Stratum 1. Two walls (W10, W11) and a nearby pavement built of large stone slabs were exposed. Wall 10 (exposed length 8 m, max. width 1.6 m) was built of large stones along an east–west axis and was preserved to a height of two courses. The width of the wall indicates it supported a massive structure or a city wall. The wall’s foundation trench severed the winepress of Stratum 2. Wall 11 (exposed length 2.5 m, width 1 m) was constructed of medium-sized stones aligned along a northeast–southwest axis, surviving to a height of one course. The stone pavement abutted the two walls and sealed the winepress. Pottery vessels dating to the Crusader, Mamluk and Ottoman periods (twelfth–sixteenth centuries CE) were discovered in this stratum. These include locally manufactured green glazed bowls from the beginning of the Ottoman period (sixteenth century CE; Fig. 4:1) and the early Mamluk period (late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries CE; Fig. 4:2), a Cypriot bowl (thirteenth century CE; Fig. 4:3), sugar pots (twelfth century CE; Fig. 4:4–6) and a krater (twelfth-thirteenth centuries CE; Fig. 4:7) from the Crusader period, cooking pots from the Mamluk (Fig. 4:8) and Crusader (Fig. 4:9) periods, an imported amphora from the Crusader period (Fig. 4:10), as well as a jug decorated with geometric patterns (Fig. 4:11) and a pomegranate-like vessel decorated with stamped floral patterns, both from either the Crusader or the Mamluk period (Fig. 4:12).
 
Stratum 2. After removing the pavement of large stones and the soil fill beneath Stratum 1 (thickness 8 cm), a rock-hewn complex winepress consisting of three treading floors (Fig. 2:3–5) and two collecting vats (Fig. 2:1, 2) was exposed. The treading floors were bounded by low walls (W12–W14) built of rectangular stones, the tops of which were used as narrow work platforms. The treading floors were paved with coarse white mosaics set on a bedding of plaster mixed with river pebbles and organic matter (thickness 0.16 m). The foundation trench of W10 severed Treading Floors 3 and 5. 
A large section of the mosaic pavement (0.7 × 2.6 m; Fig. 5) was preserved on Treading Floor 3. The must that was pressed on this surface flowed through a channel hewn in a stone in W13 into a shallow rock-cut settling pit (0.45 × 0.60 m, depth 0.2 m; Fig. 6), and from there to Collecting Vat 1. Treading Floor 4 (0.7 × 1.6 m) was partially unearthed, and only one row of its mosaic pavement was preserved, along W12. The must pressed on this surface flowed along a small plaster sluice to a gutter drilled in a stone in W13, and from there to a square settling pit (0.45 × 0.45 m, depth 0.2 m; Fig. 7), whence it flowed to Collecting Vat 2. Treading Floor 5 was also only partially exposed (1.6 × 2.7 m); its mosaic pavement did not survive at all. The must extracted on this surface flowed through a small plastered channel into Collecting Vat 1.
Collecting Vat 1 is square (2.2 × 2.3 m, 8.6 cubic m; Fig. 8); its walls were treated with a thick layer of plaster containing potsherds, and its bottom was paved with a coarse white mosaic. A staircase built of flat rectangular stones was constructed inside the vat. At the bottom of the vat, near the staircase, was a hewn semicircular sump (L117; diam. 0.6 m; Fig. 9) for collecting the remnants of must; it was paved with tesserae. Numerous pottery sherds and fragments of glass vessels from the Byzantine period, animal bones (Agha, below) and an illegible coin were discovered in the vat. Only the upper part of Collecting Vat 2 was exposed. Its dimensions were apparently similar to those of Vat 1.
The ceramic finds from Stratum 2 date mainly to the Byzantine period, and include imported bowls, kraters, cooking vessels, amphorae, jars, jugs and lamps. Imported bowls (50% of the assemblage) belong to a group of red-slipped pottery from the end of the Byzantine period—CRS 6 (Fig. 10:1), CRS 2 (Fig. 10:2), PRS 3 (Fig. 10:3, 4), ARS 107 (Fig. 10:7, 8), CRS 7 (Fig. 10:9) and CRS 11 (Fig. 10:10)—as well as red-slipped bowls that have no parallels (Fig. 10:5, 6). Bowl bases decorated with crosses (Fig. 10:11, 12) were also discovered; base 12 is similar to the PRS 69j bowls. The kraters (15% of the assemblage) date to the end of the Byzantine period. They have a thickened ledge rim with a triangular cross-section and are decorated with incisions (Fig. 10:13–16). The cooking vessels (9% of the assemblage) date to the end of the Byzantine period and beginning of the Early Islamic period. They consist of two types of casseroles, one with a flat-cut rim and two horizontal handles (Fig. 10:17, 18), another with a funnel-rim (Fig. 10:19), and a cooking pot (Fig. 10:20). Lids (9% of the assemblage) were also discovered, including a complete specimen that was found in the sump of Collecting Vat 1 (Fig. 10:21). The amphorae (3% of the assemblage) include three types: an amphora with a short thickened neck (Fig. 10:22; no parallels were found), and two with long necks, one dating to the end of the Roman period (Fig. 10:23), another dating from the fifth century until the mid-seventh century CE (Fig. 10:24). Jars (15% of the assemblage) consist of two types: one with a tall, ridged neck (Fig. 10:25) from the later sixth century CE, and one with a short neck (Fig. 10:26–28) from the fourth–sixth centuries CE. Jugs (3% of the assemblage) include a strainer jug (Fig. 10:29). The lamps include two types, both of which date to the fifth–seventh centuries CE. The first is a mold-made Phoenician lamp with an elliptical body, small fill-hole, knob handle and a channel connecting the fill-hole with the nozzle. It is decorated with herringbone, floral and linear patterns (Fig. 10:30). The second type is a Northern lamp, of which only its base, decorated with a circular pattern, was discovered (Fig. 10:31).
 
Winepresses similar to the complex winepress from the Byzantine period unearthed in Stratum 2 were discovered throughout the Western Galilee. A comparison of the volume of this winepress’s collecting vat with that of collecting vats of similar winepresses from the region suggests this is a medium-sized installation. This winepress and the finds discovered in its collecting vats indicate that there was a settlement situated in the vicinity throughout the Byzantine period that was engaged in wine production. The numerous imported bowls discovered in Stratum 2 show that commerce was actively conducted between the local residents and merchants from Cyprus and western parts of the Mediterranean Sea.
The building remains from the Crusader and Mamluk and the ceramic artifacts that include imported pottery and vessels related to sugar industry exposed in Stratum 1 may have belonged to a sugar factory in the Crusader village of La Noie. These finds allow us to revisit the question of identifying Kh. Yanuhiyah, which is mentioned in V. Guérin’s (1987/1880:24–25) description of the Galilee. Kh. Yanuhiyah (La Noie of the Crusader period) was identified by Frankel and Getzov (2012: Site 9) with the site at Kibbutz ‘Evron, on the kurkar ridge south of Nahal Ga‘aton, since at the time it best fit Guérin’s description. In light of the excavation results described here, it seems preferable that the site at Giv‘at Ussishkin be identified with Kh. Yanuhiyah.
 
 
The Animal Bone Remains
Nuha Agha
 
Methodology. Because the bones were well-preserved and not covered with concretions, they were washed with tap water, without the use of acid. Many of the bones were broken during the excavation, but the fragments remained in proximity to each other. They were restored and glued in order to avoid skewing the statistics due to double counting of the same parts. Gluing the fragments also aided in identifying the species in certain cases.
The bone assemblage was identified by comparing the finds from the excavation with bones from the Paleontology and Archaeozoology Collection at the Hebrew University Department of Evolution, Statistics and Ecology, Giv‘at Ram. All of the bones were examined for taphonomic factors and processes, both human (signs of burning and cutting) and natural (signs of roots, weather damage and gnawing by predators/rodents).

 
Results. The assemblage consists of 85 bones and teeth; 70 bones were ascribed to either a species, a genus or a particular size group of animals (Table 1). Only seven bones were discovered in Stratum 1, which contained mixed pottery from the Middle Ages; these bones will not be discussed here. In Stratum 2, 63 bones were discovered in the two collecting vats of the Byzantine winepress. It seems plausible that the debris that filled the winepress once it ceased to be used dates to the Byzantine period as well.
The bones are well-preserved without cracks or surface peeling, indicating that they were lay exposed on the surface for only a short period of time. Only scant traces of roots were discovered on the bones, and only two specimens exhibited rodent gnawing marks—shallow, parallel grooves that tend to appear in groups along the contour of the bone’s surface. All the bones in the assemblage belong to livestock: sheep/goat, cattle, pigs, camels and equids. Pig bones (N=26) constitute the largest component of the assemblage, followed by sheep/goat bones (N=17). Assuming that the bones that belong to the ‘large’ size group are mostly of cattle, the total number of cattle bones (N=16) is almost identical to that of sheep/goat. Camel and equid are represented by only a few bones.

 
Table 1. Identified Bones
Species/
Size Group
Stratum 1
(L109)
Stratum 2
(L110, L111, L113, L116)
Cattle
 
7
Camel
 
3
Equid
 
1
Large-sized animal
1
9
Sheep/goat
4
15
Goat
 
1
Sheep
1
1
Pig
1
26
Total
7
63
 
The breakdown of species’ skeletal parts represented in the assemblage (Table 2) is not equal. Cattle, camel and the ‘large animal’ are represented mainly by skeletal bones. Skeletal bones are also represented among the sheep/goats, but most of this specie’s bones are represented by the upper and lower parts of the hind limbs. Pigs are represented mainly by lower teeth; upper teeth and skeletal bones are almost completely absent.

Table 2. Breakdown of Skeletal Parts, according to Species/Group Size
Species/
Size Group
Skull
Skeletal axis
Upper front limb
Lower front limb
Upper rear limb
Lower rear limb
Total
Cattle
 
4
 
1
1
1
7
Camel
 
3
 
 
 
 
3
Equid
 
 
 
 
 
1
1
Large-sized animal
 
8
 
1
 
 
9
Sheep/goat
1
3
 
1
3
7
15
Goat
 
 
 
 
 
1
1
Sheep
 
 
1
 
 
 
1
Pig
20
1
 
2
2
1
26
Total
21
19
1
5
6
11
63
 
Based on the left third molar, the pig remains represent at least three individuals. The dimensions of the pig third molars in the assemblage (length 26.5–27.2 mm, width 14.1–14.7 mm) are significantly smaller than the dimensions of third molars among today’s wild pigs (length 34.2–45.4 mm, width 16.4–19.9 mm); hence, the teeth in the assemblage belong to domesticated pigs. The pattern of dental erosion among pig teeth (the third molar and fourth premolar) indicates that the animals were adult when slaughtered, 2.0–3.5 years old. The degree of fusing of the bones supports this conclusion; the only bone that was not fused is a distal radius, which fuses only at 3.5 years of age. These results are surprising since pigs are generally slaughtered at a young age due to their rapid reproductive rate and since adult animals cannot supply secondary products such as wool and milk or be used as work animals. In most assemblages, the majority of pig bones are of individuals less than one year of age, whereas the bones of adult animals are uncommon (as, for example, at Bet Shehan: Horwitz 2006) and sometimes belong to wild pigs. Nevertheless, a phenomenon similar to that at the site was observed in other Byzantine-period assemblages; at Caesarea, for example, pigs and sheep/goats were slaughtered at an age of c. 2.0–2.5 years (Cope 1999).
The sheep/goat bones represent at least three individuals based on the metatarsal. Of these, at least one is a goat and one is a sheep. The dental erosion pattern shows that both sheep goats were adult animals, 4 years old or over, when slaughtered. Two metatarsal bones (one right and one left) were not fused at the distal end; hence they belong to a younger individual c. 20–28 months of age. Although it was not possible to identify the sex of the adult individuals, it is likely they were female. Their mature age should be ascribed their production of secondary products, such as wool and milk.
Cattle and equid remains represent at least one adult individual each, since all of the bones are fused. The one camel is represented by vertebrae only, and therefore its age could not be determined.
Most of the cut marks (9 of 14) appear on the large animals—cattle, camel and equids—whereas only three cut marks were noted on the bones of sheep/goat and two on the pig bones. The marks are of different types, representing slaughtering, skinning, butchering and meat removal. The multitude of cut marks on the bones of the large animals stems from the method in which they were dismembered, which left numerous marks on the skeletal axis (Cope 1999:413). Apart from one charred mark on an unidentified bone, no signs of burning were noted on the bones.
 
Most of the animal bones discovered in the winepress fill represent slaughtering waste. Some of the bones represent food waste, particularly the hind quarters of sheep/goats. Presumably, the remains originated at a nearby settlement site. The limited size of the assemblage—just 70 identified bones—requires caution, and there is no way of knowing if the breakdown of species in the assemblage accurately reflect the community’s livestock. Nevertheless, it is clear that pigs constituted an important element in the population’s economy. The multitude of pig bones is likely to indicate the religion of the site’s inhabitants. During the Byzantine period, the western Upper Galilee and the northern coastal plain were inhabited mainly by Christians, as evidenced by the distribution of churches (Frankel et al. 2001:115, Fig. 4.4). The age breakdown of the pigs shows a preference for adults, which is anomalous compared with the findings from other periods but similar to finds at other Byzantine-period sites. Thus, domesticated pigs might have been utilized in a unique manner in the Byzantine period. Archaeozoological research of additional assemblages with pig remains from the Byzantine period will help clarify this point in the future.