TELL EN-NASBEH EXCAVATIONS — BADE 491 



It was evident tliat this was a tomb of considerable a<?e. On 

 removal of the larjrer doorstone the front of the tomb was found to be 

 solidly filled with black earth carried in by seepaj^e of water thr()ii«:h 

 ill-fitting joints in the doorway. When this earth had been removed 

 it was found to be a tomb with a double history. The first burial, 

 judjzinn: by the pottery, had been made about 700 B. C. ; the second 

 belon^'ed to the Hellenistic period, about 250 B. C, or later. Only a 

 part of the debris within the tomb, to«;ether with the .skeletal remains, 

 had been removed for the second burial, so that both deposits of 

 funerary gifts were substantially preserved. The Hellenistic deposit 

 comprised a number of vases and jars which were clearly imitations of 

 Cireek forms. One of them was an alabastron. There was also a small 

 globular vase of fine thin paste, which is a remarkably faithful repre- 

 sentation of a pomegranate. The prominent segmented calyx was 

 made to serve as the neck of the vase, and even the scar made by tear- 

 ing the fruit from the stem was faithfully imitated. A varied col- 

 lection of jewelry, including rings, fibulae, brooches, and ear-rings, 

 accompanied the ceramic deposit. (PI. 7.) 



The second and older deposit, dated provisionally near the begin- 

 ning of the second phase of the Iron Age (800-586 B. C), was repre- 

 .sented by 30 pieces of pottery, among them 11 saucer lamps. Only 

 one of them had a slight foot, a fact which, by comparison with 

 lamps found in rooms and stratified deposits on the Tell, would tend 

 to push back the date of this deposit to the close of the Iron Age I 

 (1200-800 B. C). The fact that only a few fragmentary human 

 remains were found in the tomb may, as already suggested, be mos< 

 plausibly exjilained by the supposition that at the time of the second 

 burial the skeletons of the first burial were removed. The contents 

 of the small tomb on the left side of the main entrance support this 

 view. It seems originally to have been intended for the burial of an 

 infant. Having been opened also at the time of the Hellenistic 

 burial, and being found too small, some large bones of adults from 

 the main tomb were thrust into it before it was closed again. In 

 any case there were found in this niche some large bones of an adult 

 lying on top of the very slight remains of a child burial. Xo other 

 objects furnished any clue to its purpose or past history. 



More difficult is it to account for the almost complete absence of 

 skeletal remains in connection with the secondary Hellenistic burial, 

 more especially since the door-stones were still in place. Perhaps 

 the tomb was robbed a few years after burial. The smallncss of the 

 funerary deposit could then be accounted for on the assumption that 

 the most valuable objects were removed together with the skeletons, 

 or perhaps an o.ssuary containing the bones. The recovery of a smuU 

 ornamental bronze handle of some receptacle which was no longer 

 in the tomb, favors this explanation. 



