Metalworking at Megiddo during the Late Bronze and Iron Ages

Abstract

Previous articleNext article FreeMetalworking at Megiddo during the Late Bronze and Iron AgesNaama Yahalom-Mack, Adi Eliyahu-Behar, Mario A. S. Martin, Assaf Kleiman, Ruth Shahack-Gross, Robert S. Homsher, Yuval Gadot, and Israel FinkelsteinNaama Yahalom-MackThe Hebrew University of Jerusalem Search for more articles by this author , Adi Eliyahu-BeharBar-Ilan University Search for more articles by this author , Mario A. S. MartinTel Aviv University Search for more articles by this author , Assaf KleimanTel Aviv University Search for more articles by this author , Ruth Shahack-GrossUniversity of Haifa Search for more articles by this author , Robert S. HomsherHarvard University* Search for more articles by this author , Yuval GadotTel Aviv University Search for more articles by this author , and Israel FinkelsteinTel Aviv University Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreIntroductionOver the years, the excavations at Tel Megiddo have yielded numerous metal objects, as well as evidence of metallurgical activity. Here we show that metalworking was practiced continuously in the southeastern sector of the tell from the end of the Middle Bronze Age until Iron IIB. During this time, one can trace changes in the production processes, including the introduction of ironworking alongside the continuation of bronzeworking. Dating and contextualizing this significant development is crucial to understanding the social, economic, and geo-political circumstances under which it occurred. The evidence that we present shows that iron production was accompanied by a substantial increase in iron, as expressed on the level of consumption. This occurred during Iron IIA, concurrent with cultural and political changes, expressed, inter alia, in the architectural layout of the city and its cultic practices. Possible evidence that local bronzesmiths may have been partially engaged in iron production already in Iron Age I is found in the form of a hoard recently unearthed at Megiddo, although iron-working debris has not yet been found in contemporary contexts.The fact that metalworking and exploitation of metal resources are strongly tied to political power and social infrastructure is well accepted.1 Especially intriguing is the introduction and gradual preeminence of iron over bronze (which continued to be produced), a process that took place at the turn of the first millennium bc, hand in hand with the emergence of new territorial kingdoms in the southern Levant.2 Increasing evidence for metalworking at Tel Megiddo, a multi-layer site that served as an important territorial/ administrative center during both the Bronze and Iron Ages,3 sheds new light on the subject.Although Tel Megiddo has been excavated by different teams for over a century, only the recent implementation of new excavation methods and microarchaeology techniques have brought to light substantial evidence of both bronze- and ironworking. 4 This evidence was traced in the recent Tel Aviv University-led excavations in Areas K and Q (Fig. 1).5 Temporal and spatial distribution of metallurgicallyrelated finds indicate that metalworking in the southeastern sector of the tell occurred continuously at least from the end of the Middle Bronze Age (earlier layers have not yet been studied there) until Iron IIB. Within this span of time, a noteworthy development was the introduction and expansion of ironworking alongside continued bronze production (Table 1). Our goals in studying this unparalleled dataset are fourfold: first, to demonstrate continuity in metal production in the same area for at least 800 years; second, to investigate when and how the introduction of iron first took place and study its interaction with the existing bronzeworking tradition; third, to understand the socio-political circumstances behind this process; and fourth, to investigate possible connections to cult.Figure 1. Aerial photo of the southern part of Tel Megiddo, looking northwest, showing excavation Areas K and Q. The picture also indicates the location of adjacent tombs on the Eastern Slope, Schumacher’s smithy, two metal hoards and relevant cultic objects.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointTable 1. Stratigraphy, relative chronology and sequence of metalworking at Megiddo. According to radiocarbon dates, the transitions occurred as follows: K-10/K-9 between 1560–1505 bce; K-9/K-8 between 1290–1210 bce; K-7/K-6 between 1185–1135 bce; K-5/K-4 between 1110–1060 bce; and K-4/K-3 between 976–901 bce (These dates are based on M. B. Toffolo, et al. Radiocarbon 56 (2014): 221–244). Gray boxes and bold letters represent strata with metalworking remains. *OI = Oriental Institute ExcavationsPeriodOI Stratum*Area KHoardsArea QMetalworkingIron IIBIVAK-1 Q-3/2 Late Iron IIAVA-IVBK-2 Q-4 (+Schumacher)Iron +bronzeEarly Iron IIAVBK-3 Q-5**Iron +bronze Q-6 Late Iron IVIAK-412/Q/76Q-7Bronze +ironEarly Iron IVIBK-51739?Q-8BronzeLB IIIVIIAK-6 Q-9BronzeLB IIVIIBK-7Ceramic VIIBK-8pot bellows VIIIK-9in tombs excavated by the OI BronzeMB III-LB IX/IXK-10 BronzeLate MBXI/XK-11 Bronze**. Transitional early/late Iron IIAView Table ImageIn order to meet these goals, we trace the spatial distribution of metallurgical debris (including metal droplets and slag) and metalworking paraphernalia (including pot bellows, crucibles, and tuyères), as well as hoards and cult-related objects, both possibly connected to this industry. We also incorporate the results of the analysis of sediments from potential metalworking contexts, since the use of microarchaeological methods has emerged as most useful for the identification of previously undetected ironworking contexts.6 Results of Lead Isotope Analysis (LIA) performed on several bronze objects are likewise mentioned in order to indicate the use of diverse copper ore sources at various times. Finally, we monitor the increasing numbers of iron vs. bronze tools and weapons in well-stratified contexts at Megiddo as supporting evidence for the crucial technological change of the onset of ironworking and its expression at the level of consumption.Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Metallurgical RemainsBronzeworkingEvidence for bronzeworking was found in Area K at the southeastern edge of the mound, in Levels K-11 (Strata XI/X of the Oriental Institute excavations [hereafter: OI]), K-10 (=OI Strata X/IX)7, K-9 (=OI Stratum VIII), K-6 (=OI Stratum VIIA), and K-5 (=OI Stratum VIB). During the late Middle Bronze, Late Bronze, and Iron Ages, this sector of the site functioned as a domestic area (with evidence for bronze production and other industries), with an uninterrupted sequence of superimposed courtyard houses.8Level K-9 has thus far yielded more significant evidence of metallurgical activity than Levels K-11 and K-10 (Table 2). Bronzeworking debris and scrap were retrieved from various spaces of the large courtyard house unearthed in this level (Squares N/10, O/9–10 and P/9–10; see Table 2). The majority of these remains originated in the central courtyard/hall (08/K/33) of the house, which was surrounded by rooms on all sides, including an adjoining large space to the northwest (10/K/27) (see Fig. 2). Pillar bases were uncovered in both large spaces, suggesting that they were at least partially roofed.Table 2. Bronzeworking remains from Levels K-11 to K-9LocusReg. No.Square StratumLocus descriptionContextDescription10/K/122LB 6O/9K-11?Ashy debrisBelow masonry-built family tombCrucible slag14/K/95AR1O/10K-11Striated surfacesSpace in central portion of buildingDroplet14/K/34AR3P/11K-10Occupational accumulationSpace in eastern portion of buildingDroplet10/K/112AR1N/10K-10Striated surfacesSpace in northwestern portion of buildingDroplet08/K/33bAR45O/9K-10/K-9Striated surfacesCourtyard/Hall 08/K/33 in houseCrucible rim fragment (Figure 5:1)10/K/60AR15O/10K-9Striated surfaces (including heat-altered sediment)Courtyard/Hall 08/K/33 in houseChunk08/K/75AR19P/10K-9Occupational debrisCourtyard/Hall 08/K/33 in houseDroplet08/K/75AR7P/10K-9Occupational debrisCourtyard/Hall 08/K/33 in houseDroplet10/K/53AR3O/10K-9Striated surfacesCourtyard/Hall 08/K/33 in houseScrap10/K/53AR6O/10K-9Striated surfacesCourtyard/Hall 08/K/33 in houseDroplet10/K/29AR15P/9K-9Accumulation on floorNarrow (storage?) Room 10/K/29 in houseDroplet+rods10/K/29AR23P/9K-9Accumulation on floorNarrow (storage?) Room 10/K/29 in houseDroplet+rods10/K/27AR15N/10K-9Striated surfacesLarge Room/Hall 10/K/27 in houseDroplet+rods10/K/68AR2O/9K-9Striated surfaces Room 10/K/68 in houseSlagView Table ImageFigure 2. Aerial photo of Level K-9, showing spaces with bronzeworking remains.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointNotably, there is no evidence for bronzeworking in Area K from Levels K-8 and K-7, which are contemporary with the 19th Egyptian Dynasty. However, the OI team found ceramic pot bellows (Figure 3: 2–3), one each in Tombs 3 and 1145A, located on the Eastern Slope of the tell, not far from Area K.9 Based on the ceramic assemblages from the tombs, they are roughly contemporary with Levels K-9 to K-7 (=OI Strata VIII–VIIB).Figure 3. Pot bellows from Area K, Reg. No. 12/K/130/VS1 (1) and from the tombs on the Eastern Slope, excavated by the OI team (2–3).View Large ImageDownload PowerPointThe metallurgical remains from Levels K-6, K-5, and K-4 have already been reported.10 The bronzeworking debris in Level K-6 included several crucible fragments found mainly in Square N/10, in an open space to the west of a domestic building (Figure 4). The fragment of a hitherto unpublished pot bellows, recently found in the same area in the course of baulk removal, also belongs to this level (Figure 3:1). In Level K-5, metallurgical debris, including crucible fragments, tuyères, and waste products (see description below), was found in Squares M–N/9–10 (Figure 5:2–4, 6–7). Analysis of the sediments in the western section of the area showed significant concentrations of copper related to this level. Metallurgical activity in Level K-4 (=OI Stratum VIA) is questionable, as the metallurgical debris may have been residual from the Level K-5 activity.Figure 4. Plan of Levels K-6 (a) and K-5 (b). The circles mark the areas where bronzeworking debris was found, including pot bellows, crucible and tuyère fragments, and waste products.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointFigure 5. Metalworking paraphernalia associated with metalworking in Areas K and Q: Crucible from Level K-10/K-9, Reg. No. 08/K/33/AR45 (1); crucibles from Level K-6, Reg. No. 02/K/44/AR1 (2), Reg. No. 02/K/39/AR2 (3) and Reg. No. 02/K/52/AR6 (4); vessel from Area Q, Reg. No. 12/Q/125/2 (5); tuyères from Area K, Reg. No. 02/K/17/AR6 (6), Reg. No. 02/K/47/AR2.2 (7); tuyère from Area Q, Reg. No. 12/Q/128/2 (8).View Large ImageDownload PowerPointIn Area Q, located just to the west of Area K (Figure 1), several bronze droplets and an amorphous bronze chunk were found in Locus 12/Q/26, a floor of Level Q-5 (=OI Stratum VB, or transitional VB/ VA-IVB) (Figures 6 and 7:d). These finds may suggest that the location of bronzeworking had shifted slightly to the west during this time. It is notable that remains of ironworking were also found on this floor, as detailed below.Figure 6. Aerial photo of Area Q after the 2014 excavation season. A sequence of hearths and associated tabun-ovens were uncovered east of Building 12/Q/99.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointFigure 7. Bronze- and ironworking remains from Area Q: Iron slag cake (a); magnet with hammerscales collected during the 2014 excavations in Area Q (b); iron slag cake from Level Q-5 (c); bronze droplets from the same context (d).View Large ImageDownload PowerPointIronworkingIron production remains were found in Area Q; here we discuss remains from Levels Q-5 and Q-4. The former features a large, well-constructed pillared building surrounded by domestic units. In the latter phase, this building went out of its primary use and was converted into several rooms and open spaces. The earliest metallurgical remains related to Level Q-5 comprise a single iron slag cake found in Locus 10/Q/68 (Figures 6 and 7:c). This locus marks the continuation of the above-mentioned Floor 12/Q/26, also associated with Level Q-5 (=OI Stratum VB, or transitional VB/VA–IVB), on which several bronze droplets were found, indicating that iron and bronze were worked side by side in Level Q-4 (=OI Stratum VA–IVB). In addition, in the northern part of Building 12/Q/99, a dark layer of sediments was found, approximately 10 cm thick and containing a considerable amount of charcoal (Locus 12/Q/81). It covered at least three column bases of the initial phase of the building (Q-5), and was therefore associated with secondary re-use of this space (Figure 8a). The excavation of the black layer included systematic sampling of the sediments (Figure 8b). The samples were analyzed using a Bruker (Tracer III-V) pXRF in order to identify possible metallurgical contamination. Copper concentrations in wt% were calculated using a specifically made calibration curve, produced by adding known amounts of copper oxide to typical Megiddo archaeological sediments, and were compared to control samples representing the naturally-occurring background levels. 11 For each of the sediment samples, we also measured the magnetic fraction, i.e., the wt% of magnetic flakes formed in the process of iron forging. These flakes, denoted hammerscales, were collected using a strong magnet. The results showed that the black sediments contained higher concentrations of both hammerscales (i.e., “magnetic fraction”) and copper contamination with respect to control samples (Figure 9), indicating that this layer contained the remains of both iron- and bronzeworking.Figure 8. (a) Aerial photo of Building 12/Q/99 in Area Q where evidence of iron working was found. The extent of the “black layer” is indicated in red. The locations of the square tuyère fragments (Figure 5:8) and the vessel/crucible (Figure 5:5) are marked as well. (b) An installation like a tabun-oven was exposed south of the building. A photo of the “black layer” in the course of sampling.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointFigure 9. Analyses of sediments from the “black layer” in Building 12/Q/99 in Area Q obtained by pXRF. The plot shows copper concentrations against the magnetic fraction (in weight percent), measured for both sediment samples collected from the “black layer” as well as control samples.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointIn order to determine whether this layer represents in situ metallurgical activity, a micromorphological investigation of the sediments was undertaken, a method widely used in archaeological research.12 For this purpose, three blocks of sediment were removed from the northern and western sections of Square C/7 (the northern part of the building). The results showed that this was probably not the original context of deposition of the sediment. Typically, an area where in situ burning takes place is expected to include a substrate showing evidence of heat, and the burnt organic remains (in the case of wood as fuel) are expected to include both charcoal and ash. In the studied feature, however, there was no evidence of a heated substrate, and there was almost no ash despite the presence of large amounts of wood charcoal. The charcoal was randomly oriented and associated with fragments of chalk/limestone (Figure 10). This charcoal and chalk pile also included fragments of unheated bones and occasional fragments of siliceous slag. The overall microstructure of the sediment was highly porous which, considered together with the random orientations, indicate that the black layer may have resulted from secondary dumping of the burnt remains, probably originating from the area east of the building (see below).Figure 10. (a) Scan of a thin section produced from the central part of the black sediment feature (width is 4.2 cm). The black particles are wood charcoal and the white particles are chalk. Note the aggregated nature of the sediment. (b) Scan of a thin section produced from the edge of the black sediment feature (width is 4.2 cm). The black feature is at the center of the image, overlying and overlain by dense brown sediment with anthropogenic debris. Note the absence of large chalk fragments and general laminated appearance. (c) Microphotograph representing the general microscopic appearance of the black sediments in the center of the feature (frame length is 7.2 mm). Note the angular charred wood fragments. Gray colored material is chalk powder (possibly burnt) and gray-brown fragments are burnt soil and/or pottery. Note the black capping of fine charcoal on top of the angular brown (possibly pottery fragment) indicating small-scale water flow within the black sediment. The white areas are voids, i.e., the material is dominated by coarse fragments of burnt wood, chalk, and soil that are not bridged or encapsulated within a sediment groundmass. This spongy microstructure, together with the angularity of charcoal and chalk fragments, indicates little if any transport/reworking. The absence of wood ash indicates that burning did not occur in situ, suggesting this material is the result of dumping of coarse by-products of metallurgical activity that took place elsewhere. (d) Microphotograph representing the general microscopic appearance of the black sediments at the edge of the feature (frame length is 7.2 mm). Note that the charcoal fragments are very small relative to those found at the center of the feature, forming thin black stringers. The stringers are encapsulated by groundmass sediment that is dominated by calcite. These observations suggest that the edge of the feature formed through hyperconcentrated flow of fines (i.e., very low flow energy) from the center of the feature to the edge where sedimentation of the fines formed alternation of calcite-rich and charcoal-rich microscopic laminae. The evidence for flow in this locality further indicates that the black sediment was exposed to rain in an unroofed area.View Large ImageDownload PowerPointThe micromorphology additionally provided evidence of water-lain fine charcoal micro-layers, in which the black layer thins away from the center of the pile. This pattern indicates that the area was not protected from rain, supporting the stratigraphic field observation regarding the building’s secondary re-use (including partial abandonment) during which the defunct column bases were covered over and the space remained unroofed.Immediately to the south, but within the same building and level, a couple of tuyère fragments (square in cross-section) were found at approximately the same elevation (Figure 5:7), together with a complete ceramic vessel (Figure 5:4). The interior of the vessel was not slagged, but XRF analysis showed copper contamination in the interior rather than exterior of this vessel, suggesting that it was likely used as a crucible. Notably, also at approximately the same elevation, an oven-like installation (10/Q/111) surrounded by several iron objects was exposed just beyond the southern exterior of the building.In the 2014 excavation season, considerable evidence of iron working was also unearthed just beyond the eastern exterior of Building 12/Q/99 (Figure 6). A sequence of hearths associated with dark industrial debris was exposed in Levels Q-5 to Q-2, mainly in Squares C-D/8, yielding ca. twenty iron slag cakes and fragments from Level Q-5, and ca. thirty from Level Q-4, as well as tuyère fragments, hammerscales, iron prills, and charcoal (Figure 7:b). These hearths were found in proximity to a sequence of large, ca. 1 m-wide ovens. Preliminary results show that the sediment from the hearths was contaminated by copper, confirming that both copper and iron were worked in this area. Based on these findings, we can safely conclude that ironworking took place in this area in Iron IIA, alongside bronzeworking, just outside the Palace 1723 compound, located only ca. 20 m to the west.13 While iron production started in Level Q-5 (Stratum VB/VA–IVB transition) east of Building 12/Q/99, contemporaneous with its use, the black layer inside the building—a dump which probably originated in the industry adjacent to it—indicates that metalworking in Level Q-4 (Stratum VA–IVB) continued after the building was no longer in primary use.Significantly, ironworking remains in this area were already reported by the first excavator of Megiddo, Gottlieb Schumacher, some one hundred years ago.14 Schumacher identified an iron smithy in the more northern of two rooms (2 m long) just outside the eastern wall of the courtyard of Palace 1723, only ca. 15 m from the spot of the black layer in Area Q. In this room, he recovered a considerable number of iron tools, as well as slag and raw material reported as lumps of “brown iron ore” and “clay ironstone.”15 The slags and lumps were found piled up together with ash and iron fragments. Based on their elevations and association with the wall of the palace compound, these remains appear to be contemporary with the Iron IIA iron- and bronzeworking in Area Q.Artifacts: Technology and TypologyCruciblesFragments of bronze-melting crucibles from Area K were made of coarse clay tempered with a relatively high proportion of vegetal material, as indicated by elongated cavities.16 Estimated firing temperatures did not exceed 800o C at the crucible’s outer surface, while inside the crucible, a black porous slag-like layer was formed at a higher temperature, resulting from the reaction between the clay and the hot melt. Analysis of prills entrapped in the crucible slag-like layer revealed that copper was available, and that the bronzesmiths were not merely involved in bronze recycling, but possibly in alloying copper with tin as well.17Based on the thick tapering walls of the crucible rim fragments and the thickness of the preserved base (Figure 5:2–4), it appears that most of the Stratum K-6 fragments belong to “flowerpot”-shaped open crucibles. This type of crucible is known from LB III–Iron Age sites,18 and also in Iron II contexts at Tell es-Safi/Gath,19 and Hazor.20 Alternatively, the Level K-10/K-9 fragment in Figure 5:1 appears to have belonged to a hemispherical bowl-shaped crucible. Examples of this type of crucible have been found in the southern Levant in LB II Hazor,21 and in an uncertain context (possibly Stratum VI of the Late Bronze III) at Tel Beth Shean.22 In Cyprus, hemispherical crucibles have been found at such sites as Enkomi, Ambelikou, and Apliki.23 Notably, the hemispherical bowl-shaped examples (ca. 17 cm in diameter and ca. 10 cm deep) are larger than the “flowerpot”-shaped crucibles. Note that the vessel from Area Q (Figure 5:5), identified as a crucible based on the copper contamination of its interior, is unique in shape and also has an extremely low capacity due to its shallow interior.BellowsThe pot bellows mentioned above from the tombs on the Eastern Slope and from Area K are all tall vessels (rather than squat), which would have been operated by hand. Those from the tombs (Figure 3:2–3) have rounded shoulders and a depression below the rim. Similar objects have been found in Israeli, Lebanese, and Syrian coastal sites, as well as in northern Syria.24Although no ceramic pot bellows have been found in Area Q, the presence of tuyères suggests the use of bellows. It is entirely plausible that during the Iron Age, the latter were made of perishable material since, to our knowledge, no such ceramic items have ever been found in association with ironworking at Megiddo or elsewhere in the southern Levant.TuyèresThe tuyères from Area K (Levels K-6 to K-4) are coarsely made of calcareous clay with varying amounts of foraminifers, and are also tempered with a high proportion of coarse vegetal matter (mostly straw).25 XRF analysis revealed that most of the examined tuyères were similar in composition to the crucibles from Level K-6.26 This similarity may suggest some regularity in the production of the refractories used in the Levels K-6 to K-4 bronze workshop, at the very least in the choice of material.The tuyères from Area K are round in cross-section (ca. 4.5–5.0 cm in diameter), bent, and tapered down to a pointed tip (Figure 5:5–6). The central perforation (bore hole) tapers from back to tip, in order to prevent hot air from being sucked in from the furnace. There are no signs of vitrification and slag formation at any of the preserved tips, suggesting no direct contact between the tuyère and the fire. Their firing temperature has been estimated to be lower than 800° C.27The round, bent tuyères are known from many bronzeworking contexts related to the LB III–Iron IIA, at such sites as Tel Dan, Hazor, Yoqneam, and Tell es-Safi/Gath. A single tuyère of the bent type was recovered at LB II Sarepta.28 The tuyères from Area Q are square in cross-section, which is typical of ironworking (Figure 5: 8). Similar tuyères have been found in ironworking contexts related to the Iron IIA at Hazor, Tel Beth Shemesh, Tell es-Safi/Gath, and Tell Hammeh in Jordan.29Waste ProductsAnalyses of copper-based waste products using a scanning electron microscope demonstrated that spherical droplets are essentially bronze drops, with an as-cast microstructure, whereas amorphous pieces are heterogeneous in their microstructure, exhibiting different zones in each sample.30 The latter include partial oxidation products shown as cassiterite crystals and cuprite dendrites, which precipitated from the melt during or at the end of the melting process, and were therefore unintentionally produced. Both the droplets and the amorphous pieces are typically formed in remelting activities involving the use of open crucibles.Iron production remains at Megiddo include hammerscales, iron prills, and slag cakes. The latter are formed at the bottom of hearths associated with the forging of blooms or iron objects, and therefore could indicate both smelting and smithing activities.31Quantification of Bronze and Iron Tools and WeaponsIn order to trace the development of iron use, we have compiled an up-to-date database of bronze and iron tools and weapons from Iron Age Megiddo retrieved up through the 2014 excavation season.32 The data include only well-stratified and dated material from the OI excavations, as well as published and unpublished material from the recent Tel Aviv University excavations. Although Megiddo has yielded numerous metal objects from the Iron Age, this strategy of focusing on secure contexts alone significantly narrowed the list to a total of 450 objects. The fact that bronze was often recycled, and that iron sometimes corrodes to an unidentifiable form, are two of the reasons why such an inventory can only provide a very general and relative picture, and should only be taken as a broad indication of the process. Figure 11a shows the count of all the objects, beginning in Iron I, as no iron objects at Megiddo predate this period (which commenced in the late 12th century bc). Figure 11b shows only objects that were catalogued as tools or weapons.Figure 11. Number of bronze versus iron objects from different periods at Megiddo; all objects (a) Tools and weapons only (b).View Large ImageDownload PowerPointAccording to both diagrams (Figures 11a and 11b), iron appeared during Iron I in relatively small numbers, while bronze was still dominant. During Iron IIA, iron increased considerably, specifically in the “tools and weapons” category. Figure 11b shows that in Iron IIA, iron comprised nearly 60% of all such objects. It can be clearly seen that in both the absolute number of iron objects and in the dominance of iron in relation to bronze, there was a considerable decrease after Iron Age IIA. This is apparent both from the general count (Figure 11a) and from the count of tools and weapons alone (Figure 11b). Although based on a small database, the strategy of utilizing only contextually secure samples allows us to safely suggest that iron production during Iron IIA was directly related to the developing local administration. The data at hand is insufficient to determine the nature of production during Iron IIB (8th century bc). It is clear, however, that following the violent destruction of the city at the end of this period by the Assyrians, iron production did not continue at the same level of intensity, and bronze regained its dominancy.Metal HoardsTwo metal hoards were found in proximity to each other near the southern edge of the tell. One is a collection of bronze objects found by the OI team in their Area CC, Locus 1739, dated to Iron I.33 Another (12/Q/76), a hoard of bronze and iron objects unearthed during the 2012 season in Area Q, is related to Level Q-7 (=Stratum VIA).34 Based on the wealth of metal objects and the proximity of these two hoards to the metalworking contexts in Areas K and Q, we view them as possible products of this metallurgical activity.Hoard from Locus 1739A collection of bronze objects was found in a domestic area of Area CC, Locus 1739 (Figure 12). According to the find register, there were at least thirty-two copper/ bronze artifacts in this locus, including nineteen bowls, two strainers, five jugs, three spearheads, two lugged axes, and a single double axe.35 The excavators attributed Locus 1739 to Stratum VI, without distinguishing between its two phases (VIB and VIA). Lilly Gershuny examined the vessels and concluded, based on stylistic considerations, that they were likely produced by a single workshop during the time of