The following observations are advanced regarding the reconstruction of Tomb 1 burial ritual. Upon the death of a family member, the body was taken to the ancestral tomb in the limestone escarpment on the western side of the settlement. The bones of earlier burials were unceremoniously swept to the sides of the chamber, thereby providing space for the new interment. The body was then placed on the floor of the chamber or on the debris of earlier burials, either in an extended or full-length position without regard to a fixed orientation. No evidence for contracted positioning was discerned. Numerous burials were documented in which the skeletal remains were covered with the body sherds of large storage jars. Vessels, furnishings and personal possessions were either placed around the circumference of the tomb or carefully arranged around the body. The deposits appear to represent a full complement of everyday articles that would presumably provide the deceased with the necessary material needs in the afterlife. Food and drink were included in the deposits and the presence of clay lamps in large numbers suggests the importance of light. Following interment, the doorway to the chamber was closed with the blocking stone. The shaft was then filled with debris.
When a second death in the family occurred and the tomb was to be used again, the debris in the shaft and then the blocking stone were removed and the corpse and its deposits were placed in the chamber. As before, the previous burials and deposits were brushed aside to make room for the new interment with its adornments.
As noted above, the practice of multiple successive burials resulted in significant destruction to the skeletal remains. In many instances, the skeletal remains were fused into a solid mass, making it difficult to study the components of the individual interment. The few burials that had not suffered destruction indicate that full-length or extended positioning was preferred. Tibia and fibula bones were in an excellent state of preservation. Some were stacked like cordwood; though most were scattered throughout the burial debris.
Several inferences may be drawn from the study of Tomb 1 mortuary practices relating to such issues as the treatment of the body, the nature of the tomb as a temporary residence and the significance of the burial deposits. The evidence suggests that there existed a contrast in attitude, regarding the corpse, between the time of interment and its later treatment after the decomposition of the flesh. At the time of burial, scrupulous care was exercised in the placement of the corpse and in the arrangement of the burial deposits. Once the body was transformed into a pile of bones, it was treated with little respect. It was normal practice to sweep aside the bones and deposits into a heap, often destroying both in the process in order to make room for subsequent burials. Apparently it was believed that the deceased was conscious of feeling and in need of sustenance as long as the flesh had not completely decomposed. With the decomposition of the flesh, however, the descendants could with impunity destroy or perhaps even remove certain of the burial deposits. The tomb was not considered the permanent residence of the dead but only a temporary station on the way to the netherworld. There is no evidence that burial deposits were renewed periodically, nor were additional supplies placed in the tombs in the years that followed interment (see Cooley 1968: 80-188 and1983 for further study of Tomb 1 mortuary practice).
Based on clearly prescribed burial characteristics, a recent study by Gonen discerns two distinct groups of burials of the Late Bronze Age in Canaan: pit burials for individual interment and cave burials for multiple interment (Gonen 1992: 9-31). Both burial types are regarded as indigenous to Canaan, having been practiced since the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age. Gonen further distinguishes another indigenous burial practice that is characterized by intramural interment. The study concludes with a presentation of eight foreign burial types that originated in different places and arrived in Canaan during different phases of the Late Bronze Age: bench burial caves, loculi burial caves, bilobate burial caves, open pits, structural chambers, and larnax, coffin and jar burials. Tell Dothan's Tomb 1 clearly falls within the general category of cave burials for multiple interments and shares the specific characteristics of the loculi burial caves.
Unlike those burials that used natural caves (such as Tell Jedur and Khirbet Rabud) or those that reused Early or Middle Bronze Age burial sites (Tel Regev, Beth-Shean, Gibeon, Jericho, Tell el-Far'ah [N] and certain ones at Gezer and Megiddo), Tell Dothan's Tomb 1 was a newly-constructed burial site of the Late Bronze Age. However, Tomb 3 was a nearby burial cave that was originally used as a cistern. As Gonen has correctly observed, a typology of Late Bronze Age tombs is impossible to establish at the present time and probably for the immediate future as well.
Like most multiple burial caves of the Late Bronze Age, Tomb 1 was located outside of the settlement's fortifications on the western slopes of the mound. Other burial chambers located on the slopes of the mound are known from Megiddo, Lachish, Tell Jedur, Tell Beit Mirsim and Beth-Shemesh. While many settlements have only one associated burial cave, this tomb was part of a cemetery that consisted of three burial caves. Unfortunately, Tombs 2 and 3 were not well-preserved by comparison, though roughly contemporary (on the later side) with Tomb 1. Nevertheless, there is no clear tomb organization in the western cemetery, consistent with Gonen's observation that the positioning of Late Bronze Age burial caves in relation to associated settlements is irrelevant.
Again, consistent with the majority of Late Bronze Age cave burials, Tomb 1 was used for multiple interments with the well-known Middle Bronze II practice of removing old bones to the sides of the chamber to make room for new burials. This practice is well-documented at Jericho, Megiddo, Beth-Shean, Gibeon and Safed. The number of interments in multiple burial tombs varies from a handful, though this circumstance is relatively infrequent, to the numbers represented in Tell Dothan's largest burial chamber. The types and numbers of funerary objects detailed above are quite characteristic of the larger Late Bronze Age burial caves. Pottery vessels of various types, mostly local, represent the largest class of funerary deposits. Approximately five percent of the Tomb 1 assemblage is imported. This datum too is consistent with the typical multiple burial cave of this period.
While Tomb 1 shares the general characteristics of cave burials for multiple interments, Gonen classifies this tomb among the categories of foreign burials, specifically caves with loculi burials (Gonen 1992: 132-33). As is clear in the accompanying plan , Tomb 1 had six rock-hewn and two constructed crypts or loculi. Similar roughly contemporary tomb constructions are known from Tell el-'Ajjul (Petrie 1931: 127, pl. 57, fig. 6; pl. 54); Lachish (Tufnell 1953: pl. 128; 1958: 228, 240, 280-87) and Megiddo (Guy 1938: 127, 129; pls 41, 42, 140, 141). Though some would suggest a slightly earlier chronology, the typical tomb with loculi was introduced at the beginning of the Late Bronze Age. This burial design obviously was intended for individual burials but in the context of the group, oftentimes the family.
While noting that loculi burial caves in Canaan display hybrid features of Greek and Cypriot origin, Gonen finds the parallels closer to Cypriot models where the design was common, beginning with the Early Cypriot period (Gonen 1992: 24-25). She studies Tumulus #7 at Paleoskutela in the center of the Karpas Peninsula as representative of the Cypriot loculi burial cave (Sjokvist 1940: fig. 45:10; Gjerstad 1934: 427-38). The parallels between this tomb construction and that of Tell Dothan's Tomb 1 are striking. The burial chamber of the Cypriot example is roughly circular with four loculi cut into the walls. Access to the burial chamber was achieved by means of a well-cut shaft with three steps that opened into a stomion. A blocking stone was located at the entrance to the tomb chamber. Seven skeletons were found in the four loculi; two burials in each of three loculi and an individual burial in the fourth. Seven additional burials were discovered on the floor of the tomb chamber. Although the number of burials in the Tell Dothan tomb is significantly larger, the parallels in tomb construction are instructive.
Tombs 2 and 3 were also discovered in Area K; the former during the 1962 season and the latter in 1964. The construction of both tombs involved the reuse of cisterns that had been quarried into the soft limestone. Neither tomb was as well-preserved as Tomb 1 and neither evidenced the stratification of the latter. In both instances, the complete architectural definition of the tomb complex was lost to later quarrying which also resulted in extensive damage to tomb deposits. Although Tomb 1 is the primary focus of this article, a few details will be presented for Tombs 2 and 3 since these burial contexts complete the picture of the western cemetery.
Tomb 2 was a small shaft-type tomb constructed in K-23 (just to the southwest of Tomb 1), an area originally used for cisterns. Cistern D was used as the shaft for Tomb 2. It was elliptical in shape, 1.40 m (north-south) x 1.60 m (east-west). The depth of this cistern-shaft was 1.30 m. In its eastern side, an opening was cut to serve as the entrance into the chamber of Tomb 2. Cisterns B (1.50 m x 1.05 m with a depth of 1.25 m) and C (1.47 m x 1.56 m with a depth of 2.20 m) were contiguous with the cistern shaft (Cistern D) on its southern side. Cistern E (1.70 m x 1.90 m with a depth of 2.00 m) was located just north of the cistern-shaft, though not contiguous with it. This cistern, however, did adjoin the chamber wall of Tomb 2. The chamber of Tomb 2 was basically rectangular, with rounded corners measuring approximately 5.50 m x 4.0 m. Five crypts were located around the chamber's northern, eastern and southern sides.
Tomb 2 skeletal remains are extremely fragmentary. Some 500 objects, including sherds, were registered from this tomb and cistern complex, suggesting chronological horizons similar to Tomb 1.
Tomb 3 was discovered some 35 m west-southwest of Tomb 1. Originally, this area was also used for cisterns. Three intact cisterns, labelled A, B and C, were completely excavated during the1964 season and another (D) was partially cleared. When Cistern B no longer functioned in that capacity, the chamber was utilized as a tomb. This bell-shaped cistern-tomb (Tomb 3), with rounded bottom, measured 1.80 m (north-south) x 1.70 m (east-west). The maximum depth of the tomb chamber was 1.60 m.
The soft limestone into which the cistern-tomb had been cut was quarried at a later time, resulting in extensive damage to the chamber and its contents. Most of the pottery was broken and widely scattered over the area of the tomb. The skeletal remains were in similar disarray. Despite the level of disturbance, there was no evidence of stratification as in Tomb 1. Only one level of burials was distinguished.
Tomb 3 yielded 89 vessels in the following categories: lamps (12), juglets (27), chalices (11), jugs (28), bowls (9), jar (1) and pyxis (1). The handful of bronze objects included a knife handle with rivets and two rings. Also noteworthy was a small assortment of beads. The skeletal remains were extremely fragmentary, including two skull fragments and teeth from an adult and an infant. The lack of data precludes observations on burial orientation or positioning.
The pottery indicates that the chronological horizons of this tomb correspond to the later levels of Tomb 1. Several examples of the diagnostic Iron I lamps and black dipper juglets with bulbous body were present as well as vessels with wheel burnishing on the inside and outside. There are no indications of continued usage in the Iron II period.
Archaeological investigation at numerous sites throughout the Levant has yielded abundant data concerning burials and burial ritual (for summaries, see Gonen 1987, 1992; Bloch-Smith 1992; Abercrombie 1979; Meyers 1970 and Rahmani 1981). The nonepigraphic data of archaeology, are hardly sufficient, however, for an understanding of death, death ritual and the theological and sociological inferences of mortuary practice. The archaeological data must be viewed in light of the literary evidence and, here too, the horizons of our knowledge have been expanded through discovery of pertinent epigraphic evidence, notably the Ugaritic texts among other sources (Lewis 1989; Tromp 1969 and Healey 1977). The final publication of Tell Dothan's western cemetery will provide a wealth of information for numerous areas of research in biblical, archaeological and ancient Near Eastern studies, especially the study of death and burial ritual in the world of Canaanite-Hebrew culture.
