SHARE
[/vc_column_text][mk_image src=”http://www.asortest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/social-fb-icon4.jpg” image_width=”42″ image_height=”42″ hover=”false” custom_url=”https://www.facebook.com/ASOResearch/” margin_bottom=”0″][mk_image src=”http://www.asortest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/social-tw-icon4.jpg” image_width=”42″ image_height=”42″ hover=”false” custom_url=”https://twitter.com/ASOResearch?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor” margin_bottom=”0″][mk_image src=”http://www.asortest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/social-in-icon4.jpg” image_width=”42″ image_height=”42″ hover=”false” custom_url=”https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-schools-of-oriental-research” margin_bottom=”0″][mk_image src=”http://www.asortest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/social-ml-icon_7.jpg” image_width=”42″ image_height=”42″ hover=”false” custom_url=”mailto:asor@bu.edu” margin_bottom=”0″][mk_image src=”http://www.asortest.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/blog-icon3.jpg” image_width=”42″ image_height=”42″ hover=”false” custom_url=”http://asorblog.org/” margin_bottom=”0″][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(255,255,255,0.01)” width=”1/6″ css=”.vc_custom_1496683923840{margin-right: 20px !important;border-left-width: 2px !important;padding-right: 20px !important;padding-left: 20px !important;border-left-color: #99422f !important;}”][mk_divider divider_color=”rgba(255,255,255,0.01)” thickness=”1″ margin_top=”3″ margin_bottom=”3″][vc_column_text] [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column border_color=”rgba(170,170,170,0.01)” width=”1/2″ css=”.vc_custom_1567014358552{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-bottom: 30px !important;border-right-width: 2px !important;border-bottom-width: 2px !important;padding-top: 5px !important;padding-right: 30px !important;padding-left: 20px !important;background-color: #ffffff !important;border-right-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;border-bottom-color: rgba(227,228,228,0.75) !important;}”][vc_column_text responsive_align=”left”]GCI-ASOR WORKSHOP ON CONSERVATION AND ARCHAEOLOGY
Limited spaces are available for this Getty Conservation Institute funded program – apply today!
[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]This is a benefit of ASOR membership, with preference given to project directors.*
What?
The Getty Conservation Institute (GCI) and ASOR are partnering to provide members a valuable one-day workshop on emerging realities in conservation and its integration with archaeology.
- Update yourself on the what, why and how of conservation.
- Understand the role of conservation as an integral part of archaeological practice.
- Gain valuable insight and information concerning, planning, budgeting, and funding for conservation.
- Develop your conservation network.
Why?
- ASOR members aim to make a difference by conserving those traces of the ancient past that we work so hard to discover, interpret and share.
- As governments make strategic decisions about which permits to grant, this workshop can help you distinguish your project.
Other benefits?
- An extra night’s hotel paid and meals for Sunday after the ASOR meeting supported by The Getty Conservation Institute (GCI).
- Binder with conservation reference materials/handouts and instructor contact details.
- Materials to use in your collaborative planning, teaching and funding requests with conservation professionals.
- Certificate of workshop completion from The Getty Conservation Institute
When and where?
Sunday, November 24, 2019, after the 2019 ASOR Annual Meeting in San Diego, at the conference hotel, The Westin San Diego.
How do I apply?
Click here for the online application form. October 1st is the deadline to apply for this limited space program. Rolling admissions, so apply now.
Want more details?
Download the Program
*Schedule, speakers, and times are subject to change
FREE Registration includes:
-Breakfast and lunch
-One complimentary hotel night at The Westin San Diego
Speakers include:
Angelyn Bass, Department of Anthropology, University of New Mexico
Harriet ‘Rae’ Beaubien, Museum Conservation Institute, Smithsonian Institution; Museum Studies Program, University of New Mexico
Suzanne Davis, Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan
Martha Demas, Buildings and Sites Department, Getty Conservation Institute
Lynn Swartz Dodd, Religion, Archaeology Research Center, University of Southern California
Heather Hurst, Department of Anthropology, Skidmore College
Ioanna Kakoulli, Materials Science and Engineering Department, University of California at Los Angeles
Douglas Porter, School of Engineering, University of Vermont
Other Questions?
Contact ASOR staff member, Arlene Press, meetings@asor.org
art purchased by the Met’s trustees from Luigi Palma di Cesnola in two lots, one in 1872 and another in 1876. The two collections amounted to around twenty thousand objects, all finds Cesnola had acquired while serving as US Consul on the island from 1865–1876. After the acquisition of the second collection, Cesnola left Cyprus to become the first director of the Metropolitan Museum, a position he held until his death in 1904. New Yorkers in the 1870s were most intriguing by the works of limestone sculptures from the sanctuary at Golgoi. In the 1880s these objects would become embroiled in a scandal because of the claim that Cesnola had performed intentionally misleading restorations, but before that disgrace and through much of the 1870s, New Yorkers were processing the arrival of an enormous volume of ancient Cypriot objects in a relatively short amount of time.
activities in the Middle Kingdom necropolis of Deir el-Bahari and Asasif. The site had previously been excavated under the auspices of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, initiated by Herbert Eustis Winlock in 1912 with survey activities followed by excavations from 1921–1922 until 1928 (Arnold 1996: 59). Winlock’s excavations had been preceded by Howard Carter’s in 1910–1911 (Morales et al. 2016: 258). The current excavations began in 2015, and have continued annually through 2018 (Morales et al. 2016, 2017, and 2018) under the auspices of the Universidad de Alcalá (Madrid, Spain), with a fifth season scheduled for October 2019.
material. Sommerville (1829–1904) was an affluent Philadelphia businessman who devoted his later life (and funds) to world travel and the collection of antiquities in Europe, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, and North Africa as well as China, Japan, India, Burma, and Thailand. He published memoirs of his travels and catalogues and discussions of the gems and seals. His collection, originally exhibited in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (1888–1891), was placed in the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania (1891) and remained there upon his bequest (see Berges 2002: 11–19). Although Sommerville’s memoir Sands of Sahara (1901) describes some of his North African travels, there is no reference to his acquisition of the Punic artifacts.
in the southern Levant thanks to four archaeological expeditions that have thoroughly excavated the mound and rapidly published the results of their digs (Ussishkin 2018). All expeditions unearthed hoards of different types from the Late Bronze and Iron Ages (Hall 2016). This new hoard was unearthed in a destruction debris, securely dated to the Early Iron Age I, ca. 1070 BCE (local Level H-11, which equals University of Chicago’s Stratum VIIA). During this period, part of a building (remnants of two rooms and an inner courtyard surrounded by three large open courtyards) was found in this area (figs. 1–2; Finkelstein et al. 2017: 267–69). The building is positioned only about 30 m from Canaanite Palace 2041 of the city of Stratum VIIA. This article offers a preliminary publication of the hoard; a full report will soon be published in the Megiddo VI volume (Arie forthcoming a).
were found in several burials dating to the Roman period. Depositing funerary offerings was a common practice in the Roman era. Roughly a third of the excavated Eastern Cemetery (fig. 2, n=24) contained grave goods (Eisenberg-Degen 2017). Taking into account that some pilfering and plundering most likely took place, this figure is consistent with percentages noted in other Roman-period burials (Findlater et al. 2013: 69–80; Winter 2015: 82–87).
(for whom it is the second-holiest site), Jews, Christians, and Muslims. The total area of Joseph’s Shrine is 661 m² and it is located in Block 5, parcel 10, according to early Islamic Immovable Property Records from the Department of Al Awqaf Al Islamyah (Jordanian Islamic Endowments), Nablus (fig. 2). Originally situated on an agricultural plain, it is now surrounded by buildings, due to expansion of housing and schools in central Balata.
The items produced at the workshop, which are now known by the name of the site, are dated to around 300 
quantitative and archaeometric analyses, we assess and compare modifications in vessel repertoires, production techniques, and material sources across both sites to understand the nature and chronology of these changes. Similar technological developments are observed at Qizlar Qalʾeh and Merv, and are examined with regard to a potential Hellenistic reception in the ceramic material. Variations in the chronological distribution of innovations and assemblage composition help us to elucidate the neighborhood relations between eastern Iran and western Central Asia at this time. Our comparisons point toward a common cultural environment for both sites especially during the Early Parthian period, which is demonstrated in the many analogies of manufacturing techniques and vessel shapes. At the same time, we see different continuing local traditions, highlighting the flexible mode in which ceramic repertoires are adapted to the changing requirements under Hellenistic rule.
iconographic, and historical aspects of the seal impressions.
scarabs found in the southern Levant is provided, with a typological analysis and a tentative dating and origin of these pieces.
ca. 60,000-item plant collection from the recently exposed Late Bronze Age IIA palace at Tel Beth-Shemesh. Room L1505 in the palace—apparently a pantry due to its contents of foodstuffs and vessels for food preparation and consumption—contained eight deposits of carbonized crop plants. Deposits of almost pure grains and very low numbers of weed seeds were found, indicating that these stored food plants were ready to be used in food preparation. Of special interest is the presence of a sizeable amount of two rare pulses in Levantine archaeobotany—fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum) and Cyprus vetch (Lathyrus ochrus)—only found in two other Bronze Age royal contexts: Tutankhamun’s tomb in Egypt and the Late Minoan II Unexplored Mansion in Knossos. Thus, in addition to attesting to the agricultural practices and culinary preferences of a Canaanite ruling court during the Amarna Age, this botanical assemblage also hints at prestigious royal gift exchanges of exotic food plants.
begun in the Early Bronze Age (EB) I, which ended in a severe conflagration. Apparently rebuilt at the beginning of EB II, the village remained a small site and technically non-urban throughout the period. Destroyed at the end of EB II, it was renewed in EB III, coinciding with the arrival of people bearing the Khirbet Kerak Ware ceramic tradition. This preliminary report includes new observations following recent studies of Tel Yaqush finds, including a new sequence of 14C dates from EB I to III (published in detail elsewhere). The excavation results summarized here reveal the unique role Tel Yaqush played during the shift to urbanism, and its contribution to our understanding of Early Bronze Age village society in the central Jordan Valley.
amounts of these were adorned, and their decorations typically conform to a few canonized conventions. A small amount of the decorated Late Chalcolithic basalt bowls are further incised with unconventional, unique designs on their exteriors. These elaborately decorated basalt bowls stand in sharp contrast to the conventionally decorated ones, thus signifying their different roles. This article discusses their geographic distributions, frequencies, and characteristics, and offers further suggestions as to their position within the Late Chalcolithic symbolic and prestige item systems. The analysis reveals regional patterns—the elaborately decorated basalt bowls are constrained to south of the Yarkon River—suggesting that the function and symbolic value of these bowls were probably geographically restricted. Their limited distribution underlines the exclusivity of these elaborately decorated bowls during the Late Chalcolithic period.
a monumental structure dated to the 14th century b.c.e. with unusual architectural features that could be either the residence of a high-ranking family or an administrative building. During the 13th century b.c.e., this building was replaced by a new structure containing a metalsmith’s workshop, inspired by Egyptian 19th Dynasty techniques, while later building phases belong to the final stages of the Late Bronze Age. No destruction layers were found, and the Late Bronze Age city was rebuilt and continued to thrive throughout the Iron Age I. Five Late Bronze Age plaque figurines, some of particular interest, are also described. An appendix discusses a rare funerary scarab of an Egyptian high official found in the 14th-century b.c.e. edifice.
investigated over the last 40 years. In recent excavation campaigns, new evidence of the earliest phases of the city (500–50 b.c.e.) has been discovered, including the sherd treated here, among other inscribed pottery in Greek and Brāhmī.
and sealed. This act was evident in the breakage of the altar’s horns and the placement of a latrine in the holy of holies. The available data suggests that the desecration of the shrine should be associated with Hezekiah’s cultic reform (2 Kgs 18:4).