Soft brown alluvium (L107, L109–L113; thickness 0.43–0.93 m) mixed with potsherds was exposed in all excavation squares. The alluvium was deposited on sand and kurkar bedrock. A wall (W10; width 0.9 m; Fig. 4) built of two rows of small fieldstones, with a core of soil fill and small stones and preserved a single course high, was exposed on the alluvium. A tamped earth floor (L106; thickness 7 cm), discovered beneath stone collapse, abutted the northern side of the wall. Sections of a habitation level with traces of ash (L101–L105; thickness 5–10 cm) were discovered in the excavation area. Five refuse pits (L108, L115–L118; diam. c. 2.5 m, depth 0.17–0.95 m; Fig. 5) dug into the alluvium were exposed in three of the excavation squares. The edges of Pits 108, 115 and 116 were lined with mud-brick material. Layers of ash, lumps of reddish burnt soil, stone collapse, bones and fragments of pottery and glass vessels were discovered in the pits. Fragments of pottery vessels from the Mamluk period (thirteenth–fourteenth centuries CE) were discovered in the alluvium soil, on Floor 106, in the habitation levels and in the refuse pits. The vessels included bowls (Fig. 6:1–13), some of which are glazed (Figs. 6:1, 5, 9; 7) and some are decorated with a geometric pattern (Figs. 6:3; 8), a lid (Fig. 6:14), cooking pots (Fig. 6:15, 16), amphorae (Fig. 9:1–5), jars (Fig. 9:6, 7) and jugs (Fig. 9:8–11), two of which are adorned with geometric decorations (Fig. 9: 9, 10). Vessels decorated with geometric patterns were most prevalent in the Mamluk period. Body fragments of buff-colored vessels decorated with incising (Fig. 10), which were widespread from the Mamluk until the Ottoman periods, were also found.
Nine flint artifacts were discovered in layers of fill and habitation levels that were dated to the Mamluk period, based on the ceramic finds. The flints included two primary flakes, three flakes and four tools. The tools consisted of a retouched flake fashioned with continuous retouch on the ventral side, a broad blade with an irregular flat retouch that was probably used as a blank for broad sickle blades (Fig. 11:1), an elongated trapezoidal sickle blade (Fig. 11:2) and a broad geometric sickle blade that is curved on its distal end, diagonal on its proximal end and formed by abrupt retouch (Fig. 11:3). The tools, particularly the geometric sickle blades, should be attributed to remains from Middle Bronze Age IIA–B. Remains from this period were discovered in the past in the excavation region (ESI 2:92).
The meager architectural remains and numerous refuse pits at the site indicate that this was an open area located on the northern fringes of a settlement that was situated nearby in the Mamluk period.
The Glass Finds
Natalya Katsnelson
The site yielded 47 glass fragments, most of which were diagnostic; no complete vessels were found and one fragment was deformed by fire (L106). Despite the small quantity and poor preservation, the glass assemblage comprises an interesting group of Mamluk-period decorative vessels (Figs. 12, 13). The majority of these fragments were recovered from L111. They include bowls and bottles made of transparent turquoise and purple glass, marvered with opaque white and turquoise trails. The turquoise bowl in Fig. 12:1 could have been decorated with a mold-blown pattern. In addition, an unusual zoomorphic piece of colorless glass with applied decoration in opaque red and white was discovered in L106 (Fig. 13).           
Comparable material dating to the twelfth–fifteenth centuries CE is well-known from Syria and Egypt. Recent excavations in Israel have proved that similarly decorated vessels might have been manufactured locally, for instance in Jerusalem, Ramla and Zefat. Yet, hardly any information on glass from the Mamluk period in the Judean foothills is known. 
A rim and a lower turquoise body fragment (Fig. 12:1) possibly belong to a large luxury bowl. It has a rounded rim, a hemispherical body, and its walls thicken toward the junction with the now missing base, which was possibly footed. The rim is adorned with a white horizontal trail, and the body is decorated with curving concentric ovals in shallow relief. The mold-blown pattern is unclear due to the small size of the fragments and the heavy weathering. Turquoise glass with marvered white trails was a favorite combination in Mamluk Jerusalem. The style of the mold-blown design is rare, appearing in Jerusalem mostly on closed vessels, such as sprinklers (Fig. 2 in Brosh N. 2005. Islamic Glass Finds of the Thirteenth to Fifteenth Century from Jerusalem–Preliminary Report. Annales du 16 Congrès de l'asssociation international pour l'histoire de verre. London. Pp. 186–190).
 Other turquoise glass fragments in L111 include a small bottle with a funnel neck and a rounded rim, adorned on its edge with a very thin white marvered trail, wounded three times (Fig. 12:2), as well as several undecorated body fragments of unclear form, possibly a flask, with remnants of a thin, horizontally-set handle (not illustrated).
Rim, body and base fragments of various shades of purple marvered glass (Fig. 12:3–5) compose another characteristic group in L111. The fragments in Fig. 12:3, 4 are cylindrical bowls adorned with white opaque trail applied and marvered spirally on a rounded rim and a body. The trail on one of the rims (Fig. 12:4 on the left) is exceptional, having turquoise color, applied in addition to white trails on a body. These marvered glass vessels were widely spread over the Islamic world and were possibly rather inexpensive. Similar fragments dating to the thirteenth–fifteenth centuries CE occurred in many local sites, including abundant finds in Jerusalem.
The purple fragment in Fig. 12:5 is a mold-blown footed version of a marvered glass bowl. It is a thick hollow ring-base decorated with a white trail, which starts as a wide ribbon underneath the base and continues upward, yet is hardly visible on the ring exterior. The base is decorated with thick flutes or ribs, protruding on both the upper and underside. These flutes indicate that the vessel was blown into a ribbed mold. A similar complete bowl, in the Toledo Museum of Art, is called a ‘fluted bowl’. It represents “luxury ware used in private dwellings” of the thirteenth century CE (Atil E. 1981. Renaissance of Islam: Art of the Mamluks. Washington, D.C., No. 55).
The purple thin-walled body fragments in Fig. 12:6 were found in L106. They show another style of marvered glass with a trailed pattern, comprising diagonal rows of dashes. This decoration requires a more elaborate technique than the simple spiral design discussed above, and thus appears on more luxurious vessels. Similar pieces from our region were found in Jerusalem and Hama.  
A fragment of a small bird-shaped vessel is shown in Fig. 13. It is one of the most interesting decorative objects found at the site (L106). The fragment consists of a complete red head and a small part of the colorless body. The head is schematically tooled and decorated with uneven drops of white glass representing the two eyes and beak. The interior of the bird’s body is coated with red paint. Thus, it is unclear if the bird's head was made of red glass or colorless glass painted in red, as the bird's body.
Complete examples are known mainly from museums and private collections; they include bird-shaped toys, pendants or small containers, whose dates range from the ninth to the twelfth centuries CE. Excavated examples, mainly from our region, come from Mamluk levels at Hama, Jerusalem and recently at Ramla. Fairly large numbers of bird-shaped fragments were excavated in Jerusalem, suggesting that they were made in a workshop within the city (Pp. 26, 47–48, Pls. 16.2; 29 in Brosh N. 2005. Mamluk Glass Workshops in Jerusalem: Marvered Glass. M.A. Thesis. Tel-Aviv University). Many of the fragments from Jerusalem resemble Fig. 13, with their red head and white eyes and beak, but differ in their body colors: purple, turquoise or blue, unlike the colorless body of Fig. 13. Examples of colorless glass with interior red enamel are rare and may have originated in Jerusalem, which was one of a few possible centers of glass manufacture in the Mamluk period (Brosh N. 2004. Red Glass Vessels from Jerusalem. Orient 39:52–68).
This small but impressive assemblage of Mamluk decorative glass bears characteristic features that resemble those of vessels manufactured in Jerusalem at that time.  
Moreover, these glass finds that were recovered from agricultural settlement situated between Jerusalem, Ramla and Ashdod, provide new and interesting data. Although the architectural remains have been almost completely demolished during the British Mandate era, the wealth of this assemblage suggests the existence of a well-established Islamic population at the site.
Furthermore, these finds provide a new insight on our, yet limited, knowledge of glass from the Mamluk period in small agricultural settlements along the Judean foothills. 
Nuha Agha
Animal bones and teeth were recovered from the excavation and the type and species of animal was identified in about half of them (c. 150 bones). Most of the finds belong to mammals, including cattle (N=72, 48%), sheep/goat (N=61, 40.67%), equid (N=5, 3.33%), canine (N=5, 3.33%) and mountain gazelle (N=4, 2.67%). In addition, bones of domestic chicken (N=2, 1.33%) and a scale of a tortoise shell (0.67%) were noted. Three bones belonging to goats were identified among the assemblage of sheep/goat finds; the distinction between goats and sheep was based on Boessneck (Boessneck, J. 1969. Osteological Differences between Sheep (Ovis aries Linne) and Goat (Capra hircus Linne). In D. Brothewell and E. Higgs, eds., Science in Archaeology. London. Pp. 331–358). Traces of roots were discerned on all the bones. Gnawing marks caused by predators, possibly dogs, were observed on three bones, two of which belong to cattle and one to sheep/goat. The distribution of the mammal skeletal remains indicates a high occurrence of cranium and axis parts and a low occurrence of limb bones (Table 1). No difference in the distribution of the skeletal remains of cattle and sheep/goat was discerned. The skeletal remains represent a minimum number of two cattle, based on tibia bones, and two sheep/goats, based on humerus bones. 
Cutting marks, found particularly on ribs, were noted on twenty-one bones (c. 16% of the identified bones), all of which belonged to cattle and sheep/goats. Most of the cutting marks were caused when the carcass was dismembered and others when the hide was flayed or the meat was removed. Interestingly, no signs of singeing or burning were visible on the bones.
The age of the sheep/goat and cattle was determined based on the wear of the lower teeth—the wisdom tooth (M3) and deciduous premolar (dp4). Two individuals less than one year of age and one young individual 2.5–3.0 years of age were identified among the sheep/goat finds. One individual less than a year of age was identified among the cattle bones. A pathology was identified on Phalanx I of a goat, probably the result of inflammation.
The skeletal remains include almost no bones that were rich in meat, and it can therefore be concluded that the source of the assemblage is mostly from butchering refuse and not food scraps. The absence of burnt marks on the bones and the multitude of cutting marks, which are indicative of slaughtering and dismemberment, corroborate this conclusion. It seems that the animals were slaughtered at the site, and the butchering refuse was discarded into pits or in an open area along the edge of the settlement, as suggested by the excavator.
The livestock economy of the inhabitants at the site was most likely based on raising cattle and sheep/goat, and to a lesser extent on other domesticated species, such as the domestic chicken. There was apparently a preference for goats in the sheep/goat herds. Hunting wildlife played a minor role in the economy of the population. The diversity of species is similar to that reported from other contemporary sites, including Khirbat Burin (Sade M. 2006. Archaezoological Finds from Khirbat Burin. 'Atiqot 51:225–229) and Giv‘at Yasaf (Horwitz L.K. 1999. The Animal Remains from Giv‘at Yasaf [Tell er-Ras]: The Persian-Hellenistic and Mamluk Periods. 'Atiqot 37:31–44). Whereas the ratio between sheep/goat and cattle at the sites of Revadim Quarry and Khirbat Burin is similar, a much higher occurrence of cattle was noted at Giv‘at Yasaf.

Table 1. Distribution of Mammals Skeletal Remains
Body part
Mountain gazelle
Upper forelimb
Lower forelimb
Upper hind limb
Lower hind limb