12th century, which includes the late Fatimid to early Crusader periods (fig. 6: LEV764-766). Shallow open vessels (fig. 6: LEV902) and globular closed vessels (fig. 6: LEV903-904) from a clear 12th century context at Horbat ‘Uza were sampled, as well as 13th century cooking ware from Acre (fig. 7, open forms: LEV891-892, LEV894-901; closed forms: LEV886-890, LEV893) and Jaffa (fig. 7, open forms: LEV907-908; closed forms: LEV905-906).

Fig. 7 – Beirut production, Crusader period, red fabric, from Acre (LEV886-901) and Jaffa (LEV905-908) (Q – quartz).

Fig. 7 – Beirut production, Crusader period, red fabric, from Acre (LEV886-901) and Jaffa (LEV905-908) (Q – quartz).
  • 9 Tiberias (Stern 2013, pp. 187, 190, fig. 7: 2, 3, 12: 3‑5; Shapiro 2013, p. 210).
  • 10 The situation may be different in the Northern Levant, although Beirut cooking ware is also well r (...)

25Analyses established that all the sampled cooking ware excavated in Israel were produced at Beirut (fig. 8a, tabl. 2), demonstrating that the Beirut workshops were the main producers of glazed cooking ware, at least during the 12th and 13th centuries, with wide distribution by land and by sea to the south, down the coast and inland to the east9 and to Cyprus in the west10 with no evidence of competing workshops within our sampling.

Fig. 8 – Histograms of Euclidean distance to Beirut red wares reference group (in red), showing different situations: a) samples integrated in the group (Cooking Wares); b) samples either integrated or marginal to the group (“Reserved-Slip”, “Slip-Painted” and “Painted Wares”); c) samples not belonging to the group (“Broad Band Slip-Painted Wares”).

Fig. 8 – Histograms of Euclidean distance to Beirut red wares reference group (in red), showing different situations: a) samples integrated in the group (Cooking Wares); b) samples either integrated or marginal to the group (“Reserved-Slip”, “Slip-Painted” and “Painted Wares”); c) samples not belonging to the group (“Broad Band Slip-Painted Wares”).
  • 11 Silt and sand are both particles of minerals and/or rocks, which differ from each other in size: b (...)

26Although the clay material comes from the same source, the ferruginous sequence of the Lower Cretaceous formations outcropping to the east of Beirut (François et al. 2003; Waksman 2011; Dubertret 1955), some change in the shape, the fabric, the thickness of the cooking pot walls and the glaze application was discerned (fig. 9). For the wares of the Fatimid period, the walls are fairly thick and the fabric contains high quantities of relatively coarse quartz sand.11 In the 12th century, the walls become extremely thin, and the fabric is fine and mostly silty, without sand. The rim shape changes slightly from an upward rim with a channel just below it, to a simple or everted rim (for more complete examples see Stern 2012, pl. 4.15: 9‑12). Both cooking pot types present only splashed glaze in the interior. After the first decades of the 13th century, another change in the Beirut cooking pots was discerned; the fabric again contains more quartz sand and is more robust than the previous types. The pots have thicker walls, an out-turned or gutter rim, and glaze covering the entire interior of the vessels (for more complete examples, see Stern 2012, pl. 4.16: 11, 4.17: 9).

Fig. 9 – The evolution of the Beirut cooking pots from the Fatimid (11th century) to the Crusader period (12th and 13th centuries). The shaded areas inside the pots represent glaze.

Fig. 9 – The evolution of the Beirut cooking pots from the Fatimid (11th century) to the Crusader period (12th and 13th centuries). The shaded areas inside the pots represent glaze.
  • 12 Of a total of 3454 rims, 3279 (95%) are from Beirut cooking wares while only 175 (5%) correspond t (...)

27The large quantities of Beirut products found at the excavations at Acre are clear evidence that the Franks adopted the Beirut cooking wares that were in use during the Fatimid period. Apparently they did not bring their own potters to produce specific cooking vessels for their cuisine, although a few examples of imported cooking vessels were found at Acre (Stern 2012, pl. 4.40: 5‑10, 4.64: 7‑11, 4.65, 4.68, 4.77, 4.78; Waksman 2012).12 Metal cooking pots were probably also used. In general it seems that there was a continuation of the use of the same ceramic cooking vessel types, and even an amplification of the dominance of Beirut wares in the market in the Crusader-period. It is not clear at this stage of research whether the Franks had some impact on the typological changes, which occurred about a century after the conquest, and whether this change is related to diet.

Beirut and competing workshops: Crusader-period red-fabric glazed table ware

28Beirut productions appear to represent the vast majority of glazed cooking wares in the southern Levant in the Crusader period, but the situation may have been different for red-fabric table wares (fig. 10‑11). Beirut table ware production at the time included an apparent continuation of the “Serçe Limanı” glazed bowls. However, they are found in a larger variety of shapes, usually with a short ledge rim, sometimes with a simple wide ledge rim, decorated occasionally with thin incisions and without a slip on the exterior (fig. 10: el‑Kabri: LEV740; Jaffa: LEV836). These glazed bowls, produced during the 12th and 13th centuries, were distributed to the same areas as the cooking wares (Waksman 2002; Stern 2012, pp. 44‑47, pl. 4.19: 11‑25, pl. 4.23: 1‑10; Stern 2013, pp. 187, 191, fig. 7: 4, 12: 7, 8). Table wares made of a similar red fabric with different decorations were found on the same consumption sites. The decorations consist of either slip-painted designs with a very shiny glaze or a reserved slip (Stern 2012, pp. 44‑47, pl. 4.20: 4‑7; 4.21: 6‑10). The chemical and petrographic analyses distinguished wares which were clearly imported from Beirut (fig. 10: slip painted, Acre: LEV794; reserved slip, el‑Kabri: LEV739, Jaffa: LEV870-871) and others which have a slightly different chemical fingerprint (fig. 10: slip-painted, Acre: LEV792, el‑Kabri, LEV745, Apollonia, LEV776; reserved slip, Acre: LEV795-797, Jaffa: LEV833-834), but it is not yet clear whether these are Beirut products (fig. 8b, tabl. 2). The lithology of the sherds is either very similar to that of the cooking pots mentioned above, or is similar to them but includes various calcareous materials such as limestone, shells and microfossil inclusions.

Fig. 10 – Beirut production (above) and samples chemically marginal to Beirut (below), Crusader period, red fabric, glazed table ware, from Acre (LEV792, LEV794-797), el‑Kabri (LEV739-740, LEV745), Jaffa (LEV833-834, LEV836, LEV870) and Apollonia (LEV776) (Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Q – quartz).

Fig. 10 – Beirut production (above) and samples chemically marginal to Beirut (below), Crusader period, red fabric, glazed table ware, from Acre (LEV792, LEV794-797), el‑Kabri (LEV739-740, LEV745), Jaffa (LEV833-834, LEV836, LEV870) and Apollonia (LEV776) (Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Q – quartz).

29Another type of bowl was found on the same consumption sites as the Beirut glazed bowls and cooking ware: “Broad Band Slip-Painted Ware” (fig. 11: Acre: LEV790-791, el‑Kabri: LEV736-737, Apollonia: LEV775, LEV777-779, Jaffa: LEV 837). These are small to medium sized bowls with a wide ledge rim, decorated with broad linear bands painted in a white slip under a low quality glaze that was usually not preserved (Waksman et al. 2008; Stern 2012, pp. 44‑47, pl. 4.21: 1‑5). Despite a similar red fabric and similar distribution patterns, the chemical analyses clearly identify a production distinct from that of Beirut (fig. 8c, tabl. 2). Nevertheless the workshop producing these Broad Band Slip-Painted Wares may still have been situated in the same area, as the petrographic analyses point to the same source materials, present in lower Cretaceous formations which extend from Lebanon to Jordan (Waksman 2002, fig. 1), and which are known as highly suitable for pottery fabrication from the Chalcolithic period onward (Goren 1995; Greenberg & Porat 1996).

Fig. 11 – “Broad Band Slip-Painted Ware”, from Apollonia (LEV775, 777‑779), Jaffa (LEV837), Acre (LEV790-791), and el‑Kabri (LEV736-737) (Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Q – quartz).

Fig. 11 – “Broad Band Slip-Painted Ware”, from Apollonia (LEV775, 777‑779), Jaffa (LEV837), Acre (LEV790-791), and el‑Kabri (LEV736-737) (Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Q – quartz).

Acre workshops: Crusader-period unglazed ware

30In the Crusader period, a new production center for unglazed wares emerged in the southern Levant (fig. 12‑13). Its productions were abundantly found in excavations in Acre and were previously defined by chemical and petrographic analyses (Stern & Waksman 2003; Waksman et al. 2008; Shapiro 2012). The “Acre Ware” includes a variety of uniform simple forms: bowls, dishes, jugs, jars, noria jars, water pipes and vessels for sugar production (Stern 1997; Waksman et al. 2008; Stern 2012, pp. 34‑38, pl. 4.1‑4.11; Shapiro 2012, pp. 104‑105, 114‑115, fig. 5.1, 5.2; Shapiro et al., in this volume). All the vessels have a light-colored exterior due to a similar surface treatment: the vessels were apparently dipped into salty sea water prior to firing (Shapiro 2012). This resulted in greater resistance to breakage and a less porous surface, almost like a glaze. It clearly upgraded this simple, mass-produced pottery, making it a ware attractive for regional trade.

Fig. 12 – Acre production, Crusader period, from Apollonia (LEV767-774), Acre (LEV803-804, LEV808-809, LEV843-846), Horbat Manot (LEV859), Jaffa (LEV825-827) (Q – quartz, Q(si) – quartz silt, Pl – plagioclase).

Fig. 12 – Acre production, Crusader period, from Apollonia (LEV767-774), Acre (LEV803-804, LEV808-809, LEV843-846), Horbat Manot (LEV859), Jaffa (LEV825-827) (Q – quartz, Q(si) – quartz silt, Pl – plagioclase).

Fig. 13 – Acre production, Crusader period. Acre (LEV800-802, LEV805-807), Bet Zeneta (LEV884-885), Horbat Manot (LEV860), Jaffa (LEV828-830) (Q – quartz).

Fig. 13 – Acre production, Crusader period. Acre (LEV800-802, LEV805-807), Bet Zeneta (LEV884-885), Horbat Manot (LEV860), Jaffa (LEV828-830) (Q – quartz).

31The “Acre bowls”, the most frequent form in Acre, were mainly found in the compound of the Hospitaller knights, who cared for the pilgrims and the sick (fig. 12: LEV843-846). These hemispherical bowls are all the same size usually with a short, rarely wide, ledge rim. The string-cut base was not further treated after removal from the potter’s wheel, resulting in a flat or disk-shaped base. The large quantities, standardized fabric and size, and somewhat careless quality of the workmanship indicate that they were mass-produced. It is assumed that these bowls are closely linked to the role of the Hospitaller knights. Interestingly, some of the sites in which “Acre bowls” were found are related to this military order: Apollonia (fig. 12: LEV767-774; Tal & Roll 2011, p. 40, fig. 33), Horbat Manot (LEV859; Stern 2001, pp. 282‑282, fig. 6: 4), Tiberias (Stern 2013, p. 193, fig. 13: 4, 5) and Jaffa (fig. 12: LEV825-826; Burke & Stern, forthcoming). Other forms of “Acre ware” were found at these sites (fig. 12‑13: Acre, plate: LEV808, jugs: LEV800-802, 805‑807, kraters: LEV803-804; Horbat Manot, jar: LEV860) and at other sites, both in the hinterland of Acre (fig. 13: Bet Zeneta, jar: LEV885, jug: LEV884; Getzov 2000, p. fig. 22: 4, 8) and on coastal sites such as Jaffa (fig. 12‑13: jug: LEV828, jar: LEV829-830, krater: LEV827; Burke & Stern, forthcoming). As with the Beirut wares, the chemical and petrographic analyses of “Acre wares” were expected to provide further information on the organization of production and the possible location of the workshop(s), as well as on the potters and consumers. One of our hypotheses was that competing workshops that produced and distributed similar vessels existed on the southern coastal plain, especially at Jaffa and Apollonia. Regarding the cultural identity of the potters and the consumers, we attempted to define this by comparing the fabric of this pottery to that of the Early Islamic pottery workshop sampled at Acre. This may provide hints as to a possible continuation of pottery production by local inhabitants settled in Acre prior to the Frankish conquest, or it may indicate a different pottery production tradition, suggesting that the potters came with the Frankish newcomers. Concerning the first hypothesis, the archaeometric analyses do not provide evidence for competing workshops, and the petrographic analyses determined that all the “Acre bowls” and other forms were indeed produced using clayey materials available in the vicinity of Acre. This demonstrates that the Acre workshops distributed their wares as far south as Jaffa, about 140 km from Acre, and about 50 km inland to Tiberias. Furthermore, the analysis also shows that “Acre ware” was used by both Franks at Horbat Manot and the local indigenous population at Horbat Bet Zeneta.

32Who were the potters and for which population were the “Acre wares” intended? Some clues can be found in the shape and the fabric. Regarding shape, among the jugs for example two basic shapes can be seen. Most of them have a long straight or slightly funnel-shaped neck, a piriform body, a flat or low ring base and one handle that extends from the middle of the neck to the shoulder (fig. 13: LEV805-806; Stern 2012, p. 35, pl. 4.6: 5‑19). But some of the jugs have a different shape, with a funnel-shaped neck and a strainer at the base of the neck consisting of perforated narrow slits. Three small handles extend from the lower neck to the beginning of the shoulder. This type of jug made in the Acre fabric was found both at Acre (fig. 13: LEV800-802) and at Horbat Bet Zeneta (fig. 13: LEV884). These two distinctive jug forms clearly indicate different traditions of liquid consumption, reflecting different cultural backgrounds. The first shape is very similar to western-style jugs, for example a contemporary jug found at the Embrici tower in Genoa (Benente 2011, p. 29, fig. 3, 4), whereas the second form is similar to contemporary Ayyubid jugs, found for example at Jerusalem (Avissar & Stern 2005, p. 108, type II.4.1.2, fig. 45: 2, 3). So it is clear that the Acre workshops produced vessels for liquid consumption in both the western, European style and in the eastern, Islamic tradition.

33Regarding the raw materials used, petrographic and chemical analyses have shown that the materials from which the Acre wares were produced do not form a homogeneous group, but comprise a variety of materials (tabl. 2), which may be found in the vicinity of Acre. Most of the examined samples were tempered with almost pure quartz sand from the south of Acre (tabl. 1: petrographic group 1, “Akko Hamra”), others with beach sand composed of shells and quartz from the seashore to the north of Acre (tabl. 1: petrographic group 2, “Akko to Rosh HaNiqra”). However most of these slight variations in fabric occur in the same shapes and manufacturing processes. This may be explained by the possibility that one workshop mined the raw materials at different locations, or that, more probably for a city as important as Acre, a cluster of workshops produced similar wares. The main production appears to have been red wares with a light-colored surface due to the use of sea water (Shapiro 2012). Variants, such as “Acre bowls” with a red surface (fig. 12: LEV771-774, tabl. 2: Acre Crusader, low-calcareous variants), and those of a grey fabric and/or surface may be explained by various firing conditions. It is noticeable, however, that jugs whose form is related to the Islamic world appear to continue the Islamic tradition in that more calcareous clays and/or higher temperatures for firing were used (tabl. 2: Acre Crusader, calcareous and high-calcareous variants). At this stage of research, we do not know whether they were manufactured by one or several workshops, but there is no doubt that similar raw materials and technologies were used.

Tiberias workshops: Crusader-period unglazed ware

34As we have shown above, the Acre workshop’s simple unglazed utilitarian vessels dominated the markets, and their productions were distributed to distant sites, even inland to Tiberias. However, chemical and petrographic analysis of a type of jar found in Tiberias, very similar both in fabric and shape to those produced in Acre, indicates local production (fig. 2, tabl. 2: LEV861-862; Stern 2013, p. 190, fig. 12: 1, 2; Shapiro 2013, pp. 210‑211). Both the Acre and Tiberias workshops would have produced similar jars, the former in a red fabric with a light-colored surface, the latter made with calcareous, buff-firing clays, continuing the tradition of Early Islamic workshops.

Discussion

35A comprehensive understanding of pottery production, trade and consumption would require contemporary written documents containing information on these activities. Unfortunately, such information was rarely recorded in written form, the few examples that exist usually refer to these activities in an indirect way. Some from the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem reveal information relevant to this study: apparently the Genoese exported pottery produced in Beirut, and pottery was imported and exported through the port of Acre (Pringle 1982, p. 113; 1986, pp. 468‑469; Stern 2012, p. 147; Jacoby 2016, p. 267). David Jacoby’s numerous articles concerning sea and land trade provide additional information on the distribution modes used to market the products of the Beirut and Acre workshops. Ships involved in short and medium distance maritime coastal trading, operated by the Italian maritime communes (Genoa, Pisa and Venice) and/or the local traders, were probably responsible for the distribution of the Beirut cooking and table wares along the Levantine coast and to Cyprus (Jacoby 1998; 2007; 2010; 2016). The modes of distribution by land of the bulky and breakable cooking pots are less obvious. Frankish sources record that dates from Tiberias and wine from Nazareth were transported by land to Acre on donkeys and camels (Jacoby 1998, p. 107). It is possible that these pack animals could have carried goods from Acre to these inland destinations, suggesting that Beirut cooking ware arrived at Tiberias in two stages: by ship to Acre and from there by land on these animals.

  • 13 Denys Pringle suggested coastal redistribution of both local and imported pottery in the eastern M (...)

36As pottery production, distribution and consumption are not directly mentioned in the contemporary written sources, reconstruction of these activities must be based mainly on archaeology and archaeometry.13

37The archaeometric data obtained within the framework of the POMEDOR project has illuminated two main areas of research:

  • pottery workshops, their typological repertoire and their markets;
  • continuity and change in ceramic production in the southern Levant, and their possible relationships to the arrival of new populations with different cultural backgrounds and dietary habits.

38The Beirut workshops show continuous production of both cooking and glazed table wares produced in a red fabric, without an apparent break between the Fatimid and Crusader periods. On the other hand, there is a clear change in the occurrence of calcareous glazed bowls at the beginning of the Crusader period. Those of Beirut are no longer found in the southern Levant in contexts that date to after the first decades of the 12th century, and those from Tiberias ceased to be produced even earlier, at some point during the late Fatimid period (last decades of the 11th century).

39Second, a new ceramic production began in Acre with the arrival of the Franks, producing pottery of both western European style and eastern Islamic style. In Tiberias there also existed a new pottery workshop that produced at least storage jars of the same type as at Acre.

40The chemical and petrographic analyses show that the two previously known pottery workshops at Beirut and Acre were distributing their products over a wide geographical range, wider than realized before. So far we have no evidence for competing workshops that produced glazed cooking wares in the southern Levant. The Beirut cooking wares were clearly made for export. Although we cannot consider that the Beirut workshops were specialized in cooking vessels, as they were also producing and exporting table wares, quantitative analysis has shown that the Beirut cooking wares found at Acre were ten times more numerous than the Beirut table wares and the Broad Band Slip-Painted wares of unknown origin (Stern 2012, p. 29, tabl. 3.5).

  • 14 The Siphnos cooking pots were apparently distributed mainly in the Aegean (Vroom 2003, p. 185, fig (...)

41A more selective choice of raw materials was made for these cooking vessels, as it was necessary for them to withstand repeated heating and cooling during use (Waksman 2002). The Beirut fabric apparently matched these requirements very well, as suggested by the extent and volume of diffusion. Whether specific food products or food preparations were also associated with this diffusion is a possibility which we attempted to investigate by examination of examples found in Cyprus (Pecci et al. 2015; Gabrieli et al., in this volume), with only preliminary results so far. Specialized workshops focused on cooking wares are well known in the archaeological and ethnographic records. For example, the products of a Levantine workshop of cooking wares of the Byzantine period, possibly located near Tell Keisan, were found all around the Mediterranean (Waksman et al. 2005); during the 18th to early 20th centuries, cooking vessels of good quality manufactured on a large, almost industrial scale, on the Cycladic island of Siphnos and at Vallauris, Provence, were distributed to distant markets in the Mediterranean region and beyond.14

42Our analyses also show that the Acre pottery workshops specialized in simple bowls and other common wares used in daily life that were subjected to a particular surface treatment. Their distribution down the coast to Jaffa and Apollonia, as well as inland to Tiberias, indicates that there was a regional demand for these wares. Jugs that were produced in two distinct forms indicate that the “Acre ware” vessels were intended for consumers having various cultural identities in the region.

43Due to the slight variation in fabric composition noted above, it is plausible to suggest the existence of a cluster of workshops in and around Acre that were producing similar wares. Such pottery workshop clusters are well known in archaeology and ethnography, for example the 13th-14th centuries Paphos-Lemba wares (Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1996; von Wartburg 1997).

Concluding remarks

44Coming back to our initial research questions, tracing cultural identity in the ceramic evidence and learning more about the pottery workshops, we have seen that there is not one clear answer: it is a complex and dynamic situation. Both changes and continuation in the local pottery production have been detected, starting with the establishment of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.

45The tradition of buff-fabric glazed wares slowly came to an end after the change of rule between the Fatimids and Crusaders. But it persisted for some categories of unglazed common wares produced in Acre and Tiberias, some of which are clearly related by their forms to Islamic traditions. Furthermore, the use of sea water to lighten the surface color of the main production of common wares in Crusader Acre could be seen as a desire to continue this tradition of buff-resembling wares, although it may also be related to functional properties (see also Shapiro et al., in this volume). Further insights may become possible with the discovery of the archaeological remains of the Acre pottery workshops. But the analyses have suggested that in Acre a cluster of workshops produced wares that were intended for – and utilized by – both European and eastern consumers.

  • 15 For example, it has been suggested that the Peloponnese cooking wares changed in form and fabric b (...)

46On the other hand, the Beirut potters continued to manufacture and market their famous cooking wares despite the Crusader conquest, which even increased its diffusion. Although cooking wares are usually seen as strong indicators of food traditions (Gabrieli 2006),15 Beirut cooking wares were apparently also used by the Frankish newcomers to prepare their own dishes. The use of metal cooking pots by the Franks should not be ruled out. These are not preserved in the archaeological record as are the ceramic vessels, and therefore it is impossible to reconstruct the ratio of ceramic to metal cooking pots used in a Frankish household. In any case, it is clear that the Franks also used the “local” cooking wares, as attested in the many excavations, possibly in a manner different from that of the indigenous population. An 18th-19th century ethnographic parallel shows that the French-manufactured cooking pots from Vallauris mentioned above were used by African slaves to cook their traditional liquid-based foods in Martinique and Guadeloupe (French Caribbean Islands; Kelly & Wallman 2014, p. 35). This demonstrates adaptation of new cooking vessels to existing food preparation habits, and conversely the adaptation of an existing cooking ware repertoire to new food recipes may well have occurred in the southern Levant of the 12th century. Unfortunately, we lack the appropriate archaeological material to investigate this possibility through residue analysis, for example (Pecci et al. 2015; Gabrieli et al. 2017; in this volume; Waksman, in this volume, n. 64), and further research is clearly needed.

  • 16 A previous study comparing ceramic assemblages of three contemporary 13th century contexts by quan (...)
  • 17 For example, it has been suggested that in late medieval Spain food and foodways were strongly lin (...)
  • 18 Other archaeological food-related issues include food production (Shapiro et al., in this volume) (...)

47The intention of the present project was to investigate the people who fabricated and used this pottery during the Fatimid and Crusader periods, and to determine whether the pottery reflects the population changes in the southern Levant.16 Despite the consensus that foodways were a fundamental aspect of the people’s lifestyles and identities,17 in this study we were not able to advance very far in answering questions regarding the culinary preferences of the people who used the cooking pots and table wares we investigated. However, it is hoped that firmer bases concerning the main trends in the development of the production and diffusion of several categories of pottery related to food will be established. Our study concentrates on the local wares lato sensu, that is, wares manufactured within the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem which may reflect the adoption by local potters of new uses and fashions related to the arrival of the Franks, as well as the influence of craftsmen from the west who brought their own skills. A further step would be to collate information gained from this study with other studies, such as those concerned with historical evidence of food trade (Jacoby 2007) and consumption (Bronstein 2013), and other food-related archeological evidence,18 such as that of cooking and baking devices (Boas 2010, pp. 125‑130; Yehuda, in this volume), in order to provide further insights into food and foodways in the medieval southern Levant before and after the Crusades.

Acknowledgements and credits

48This study was funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR) through the POMEDOR project, and we acknowledge the support of the ANR under reference ANR-12‑CULT-0008. Thanks are due to the staff of the analytical facilities, CNRS UMR 5138, Lyon, and to the Israel Antiquities Authority, who kindly provided permission to sample pottery from its excavations; to the excavators of the Israel Antiquities Authority: Eliezer Stern, Danny Syon, Howard Smithline, Nimrod Getzov and Yoav Arbel, the curators: Ayala Lester and Giulia Roccabella, and the excavators from Tel Aviv University: Oren Tal and Lisa Yehuda.

49Photos of pottery are by Yona Waksman, photos of fabrics are by Alain Bernet and Baptiste Solard, photos under the polarizing microscope are by Anastasia Shapiro, pottery drawings are by Hagit Rozen-Tahan, Irena Lidski-Reznikov (Jaffa, Qishle), Itamar Ben Ezra and Yona Waksman (Apollonia), the map and the figures layout are by Anastasia Shapiro.

Bibliographie

Amouric & Vallauri 2007: Amouric H., Vallauri L., “Céramiques méditerranéennes et du Midi français dans les colonies d’Amérique. Fin xviie-xviiie s. Relecture et nouveaux apports”, in G. Avery (ed.), French colonial pottery: An international conference, Nachitoches, 2007, pp. 199‑257.

Amouric et al. 1999: Amouric H., Richez F., Vallauri L., Vingt mille pots sous les mers, Aix-en-Provence, 1999.

Arbel 2009: Arbel Y., “Yafo, the Qishle”, Hadashot arkheologiyot: Excavations and surveys in Israel 121, 2009 (www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=1051&mag_id=115, accessed 20/06/2016).

Arbel 2017: Arbel Y., “Salvage excavations in Jaffa’s lower town (1994‑2014)”, in A.A. Burke, K.S. Burke, M. Peilstöcker (ed.), The history and archaeology of Jaffa 2, Los Angeles, 2017, pp. 63‑87.

Arbel & Rauchberger 2015: Arbel Y., Rauchberger L., “Yafo, Rabbi Yehuda Me-Raguza Street”, Hadashot arkheologiyot: Excavations and surveys in Israel 127, 2015 (www.hadashot-esi.org.il/Report_Detail_Eng.aspx?id=24902&mag_id=122, accessed 20/06/2016).

Arnon 2008: Arnon Y.D., Caesarea maritima: The late periods (700-1291), BAR International series 1171, Oxford, 2008.

Avissar 1996: Avissar M., “The medieval pottery”, in A. Ben-Tor, M. Avissar, Y. Portugali (ed.), Yoqne’am I, The late periods, Qedem reports 3, Jerusalem, 1996, pp. 75‑172.

Avissar & Stern 2005: Avissar M., Stern E.J., Pottery of the Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk periods in Israel, IAA reports 26, Jerusalem, 2005.

Ayalon et al. 2013: Ayalon E., Tal O., Yehuda L., “A 12th century oil press complex at the Crusader town of Arsur (Apollonia-Arsuf) and the olive oil industry in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem”, Journal of Eastern Mediterranean archaeology and heritage studies 1/4, 2013, pp. 259‑291.

Benente 2011: Benente F., “Mediterranean and Ligurian ceramics in Genoa in the 12th and 13th centuries: New data from the excavation of the Embriaci tower”, Medieval ceramics 31, 2011, pp. 27‑33.

Boas 2010: Boas A.J., Domestic settings: Sources on domestic architecture and day-to-day activities in the Crusader states, Leiden, 2010.

Boas 2011: Boas A.J., “Frankish Jaffa”, in M. Peilstöcker, A.A. Burke (ed.), The history and archaeology of Jaffa 1, Los Angeles, 2011, pp. 121‑126.

Bronstein 2013: Bronstein J., “Food and the military orders: Attitudes of the hospital and the temple between the 12th and 14th centuries”, Crusades 12, 2013, pp. 133‑152.

Burke & Stern, forthcoming: Burke K.S., Stern E.J., “Crusader pottery from the Qishle excavations”, in Y. Arbel (ed.), Excavations at the Ottoman military compound (Qishle) of Jaffa, Jaffa cultural heritage project, vol. 4, A.A. Burke & M. Peilstöcker (series ed.), Münster, forthcoming in 2020.

Constable 2013: Constable O.R., “Food and meaning: Christian understanding of Muslim food and food ways in Spain (1250‑1550)”, Viator 44/3, 2013, pp. 199‑236.

Cytryn-Silverman 2010: Cytryn-Silverman K., “The ceramic evidence”, in O. Gutfeld (ed.), Ramla: Final report on the excavations north of the White Mosque, Qedem report 51, Jerusalem, 2010, pp. 97‑211.

Cytryn-Silverman 2015: Cytryn-Silverman K., “Tiberias, from its foundation to the end of the Early Islamic period”, in D.A. Fiensy, J.R. Strange (ed.), Galilee in the Late Second Temple and Mishnaic periods, vol. 2, The archaeological record from cities, towns, and villages, Minneapolis, 2015, pp. 186‑210.

Dubertret 1955: Dubertret M.L., Carte géologique du Liban (1/200000), Paris, 1955.

Ellenblum 1998: Ellenblum R., Frankish rural settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, Cambridge, 1998.

El‑Masri 1997-1998: ElMasri S., “Medieval pottery from Beirut’s downtown excavations: The first results”, ARAM 9‑10, 1997‑1998, pp. 103‑119.

Foran 2011: Foran D., “Byzantine and Early Islamic Jaffa”, in M. Peilstöcker, A.A. Burke (ed.), The history and archaeology of Jaffa 1, Los Angeles, 2011, pp. 109‑120.

François et al. 2003: François V., Nicolaïdes A., Vallauri L., Waksman S.Y., “Premiers éléments pour une caractérisation des productions de céramique de Beyrouth entre domination franque et mamelouke”, in Ch. Bakirtzis (ed.), VIIe Congrès International sur la Céramique Médiévale en Méditerranée (Thessaloniki, 11‑16 octobre 1999), Athens, 2003, pp. 325‑340.

Frankel & Getzov 2012: Frankel R., Getzov N., Archaeological survey of Israel, ‘Amka-5, 2012 (www.antiquities.org.il/survey/new/default_en.aspx?surveynum=4, accessed 15/06/2016).

Gabrieli 2006: Gabrieli R.S., Silent witnesses: The evidence of domestic wares of the 13th-19th centuries in Paphos, Cyprus for local economy and social organisation, PhD, University of Sydney, 2006 (unpublished).

Gabrieli 2008: Gabrieli R.S., “Towards a chronology: The medieval coarse ware from a tomb on Icarus Street, Kato Paphos”, Report of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus, 2008, pp. 423‑454.

Gabrieli 2009: Gabrieli R.S., “Stability and change in Ottoman coarse ware in Cyprus”, in B. Walker (ed.), Reflections of empire: Archaeological and ethnographic perspectives on the pottery of the Ottoman Levant and beyond, AASOR 64, Boston, 2009, pp. 67‑77.

Gabrieli et al. 2001: Gabrieli R.S., McCall B., Green J.B., “Medieval kitchen ware from the theater site at Nea Paphos”, Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, 2001, pp. 335‑353.

Gabrieli et al. 2017: Gabrieli R.S., Waksman S.Y., Shapiro A., Pecci A., “Cypriot and Levantine cooking wares in Frankish Cyprus”, in J.A.C. Vroom, Y. Waksman, R.M.R. van Oosten (ed.), Medieval MasterChef. Archaeological and historical perspectives on eastern cuisine and western foodways, Turnhout, 2017, pp. 119‑143, 376‑377.

Gabrieli et al., in this volume: Gabrieli R.S., Waksman S.Y., Shapiro A., Pecci A., “Archaeological and archaeometric investigations of cooking wares in Frankish and Venetian Cyprus”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 97‑112.

Getzov 2000: .גצוב נ [= Getzov N.], “חפירות בחורבת בית זניתה” [= “Excavations at Horbat Bet Zeneta”], עתיקות [= ‘Atiqot] 39, 2000, pp. 75*-106*, pp. 202‑204 (English summary).

Getzov et al. 2009: Getzov N., Avshalom-Gorni D., Gorin-Rosen Y., Stern E.J., Syon D., Tatcher A., Horbat ‘Uza: The 1991 excavations, vol. 2, The late periods, IAA reports 42, Jerusalem, 2009.

Goren 1995: Goren Y., “Shrines and ceramics in Chalcolithic Israel: The view through the petrographic microscope”, Archaeometry 37, 1995, pp. 287‑305.

Greenberg & Porat 1996: Greenberg R., Porat N., “A third millennium Levantine pottery production center: Typology, petrography, and provenance of the Metallic Ware of northern Israel and adjacent regions”, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 301, 1996, pp. 5‑25.

Hahn 1997: Hahn M., “Modern Greek, Turkish and Venetian periods: The pottery and the finds”, in E. Hallager, B.P. Hallager (ed.), The Greek-Swedish excavations at the Agia Aikaterini Square (Kastelli, Khania 1970-1987), Stockholm, 1997, pp. 170‑196.

Hartal 2009: Hartal M., “Hammat Tiberias (south)”, Hadashot arkheologiyot: Excavations and surveys in Israel 121, 2009 (www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1097&mag_id=115, accessed 10/02/2020).

Hirschfeld 2004: Hirschfeld Y., Excavations at Tiberias (1989-1994), IAA reports 22, Jerusalem, 2004.

Hirschfeld & Gutfeld 2008: Hirschfeld Y., Gutfeld O., Tiberias: The House of the Bronzes I, Qedem 48, Jerusalem, 2008.

Homsy 2009: Homsy G., Recherches sur la céramique glaçurée de Beyrouth à la période médiévale (ixe-xve siècle), PhD, Poitiers University, 2009 (unpublished).

Jacoby 1998: Jacoby D., “The trade of Crusader Acre in the Levantine context: An overview”, Archivio storico del Sannio 1‑2, 1998, pp. 103‑120.

Jacoby 2005: Jacoby D., “Aspects of everyday life in Frankish Acre”, Crusades 4, 2005, pp. 73‑103.

Jacoby 2007: Jacoby D., “The economic function of the Crusader states of the Levant: A new approach”, in S. Cavaciocchi (ed.), Europe’s economic relations with the Islamic world (13th-18th centuries), Florence, 2007, pp. 159‑191.

Jacoby 2010: Jacoby D., “Acre-Alexandria: A major commercial axis of the 13th century”, in M. Montesano (ed.), “Come l’orco della fabia”. Studi per Franco Cardini, Florence, 2010, pp. 151‑167.

Jacoby 2016: Jacoby D., “Frankish Beirut: A minor economic centre”, in M. Sinibaldi, K. Lewis, B. Major, J. Thompson (ed.), Crusader landscapes in the medieval Levant: The archaeology and history of the Latin East, Cardiff, 2016, pp. 263‑276.

Jenkins 1992: Jenkins M., “Early medieval Islamic pottery: The 11th century reconsidered”, Muqarnas 9, 1992, pp. 55‑66.

Joyner 2007: Joyner L., “Cooking pots as indicators of cultural change: A petrographic study of Byzantine and Frankish cooking wares from Corinth”, Hesperia 76, 2007, pp. 183‑227.

Kahanov et al. 2012: Kahanov Y., Cvikel D., Wielinski A., “Dor C shipwreck, Dor Lagoon, Israel: Evidence for maritime connections between France and the Holy Land at the end of the 19th century”, Cahiers d’archéologie subaquatique 19, 2012, pp. 173‑212.

Kassir 2010: Kassir S., Beirut, Berkeley, 2010.

Kelly & Wallman 2014: Kelly K.G., Wallman D., “Foodways of enslaved laborers on French West Indian plantations (18th-19th century)”, Afriques 5, 2014 (journals.openedition.org/afriques/1608, accessed 15/12/2016).

Kováts 2012: Kováts I., “Meat consumption and animal keeping in the citadel of al‑Marqab: A preliminary report”, in P. Edbury (ed.), The military orders, vol. 5, Politics and power, Aldershot, 2012, pp. 65‑75.

Lev 2012: Lev Y., “A Mediterranean encounter: The Fatimids and Europe, 10th to 12th centuries”, in R. Gertwagen, E. Jeffreys (ed.), Shipping, trade and Crusade in the medieval Mediterranean, London-New York, 2012, pp. 131‑156.

Mitchell 2016: Mitchell P.D., “Intestinal parasites in the Crusades: Evidence for disease, diet, and migration”, in A. Boas (ed.), The Crusader world, London-New York, 2016, pp. 593‑606.

Oren 1971: Oren E., “Early Islamic material from Gani-Hammat (Tiberias)”, Archaeology 24, 1971, pp. 274‑277.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi 1996: Παπανικολα-Μπακιρτζη Δ. [= Papanikola-Bakirtzi D.], Μεσαιωνική εφυαλωμένη κεραμική της Κύπρου τα εργαστήρια Πάφου και Λαπήθου [= Medieval glazed pottery of Cyprus: Paphos and Lapithos ware], Thessaloniki, 1996 (Greek; English summary, pp. 213‑220).

Pecci et al. 2015: Pecci A., Gabrieli R.S., Inserra F., Cau M.A., Waksman S.Y., “Preliminary results of the organic residue analysis of 13th century cooking wares from a household in Frankish Paphos (Cyprus)”, STAR: Science & technology of archaeological research 1/2, 2015, pp. 99‑105 (doi.org/10.1080/20548923.2016.1183960, accessed 10/12/2019).

Peilstöker 2006: Peilstöker M., “La ville franque de Jaffa à la lumière des fouilles récentes”, Bulletin monumental 164/1, 2006, pp. 99‑104.

Peilstöker 2011: Peilstöcker M., “The history of archaeological research in Jaffa (1948-2009)”, in M. Peilstöcker, A.A. Burke (ed.), The history and archaeology of Jaffa 1, Los Angeles, 2011, pp. 17‑32.

Phillips 1995: Phillips J., “The Latin East (1098-1291)”, in J. Riley-Smith (ed.), The Oxford illustrated history of the Crusades, Oxford, 1995, pp. 112‑140.

Pringle 1982: Pringle D., “Some more Proto-Maiolica from ‘Athlit (Pilgrims’ Castle) and a discussion of its distribution in the Levant”, Levant 14, 1982, pp. 104‑117.

Pringle 1986: Pringle D., “Pottery as evidence of trade in the Crusader states”, in G. Airaldi, B.Z. Kedar (ed.), I comuni italiani nel regno crociato di Gerusalemme, Genoa, 1986, pp. 451‑475.

Pringle 1993: Pringle D., The churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A corpus, vol. 1, A-K (excluding Acre and Jerusalem), Cambridge, 1993.

Pringle 1998: Pringle D., The churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A corpus, vol. 2, L-Z (excluding Tyre), Cambridge, 1998.

Pringle 2009: Pringle D., The churches of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A corpus, vol. 4, The cities of Acre and Tyre, Cambridge, 2009.

Redford et al. 2001: Redford S., Ikram S., Parr E.M., Beach T., “Excavations at medieval Kinet, Turkey: A preliminary report”, Ancient Near Eastern studies 38, 2001, pp. 58‑138.

Re’em 2010: Re’em A., “Yafo, the French hospital (2007-2008)”, Hadashot arkheologiyot: Excavations and surveys in Israel 122, 2010 (www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=1566&mag_id=117, accessed 20/06/2016).

Roll 2007: .רול י [= Roll I.], “מפגש הצלבנים והמוסלמים באפולוניה-ארסוף לאור הממצא הארכאולוגי והמקורות הכתובים” [= “The encounter of Crusaders and Muslims at Apollonia-Arsuf as reflected in the archaeological finds and historical sources”], in .רול י., טל א., ווינטר מ [= I. Roll, O. Tal, M. Winter] (ed.), מפגש הצלבנים והמוסלמים בארץ-ישראל: השתקפותו בארסוף בסידנא עלי ובאתרי החוף [= The encounter of Crusaders and Muslims in Palestine as reflected in Arsuf, Sayyiduna ‘Ali and other coastal sites], Tel Aviv, 2007, pp. 9-103 (Hebrew), iii (English summary).

Shapiro 2012: Shapiro A., “Petrographic analysis of Crusader-period pottery from the old city of Acre”, in E.J. Stern, ‘Akko I. The 1991-1998 excavations: The Crusader-period pottery, vol. 1, IAA reports 51, Jerusalem, 2012, pp. 103‑126.

Shapiro 2013: Shapiro A., “Petrographic examination of medieval pottery, Tiberias”, ‘Atiqot 76, 2013, pp. 209‑212.

Shapiro et al., in this volume: Shapiro A., Stern E.J., Getzov N., Waksman S.Y., “Ceramic evidence for sugar production in the ‘Akko plain: Typology and provenance studies”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 163‑190.

Smithline 2004: Smithline H., “El‑Kabri”, Hadashot arkheologiyot, excavations and surveys in Israel 116, 2004 (www.hadashot-esi.org.il/report_detail_eng.aspx?id=3&mag_id=108, accessed 10/02/2020).

Stacey 2004: Stacey D., Excavations at Tiberias (1973-1974): The Early Islamic periods, IAA reports 21, Jerusalem, 2004.

Stepansky 2004: Stepansky Y., “The Crusader castle of Tiberias”, Crusades 3, 2004, pp. 179‑181.

Stern 2002: Stern E., “Excavations in Crusader Acre (1990-1999)”, in M.C. Calò Mariani (ed.), Il cammino di Gerusalemme. Atti del II Convegno internazionale di studio (Bari-Brindisi-Trani, 18‑22 maggio 1999), Bari, 2002, pp. 163‑168.

Stern 2006: Stern E., “La commanderie de l’ordre des Hospitaliers à Acre”, Bulletin monumental 164/1, 2006, pp. 53‑60.

Stern & Syon, forthcoming: Stern E., Syon D., ‘Akko, the excavations of 1991-1998, vol. 3, The late periods, IAA reports, Jerusalem, forthcoming.

Stern 1995: Stern E.J., “An Early Islamic kiln in Tiberias”, ‘Atiqot 26, 1995, pp. 57‑59.

Stern 1997: Stern E.J., “Excavations of the courthouse site at ‘Akko: The pottery of the Crusader and Ottoman periods”, ‘Atiqot 31, 1997, pp. 35‑70.

Stern 1998: Stern E.J., “Evidence of Early Islamic pottery production in Acre”, ‘Atiqot 35, 1998, pp. 23‑25.

Stern 2001: Stern E.J., “The excavations at Lower Horbat Manot: A medieval sugar-production site”, ‘Atiqot 42, 2001, pp. 277‑308.

Stern 2012: Stern E.J., ‘Akko I. The 1991-1998 excavations: The Crusader-period pottery, 2 vol., IAA reports 51, Jerusalem, 2012.

Stern 2013: Stern E.J., “Crusader, Ayyubid and Mamluk-period remains from Tiberias”, ‘Atiqot 76, 2013, pp. 183‑208.

Stern 2015: Stern E.J., “Pottery and identity in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem: A case study of Acre and western Galilee”, in J. Vroom (ed.), Medieval and post-medieval ceramics in the Eastern Mediterranean: Fact and fiction. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Byzantine and Ottoman Archaeology (Amsterdam, 21‑23 October 2011), Turnhout, 2015, pp. 287‑315.

Stern, forthcoming: Stern E.J., “Crusader pottery from the excavations of MeRaguza Street, Yafo”, ‘Atiqot 100, 2020, forthcoming.

Stern & Stacey 2000: Stern E.J., Stacey D.A., “An 11th-century pottery assemblage from Khirbat al‑Khurrumiya”, Levant 32, 2000, pp. 172‑177.

Stern & Tatcher 2009: Stern E.J., Tatcher A., “The Early Islamic, Crusader and Mamluk pottery from Horbat ‘Uza”, in N. Getzov, D. Avshalom-Gorni, Y. Gorin-Rosen, E.J. Stern, D. Syon, A. Tatcher, Horbat ‘Uza: The 1991 excavations, vol. 2, The late periods, IAA reports 42, Jerusalem, 2009, pp. 118‑175.

Stern & Waksman 2003: Stern E.J., Waksman S.Y., “Pottery from Crusader Acre: A typological and analytical study”, in Ch. Bakirtzis (ed.), VIIe Congrès International sur la Céramique Médiévale en Méditerranée (Thessaloniki, 11‑16 octobre 1999), Athens, 2003, pp. 167‑180.

Syon & Tatcher 2000: Syon D., Tatcher A., “Akko, Ha-Abirim Parking Lot”, Excavations and surveys in Israel 20, 2000, pp. 11*-16*.

Tal & Roll 2011: Tal O., Roll I., “Arsur: The site, settlement and Crusader castle, and the material manifestation of their destruction”, in The last supper at Apollonia: The final days of the Crusader Castle at Herzliya, Tel Aviv, 2011, p. 10‑79 (Hebrew with illustrations), pp. [8]-[51] (English).

Von Wartburg 1997: von Wartburg M.‑L., “Lemba ware reconsidered”, Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus, 1997, pp. 323‑340.

Vroom 2003: Vroom J., After Antiquity: Ceramics and society in the Aegean from the 7th to the 20th centuries A.C. A case study from Boeotia, Central Greece, Archaeological studies Leiden University 10, Leiden, 2003.

Vroom 2011: Vroom J., The Morea and its links with southern Italy after AD 1204: Ceramics and identity”, Archeologia medievale 38, 2011, pp. 409‑430.

Waksman 2002: Waksman S.Y., “Céramiques levantines de l’époque des Croisades. Le cas des productions à pâte rouge des ateliers de Beyrouth”, Revue d’archéométrie 26, 2002, pp. 67‑77.

Waksman 2011: Waksman S.Y., “Ceramics of the ‘Serçe Limanı type’ and Fatimid pottery production in Beirut”, Levant 43, 2011, pp. 201‑212.

Waksman 2012: Waksman S.Y., “Chemical analysis of Western Mediterranean ceramic imports”, in E.J. Stern, ‘Akko I. The 1991-1998 excavations: The Crusader-period pottery, vol. 1, IAA reports 51, Jerusalem, 2012, pp. 127‑132.

Waksman 2017: Waksman S.Y., “‘Provenance studies’: Productions and compositional groups”, in A. Hunt (ed.), Oxford handbook of archaeological ceramic analysis, Oxford, 2017, pp. 148‑161.

Waksman forthcoming: Waksman S.Y., “Provenance studies of Byzantine and Levantine pottery imported at Kinet Höyük”, in S. Redford (ed.), Excavations at Kinet Höyük: The medieval period, forthcoming.

Waksman et al. 1999: Waksman S.Y., Segal I., Porat N., Stern E.J., Yellin J., An analytical study of ceramics found in Crusader Acre: Levantine productions and imports from the Byzantine world, Geological survey of Israel internal reports GSI/8/99, 1999.

Waksman et al. 2005: Waksman S.Y., Reynolds P., Bien S., Tréglia J.‑C., “A major production of Late Roman ‘Levantine’ and ‘Cypriot’ common wares”, in LRCW I: Late Roman coarse wares, cooking wares and amphorae in the Mediterranean. Archaeology and archaeometry, BAR International series 1340, Oxford, 2005, pp. 311‑325.

Waksman et al. 2008: Waksman S.Y., Stern E.J., Segal I., Porat N., Yellin J., “Some local and imported ceramics from Crusader Acre investigated by elemental and petrographical analysis”, ‘Atiqot 59, 2008, pp. 157‑190.

Waksman et al. 2017: Waksman S.Y., Capelli C., Cabella R., “Études en laboratoire de céramiques islamiques du Caire. L’apport des fouilles récentes”, in R.‑P. Gayraud, L. Vallauri, Fouilles d’Istabl ‘Antar (Fustat). Céramiques d’ensembles des ixe et xe siècles, Cairo, 2017, pp. 383‑414.

Watson 2004: Watson O., Ceramics from Islamic lands, London, 2004.

Yehuda, in this volume: Yehuda L., “Between oven and Tannur: ‘Frankish’ and ‘indigenous’ kitchens in the Holy Land in the Crusader period”, in Waksman 2020, pp. 147‑162.

Notes

1 Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 5211, f.364v. gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b550071673/f732.image.r=arsenal%20bible (accessed 11/01/2017), above right.

2 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Ar 3929 f.149r. gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8422962f/f309.image.r='Maqamat%20Al-Hariri (accessed 11/01/2017).

3 Another category of pottery related to food, sugar wares, was also investigated, see Shapiro et al., in this volume.

4 Only short summaries are given here, as extensive literature is available elsewhere.

5 These two sites are presented in more detail in Shapiro et al., in this volume.

6 Samples numbers in the Lyon laboratory are indicated, see also table 1 and 2.

7 Two unpublished excavations in that area which also unearthed pottery production remains were conducted by Gilad Cinamon on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority (excavation permit A-5361/2008) and by Moshe Hartal and Anna de Vincenz on behalf of Tel Aviv University (excavation license B-402/2013).

8 Further investigations are ongoing, as the tradition of turquoise glaze is related to the Islamic world and, technically speaking, to the introduction of an alkali component in the ingredients (flux) of the glaze (Waksman 2017, pp. 155‑156).

9 Tiberias (Stern 2013, pp. 187, 190, fig. 7: 2, 3, 12: 3‑5; Shapiro 2013, p. 210).

10 The situation may be different in the Northern Levant, although Beirut cooking ware is also well represented there, for instance in Tell Arqa and Kinet Höyük (Waksman 2011; forthcoming).

11 Silt and sand are both particles of minerals and/or rocks, which differ from each other in size: below 0.06 mm for silt and between 0.06 and 2 mm for sand.

12 Of a total of 3454 rims, 3279 (95%) are from Beirut cooking wares while only 175 (5%) correspond to other, imported types of cooking wares (Stern 2012, p. 29, tables 3.5, 3.6).

13 Denys Pringle suggested coastal redistribution of both local and imported pottery in the eastern Mediterranean during the 13th century. In his article he also proposes the use of archaeometric analysis to further understand these occurrences (Pringle 1986). Our ongoing study has been following this suggestion.

14 The Siphnos cooking pots were apparently distributed mainly in the Aegean (Vroom 2003, p. 185, fig. 6/39: W 43.1‑2) and also to the Eastern Mediterranean (Cyprus: Gabrieli 2009, p. 71, fig. 6.7: 6, 7; Crete: Hahn 1997, p. 189, pl. 57: 80-P 0354/0358). The Vallauris cooking pots, on the other hand, were exported throughout the Mediterranean, as attested by shipwrecks in the Western Mediterranean (Amouric et al. 1999, pp. 131‑135, fig. 259‑262) as well as in the Eastern Mediterranean (Kahanov et al. 2012, pp. 178‑182, fig. 5‑9). They also reached the French colonies in North America (Amouric & Vallauri 2007) and the Caribbean islands (Kelly & Wallman 2014, p. 35).

15 For example, it has been suggested that the Peloponnese cooking wares changed in form and fabric between the Middle Byzantine and the Frankish periods, reflecting a change in cooking and dining habits (Joyner 2007). This coincided with a change in the diameter of table wares, perhaps indicative of the newcomers’ culinary traditions (Vroom 2011, pp. 419‑426).

16 A previous study comparing ceramic assemblages of three contemporary 13th century contexts by quantification of the different pottery types that were used by the Frankish and indigenous population has shown that while they used the same ceramic wares, they did so in different percentages (Stern 2015).

17 For example, it has been suggested that in late medieval Spain food and foodways were strongly linked to cultural, social and religious identity (Constable 2013).

18 Other archaeological food-related issues include food production (Shapiro et al., in this volume) and information gained from archaeozoological and archaeobotanical studies (for example see Boas 2010, pp. 132‑142; Kováts 2012; Mitchell 2016, p. 602), which are still few for the Fatimid and Crusader periods, and require more attention in the future.

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 – Map of the southern Levant with locations of the sites mentioned in the text and the periods.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,7M
Titre Fig. 2 – Tiberias production, Fatimid period, from a kiln context in Tiberias (LEV863-869) and from el‑Kabri (LEV733-734); Crusader period, from Tiberias (LEV861-862) (Ca – carbonate rock [chalk or decomposed limestone], Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Ba – basalt, Fo – foraminifera).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,7M
Titre Fig. 3 – Acre production, Abbasid period, from a kiln context (LEV873-882) (Fo – foraminifera, Q – quartz).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,4M
Titre Fig. 4 – Beirut production, Fatimid period, calcareous fabric, from el‑Kabri (LEV738), Horbat ‘Uza (LEV822-824) and Apollonia (LEV758-763) (Ca – carbonate rock [chalk or decomposed limestone], Q – quartz, Q(fe) – quartz with ferruginous coating).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,6M
Titre Fig. 5 – Binary plot titanium / zirconium, showing how the glazed table wares produced in the Acre, Tiberias and Beirut workshops in the Early Islamic (EI) and Fatimid periods may be differentiated. The cross corresponds to the mean and standard deviation of Beirut buff wares reference group (after Waksman 2011).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 172k
Titre Tabl. 1 – List of the samples analyzed and associated petrographic groups. CR: Crusader, EI: Early Islamic.
Légende Tabl. 1 (1/3)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 675k
Légende Tabl. 1 (2/3)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 682k
Légende Tabl. 1 (3/3)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 271k
Titre Tabl. 2 – Chemical compositions of samples of Early Islamic, Fatimid and Crusader wares: new reference groups for Acre and Tiberias in the Early Islamic and Fatimid period, Acre wares lato sensu, Beirut and related wares. Major and minor elements are indicated in oxides weight %, trace elements in ppm (part per million); m: mean, σ: standard deviation, n: number of samples, l.q.: limits of quantification, n.d.: not determined; elements between brackets were not used in the multivariate statistics; data marked with an asterisk were not taken into account in the calculation of m and σ.
Légende Tabl. 2 (1/4)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 405k
Légende Tabl. 2 (2/4)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 707k
Légende Tabl. 2 (3/4)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-11.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 789k
Légende Tabl. 2 (4/4)
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-12.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 238k
Titre Fig. 6 – Beirut production, Fatimid-Early Crusader period, red fabric, from Horbat ‘Uza (LEV815-818), el‑Kabri (LEV728-731), Apollonia (LEV764-766) and Horbat ‘Uza (LEV902-904) (Q – quartz).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-13.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 3,0M
Titre Fig. 7 – Beirut production, Crusader period, red fabric, from Acre (LEV886-901) and Jaffa (LEV905-908) (Q – quartz).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-14.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,7M
Titre Fig. 8 – Histograms of Euclidean distance to Beirut red wares reference group (in red), showing different situations: a) samples integrated in the group (Cooking Wares); b) samples either integrated or marginal to the group (“Reserved-Slip”, “Slip-Painted” and “Painted Wares”); c) samples not belonging to the group (“Broad Band Slip-Painted Wares”).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-15.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,4M
Titre Fig. 9 – The evolution of the Beirut cooking pots from the Fatimid (11th century) to the Crusader period (12th and 13th centuries). The shaded areas inside the pots represent glaze.
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-16.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 598k
Titre Fig. 10 – Beirut production (above) and samples chemically marginal to Beirut (below), Crusader period, red fabric, glazed table ware, from Acre (LEV792, LEV794-797), el‑Kabri (LEV739-740, LEV745), Jaffa (LEV833-834, LEV836, LEV870) and Apollonia (LEV776) (Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Q – quartz).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-17.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,6M
Titre Fig. 11 – “Broad Band Slip-Painted Ware”, from Apollonia (LEV775, 777‑779), Jaffa (LEV837), Acre (LEV790-791), and el‑Kabri (LEV736-737) (Fe – ferruginous material [iron oxides/limonite], Q – quartz).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-18.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,7M
Titre Fig. 12 – Acre production, Crusader period, from Apollonia (LEV767-774), Acre (LEV803-804, LEV808-809, LEV843-846), Horbat Manot (LEV859), Jaffa (LEV825-827) (Q – quartz, Q(si) – quartz silt, Pl – plagioclase).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-19.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 3,3M
Titre Fig. 13 – Acre production, Crusader period. Acre (LEV800-802, LEV805-807), Bet Zeneta (LEV884-885), Horbat Manot (LEV860), Jaffa (LEV828-830) (Q – quartz).
URL http://books.openedition.org/momeditions/docannexe/image/10159/img-20.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 3,2M

Acheter

Volume papier

LCDPUleslibraires.fr
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search