JIPS Vol. 36 2006 by Israel Prehistoric Society

Mitekufat Haeven

JOURNAL OF THE ISRAEL PREHISTORIC SOCIETY vol. 36

Editor:

STEVEN A. ROSEN

Supported by the Irene-Levi Sala CARE Foundation and by Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

THE ISRAEL PREHISTORIC SOCIETY 2006

Table of Contents Foreword Steve Rosen

Articles Omry Barzilai, Ariel Malinsky Buller,, and Oren Ackermann Kefar Menachem West: A Lower Palaeolithic site in the Southern Shephela, Israel

Dani Nadel and Michal Nadler Ohalo I – Shaldag Beach: A Final Report on an Epipaleolithic-Neolithic Workshop Site in the Sea of Galilee

Vered Eshed, Haim Cohen, and Hila Ashkenazy New Discovery of old Material: Two Natufian Individuals from Nahal Oren Site

Yosef Garfinkel The Burials of Kfar HaHoresh – A Regional or Local Phenomenon?

109

Danny Rosenberg and Nimrod Getzov A Basalt Chipping Floor from Level VI (PPNC) at Hagoshrim

117

Danny Rosenberg, Ammnon Assaf, Ruth Eyal, and Avi Gopher Beisamoun – The Wadi Rabah Occurrence

129

Liora Kolska Horwitz, Omri Lernau, and Ehud Galili Fauna from the Submerged Pottery Neolithic Site of Newe Yam, Northern Israel

139

Haskel J. Greenfield, Ehud Galili and Liora Kolska Horwitz The Butchered Animal Bones from Newe Yam, a Submerged Pottery Neolithic Site off the Carmel Coast

173

Benjamin Saidel, Tali Erickson-Gini, Jacob Vardi, Steven A. Rosen, Edward Maher, and Haskel Greenfield Test Excavations at Rogem Be’erotayim in Western Negev

201

Haim Winter Reaping with Flint Sickles: From Prehistory to Early Historic Ages

231

245

Notes for Authors

249

Editor’s Foreword It has been a great honor to have asked by my friends and colleagues to return to Mitekufat Haeven, the Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society, as editor after my earlier stint as assistant editor with Avi Gopher. I thank the members of the society for this vote of confidence. Taking up the editorship affords me the opportunity of reflecting briefly on the past twenty years at the practice of prehistory in Israel, especially as seen through the journal and the society. Beyond the tremendous strides in our knowledge and understanding of prehistoric times, needing little explication since it appears so clearly in the basic content of each issue of JIPS, three inter-related phenomena stand out. First, the journal has achieved a genuinely international stature in its content and presentation. We are cited not only by one another, but by all who work in the prehistory of the Near East. This has been the long work of generations of editors whom it is my privilege to succeed. It is my hope to continue that tradition (birth pangs of this first issue aside, with apologies). Second, the journal, and the society as well, founded by talented and energetic amateurs with only limited professional guidance, is now firmly in the professional arena. I sincerely hope that our founding generation is pleased with the growth and evolution of the profession, and with the directions it has taken. I am pleased to be able to point to the continued activity of this generation in several papers in this issue of the journal and encourage the continued interest on the part of the amateur prehistorians. Unlike most arenas where the word “amateur” implies lesser skills than “professional”, it is clear that younger generations of prehistorians will always have something to learn from their preceding generations. Finally, if the role of amateurs has decreased, our students are taking an ever- increasing part in both publishing in JIPS, and in the life of society. I see the journal as an excellent incubator for the younger generations of prehistorians, less threatening than the large international forums, but still demanding, rigorous, and indeed peer-reviewed. I encourage students to use the journal to develop their ideas and their careers. Steve Rosen

KEFARofMENACHEM WEST Society 36 (2006), 7-38 Jurnal The Israel Prehistoric

Kefar Menachem West: A Lower Palaeolithic site in the Southern Shephela, Israel OMRY BARZILAI1 ARIEL MALINSKY BULLER2 OREN ACKERMANN3

1 2

Israel Antiquities Authority. P.O.B 586, Jerusalem 91004

Department of Prehistory, Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University Jerusalem, 91905 3

The Institute of Archaeology, The Martin (Szusz) Department of Land of Israel Studies and Archaeology, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900

ABSTRACT A salvage excavation at Kefar Menachem West in the Southern Shephela, Israel exposed a Lower Paleolithic site in a primary context. This open-air site is embedded on top of a hamra layer overlain by a quartzic brown paleosol approximately three meters below the modern surface. The lithic assemblage is characterized by flake tools that were produced by three discrete methods differing by volumetric perceptions. Two display predetermined flint knapping. No handaxes were found at the site, but other Lower Palaeolithic components such as corechoppers, cores on flakes, and flake tools are present. Review and comparison with other Lower Palaeolothic sites within the Southern Shephela reveal that these predetemined flake technologies were common in the region over a wide time span.

INTRODUCTION The last decade has witnessed intensification of research on the Lower Palaeolithic period in the Shephela region and the Coastal plain in southwest Israel (Fig. 1). New excavations 7

BARZILAI et al.

Figure 1: Kefar Menachem and other Lower Palaeolithic sites mentioned in the text.

were conducted at Bizat Ruhama (Ronen et al. 1998; Laukhin et al. 2001) and Revadim (Marder et al. 1999; Marder et al. 2006a), and the old excavation of Holon was re-analyzed (Porat et al. 1999; Chazan 2000a; 2000b). This paper reports on recent excavations, being the fourth to be carried out, at Kefar Menachem (Gilead and Israel 1975; Goren 1979; Lamdan 1982). Together with the old excavations, this project expands our understanding and gives a broader picture of the Lower Palaeolithic period of this region. Kefar Menachem West (KMW) is one in a series of Lower Palaeolithic localities scattered around Kibbutz Kefar Menachem (Fig. 2). As early as the 1950â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s handaxes and choppers were collected from 14 areas around the kibbutz and were plotted by M. Israel and other kibbutz

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Figure 2: The localities around Kefar Menachem.

members. The first locality excavated in 1972 north of the kibbutz is called the “Lullim”1 (Gilead and Israel 1975). The excavation area of 30 sqm revealed an archaeological layer comprising flint artifacts and pebbles embedded in the upper part of a hamra layer that was covered by dark top soil. Following Gilead and Israel in 1978, two salvage excavations were conducted at the “Lashon quarry” (Goren 1979), located 1.5 km east of the kibbutz, and at area A (Lamdan 1982), that is the extension of the Lullim. Goren’s excavation at the Lashon quarry exposed a secondary deposition of flint artifacts buried in a conglomerate channel, situated on top of bedrock. Lamdan placed his excavation (area A) adjacent to the western edge of Gilead and Israel’s excavation at the Lullim. The small excavation (only 5 sqm) revealed many flint artifacts in a disturbed clayish soil. Three more localities (Fig. 2) were discovered during an archaeological survey by Y. Dagan in 1982 (pers. comm.). “KM 1 and 2” found within the kibbutz contained

The “Lullim”, named after its location, means chicken coop in Hebrew.

BARZILAI et al.

concentrations of Lower Palaeolithic flint artifacts, and “Nahal Barkai”, at the foothills of Tell Harasim,contained Lower Palaeolithic flint artifacts in conglomerate material. Another locality that unfortunately had been destroyed by construction works is the “Kurkar quarry” that was discovered in a survey by O. Marder and M. Chazan in 1997 (pers. comm). The site was located in a quarry approximately 300 m north of KMW. It is exceptional compared to the other localities, in that in addition to flint artifacts it contained fossilized bones and handaxes. not found in the other localities. The latest discovery in the area is KMW, found during construction works of Route 6. Flint artifacts were found in dirt piles next to a deep modern trench that damaged the site. Intensive collection from the piles (by O. Marder and Z. Matzkevitz) was followed by two weeks salvage excavation directed by one of the authors (O.B.) on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority (Barzilai in press). The excavation was conducted in three areas covering in total 24.5 sqm (Fig. 3). These were excavated in a 1x1 meter grid divided into sub-squares, in five cm spits. Flint artifacts larger than three cm were piece plotted in three dimensions. All of the sediment was dry sieved through five mm mesh.

Figure 3: Plan of the excavated areas in KMW.

GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND KMW is situated in the south-eastern coastal plain of Israel, on the border with the Judean Shephela (Judean foothills), 85-86 m above sea level on gentle slope of a low hill. The general geological structure of the area is primarily composed of Holocene and PlioPleistocene alluvial and aeolian sediments of the Kurkar Group. There are six geological components in the sequence, with the top two belonging to the Holocene Stage, and the bottom four belonging to the Plio-Pleistocene Stage. These components are as follows: (1) Alluvium; (2) Dune sand; (3) Calcareous sandstone; (4) Red sand and loam; (5) Ahuzam

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Formation containing alluvial gravel; (6) Pleshet Formation containing Limestone mixed with gravel and sand (Buchbinder 1969a; Sneh 2004). The pedological surface structure to the north of the site is composed of grumosol (vertisol); in the site itself and farther south, it is composed of clayey dark brown soil (Bruins and Yaalon 1979; Dan et al. 1972; 1976; Dan and Bruins 1981). The mixed aeolian-alluvial grumosol and the clayey dark brown soil were formed from sedimentary deposits of alluvium from the hills and clayey aeolian loess sediments that were transported from the deserts located to the south (Yaalon and Dan 1974; Dan and Bruins 1981; Bruins and Yaalon 1992).

Physical structure of the site An examination of the site reveals that it is composed of three units of superimposed soils and paleosols in a sequence, separated by unconformity surfaces (Table 1, Fig. 4). The upper layer (Unit I) is a 1.5-3 m thick dark brown soil; the first paleosol (Unit II) is a 0.4-0.8 m thick sandy clay-loam quartzicbrown soil; the lower paleosol (Unit III) is red hamra / husmass. The archaeological horizon is located on top of the unconformity surface lying between the two paleosols (Units II and III). The upper part of Unit I correlates with the alluvium component (1) of the general geological structure of the area. The lower part of Unit I, Unit II and Unit III correlate with the red sand and loam component (4).

Figure 4; Schematic profile in area A, looking west (64/65 boundary).

BARZILAI et al.

12 Table 1: Characteristics of the geological units at KMW Unit Thickness (cm)

150-300

40-80

>150

Soil type*

Dark Brown Soil

Quartzic Brown Soil

Hamra Husmass

Color (dry)**

Brown 10YR 5/2-3

Brown 7.5 YR 5/4

Red 2.5 YR 4/8

Texture***

Clay

Sandy clay loam

Sandy clay loamy

Fraction size distribution (%) ***

Sand

Silt

Clay

Structure

Angular blocky to prismatic

Massive to subangular blocky

Subangular blocky

Boundary

Gradual

Clear wavy

Remarks

• Well-developed horizontal and vertical slickensides structure with clay skins on the peds edges. • Elongated carbonate nodules and manganese mottles

• Round and elongated carbonate nodules. • Red mottles

– • Round and elongated carbonate nodules. • The upper contact of this unit is slightly irregular, showing some small scale topographic undulation and erosion. This indicates an erosional unconformity (time-gap) between the Hamra and the overlying Quartzic Brown Soil. • The artifacts were found on top of this unit.

Soils are described according to Israeli classifications (Dan and Koyumdjiski, 1979 and Dan et al. 1976). ** Color according to Munsell (1998). *** Fraction size distribution analysis was conducted by the sedimentation column method according to Wright (1939) at the Field Service Laboratory at the regional agriculture research center, Zemach, Jordan Valley.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Observations reveal that the sediments within KMW were subjected to intensive leaching as carbonate nodules and manganese, in the form of small lumps, were identified both in the hamra / husmass (Unit III) and dark clay (Unit II) layers. This process might explain the scarcity of bones in the site, as only two carbonized weathered fragments were found within the excavated areas. Apparently the leaching altered the chemical balance within the sediments and the bones were dissolved. The ancient topography of the site was buried more than two meters below the current surface. It is characterized by irregular to undulating slopes and is dissected by rills and gullies. The section sequence observed in KMW is quite similar to the section sequence recorded in Revadim, located 5 km north of Kefar Menachem. In Revadim, the hamra / husmass was overlain by a quartzicgray brown soil and dark brown grumosol. This suggests that both sites were similar environmentally. In a study conducted by Gvirtzman and colleagues (1999),they suggested that the hamra (the formation prior to the husmass) at Revadim was formed as a result of humid conditions that enabled complete leaching of carbonates from the soil. The presence of two overlying soils with carbonate nodules are interpreted as indicating climatically drier conditions. This study of Revadim also suggested that the lower archaeological horizons (units B2/ C5) found on top of the hamra were formed concurrently with the hamra (Gvirtzman et al. 1999). However, in KMW our identification of artifacts on top of the unconformity level suggests another possibility; that human activity occurred after the hamra was formed. The unconformity between Units II and III in KMW is characterized by irregular to undulating slopes and is dissected by rills and gullies. In general, rills and gullies are incised in loose soil or sediment with low vegetation cover, and are caused by ephemeral runoff. The reason for their formation is a change in landscape equilibrium; such a change may include climate change from wetter to drier conditions. From the evidence detailed above, the stages in the landscape history may be reconstructed as follows: 1. Hamra formation occurred during relatively humid conditions, 2. A change in landscape equilibrium, perhaps from wetter to drier conditions, lead to an eroded surface that was dissected by rills and gullies, 3. Dry conditions led to sediment accumulation concurrent with carbonated sedimentation of the hamra, thereby changing it to husmass; (this is when the hominids activities occur), and 4. Sedimentation and pedogenic processes occurred and Units I and II were transformed into sandy clay-loam quartzic brown and dark brown soil.

Site setting and preservation KMW comprises small patches of natural flint pebbles and lithic artifacts. No bones were found in the excavation except for two weathered carbonized fragments.

BARZILAI et al.

The artifact density within the excavated areas greatly varies. In area A (n=904) finds are relatively abundant with an average of over 60 artifacts per one sqm (Fig. 5). Most of the artifacts were embedded in two clusters. The larger one (Locus 2) is sloping towards the north, dropping from 85.9 to 85.6 meters above sea level (Fig. 4). The small cluster (Locus 1) is embedded in a shallow depression with two major artifact concentrations. Its contents suggest a single knapping station that was exposed to minimal post-depositional movement as we were able to refit four flakes onto a core (see below). The other two areas, by contrast, are less dense. Area C (n=80) contains approximately 15 artifacts per one sqm, and area B (n=24) only 6 artifacts per one sqm.

Figure 5: Artifact density within area A.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

The artifact preservation implies on minimal post-depositional movement. Remarkably most of the artifacts are fresh (72.4%), and approximately two thirds are not patinated (table 2). One fourth of the items displays slight abrasion (24.9%), and only 13 items (2.7%) are heavily abraded. Although hearths were not identified within the excavation areas, 4.5% of the artifacts (n=47) are burnt. Table 2: Artifact state of preservation at Kefar Menahem West. Sharpness * patina cross tabulation Patina

Sharpness

None

One

Two or more

Total

Fresh

Count %of Total

224 45.8

128 26.2

2 0.4

354 72.4

Semiabraded

Count %of Total

19Öż 3.9

102 20.9

1 0.2

122 24.9

Abraded

Count %of Total

6 1.2

7 1.4

Total

Count %of Total

249 50.9

237 48.5

13 2.7 3 0.6

489 100

THE LITHIC ASSEMBLAGE The lithic analysis of KMW is based on 1008 artifacts obtained from the three excavation areas (Table 3). In addition, surface collected items from the dirt piles were evaluated for raw material type and shape. On the whole that lithic assemblage of KMW was quite large as the 2065 items from the excavation areas and dirt piles correspond to only a small sector of the original site.

Raw material The majority of the flint at KMW originates from the Pleshet and Ahuzam formations that are partly exposed in conglomerates around the kibbutz (Buchbinder 1969b; Gilead and Israel 1975: fig. 3; Goren 1979; Sneh and Buchbinder 1984). These are comprised mainly of abraded angular and rounded pebbles of three texture groups that were also identified in Revadim and Bizat Ruhama (Buller Malinsky personal observation; Zaidner 2003: fig. 3). The most frequent material group is coarse-grained brecciated flint, most likely of Mishash formation (Table 4). It is comprised of two or more colors, usually in the form of large angular pebbles weighing more than 100 grams.

BARZILAI et al.

16 Table 3: General breakdown of Kefar Menahem West flint ASSEMBLAGE

Area A

Area B

Area C

Total in excavated areas

Collected from piles

TOTAL

DEBITAGE PE

193

48.7

44.4

210

48.8

254

45.8

464

47.2

Flakes

132

33.3

55.6

148

34.4

241

43.5

389

39.5

Blades

2.3

0.0

2.1

0.5

1.2

12.6

0.0

11.9

5.2

2.0

0.0

1.9

10.1

6.5

CTE CT RB

1.0

0.0

0.9

0.4

Total

396

100

430

100

554

100

984

100

Chips

153

40.9

33.3

25.9

162

39.8

23.3

257

32.8

25.7

33.3

107

26.3

118

31.4

225

28.7

106

28.3

16.7

7.4

109

26.8

163

43.3

272

34.7

5.1

16.7

33.3

7.1

3.7

374

100

407

100

376

100

783

100

DEBRIS

Chunks Natural flint Flint pebbles Total

DEBITAGE

396

43.8

37.5

31.3

430

42.7

430

40.7

860

41.6

DEBRIS

374

41.4

25.0

33.8

407

40.4

407

38.5

814

39.4

TOOLS

7.2

16.7

12.5

7.8

7.5

158

7.7

CORES

7.6

20.8

22.5

9.1

141

13.3

233

11.3

TOTAL

904 100.0

24 100.0

80 100.0 1008 100.0 1057 100.0 2065 100.0

The second most frequent type is fine-grained translucent flint of one solid color (brown or grey), possibly also of the Mishash formation. The flint blocks of this type are small globular pebbles weighing less than 50 grams. The third type is fine-grained flint with thin lime veins. It has one solid color that varies including brown, grey, or yellowish. The flint blocks are of medium sized angular or globular pebbles weighing between 60-100 grams. In addition there are a few items that are made on other raw material types and patinated items.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Table 4: Raw material type at Kefar Menahem West. Type * raw material type cross tabulation TYPE

RAW MATERIAL Breccieted

Debitage

Tools

Cores

TOTAL

Count

159

Fine grained with lime veins 23

Translucent

132

Patinated

111

Other

Total

437

% within Type

36.4

5.3

30.2

25.4

2.7

100.0

% within RM

74.0

44.2

74.2

79.9

52.2

72.0

Count

% within Type

29.1

19.0

29.1

12.7

10.1

100.0

% within RM

10.7

28.8

12.9

7.2

34.8

13.0

% within Type

36.3

15.4

25.3

19.8

3.3

100.0

% within RM

15.3

26.9

12.9

13.0

15.0

Count

215

178

139

607

Count

% within Type

35.4

8.6

29.3

22.9

3.8

100.0

% within RM

100.0

Debitage The debitage analysis indicates that KMW is dominated by production of short thick flakes (fig. 6; tables 3, 5). The assemblage comprises 48.8% primary elements (defined as flakes with more than 25% cortical surface), 34.4% flakes, 2.1% blades, and 14.7% core trimming elements (CTE). The primary elements, flakes, and blades show great similarities in their morphometric attributes such as size and scar pattern, although they slightly vary in size (Table 5). No evidence for true blade technology is attested in the assemblage. The few blades found (N=9) were produced in the course of flake production and therefore should be seen as flake byproducts rather than laminar artifacts. Most of the items (57.5% of the flakes and 91% of the primary elements) have a low number of scars (three or less) on their dorsal face (Fig. 6:2-4). Flake scar patterns are dominated by unipolar scars (56.8%). The remaining patterns are centripetal (11.3%), perpendicular (10.8%), and bipolar (4.9%). Most of the striking platforms are plain (67%) or cortical (17%), while only few items (8%) are faceted. A small number of Kombewa flakes are evident (Fig. 6:6-7). These relatively small thin â&#x20AC;&#x153;flakeletsâ&#x20AC;? were most likely detached from cores on flakes (see below). The chip component (flakes under two cm) is rather low (n=162) and comprises only 16.1% of the whole the assemblage (table 3).

Figure 6: Primary and secondary flakes in KMW.

BARZILAI et al.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Table 5: Debitage size

Flake

Mean N Std. Deviation

Thickness

Striking platform's width

Striking platform's thickness

28.33

26.73

8.65

14.44

6.36

114

162

102

105

9.52

3.50

6.35

2.94

29.25

10.78

15.87

7.07

117

165

214

130

136

Std. Deviation

12.06

10.73

3.88

8.15

3.64

Mean

37.64

29.68

12.73

12.78

7.01

Std. Deviation

13.54

10.67

5.51

6.89

4.42

Mean

32.48

28.45

10.26

14.88

6.80

242

330

436

271

283

11.91

10.36

4.24

7.39

3.53

Total

Width

33.89

Mean N

CTE

Length

N Std. Deviation

The CTE are items with dorsal scar patterns that bear remnants of core rejuvenation (Fig. 7). The dominant core waste types are core tablets (Fig. 7:1-2, 5) and crested items (Fig. 7: 3-4, 6). The most dominant scar pattern is the ridge (48%), while the remaining patterns areis unipolar (25%) and centripetal (13%). Butt preparation is minimal as 78% of the striking platforms are un-worked (60% plain and 18% cortical) and only 11% are faceted.

The cores Like the debitage, the core analysis reveals that all of the cores were designated for flake production. They comprise tested nodules, polyhedral cores, “Central Surface” cores, prismatic cores, cores-on-flakes, and fragments (Table 6). The classification is done according to Leakey’s (1971) and Isaac’s (1997) typological lists, and the volumetric conception of utilization as defined by Boëda and his colleagues (1990). The tested nodules (n=14) are flint blocks that bear less than three flake scars. The removal angle is quite blunt and therefore excludes the nodules from functioning as chopping tools. Most are made on small brecciated flint blocks and minute translucent pebbles. The polyhedral cores (n=23) display simple flake removals from two or more nonhierarchical faces (Fig. 8:1). This technology involved minimal knapping as most of the

Figure 7: Core trimming elements in KMW.

BARZILAI et al.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Table 6: Core type frequencies at Kefar Menahem West Area A

Area B

Area C

CORE TYPE

Tested nodules

17.4

20.0

5.6

15.2

Central Surface

30.4

0.0

22.2

27.2

Polyhedral

21.7

40.0

33.3

25.0

0.0

11.1

3.3

40.0

5.6

18.5

0.0

22.2

10.9

100.0

Prismatic Core on flake Fragment Total

1.4

20.3

8.7

100.0

Total

cores bear a low number of scars (4-7). The majority of them are made on brecciated flint and the main products from these cores were primary flakes. The prismatic cores (n=3), although rare, display a distinct volumetric concept where the removal surface is on the lateral parts of the block while the striking platform is at the upper sector (Fig. 8:2). The cores display a convergent unipolar scar pattern, from the striking platform toward the core base. The number of scars on the removal surface is 5-6. The purpose of production is elongated broad flakes that were removed from the core’s lateral parts (Fig. 6:8-9). The only flint that was used for this technology is the translucent type. The “Central Surface” cores (n=25) in KMW have characteristics of discoidal cores with a little of the Levallois volumetrics as defined by Boëda (1993. 1995). The cores resemble the discoidal volumetric concept by having a similar angle between the removal surface and the striking platform that is less than 90° (Boëda 1995: fig 4.33; 4.36). However, they differ in having a preferential removal surface (typical of Levallois), and by a core section (between the removal surface and the striking platform) that is trapezoidal and not bi-conical. The removal surface is located at the upper sector of the core (Fig. 8:3). It is encircled by short flake scars that served as the striking platforms. The volumetric approach in these cores is seen in the utilization ofe the upper part of the block. The scar patterns on the removal surface are centripetal, semi-radial, bipolar, or unipolar. The “Central Surface” cores are made on all three flint types, but tend to use more of the translucent flint. The number of scars on the removal surface is greater than in the polyhedral, ranging from 5-9. The cores-on-flakes (n=17) for the most part use the “Central Surface” cores volumetric approach (Fig. 8:4). In this case the ventral face of the flake becomes the preferential removal surface. In most cases only one to two removals were made, but there are also items that show more removals detached centripetally. However, two cores made on thick flakes show the prismatic volumetric conception, where the ventral face is utilized as the striking platform and the flake’s lateral edges as the removal surface.

Figure 8: The core types in KMW.

BARZILAI et al.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Refits One of the outstanding features from KMW is a refitted “Central Surface” core with a unipolar scar pattern (Fig. 9). The core and the four flakes (Fig. 9:I-V) were found in Locus 1 in area A The block selected for knapping was a flat pebble with an irregular shape. The first strike was made at one end, perpendicular to the wide surface thus establishing a striking platform (Fig. 9: stage A/1). Four consecutive flakes were then removed all heading to the same direction (Fig. 9: stage B/2-5). The first is an initial flake (Fig. 9:1), while the other three flakes bear unipolar scars on the right side and cortex on the left (the second flake is missing) (Fig. 9:2,4,5). The next stage in the reduction was to expand the striking platform by two additional perpendicular removals (Fig. 9: stage C/6-7). After the expansion of the striking platform three non-cortical flakes with unipolar scar patterns were detached (Fig. 9: stage D/8-10). The first is distally broken (Fig. 9:8) while the other two are missing (Fig. 9: 9-10). The refitted core displays simple unipolar flaking, utilizing the broad surface of the flint cobble. This “Central Surface” core technology comprises ten removals; three were made for preparing the striking platform, while the remainder are primary and secondary flakes from which respectively three are missing (one PE, two flakes). These were probably taken away for utilization or modification (i.e., transformed into tools).

Tools The most dominant trait of the tools at KMW is the deep/intensive retouch that removes and shapes the lateral edges of the tool blanks. Most of the tools shows the same technological characteristics seen in the cores and debitage. The majority were made on flakes (54%) and primary elements (32%), although some were made on CTE (6%). Chunks, cores, and even chips were occasionally exploited as well. The tools are generally small, averaging 28.8+/-7.5 mm in length, 25.6+/-9.5 mm in width, and 10.2+/-4.5 mm in thickness. There is no raw material preference within the tools as both the brecciated and the translucent flint were equally selected (Table 4). The most frequent tool type is the retouched flakes (41.8%). These vary in retouch, its location, and penetration (Table 7; Fig. 8:1-4). Notable are flakes with invasive ventral retouch at the distal end resembling the Nahr Ibrahim technique (Fig. 10:1-2). The main difference between these tools and “Nahr Ibrahim” items is that they are lacking a truncation (Schroeder 1969; Solecki and Solecki 1970; Goren-Inbar 1988). Another significant type consists of retouched flakes with alternating retouch forming bifacial working edges (Fig. 10:3). The second most frequent tool type is the scrapers, which also vary (Table 7). They include large inverse side scrapers (Fig. 11:1-2), small déjéte double scrapers (Fig. 11:3) and end-scrapers (Fig. 11:4).

Figure 9: Refitted flake core from area A in KMW.

BARZILAI et al.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Table 7: Tool type frequencies at Kefar Menahem West AREA TYPE

SUB-TYPE

Retouched Flakes Alternating bifacial Scrapers

TOTAL N

–

Total

End

–

Side

–

Doubles side scraper

–

Heavy duty scraper Total

30 41.8

–

19.0

Multiple tools

–

10.1

Awls

–

2.5

Denticulates

–

7.6

Notches

–

5.1

Burins

–

3.8

Core chopper

–

3.8

Hammer stone

–

6.3

100

Total

–

Multiple tools constitute another dominant type (10.1%), consisting mostly of combinations of scrapers (end or side scrapers) with denticulate or awls (Fig. 11:6). Rare (3.8%) but with chronological importance, is the core-chopper (Fig. 12: 4, 6). These tools are fashioned on flat pebbles in the same manner (alternating retouch that forms a bifacial working edge) as some of the retouched flakes. The remaining tools (approximately one quarter) are awls (Fig. 12:2-3), denticulates (Fig. 11:5), notches, burins (Fig. 12: 5) and hammer stones (Fig. 12:1).

DISCUSSION The discussion attempts to touch up on several issues including: geological and environmental setting, site preservation and post-depositional processes, lithic industry, and comparison between KMW and other Lower Palaeolithic sites within the Shephela region. However, before doing so one must take into account the following factors: 1) Our perception of KMW is based on small excavation areas that may misrepresent the function and character of the general site. In terms of function it is difficult to reconstruct aspects like subsistence strategy as no bones were preserved.

Figure 10: Flake tools in KMW.

BARZILAI et al.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Figure 11: Scrapers, denticulate and a multiple tool in KMW.

Figure 12: Hammer stone, awls, burin and core-choppers in KMW.

BARZILAI et al.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

2) The absolute chronology of KMW is unknown as no geochemical dating assays, such as Paleomagnetism or OSL, were conducted. Even relative dating is limited as the only fossil indiceswithin the lithic assemblage are core-choppers. No handaxes were found.

Geological and environmental setting Geologically/pedologically, KMW is situated on top of a hamra soil that is covered by a dark clayish palaeosol. Similar settings were noted at other Lower Palaeolithic localities in the Shephela (Kefar Menahem Lullim, Revadim (B2/C5), Bizat Ruhama C1, and Nahal Kissufim 1), also embedded on top of hamra and covered by dark clay (Gilead and Israel 1975; Marder et al. 2006; Ronen et al. 1972; 1998). On the other hand, we know that the geological profile in the Shephela is comprised of repetitive sequences of hamra and clayey soils (Buchbinder 1969a), and therefore it is unclear into which sequence each of the mentioned sitesfits. Another common feature to the southern Shephela Lower Palaeolithic sites is the flint sources. It appears that exposures of conglomerate surfaces of the Pleshet and Ahuzam formations identified in the vicinities of Kefar Menachem, Bizat Ruhama and Revadim (Barzilai personal observation; Marder et al. 1999; Zaidner 2003) were most utilized. These provided precious flint pebbles containing all that was needed for flint knapping, includingraw material and hammer stones. For the time being the only conclusion we can draw, regardless of the dating, is that most of the sites, if not all, in the Southern Shephela shared similar landscapes that included low hamra hills dissected by fluvial systems with exposures of conglomerate surfaces of the Pleshet and Ahuzam formations.

Site preservation and post depositional processes The excavation and the lithic analysis revealed that the occupational level at KMW is comprised of clusters (Loci 1 and 2 in Area A), reflecting distinct knapping stations, as shown by artifact densities and by refits (Figs. 5, 9). This phenomenon was also noted at Lower Palaeolithic Mashariâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;a 1 in Jordan, with flake clusters and a conjoinable core (Macumber and Edwards 1997:27). This, together with artifact preservation (fresh and not patinated), at KMW verifies that the site is in a primary depositional context. Nevertheless, post-depositional processes affecting the site and its associations did occur at the site. Soil-turbation processes, primarily slickenside, most likely caused artifact vertical movements. For example, within the refitted aggregate one of the refitted flakes was found 20 centimeters below the rest. The same phenomenon was observed in Revadim where three conjoinable pieces of one bone were separated by a few centimeters (Gvirtzman et al. 1999). These types of vertical movements are common in these kinds of soils. It is possible that this caused hearth shattering at KMW as burnt items are present but the hearths themselves were not identified.

BARZILAI et al.

Another post-depositional process that possibly operated at KMW is bone decompositioin. Both the scarcity of bone and heavy weathering of the two pieces recovered are probably related to post depositional chemical activity. Only future research can provide more information regarding the particular process.

Lithic industry By definition, the lithic industry of KMW should not be ascribed to the Lower Palaeolithic Acheulian complex as it does not contain any handaxes (Leaky 1975). However, the difficulty in such a distinction is that many of the so-called Acheulian occurrences throughout the Levant contain only a small handaxe component. Even “pure” Acheulian sites like Gesher Benot Ya’aqov contain only 14% bifaces in the tool assemblage (Madsen and Goren-Inbar 2005) while according to Kleindienst (1961) Acheulian assemblages should contain not less than 40-60% of the assemblage. A minute number of handaxes (e.g., Berekhat Ram: 8 handaxes out of 6809 artifacts) or even the absence of this type in the excavated assemblages (e.g., Lulim, Evron Quarry) should not exclude a site from being classified as Lower Paleolithic (Goren-Inbar 1985; Ronen 1991). The KMW assemblage is comprised of other Lower Palaeolithic characteristics such as small flake tools (see below) and few core-choppers. Technologically one can note that the KMW industry portrays a complex industry comprising three discrete flake technologies: polyhedral, the Central Surface and prismatic. The later two exhibit a higher degree of planning and pre-determination by the flint knappers. Still all yielded low numbers of flakes per core and were minimally prepared before the detachments. Most of the debitage butt displays prominent bulbs, crushed striking platform and double bulbs. It is likely this is a consequence of hard hammer use (Wiseman 1993), as rounded flint pebbles are evident in KMW lithic industry. It seems that the manufacture mode was not dictated by raw material as there were no differences in the preparation, number of scars, and scar pattern between the different raw materials. The tools in KMW are found in low frequencies. The tool kit comprises retouched flakes, scarpers, notches, denticulates, perforators, and a few core-choppers. The low frequencies might reflect preferences for non-retouched items or, more likely, the transport of the retouched tools from site. As for the absence of handaxes, it seems somehow different as no bifacial waste products were found in the assemblage. Here we tend to see the reason in an unsuitable configuration of raw materials or in the presence of specific functional areas within the site.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

KMW and other Lower Paleolithic sites of the Shephela and the Southern coastal plain Lower Palaeolithic occupations within the Shephela and the Southern coastal plain were recorded in Holon, Revadim Quarry, Bizat Ruhama, Nahal Kissufim and Kefar Menachem (Fig. 1). Each of these represents several occupations that are spatially and/or stratigraphically distinct. In fact, we recognize at least 15 localities within these five sites, of which, 12 were excavated, and 8 of them were dated by absolute means (Table 8). Table 8: Lower Palaeolithic localities in the Shephela and Coastal Plain Locality

Geological setting

Absolute dating

Assemblage Characteristics size of the lithic Industry

B. Excavation Ruhama C 10 sqm.

On the border between dark clay soil laid on Hamra.

>780 KY by Paleomag

995

Small flake tools. dominated by pointed items and small amount of core- chopper (0.7% of the whole assemblage). No handaxes.

â&#x20AC;&#x201C;

Revadim B1

Excavation of 20 sqm.

Embedded in quartzic grey brown paleosoil.

<780 KY by Paleomag

Under research

Revadim B2

Excavation of 70 sqm.

Directly on the contact of Hamra and quartzic grey brown paleosoil

<780 KY by Paleomag

Under research

Revadim C1

Excavation of 92 sqm.

Embedded in quartzic grey brown paleosoil.

<780 KY by Paleomag

Under research

At this stage of research observed are: Elephant, Hippotamus, Equus, cervidae, bovidae

Revadim C2

Embedded in quartzic grey brown paleosoil.

<780 KY by Paleomag

Under research

Assemblages still under research. At the monument, one can detect low percentage of handaxes and core-choppers. Flake tools are the dominant character including: scrapers, notches, awls and multiple tools.

Revadim C3

Embedded in quartzic grey brown paleosoil.

<780 KY by Paleomag

Under research

Directly on the contact of Hamra and quartzic grey brown paleosoil

<780 KY by Paleomag

Under research

Revadim C5

Research level

Excavation of 8 sqm.

Fauna

BARZILAI et al.

32 Locality

Research level

Geological setting

Absolute dating

Assemblage Characteristics size of the lithic Industry

Holon

Excavation of 270 sqm.

Embedded in light clay soil.

KM Lullim

Excavation of 30 sqm.

Embedded in an upper part of Hamra layer that is covered by dark top soil.

KM Lashon

Excavation of 9 sqm.

KMW

N. Kissufim 1

Fauna

198-204 KY by ESR

1468 ( not including fragments).

Flake tools (ret. flakes, scrapers, notches). Handaxes (6.9% of the tools). Corecoppers (2.6% of the tools). Nahr Ibrahim technique.

–

Approx. 2000 items.

Core-choppers (27% of the tools), small flake tools (scrapers, notches, awls and multiple). No handaxes.

–

In a buried channel of conglomerate that is situated on a bed rock.

–

370

Large flake tools. Levallois technique. No handaxes.

–

Excavation 24.5 sqm

Directly on the contact of Hamra grey brown paleosoil

–

2065 including surface collection.

Small flake tools (scrapers, notches, awls and multiple. Few core-choppers. No -handaxes

Survey

embedded in red-brown mud (Hamra?) that is covered by grey clay with calcite concretions

–

Handaxe and Levallois

–

N. Survey Judeidah 2

–

Handaxe and Levallois

–

N. Survey Judeidah 3

–

Handaxe and Levallois

–

N. Survey Judeidah 4

–

Handaxe and Levallois

–

Elephant, Hippotamus, Equus, cervidae, bovidae

The earliest Lower Palaeolithic occupations in the Shephela seem to occur at Bizat Ruhama C1, dated by two independent Paleomaganetism readings placing the site earlier than 780 KY (Ronen et al. 1998; Laukhin et al. 2001; Ron and Gvirtzman 2001).

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

The excavated locality (10 sqm) is embedded in a sandy layer (C1) sandwiched between a reddish hamra soil (D) and dark gray/black hydromorphic clay. The lithic assemblage in this area is comprised of small flake tools, some core-choppers, and no handaxes (Zaidner 2003). This small flake industry was defined as “micro-lithic Acheulian” or “small tool tradition” (Ronen et al.1998:167; Zaidner 2003). The Bizat Ruhama assemblage shows some resemblance to KMW, primarily in the tool size (average length of 28 mm in KMW, and 22 mm in Bizat Ruhama), but also in the lithic technology. Like at KMW, the Bizat Ruhama assemblage is dominated by flake technology that is comprised of polyhedral, the “Central Surface” (radial according to Zaidner), and prismatic (unipolar according to Zaidner) cores types (Zaidner 2003: figs. 6-7). On the other hand it seems the cores were more exploited in Bizat Ruhama (averaging 9.5 scars per core) than in KMW. The core and tool frequencies differ between the two sites. Core frequency at Bizat Ruhama (4%) is quiete low compared to KMW (9.1%). The opposite is true for the tools (29% at Bizat Ruhama, at KMW 7.8%). These differences could derive from different factors such as chronology, function, raw material availability, as well as perhaps but to different analytic methods2. Bizat Ruhama seems to contain several occupations as recently another locality (area A) was exposed by Zaidner (personal communication) 70-80 m from Ronen’s previous excavation. The excavated 25 sqm revealed an archaeological surface with similar lithic characteristics on top of a hamra covered by dark clay. Another site with at least 6 occupational phases is Revadim Quarry, where 190 sqm were excavated, exposing well preserved archaeological surfaces (Gvirtzman et al. 1999; Marder et al. 1999; Marder et al. 2006a; 2006b). The occupational phases are stratigraphically distinct and all are dated by Paleomagnetism to be later than 780 ky ago. Layer B1 is situated in quartzic grey brown clay soil, 20-40 cm above the contact with the Hamra. Layer B2 is laid directly on the upper contact of the hamra and the quartzic grey brown clay soil. These two layers are comprised of clusters with low artifact density of (compared to layers C2 and C3) but they have the highest density of handaxes in the site, 1 biface per one sqm. Layers C1-C3 were embedded in the quartzic gray brown clay soil while C5 was embedded on the contacts between the quartzic gray brown clay soil and the hamra. Layer C5 is stratigraphically similar to layer B2. All layers (C1-C5) are comprised of dense surfaces (“living floors”) of flint artifacts and bones (ca. 200 per one sqm). Although the lithic assemblage is still under study, preliminary observations reveal low percentages of handaxes

For example fragmented and exhausted cores in B. Ruhama were considered angular fragments (Zaidner 2003:26; 42).

BARZILAI et al.

and core-choppers. The main components are the flake tools such as scrapers, notches, awls and multiple tools (Marder et al. 1999). Revadim shows great resemblance to KMW in raw material selection and in the cores that are orientated toward flake production. Some of the cores show the same pre determined volumetric conceptions that were observed in KMW. Holon is an open-air site excavated in the 1960’s and attributed by Yizraeli (1967) to the Middle Acheulian. Renewed analyses of the lithic and faunal assemblages along with ESR dates in proximity to the excavation have revised the site’s chronology, dating it to 200,000 KY (Chazan 2000a; Porat et al. 1999). The locality in Holon is embedded in light clay soil (Yizraeli 1967) oryellow brown molted clayey sand (Porat et al. 1999), approx. half a meter above the contact with the hamra3. The lithic industryhas low frequencies of handaxes and core-choppers and mostly flake tools such as scrapers and multiple tools are evident, of Some of these were attributed to the Nahr-Ibrahim technique (Chazan 2000a). Holon shares characteristics with KMW, mainly in the predominance of flake tools. Moreover the core technology that was described by Chazan (2000b: figs. 4-5) as having a triangular geometry is analogous to volumetric utilization in the KMW the “Central Surface” technology. In terms of the other Kefar Menachem localities, the Lullim and the Lashon sites (neither dated by geochemical methods), the Lullim locality share mores similarities with KMW as it was embedded in the upper part of a hamra layer covered by dark clay soil. The raw material is comprised of all three flint types present in KMW. The lithic assemblage is characterized by high frequencies of core-choppers, scrapers, notches and denticulates and as at KMW it lacks handaxes4. The core (6%) and tool (8%) frequencies within the assemblage are similar to those of KMW, and more important, the Lullim assemblage contains both prismatic and the “Central Surface” cores (Gilead and Israel 1975: figs. 7:14, 16). The Lashon locality was found in a conglomerate channel situated on bedrock (Goren 1979). The raw material of the Lashon is different from that of KMW as it is comprised of larger pebbles mainly of the brecciated flint .The lithic assemblage is of large flake industry with a prominent Levallois component. This is totally different and seems to be chronologically later than that of KMW. Additional Lower Paleolithic localities without geochemical dating were found in a survey at Nahal Kissufim (Ronen et al. 1970). The site of Nahal Kissufim 1, also known

We do not know how many localities are in Holon but we assume there were several as it is a fairly large site (270 sqm of it were excavated). It should be noted that handaxes were found in the vicinity of the both sites (KMW and the Lullim) by Moshe Israel.

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

as the “Machtesh”, is embedded in red-brown mud (hamra?) covered by grey clay with calcite concretions (Ronen et al. 1970: fig. 3). The lithic industry is different than KMW as it comprises handaxes and high Levallois index. According to Ronen and colleagues, the two components are found together, integrated in a single assemblage. Other archaeological localities with similar archeological features (handaxes and Levallois technique) and geological settings were found in Nahal Judeidah 2-4 (Ronen et al. 1970).

CONCLUDING REMARKS The overview of the Lower Paleolithic sites in the Southern coastal plain and the Shephela, reveals geological, technological, and typological similarities over a wide time span (>780200 KY). Yet, the resemblances between KMW and these other sites is are not definitive, and cannot be used for relative dating. On the other hand, they do provide an initial ground base for future research of the Lower Paleolithic flake technologies, especially for the prominent role of pre-determined flake knapping, as seen most importantly in the “Central Surface”, with its intermediate traits between the discoidal and Levalloisian volumetric conceptions. Finally, a comprehensive regional landscape archaeology programis warranted as most of the sites contain several localities. Are these the traces of a repetitive pattern of small bands returning on seasonal basis to the same locality are we seeing a single site-complex? It should be emphasized that this phenomenon is evident at most of the Lower Palaeolithic open air sites in the Levant (e.g. Ubeidiya, Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Evron, Bizat Ruhama, and Revadim). Such research will need to focus on dating, environment, geology, postdepositional processes and more, hopefully will clarify and reveal insights as regarding early hominids behavior in this region.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper is dedicated in memory of Moshe Israel (1920-2005) who explored and investigated the Lower Paleolithic localities at Kefar Menachem. We deeply thank Ofer Marder for everything he made in the course of this project. That is for finding the site, collecting the artifacts before the excavation, guiding and participating in the excavation, advising in the lithic analysis and reading draft of the report. Special thanks are also given to all who helped before and during the excavation: Zinovi Matskevich and Ofer Marder for collecting items and preparing the site before excavation, Yigal Israel, Daniel Varga and Haim Lavi for helping during the field work. Thanks to Na’ama Goren for permitting us to study the assemblage of Kefar Menachem Lashon, and Natalia Gubenko for showing the assemblage of Kefar Menachem Lullim.

BARZILAI et al.

We thank also thank Erela Hovers, Anna Belfer Cohen and Angela Davidzon for commenting on the paper draft, Yossi Zaidner for fruitful discussions, Vadim Asman and Slava Pirski for illustrating the site plan (fig. 3), Michal Birkenfeld for plotting the artifact density GIS (fig. 5), Leoind Zeiger for illustrating the flint artifacts (figs. 6-12), and Liticia Barda for providing maps (figs. 1-2). The excavation was financed by Route 6 and the IsraelRail Authority.

REFERENCES Barzilai O. In press. Kefar Menachem West. To appear in: Hadashot Arkehologiyot. Boëda E. 1993. Le debitage discoïde et le debitage Levallois récurrent centripète. Bulletin de la Société Prehistorique Francaise 90:392-404. Boëda E. 1995. Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a Technique. In Dibble H. L. and BarYosef O. (eds.), The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology. pp.44-68. (Monographs in World Archaeology 23). Prehistory Press: Wisconcin. Boëda E., Geneste J-M., and Meignen L.. 1990. Identification de chaînes opératoires lithiques du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Paléo 2:43-80. Bruins, H. J. and Yaalon D. H. 1979. Stratigraphy of the Netivot section in the desert loess of the Negev (Israel). Acta Geologica Academiae Scientarium Hungaricae 2 (1-4): 161-169. Bruins H. J. and Yaalon D. H. 1992. Parallel advance of slopes in aeolian loess deposits of the northern Negev, Israel. Israel Journal of Earth Sciences 41: 189-199. Buchbinder B. 1969a. Geological Map of Hashephela Region, Israel, Explanatory Notes. The Geological Survey of Israel. Jerusalem. Buchbinder B. 1969b. Young conglomerates in Hashephela area. Israel Journal of Earth Sciences 18: 158. Chazan M. 2000a. Typological analysis of the Lower Palaeolithic site of Holon, Israel. Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel Prehistory society 30:7-32. Chazan M. 2000b. Flake production at the Lower Paleolithic site of Holon (Israel): Implication for the origin of the Levallois method. Antiquity 74: 495-499. Dan J., Yaalon D. H., Koyumdjisky H. and Raz Z.. 1972. The soil association map of Israel. Journal of Earth Sciences 21: 29-49. Dan J., Yaalon D. H., Koyumdjisky H., and Raz Z.. 1976. The Soils of Israel (Pamphlet 159). Bet Dagan: The Volcanic Center. Agricultural Research Organization. Institute of Soils and Water, Soil Conservation and Drainage Department. Ministry of Agriculture. Dan J. and Koyumdjiski H. (Eds.), 1979. The Classification of Israel Soils. Spec. Pub. No. 137. Bet Dagan: The Volcanic Center (in Hebrew). DanJ. and Bruins H. J.. 1981. Soils of the southern coastal plain, In Dan J., Gerson R., Koyumdjisky H., and Yaalon, D. H. (eds.) Aridic Soils of Israel. pp. 143-87. Department of Surveys. 1985. Atlas of Israel. Tel-Aviv: State of Israel Ministry of Construction. Gilead D. and Israel M. 1975. An Early Palaeolithic site at Kefar Menahem. Tel Aviv 1: 1-12. Goren N. 1979. Kefar Menahem Lashon. Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel Prehistory society 16:69-87. (In Hebrew).

KEFAR MENACHEM WEST

Goren-Inbar N. 1985. The Lithic assemblage of the Berekhat Ram Acheulian site, Golan Heights. Paléorient 11(1): 7-28. Goren-Inbar N. 1988. Too small to be true? Reevaluation of cores on flakes in Levantine Mousterian assemblages. Lithic technology 17(1): 37-44. Gvirtzman G., Wieder M., Marder O., Khalaily H., Rabinovich R. and Ron H. 1999. Geological and pedological aspects of an Early Paleolithic site: Revadim, central coastal plain, Israel. Geoarchaeology 14: 101-126. Issac G. L. 1997. Koobi Fora Research Project Vol. 5, Plio-Pleistocene Archaeology. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Kleindienst M. R. 1961. Variability within the Late Acheulian Assemblages in Eastern Africa. The South African Archaeological Bulletin 62: 35-62. Lamdan M. 1982. Kefar Menahem A. Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel Prehistory society 17: 52-55. (In Hebrew). Laukhin S. A., Ronen A., Pospelova G. A., Shaonava Z. V., Ranov V. A., Burdukieiewicz J. M., Volgina V. A. and Tsatskin A. 2001. New data on the Geology and Geochronology of the Lower Palaeolithic site Bizat Ruhama in the southern Levant. Paléorient 27:69-80. Leakey M. D. 1971. Olduvai Gorge, Volume 3, Excavation in beds I and II 1960-1963. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leakey M. D. 1975. Cultural patterns in the Olduvai sequence. In Butzer K. W., and Isaac G. L. (eds.) After the Australopithecines: Stratigraphy, Ecology and Culture. Change in the Middle Pleistocene .pp. 477–493. The Hague. Macumber P. G. and. Edwards P. C. 1997. Preliminary results from the Acheulian site of Mashari’a 1, and a new stratigraphic framework for the Lower Palaeolithic of East Jordan Valley.Iin Gebel H. G., Kafafi Z. and Rollefson G. O. (eds.) The Prehistory of Jordan II. Perspective from 1997. pp. 23-43. (Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 4). Berlin: ex oriente. Madsen B. and Goren-Inbar N. 2004. Acheulian giant core technology and beyond: an archaeological and experimental case study. Eurasian Prehistory 2: 3–52. Marder O., Gvirtzman G., Ron H., Khalaily H., Wieder M., Bankirer R., Rabinovich R., Porat N. and Saragusti I. 1999. The Lower Paleolithic Site of Revadim Quarry, Preliminary Finds. Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel Prehistory society 28: 21-53 Marder O. Milevski I and Matskevich Z. 2006a. The Handaxes of Revadim Quarry: Typo-Technological Considerations and Aspects of Intra-Site Variability. In Goren N., and Sharon G., Axe Age: Acheulian Tool-Making from Quarry to Discard. pp. 223-242. London: Equinox. Marder O., Milevski I., Rabinovich R., Ackermann O., and Shahack-Gross R. 2006b. The Lower Palaeolithic Site of Revadim Quarry, Israel. Paper presented at the 5th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Madrid. Munsell. 1998. Munsell Soil Color Charts. 1998 Revised Washable Edition. New Windsor: Gretag Macbeth. Porat N., Zhou L. P., Chazan M., Noy T. and Horowitz L.K. 1999. Lower Paleolithic Oper-Air Site of Holon, Israel-Luminescence and ESR Dates. Quaternary Research 51: 328-41. Ron H. and Gvirtzman G. 2001. Magnetostratigraphy of Ruhama badland Quaternary deposits: a new age of Lower Palaeolithic site. Israel Geological Society Annual Meeting, 2001. pp. 95. Ronen A. 1991. The lower Paleolithic site Evron Quarry in western Galilee, Israel. Sonderveroffentlich ungen, Geologisches lnstitut der Universitiit zu Koln 82: 187-212.

BARZILAI et al.

Ronen A., Gilead D., Schachnai E. and Saul A. 1972. Upper Acheulian in the Kissufim Region. Proceedings of the American Philosophic Society 116:68-96. Ronen A., Burdukiewicz J. M., Laukhin S. A., Winter Y., Tsatskin A., Dayan T., Kulikov O. A., Vlasov V. K, and Semenov V. V. 1998. The Lower Palaeolithic site of Bizat Ruhama in the Northern Negev. Archaelogisches Korrespondenzblatt 28:163-173. Schroëder B. 1969. The Lithic Industries from Jerf Ajla and Their Bearing on the Problem of a Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition. Un published Ph.D. Thesis, Columbia University. Sneh A. 2004. Geological Map of Israel, Sheet 10-II, Gedera. The Geological survey, Ministry of National Infrastructures, State of Israel, Jerusalem. Sneh A. and Buchbinder B. 1984. Miocene to Pleistocene surfaces and their associated sediments in the Shephela region, Israel. GSI, Current Research: 60-64. Solecki R. L. and Solecki R.S. 1970. A new secondary flaking technique at the Nahr Ibrahim cave site. Bulletin du Musée de Beyrouth 23:137-142. Wiseman M. 1993. Lithic blade elements from the southern Levant. A diachronic view of changing technology and design processes. Mitekufat Haeven: Journal of the Israel Prehistory society 25: 13-102. Wright C. H. 1939. Soil Analysis. London: Thomas Murby. Yaalon D. H. and Dan J. 1974. Accumulation and distribution of loess-derived deposits in the semi-arid and desert fringe areas of Israel. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie N.F. 20: 91-105. Yizraeli T. 1967. A Lower Paleolithic site at Holon. Israel Exploration Journal 17: 144–152. Zaidner Y. 2003. The Lithic Assemblage of Bizat Ruhama: Lower Palaeolithic in Southern Coastal Plain, Israel. Unpublished MA. Thesis, University of Haifa. (In Hebrew).

OHALO SHALDAG BEACHSociety 36 (2006), 39-97 Jurnal of 1The Israel Prehistoric

Ohalo I – Shaldag Beach: A Final Report on an Epipalaeolithic – Neolithic Workshop Site in the Sea of Galilee DANI NADEL1 MICHAL NADLER1 ELLA WERKER2 ELISABETTA BOARETTO3

1 2

Zinman Institute of Archaeology, the University of Haifa, Haifa 31905

Department of Botany, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 91904 3

Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot 76100

ABSTRACT The Ohalo I – Hof Shaldag site was discovered in 1986, when water level in Lake Kinneret dropped to ca. –212 m. The finds cover an area of about 3,000 sq m. This final report includes a summary of previous publications, all fieldwork endeavors, and the details of the flint and basalt assemblages. During the year of the lowest water level, wood remains from the Late Pleistocene with no archaeological context were found. These include Platanus (Plane tree), Salix (Willow) and Fraxinus (Ash), radiometrically dated to 16,500 BP (uncal.). The large flint assemblage is characterized by the presence of many very large cores and blades, some of which are rolled and patinated. The blades were fashioned into endscrapers and burins, most probably dating to the Geometric Kebaran or somewhat earlier industries. There are also geometric and non-geometric microliths, as well as Natufian lunates. A variety of Pre-Pottery Neolithic B and Pottery Neolithic sickle blades and arrowheads are present, made on different flints and mostly sharp and fresh. There are isolated Wadi Raba / Chalcolithic tools. The basalt assemblage includes a high number of pestles, accompanied by a variety of bowls, net sinkers and other types. 39

NADEL et al.

We believe the location served as an atelier, where large quantities of local flint and basalt were used for the production of tools. When considering other Epipalaeolithic sites around the lake, two points are clear. First, the Ohalo I site provides evidence for the longest use of a single locale, as all other sites are single period occupations. Second, all the eastern Haon and Ein Gev sites are topographically much higher than the western sites (Ohalo I and II). As for the Neolithic period, the sites are to the south and a little away from the lake. Interestingly, the Ohalo I types of sickle blades are not similar to the ones found at the nearby Yarmukian Sha’ar Hagolan, but are of the Jericho IX – Lodian types.

INTRODUCTION The site of Ohalo was first discovered by D. Ben-Ami in 1986, when water level in the Sea of Galilee dropped to ca. 212 m below msl (henceforth –212 m). It was visited in the same year by O. Bar-Yosef and D. Nadel, who did not find in situ remains, but reported on the flint and basalt implements collected in a limited area (Bar-Yosef and Nadel 1988). Then, in 1989, another site was found 800 m to the south, and thus the first site was named Ohalo I while the new one was labeled Ohalo II. In a comprehensive survey around the submerged lakeshores (temporarily exposed in the fall of 1990), it became apparent that the Ohalo I site is much larger than previously though, extending south to Hof Shaldag (temporarily regarded as a separate site). Fieldwork was carried out during that year by D. Nadel, who also took advantage of low water levels during 1999-2001 and carried out more work. This paper is the final report on the Ohalo I – Hof Shaldag complex, providing a short summary of previously published material, and presenting all subsequent data never published before. The Ohalo I site is located on the southwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee (Israel). It covers an area of at least 3,000 sq m, extending along the shore of the lake (Figures 1, 2, 3). The site is defined by the presence of concentrations of flint and basalt implements, with very few weathered potsherds. The topographically highest locations of finds are at ca. –211 m, and thus the site was visible only in years of low water levels. As the water level in the lake dropped, more of the site was exposed (Figure 4). Thus, high concentrations of finds were found even at –214.7 m, and it is unclear how much further east the site extends. To the northeast, patches of finds are found on the submerged peninsula, while to the west no finds are visible as modern fields have affected the area. Most of the beach in the southern half of the area, near Hof Shaldag (Shaldag Beach) is sandy, though outcrops of clay were also visible in deeper locations here and all along the site. A layer of rolled pebbles covers the northern half, and especially the entire area of the “peninsula”. Isolated larger basalt stones are found at various locations, with higher concentrations in the north (probably connected to the remains of structures, see below).

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 1: Map of southern Sea of Galilee showing location of Ohalo I (central area of fieldwork) and Ohalo II.

It is to be stressed that the outlet of the Jordan River was here until about 1000 years ago (Ben-Arieh 1965). The course of the outlet was to the southwest, using an older riverbed running into the Late Pleistocene Lake Lisan. From the wide outlet, the river ran around and to the west of Tell Beit Yerah, and then south to the Dead Sea. Within the large site area, there are remains of stone structures. The highest is a round stone pile, ca. 7 m in diameter – never excavated. It is located at the saddle connecting the “peninsula” to the beach, at a bottom elevation of ca. –212 m. The second is a elongated rectangular stone structure, about 20x10 m, in an axis parallel to the beach and almost 100 m to the east of the round structure, at a bottom elevation of ca. –214 m and about 0.6-0.8 m high (Figures 5, 6). To the south of these, there was a disturbed semi-circle of large basalt stones at ca. –213 m, maybe the remains of a small quay. We tentatively suggest that these were constructed during the Hellenistic/Roman/Byzantine period, on the basis of similarities to other remains around the lake (Nun 1991). Also, several small surface stone circles (ca. 1 m diameter) were found along the higher part of the southern beach, with no associated

NADEL et al.

Figure 2: Bathymetric map of the Ohalo I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hof Shaldag area. Shaded area represents scatter of flint and basalt implements. Heavy dotted line is the central base-line, black squares represent focus of fieldwork (including trenches). Some of the old rusty pipes were removed by the local authority during years of low water levels.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 3: Aerial photo of Ohalo I looking north. Note the partially submerged “harbor” in center of photo (compare to Fig. 2).

NADEL et al.

Figure 4: Ohalo I, looking north during the fall of 2000.

Figure 5: Ohalo I, looking northeast during the fall of 2000, the elongated built stone structure is partially exposed (water level is â&#x20AC;&#x201C;213.80 m).

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 6: The elongated built stone structure, constructed of large and small stones.

artifacts. A section through one yielded no finds. We believe these may have been constructed during the last few centuries.

FIELDWORK Archaeology During the 1986 visit, the water level was â&#x20AC;&#x201C;212.4 m, and the only area exposed was the topographically higher locale, at the north, near the round structure. A surface collection was carried out, mostly between pebbles and big stones. No trenches were dug, and the collection included several hundreds of flints and a handful of basalt implements. The published finds were attributed to the Geometric Kebaran (Bar-Yosef and Nadel 1988) and no further studies were conducted on these remains. During the 1990 low-level season it was possible to expand the area of fieldwork, and the Hof Shaldag â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Ohalo I beach was studied in some detail. A long north-south baseline

NADEL et al.

was established with a relevant 1x1 m grid, and sampling locations were marked along it (Figures 7, 8). Each sampling area was fully collected by wet sieving all the surface sand (2 mm mesh), usually 5–20 cm thick. The total area of these sampling units is 294 sq.m. (Table 1), and thousands of flints were retrieved. Furthermore, in each of the collection locations a pit was dug into the sand/clay in search of deeper in situ layers or remains. In no cases wee archaeological finds observed below the surface layer. During each of the 1999-2001 seasons of low water level, the site was visited and surface collections were conducted. As the level during these years dropped below –214 m, more of the eastern part of the site was exposed, especially at the north, where a large “peninsula” was exposed. Most of this new area was devoid of finds, but the water line south of the peninsula was still rich with flints and basalt implements. In 2001 a study of the lowest part of the exposed site was conducted at –214.80 m. In addition to a systematic surface collection, a square of 1x2 m (OH I East) was excavated through the entire sandy layer, and the sediment was wet sieved (2 mm). In one sub-square we excavated additional 30 cm into the harder silty sand below the loose surface layer. Again, no in situ layers or finds were recorded. Table 1: Units of total surface collection, retrieved by sieving the surface sediment. Unless specified in text, each unit is one continuous area. LOCATION

AREA (sq m)

A-L/543-548

A-O/419-427

135

ZM/437

AW-AV/500-512

AP-AQ/826-827

AW-AX/802-803 A-AE/750-800 OH I East TOTAL

4 (10 units) 40 2 294

Geology During surface collection and small-scale trench digging, the local stratigraphy was established. The top layer of sands and/or pebbles contained archaeological remains in various densities (from almost none to very high). The remains represented several Epipalaeolithic and Neolithic cultures, although sporadic finds of historical periods were also present. The thickness of the layer varied, but was usually 5-20 cm. Under this top layer, harder sands were sometimes encountered. In some locations, we exposed a clay/silt layer under the sands, that is the top of the local Lisan Formation.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 7: Location of sampling units along the southern side of the central baseline (to the left of grid letter A). In all squares the surface sands were removed, while shaded squares indicate deeper trenches below surface sands / stones.

NADEL et al.

Figure 8: Location of sampling units along the northern side of the central baseline. In all squares the surface sands were removed, while shaded squares indicate deeper trenches below surface sands / stones.

In February 2000 we joined a geological team studying in detail the geological sequence at Shaldag Beach, where the former Jordan outlet was located (Hazan 2003). Ten trenches were dug by a JCB in the study area, totaling more than 20 m in length and reaching more than 1 m depth in most locations. The trenches were dug in various orientations, placed to the east and southeast of the Shaldag house and restaurant, in an area of ca. 5,000 sq m. The southern-most trench was only 30 m north of Ohalo II (Locus 13). Water level at the time was –212.3 m, and the top of the trenches was at –212 / –211.5 m.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

The lithological sequence was documented and has been reported in detail (Hazan 2003; see also Hazan et al. 2005). In general, all trenches showed a sequence of horizontal layers of sands and silts. In some locations there were sections through past channels with pebbles and gravels. A black layer was observed in the southern trenches (Figure 9). It was documented at heights of –211.5 / –213 m, with a thickness of 5–10 cm. A sample of 6 cubic cm was studied under the microscope, showing the presence of plant fragments and fungus (Wasser, personal communication). It appears that this layer could be contemporaneous with the Ohalo II occupation, given a similar layer exposed in many parts of that site at the same height. A Melanopsis shell found 0.5 m below the layer was dated to 23,500 BP (Hazan 2003). We believe this layer represents the quickly submerged vegetation growing along the beach. The swift rise of water level drowned the vegetation, and the organic material was buried in anaerobic conditions under layers of sands and silts. Organic remains were found at similar heights in other locations further south and dated to the Late Pleistocene (Nadel et al. 2001).

Figure 9: A section through the clay layers of JCB trench 3 (opposite the Shaldag house), between Ohalo I and Ohalo II. Note the dark organic layer in the process of sampling. Vertical bar = 20 cm.

NADEL et al.

Wood remains During the fall of 2001, when water level was at –214.70 m (Figure 10), a survey of the “peninsula” showed the presence of large pieces of well-preserved wood at elevations of –214.50/–214.60 m. One was the bottom of a tree trunk, 40 cm in diameter and set in clay. Other wood remains included several thick pieces of branches lying horizontally and covered by a crust of clay (Figures 11, 12). These were up to 30–40 cm long and 10 cm in diameter. The trunk and two branch pieces were taken to the lab for further analyses. It should be stressed that no archaeological finds were associated with the preserved wood. The two branches have identical 14C dates, ca. 16,500 BP (uncalibrated, Table 2). Interestingly, they belong to two different species, Salix (Willow, Figure 11) and Fraxinus (Ash, Figure 12). The tree trunk was identified as Platanus (Plane tree). All three species grow today in water-rich environments in the north of Israel. The wood specimens seem to reflect the beach line (and water level of the lake) 16,500 years ago. Just over 2 km to the south, at the southern beach of Tell Beit Yerah (near the

Figure 10: A view to the northeast at the northern end of the “peninsula”, where wood remains were found. Water level: –214.70 m.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 11: A branch of Salix (Willow) embedded in a crust of clay. The piece on the right was removed from the ground and turned up-side-down. Scale arrow: 20 cm.

Figure 12: A branch of Fraxinus (Ash), just after retrieval. Note the quality of preservation and the presence of rings. Diameter is ca. 10 cm.

NADEL et al.

current outlet of the Jordan river), several large wood remains were exposed at elevations of –212 / –213 m (Nadel et al. 2001). They were found lying horizontally, some of them more then 2 m long and 30 cm in diameter. No archaeological finds were directly associated. Five were identified as Salix (Willow), and all ranged in dates between 15,400+160 BP and 16,410+160 BP (Ibid. table 1). If the younger date is excluded, the average of the four trunks is 16,100+80 BP. Though these finds are topographically 1.5–2 m higher than the wood remains at Ohalo I, the dates are almost identical. The Ohalo II site, also mostly at –212 / –213 m, is extensively dated (45 radiocarbon dates), and the average of the occupation age is ca. 19,500 BP, or 22,500-23,500 bp, calibrated (Nadel 2002; Nadel et al. 1995). These dates from various locations along the southwestern shore of the lake indicate water level fluctuations. For example, water level was low at the time of the Ohalo II occupation (19,500 BP), and then low again at about 16,500 BP – 16,000 BP. For various reasons not elaborated here, water level had to be several meters higher between these two periods (see also Bartov et al. 2002). Table 2: 14C dates of wood remains from the northeast peninsula at Ohalo I. Lab N.

Specimen

Age

d 13C PDB

RT 4248

Branch

16,400+100

–25.7

RT 4249

Branch

16,500+100

–28.2

Amateur collections Since the very beginning of fieldwork it became apparent that for years locals were randomly collecting finds from the entire area of the Hof Shaldag – Ohalo I site and keeping them at home. Most of the collections were never shown to us, with two exceptions. The first is Z. Lazar, who found the Ohalo II site in 1989 and reported it. He then gave us all the finds he collected from both sites, and helped us in every possible way. The second is S. Yizraeli, who with a friend collected a very large number of remains (thousands of flints and hundreds of basalt implements) from the beach, during every year of low water level. In 2001 we came to an agreement (supported by an IAA representative), and most of his collection was handed to us. It is included in the analyses below. THE FLINT ASSEMBLAGE The flint assemblage presented here (N=4,871) includes most of the flints found at the site (Table 3). Some of the large surface collections are represented by samples. None of the flints was found in an archaeological context, and they all derive from the surface layer of sand/ pebbles. As such, the assemblage is heterogeneous in many aspects as the specimens belong

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

to several periods and cultures and underwent a variety of processes such as patination and rolling on the beach. Table 3: The flint assemblages from Ohalo I – Hof Shaldag, presented by years and areas of collection. Bld=blades, bldlt=bladelets, pr.el.=primary elements, cte=core trimming elements, b.sp.=burin spalls. PROVENANCE

tools

cores

bld

bldlt

flk

pr.el.

cte

Bar-Yosef and Nadel 1988

101

163

Lazar Collection

b.sp. 1

total 444 13

Survey 1990

320

Pipe Area, –214.00-90, Nov. 2001

201

507

132

1484

417

153

–214.00-80, 25.10.01

Pipe Area (South), –214.00-90, Nov. 2001

XW99, –214.7075, 2 mm wet sieve, Nov. 2001

Tool Collection

–213.50-70, 19.7.01

Yizraeli Collection, Oct. 2001

101

373

167

801

TOTAL

608

251

1139

189

1955

661

4871

23.4%

3.9%

3071

214

12.5% 5.2%

40.1% 13.6%

1.2% 0.2%

100.1%

As examples of these processes, the following data from a studied sample of the flint tools are illuminating. Out of 538 tools 37.5% are broken, and 8.5% are heavily rolled. All pieces are patinated, though some more heavily than others. The most common patination colors are shades of brown/red (40.7%) and black (33.7%), followed by gray (14.9%), and others (yellow, white, etc., 10.7%). Work on oxidizing/reducing environments and their effects on flint patination in the Sea of Galilee has been conducted by Nadel and Gordon (1993). One of the conclusions reached there was that black patina developed in submerged anaerobic conditions, while yellow variants developed in oxidizing environments. Each could have developed within less than a year in lakeshore environments.

NADEL et al.

As is common with surface collections, the quantity and kinds of missing elements is unknown. However, tool types belonging to various Epipalaeolithic, Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultures are present. Most of these are also identified through technological aspects of the assemblage. Due to the culturally mixed nature of the assemblage, as well as the apparent level of preservation, only certain aspects of the flints will be dealt with here. These include basic observations on cores and debitage, and an attempt to describe the tools with their cultural affinities. The geological source of the raw materials used for the manufacture of the debitage and tools are sometimes hard to identify due to patination. The variety is wide, as can be seen by the matrix and cortex. However, the most impressive aspect is the large size of many specimens. There are cores more than 15 cm long, and several very large and thick blades/ flakes. As these large specimens also include pieces with a high cover of cortex, it is assumed that flint knapping took place locally, probably using local cobbles and pebbles available on the beach.

Cores The cores comprise a very heterogeneous assemblage (Figures 13-15). A large sample was studied here (N=237). Patina is present on most of them, and there are 120 with black/gray shades (50.6%), 98 with brown/red shades (41.4%), and 19 with white, yellow and other colors (8.0%). The cores are classified by scar types, e.g., blades, bladelets, flakes or mixed (Table 4). The small exhausted cores are presented at the bottom of the table. Flake cores are the most common, comprising 59.5% of the cores (N=141). Excluding the exhausted ones, the average length of the flake cores in the sample is 5.8 cm, while the longest core is 14.0 cm and the shortest is 3.0 cm. The exhausted cores are much smaller. Bladelet cores (including exhausted, N=67, 28.3%) have bladelet scars, sometimes accompanied by flake scars. The longest is 7.6 cm, but on average they are a little shorter than 5 cm. Blade cores (8%) are not numerous, but they are the largest cores at the site. The cores with exclusive blade scars (no flake scars) are very long, with an average of 9.6 cm, while the longest is 18.5 cm. It should be remembered that large cortical elements are also present, as well as many burins and endscrapers fashioned on large blades. On the other hand, there are 61 small exhausted cores. The dimensions within each core category vary considerably, indicating local manufacture of blanks from a large variety of pebbles and cobbles, as well as locally working the cores to exhaustion. The variety of cores reflects the presence of a mixed assemblage where huge blades and flakes were manufactured, as well as typical Epipalaeolithic bladelets.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 13: Cores, 1-3.

Figure 14: Cores, 1, 2.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 15: Cores, 1, 2.

NADEL et al.

Table 4: A sample of cores from Ohalo I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hof Shaldag, presented by scar types and average length (cm). The exhausted cores are presented separately at the bottom. SCAR TYPES

AVG MAX L

MIN L

MAX L

9.6

4.7

18.5

Blade/bladelet

6.4

5.4

Blade/flake

6.9

4.0

bladelet

4.3

3.4

5.0

2.5%

bladelet/flake

4.6

2.6

7.6

16.9%

flake

5.8

3.0

14.0

102

43.0%

blade/bladelet/flake

7.8

6.2

9.4

1.7%

blade/flake, exhausted

6.5

0.4%

bladelet, exhausted

3.6

2.7

4.3

1.3%

bladelet/flake, exhausted

3.3

2.1

4.9

7.6%

flake, exhausted

3.6

2.1

7.4

Blade

TOTAL

1.3%

7.8

2.5%

11.9

6.3%

16.5%

237

100.0%

Debitage Flakes are the most common knapping product, 1,955 (40.2%). They vary in raw material, size, and patination. Blades are also common, 23.4%; many are patinated and broken, but some are very large. Bladelets are much less frequent, only 3.9%. The presence of cortical elements (13.6%) and core trimming elements (1.2%) indicate local knapping, at least of some of the cores. Commonly, the presence of many small pieces (<1.5 cm) could be used as evidence for local knapping, as they tend to accumulate in knapping locales. These are rare in the assemblage discussed here. However, it is most probable that the under-representation of small and light elements (including bladelets) is due to wave action that could have easily transported the lighter pieces.

Tools A sample of 538 tools was studied, and the specimens vary between fresh and sharp to very rolled and patinated. Although relative frequencies in such an assemblage could be misleading, they do show which tool types (and therefore prehistoric cultures, potentially) are more abundant than others (Table 5). Only the most prolific and cultural-specific types are discussed below.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Table 5: Tool types found at the site, with tentative separation of Epipalaeolithic (top, shaded) and Neolithic (bottom, shaded) tool types. Un-shaded types could belong to either of the above or other cultures. TYPE

161

29.8%

Carinated scrapers

0.2%

Scrapers

0.2%

Endscrapers

Burins Burin-scrapers

4.4%

0.2%

Microliths

7.0%

Geometric microliths

3.0%

Notches-denticulates

5.2%

Massive tools

8.5%

1.1%

Awls-borers

2.8%

Retouched blades

Backed blades

105

19.4%

Retouched flakes

8.5%

Truncations

2.4%

Axes

0.4%

Adzes

0.4%

Arrowheads

1.3%

Spear points

0.7%

Sickle blades

3.5%

Perforated disk

0.2%

Varia

0.9%

541

100.1%

TOTAL

Epipalaeolithic tools End scrapers The most common tool is the endscraper (N=161), found on small and large blanks, with all types of patina (Figures 16-19, 20:2,3, 22:2, 25:1,2). Blades were chosen for blanks in 107 cases (66.5%), while flakes are less common (30.4%), and the remaining were made on core trimming elements. Blade blanks are mostly complete (71%), while among the flakes 61% are complete. The length of the complete endscrapers on blades shows a tendency to produce and use large tool blanks (Figure 21). It is noteworthy that 65% of the blades are 6.0 cm or longer, and the average length is 6.9 cm. Fifteen specimens are 10 cm or longer. The width of the complete end scrapers on blades shows the same trajectory, with an average of 2.6 cm,

Figure 16: End scrapers on blades, 1-8.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 17: End scrapers on blades, 1-6; Burin, 7.

Figure 18: End scrapers on blades, 1-4; end scrapers on flakes, 5, 6.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 19: End scrapers, 1, 6; retouched blades, 2-5, 7, 8.

Figure 20: Perforated disc, 1; retouched blade, 2; end scraper, 3.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 21: Length of complete endscrapers on blades (N=77).

and with 23.4% of the specimens 3 cm wide or more. In five cases the width is more than 4 cm. There is also one small carinated scraper on flake. Burins Burins are not common (N=24), with 13 on blades and 11 on flakes. Nine are broken. Among the complete specimens on blades, there are two very large cases, 12.7 and 10.6 cm long (Figure 17:7). The average width of the complete burins on blades is 3.1 cm. Endscrapers and Burins Both end scrapers and burins were preferably made on large blades. According to other components of the assemblage, such as cores (see above), these were manufactured locally. In various Kebaran and Geometric Kebaran sites in the region both tool types were fashioned on large blades. Noteworthy are Ein Gev I and Haon III (respectively), located topographically a little higher, on the opposite side of the lake, where relevant specimens have been found (Bar-Yosef 1970: Fig. 91-93; Bar-Yosef 1975: Fig. 3). The ratio of scrapers to burins is 6.7, and it should be noted that in the Haon III Geometric Kebaran site, the ratio, 2.6, is also in favor of the scrapers (Bar-Yosef 1975: Table 3).

NADEL et al.

Figure 22: Burin, 1; end scraper, 2.

Retouched blades Retouched blades are common (N=105). Fifty-four are complete, and they show a range of retouch characteristics. Some of the complete blades are very large, with 10 specimens longer than 10 cm and wider than 4 cm (Figure 22:1). The average width of the complete blades is 2.7 cm. One of the broken specimens is 17.3 cm long.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

The use of blade blanks for endscrapers, burins, and retouched blades is similar in that in all three categories there is a substantial representation of the large blanks. The three types include very long straight blades, with similar widths and lengths, of which many easily exceed 10 cm. It is therefore suggested that the three types belong to the same industry, manufacturing and using these tools locally. Massive tools Massive tools (N=46) are mostly complete (71.7%), probably due to the width and thickness of the blanks (Figures 23, 24). There are several types within this category, all larger and heavier than â&#x20AC;&#x153;regularâ&#x20AC;? tools. Twenty-two are made on blades, 17 on flakes, two on core trimming elements, and five on cores. Within the 14 complete blades, six are 10 cm long or more, with an average length of 8.7 cm and width of 3.5 cm. Microliths Microliths (N=32) were all found during the 1990 season or before (excluding one), and not during the later visits to the site (Figures 25, 26). It is possible that some were washed away during the retreat of the lake. Microliths were encountered in very small numbers all along the site, from the sandy south to the pebbly north. Sixteen are complete, seven are rolled and two are heavily patinated. The most common is the partially retouched bladelet (N=24, Figure 26:6). Completely retouched bladelets are present (N=4), as well as one obliquely truncated bladelet. A backed bladelet and two fragments of backed bladelets complete the list. It should be noted that in well-preserved sites the frequencies of microlith fragments are high, as many break on site during preparation, maintenance or use. The lack of these here, again, is attributed to the low level of preservation.

Geometric microliths Geometric microliths (N=16, Figures 25, 26) were mostly found during the 1990 season, in the southern half of the site, at elevations higher than â&#x20AC;&#x201C;212 m. Twelve of the microliths are complete (75%), none are rolled, and only three are heavily patinated. This is quite remarkable when lakeshore post-depositional processes are known to have taken place. Is it possible that the small tools underwent different depositional processes than the contemporaneous larger end scrapers and burins? Did the smaller elements get buried quicker and deeper (by trampling, for example) in sands or silts, thus avoiding the effects of waves and rolling lakeshore pebbles? However, as only half of the non-geometric microliths are complete, it seems that the geometrics better endured the vagaries of time, as they are backed and truncated, and have less delicate edges vulnerable to breakage.

NADEL et al.

Figure 23: Massive tools, 1, 2.

This group includes three Helwan lunates: two small ones (2.2 and 1.3 cm long), and a large specimen (Figure 25:6-8). They probably belong to the earlier half of the Natufian. There are three proto-rectangles, three rectangles and two broken rectangles (Figure 26). There are three proto trapezes, one trapeze, and one asymmetric trapeze. This group of trapeze-rectangle most probably reflects the presence of Geometric Kebaran knappers here. The nearest Geometric Kebaran site, Haon III, yielded a higher frequency of geometric microliths (in comparison to Ohalo I). This is at least partially due to post depositional processes at the latter site.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 24: Massive tools, 1, 2.

Neolithic tools Arrowheads There are seven flint arrowheads in the assemblage. Three are Helwan points (Figure 27:4,5). One is complete, with a sharp symmetrical point. Another has a missing tip, and the tang is small. A third is very big, with pressure flaking on both faces. There are four Byblos points, two of which are complete (Figures 27:1,3, 28:2,3). There is also one complete Byblos point made of obsidian (Figure 27:2). These arrowheads should be dated to the MPPNB/LPPNB. It should be pointed out that two Byblos points made of bone were also found (see below). Spear points There are four heavy spear points, each longer than 10 cm. One is complete (16.2 cm long), symmetrically pointed, with the ventral face fully covered by pressure retouch, and the left dorsal side partially retouched (Figure 28:1). Another complete object has â&#x20AC;&#x153;Abu Goshâ&#x20AC;?

NADEL et al.

Figure 25: End scrapers, 1, 2; microlith in preparation, 3; microliths, 4-11. Note the dimensions of the lunates (6-8).

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 26: Microliths, 1-19.

Figure 27: Arrowheads, 1-5. Specimen 2 is made of obsidian.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 28: Spearpoint, 1; arrowheads, 2, 3.

NADEL et al.

retouch along the heavy tang, and both edges are ventrally retouched all along (Figure 29: 2). The two others are broken but of similar length (Figures 29:1, 30:1). They also have ventral pressure flaking. The four are made of high-quality long blades of the PPNB naviform technology. Sickle blades Sickle blades are the most common among the clearly defined Neolithic tools (N=19). Some are not identifiable as cultural-specific, but seem to belong to the Pottery Neolithic cultures. Seven straight blades with no truncations, with straight backing, partial/delicate retouch or no retouch seem to belong to the PPNB (Figures 32:1, 3-7, 36:4). One wide bifacially retouched blade with double truncations belongs to the Jericho IX (Lodian) industry (Figure 33:1). There are two bifacially denticulated blades with one straight truncation that could be Yarmukian or Jericho IX (Figure 33:2,3). Another denticulated blade could be of either, too. The Wadi Raba culture is represented by a short, narrow, truncated and denticulated blade (Figure 34:5), a wide truncated and bifacially denticulated blade (Figure 34:6), and two wide, curved bladeswith bifacial denticulations (Figures 33:4, 34:3). One of the large spear points has a large diagonal area covered by sickle sheen (Figure 30: 1). It appears that this specimen was used at some point for cutting grasses while hafted at the end of a long handle, and definitely not as a segment in a row with other flints. The sickle blades belong mostly to pottery Neolithic cultures, while arrowheads are mostly from the Pre-Pottery cultures. As arrowheads are not very common in the Yarmukian, and become rare in the two later cultures, the presence of Jericho IX and Wadi Raba industries is represented solely by the sickle blades. Bifaces There are four specimens, two of which are chisels (Figure 35:1,2). One has a tranchet blow at the active edge, most probably Pre-Pottery Neolithic. Bifacial knives One specimen fashioned on tabular flint is present (Figure 31:1). It is 7.2 cm long, with one natural straight side. Both faces are cortical, and only the opposite side is bifacially retouched, forming a curved edge (see Nadel 1994). It could be grouped with Tuwailan knives and other bifacial knives dating to the LPPNB/PPNC (Goring-Morris et al. 1994; Galili at al. 1993). Long retouched blades There are three delicate long blades with retouch (Figures 30:2, 36:1,2). These were manufactured from long naviform blade cores, typical of the PPNB. The Neolithic blades

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 29: Spearpoints, 1, 2.

Figure 30: Spearpoint, 1 (note the later sickle sheen); retouched blade, 2.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 31: Bifacially retouched knife, 1; retouched blade, 2; bifacially retouched fragment, 3; arrowhead, 4; borer, 5.

Figure 32: Sickle blades, 1-7.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 33: Sickle blades, 1-4.

are easily distinguished from the Epipalaeolithic blades, not only on technological grounds. They are very straight, thinner than the older ones, and have no patination or rolling signs, like most of the arrowheads, spear points, sickle blades, and bifaces. It should be stressed that although all the submerged beaches of the lake were surveyed, the Ohalo I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hof Shaldag is the richest Neolithic site, in terms of arrowheads and sickle blades.

Figure 34: Sickle blades, 1-6.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 35: Bifaces, 1, 2; retouched blade, 3; sickle blade, 4.

NADEL et al.

Figure 36: Retouched blades, 1, 2.

Chalcolithic tool There is one Chalcolithic perforated disc (Figure 20:1). It is broken, with about half present. The specimen is flat, with hardly any scars on the ventral face, while the dorsal face is flaked all over. One edge has a concave retouch, while another straight edge is partially retouched.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Distribution of tools Distribution maps for a surface site seem to be irrelevant, as it is obvious that many remains were moved by wave action or are missing altogether. However, there appears to be a tendency of sickle blades to concentrate in the southern half of the site, though other Neolithic types were found in small numbers all over the site. It also seems that microliths may have higher concentrations in the northern half of the site.

Discussion The flint assemblage is very heterogeneous, both in terms of preservation and cultural origin. The large heavy specimens, including cores, cortical pieces, blades, and flakes, are usually patinated and/or rolled. As this assemblage includes endscrapers and burins on large blades, it is tentatively assigned to the Geometric Kebaran (see presence of geometric microliths), though some specimens could easily fit the Kebaran and even Upper Palaeolithic industries. As the pieces are many and as they are heavy, it is suggested that they were manufactured locally and not rolled into the site. In other words, this was an atelier where locally available large flint cobbles were used to manufacture tools on long heavy blades, as well as other large and massive tools. The second group of implements includes the microliths. Some are definitely Geometric Kebaran, while others are not indicative. The presence of lunates suggests Natufian origins. The relatively small numbers found in such a large site could be explained by post depositional bias of small light objects. The third group is clearly Neolithic. The specimens are much less rolled and patinated. Typologically, they belong to the PPNB, PPNB/C, Jericho IX, and Wadi Raba cultures. There are cores, blades, and flakes of the same raw materials with the same level of preservation, and in some cases typical technological traits. Therefore, one can conclude that tool manufacture during these (or at least some of these) Neolithic periods took place locally. The high-level preservation of some of the tools is remarkable. It is possible that they were covered by silt/sand shortly after use and thus protected from wave action and the abrasion of rolling pebbles. The assemblage reflects the attractiveness of the location to flint knappers through the millennia. They returned to the beach once and again for a specific activity, namely, the exploitation of local cobbles and pebbles for tool manufacture.

THE GROUND STONE INDUSTRY Ground stone implements were found in all parts of the site, during every visit. These, like all other finds, were on the surface. Out of 153 artefacts, 138 (90.2%) are made of basalt and 13

NADEL et al.

of limestone (Table 6). In addition there is one broken grinding stone made of sandstone and one small hammerstone made of flint. Table 6: Stone implements from Ohalo I, presented by raw materials and types. TYPE

basalt

Pestles

total

45.8%

Mortars and bowls

17.6%

Hand stones

8.5%

3.9%

Grinding stones

limestone

flint

sandstone

Weights

5.2%

Double notch weights

5.2%

Shaft straighteners

0.7%

1.3%

Celts

Flat with tiny cupmark

Hammerstones

Flakes

Varia

138

TOTAL

2.0%

8.5%

153

100.1%

Pestles The most common type is the pestle, with 70 specimens (45.8%), mostly from the Yizraeli collection (see above). All are made of local basalt. A sample of 58 was studied and measured (Figures 37, 38, 41). Of these, 34 are made of dense basalt, while 24 are made of porous basalt. There are seven complete pieces, all made of the dense basalt. The complete pestles range in length from 12 to 19 cm, with an average of 16.4 cm. The specimens are usually not completely round but a little oval in section. Thus, two measurements of diameter were taken for each. The wider diameter ranges between 4.1â&#x20AC;&#x201C;7.4 cm with an average of 5.6 cm, and the smaller diameter ranges between 2.7â&#x20AC;&#x201C;6.2 cm, with an average of 4.9 cm. There are 15 specimens with an elongated oval cross section. Two additional specimens have a plano-convex section. There are also three implements with a triangular section and one with a rectangular section. There are 35 pestles with a cylindrical longitudinal section. The conical longitudinal section is also common (N=12), while eight have a loaf-shape form, with the two ends

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 37: Basalt pestles, 1-4.

Figure 38: Basalt pestles, 1-3.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

narrower than the center (Figure 37:1). The latter were probably used for grinding, after being pestles. No correlations between raw material and longitudinal or cross sections were observed. The narrow end of the implement is convex in 27 cases, while four are flat and three are pointed. In the other mesial cases the active end is missing. It is noteworthy that the broken pieces usually have a flat break, while diagonal or irregular breaks are extremely rare. In the Levant, basalt pestles are found in sites dating from the Upper Palaeolithic onwards, well into historical times (Wright 1991, 1993; Rosenberg 2004). However, they are rare in the first periods, sometime absent in Upper Palaeolithic and Epipalaeolithic sites. Their dimensions and types hardly change through time, as they were probably used in the same manner for the same purpose through the millennia. Accordingly, it is hard to date the implements described here. Nonetheless, as most finds at the site are flints from Epipalaeolithic, Neolithic and even Chalcolithic cultures, and as pottery sherds (even eroded or rounded by water) are hardly present, it is cautiously suggested that the pestles may have been manufactured during one or more of these prehistoric periods (and see dates of other basalt implements below).

Vessels The second most common category includes all vessels â&#x20AC;&#x201C; flat and deep bowls, as well as mortars (Figures 39, 40, 41). None of the 27 specimens is complete or even almost complete. There are two large pieces of deep mortars, with a simple rim but no base (Figure 40:2), and two rim fragments of mortars. These could be as early as the Kebaran (see for example Ein Gev I, Bar-Yosef 1970: Fig. 97) and at least as late as the Chalcolithic. There is one specimen of a bowl with a flat base (Figure 40:1). The inner diameter is ca. 20 cm, and the height is 10 cm. Such specimens are common in the Chalcolithic, and many were reported from relatively near sites in the Golan (Epstein 1998: Plates XXXIV, XXXV). There is one round heavy monolithic leg of a footed bowl (Figure 39:1). The bottom part is wider than the upper, and the bowl itself is missing (broken). According to finds from Hagoshrim, it could be assigned to the Wadi Raba culture (Getzov, personal com. 2004). There is a wide shallow bowl with one tiny leg (the rest is missing, it probably had 3-4 legs), and it could belong to the Iron Age. There are two cupmark bowls in round basalt stones, with a flat rim 3-5 cm wide. There is one rim of a shallow bowl with a thick base. It is similar to broken bowls found in situ at the Early Epipalaeolithic site of Ohalo II. There are several other rim fragments, but most of the assemblage is composed of fragments with no rim or base.

Figure 39: Footed bowl, 1; broken bowls, 2-3.

FIGURE 40: Flat-based bowl, 1; mortar, 2.

NADEL et al.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Figure 41: Basalt pestles, 1, 2, 6, 8; massive flint tool, 3; basalt bowls, 4, 5; basalt hammerstone, 7 (all from the 1986 season; after Bar-Yosef and Nadel 1988).

NADEL et al.

Grinding stones Six grinding stones were found, all broken. Five are made of basalt and one of sandstone. The top of each is flat (or almost flat), while the bottom is convex, sometimes only crudely shaped. The largest (sandstone) is broken but measures 32x28x6 cm. Simple flat grinding stones, with no saddles, could date to various periods and are not culture-specific.

Hand stones Hand stones (N=13) made of basalt were recovered. They all have an oval shape, though none are complete. Most pieces are 7-12 cm long, 6-8 cm wide and 2.5-4.6 cm thick. Similar flat natural pebbles appear to be common on the beach, and it is possible that during our fieldwork we missed archaeological specimens due to this resemblance. It should also be noted that some of the small or broken pestles were later used for grinding activities.

Weights There are eight weights, seven of which are of basalt. Four of the specimens have a central hole. Another specimen is probably a broken example of the same type. These are known from various cultures, such as the PPNC (see for example Atlit Yam, Galili et al. 1993: Fig. 15), the Pottery Neolithic (Garfinkel 1999, p. 37; Gopher and Orrelle 1995) and the Chalcolithic (e.g. Epstein 1998: Plate XLIII). Another type of weight is the notched pebble. Six have been published (Nadel and Zaidner 2002) and two new ones are added here. All specimens are natural pebbles with two opposed notches, created by crude flaking and / or pecking. Three are made of basalt and five of limestone. Most are 10â&#x20AC;&#x201C;15 cm long, while the longest (18.2 cm) is outstanding, as the average length is 13.3 cm. The average weight is 0.76 kg, though two are very heavy, 1.6 and 1.3 kg. Although not numerous here, these specimens can be dated. At Ohalo II, six specimens were found in situ and 41 on the surface of the site (Ibid.). Thus, the specimens at Ohalo II can securely be attributed to the occupation period, ca. 22,500-23,500 cal. BP. It should be noted that most of the Ohalo I artifacts are similar in raw material and manufacture characteristics to the Ohalo II assemblage. It is suggested that the Ohalo I specimens are of the same age. It is worth mentioning that four additional weights were recovered from the alluvial fan north of Ohalo II, towards Ohalo I. Similar weights, though clearly smaller, were found in large numbers (N=55) at Haon Beach, dated to the Chalcolithic/Early Bronze Age. Small weights were also found at the near by Tell Beit Yerah. It was suggested that the weights served as net sinkers in these lakeshore sites, as well as in many places around the world, in the past and present (Nadel and Zaidner 2002). Interestingly, apart from isolated finds in some Neolithic sites, this type of tool was reported

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

in the southern Levant only from Natufian Eynan (where again they are smaller than the Ohalo II examples).

Varia Other types are rare. For example, there is one broken shaft straightner, made of basalt. Such specimens are found in small numbers in Natufian and Pottery Neolithic sites.

Discussion Basalt and limestone raw materials were present on the beach as pebbles and large stones (part of a local alluvial fan) and on the nearby slopes. It is suggested that most (if not all) basalt and limestone implements were manufactured locally. This is supported by the presence of some flakes. Also, it would not be very logical and economic to manufacture heavy basalt tools elsewhere, and then carry them to the Ohalo I site, where the same raw material is plentiful. This interpretation is similar to that provided for the flint assemblage, namely that the beach here served as a workshop for manufacturing flint and basalt implements (and limestone on a much smaller scale). The types of tools vary considerably. Pestles, and probably the mortars and some of the bowls, served for pounding and preparation of foods, minerals, etc. (Rosenberg 2004). Grinding kits (bases and hand stones) are also present, reflecting food preparation. Weights of two types (with holes, with opposed notches) were probably used as net sinkers or loom weights. Other types are present in very small numbers. As a minimum list, food preparation and fishing are represented in the ground stone assemblage. The dates of some of the implements can be clearly established, on typological grounds. Thus, there are Early Epipalaeolithic net sinkers, a Natufian or Pottery Neolithic shaft straightener, Chalcolithic bowls, and pestles that could belong to any of the above. It should be stressed that pottery sherds and other material remains from historic times are very rare at the site. It is therefore reasonable to suggest that the pestles, too, may belong to a prehistoric period. Alternatively, this could have been a beach workshop, where apart from stone tool preparation hardly any other activities took place. In such a scenario, pestles could have been manufactured during a historical period. It should be pointed out, again, that all finds were retrieved from the surface. Although numbers are relatively high, no associated archaeological layer or in situ feature was found. Accordingly, the concentrations of heavy stone tools either reflect an atelier or the presence of a nearby living site. Such a site, if there is one, has not been found, presumably as it is still submerged in a place not exposed in the last decade, or it is completely destroyed by modern construction (the road to the west of the site).

NADEL et al.

ANIMAL BONES Very few bones were found, some too small and fragmentary for analysis. The relatively larger pieces (N=9) are presented in Table 7. The small and isolated remains of Bos, Sus, Capra/Ovis and Gazella (?) are not enough to support statements concerning past economies, hunting / herding strategies or environmental conditions. The small number of remains probably reflects, more than anything, preservation conditions at the submerged beach, in sandy and stony matrix. It is worth noting that in most surface sites recorded around the lake, bones were hardly present (Nadel 1991, 1993) though Rabinovich found articulated Hippopotamus bones on the beach of Genosar (with no archaeological context). Only in cases where the bones were deposited deep enough, protected from wave action and surface abrasion, did they preserve well, as at Ohalo II (Nadel 2002). Nonetheless, one can also attribute the low number of bones to the function of the site, an atelier for the production of certain flint and basalt implements. Accordingly, remains such as animal bones and other kinds of daily domestic activities are not common. Table 7: Identifiable bones from Ohalo I. PROVENANCE Surf collection

BONE Radius

SIDE Complete

SP.

Capra/Ovis?

100

MODIFICATION

Surf collection

Metapod

Complete

Sus sp.

100

Surf collection

Metapod

Complete

Sus sp.

100

Yizraeli collection

Maxilla

Bos sp.

100

Yizraeli collection

Mandible

Bos sp.

Yizraeli collection

Molar

Bos sp.

Yizraeli collection

Long bone

Mid-Shaft frag.

Gazelle bodysize

<25

Abrasion

Yizraeli collection

Long bone

Mid-Shaft frag.

Gazelle bodysize

<25

Abrasion

Surf collection

Long bone

Mid-Shaft frag.

Gazelle bodysize

<25

Abrasion?

Prime-adult

Yizraeli collection

Horn

Frag.

Gazella?

Tool

Surf collection

Horn

Frag.

Gazella?

Tool

Surf collection

Long bone shaft

Complete

Gazella?

100

Arrowhead

Surf collection

Long bone shaft

Complete

Gazella?

100

Arrowhead

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

BONE TOOLS Two Neolithic Bone Points Two bone points were found at the site and described in detail (Nadel 1994). Both are complete, well-shaped and similar to each other. Each is 42 mm long, and one has delicate retouch scars along the side. The specimens look exactly like Byblos points in terms of form and dimensions. Bone points are known in the Levant from the Upper Palaeolithic onwards. However, as the flint assemblage attests to several cultures with arrowheads, beginning by the PPNB, bone points of these periods should be considered for comparison. In the southern Levant, simple, symmetrical, thin pointed bone implements are known from many sites, of which we can mention as examples Abu Gosh (Lechevallier 1978: Fig. 35), Beidha (Kirkbride 1966: Fig. 6), Beisamoun (Lechevallier 1978: Fig. 69), Jericho (Marshall 1982), Yiftahel (Garfinkel and Horowitz 1988) and Nahal Hemar Cave, where wood points were also preserved (BarYosef and Alon 1988: Plates 3-4). However, in none of the above-mentioned Neolithic sites were there any bone points with notches, barbs, wings or tangs, like the flint arrowheads. It should be remembered that in some earlier Natufian sites barbed bone implements were recovered (see Campana 1989: Plate 27). The two implements described here are thus remarkable for being so similar to tanged Byblos points made of flint, as well as having clear retouch scars on one. The two bone points could be dated according to their similarity to flint arrowheads to the LPPNB, the PPNC or the early Pottery Neolithic.

Other Implements Two fragments of artificially smoothed horn cores (gazelle?) were found. In addition, there are three mid-shaft fragments of long bones (gazelle body-size), with signs of abrasion.

SMALL FINDS Several small finds were recovered. Noteworthy is a small artifact made of soft limestone (Nadel 1993: Fig. 7). It is flat, elongated, and broken at one end. It has a partially perforated hole (it does not go through the specimen) near one end, and a notch on one side. It could have been a weight, though it also looks like a figurine in profile.

DISCUSSION The Ohalo I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hof Shaldag site is a large surface concentration of finds, with no in situ prehistoric layers/features. No correlation was found between the flint and basalt implements

NADEL et al.

and the stone structures, which are probably very late (Roman or later?). The finds include specimens belonging to the Early Epipalaeolithic (notched stone weights), the Geometric Kebaran (geometric microliths, endscrapers and burins on blades, etc.), Natufian (lunates), PPNB (sickle blades, etc.), Jericho IX (sickle blades), Wadi Raba (sickle blades, basalt implements) and Chalcolithic (the perforated disc). This is a minimal list, as some tools could have been manufactured during other periods. The location was chosen for being on the shore, in a fishing bay protected from the northern winds and storms. A wide variety of desired raw materials were present: basalt stones and pebbles in various qualities and dimensions, and flint cobbles and pebbles, again of a wide range of qualities. The presence of heavy implements and sharp objects rules out the possibility of an aggregation location of artifacts washed to shore by wave action (though some pieces could always arrive and disappear in such a way). Furthermore, the high densities of some objects, although a surface site, support our interpretation as an atelier for tool production (especially basalt pestles and endscrapers and burins on long blades). Thus, the near absence of animal bones and pottery should perhaps not be exclusively explained by preservation conditions. It could also reflect a task-specific non-residential location, where apart from stone working few other activities took place. The sickle blades with sheen may suggest that a pottery Neolithic site was very nearby, either in a lower submerged location, or more probably in a nearby somewhat higher place, destroyed by modern work or still deep below surface. The site is wide, and located on a flat beach near an ancient outlet of the Jordan river. There is no apparent evidence for large-scale tectonic changes of the local geomorphology, though small-scale blockades and openings of the Jordan outlet could have resulted from earthquakes (Belitzky and Nadel 2002; Hazan 2002, 2003; Nadel et al. 2001). The fact that through the millennia people used exactly the same geographical-topographical spot indicates only minor changes, if any, of the Ohalo I beach. There is ample evidence for water level fluctuations during this time interval (Ibid; Bartov et al. 2002), but no evidence for meaningful physical changes of the beach. While trying to reconstruct settlement patterns around the lake, one should keep in mind that additional sites were probably present, but these have not been found, being either still submerged, destroyed, or covered by modern development). None of the Epipalaeolithic sites around the lake, located near Ein Gev and Haon, have been exposed on a large scale, and most have been studied through only limited test pits (Bar-Yosef 1975, 1978). These eastern sites represent only a single period each, and even the Ohalo II site represents only a very short time, at the beginning of the Epipalaeolithic (Nadel 2002). Thus, apart from Ohalo I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Hof Shaldag, all Epipalaeolithic sites in the lower parts of the Kinneret Basin are uni-cultural. It is suggested that this site served as an atelier during

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

several periods and probably even as a fishing spot. It is due to the availability of desired raw materials that the site served for more than one period, while occupation locales shifted every period. It is interesting to note that all the eastern Epipalaeolithic sites were found above the â&#x20AC;&#x201C;209 m level (the water level when the modern lake is full), while the two western sites, Ohalo I and Ohalo II, were found below this level. This may reflect vertical tectonic movements on either side of the lake (a controversial issue that will not be reviewed here). Alternatively, a variety of factors could have caused a biased situation where the eastern lower sites are buried under deep sediments. During the Neolithic, settlement patterns around the lake changed. Two large sites are located away from the lake, to the south. Tel Ali is ca. 3 km from Ohalo I, while Shaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ar Hagolan, the largest Neolithic village in the area, is about 6 km away (Garfinkel 1999). It is noteworthy that none of the Ohalo I Neolithic flint types appears to belong to the Yarmukian culture (Garfinkel 1993; Gopher and Gophna 1993). Along the beaches of the lake, we found several locations with isolated Neolithic flint tools, but again with no in situ features (Nadel 1991, 1993). It appears that the Neolithic villages were commonly established further away, while the beaches were visited for task specific activities such as fishing (?) and raw material procurement and use (large basalt and flint) in specific locales. Sites from the historic periods show a new settlement pattern, with several large mounds established on the beach. Each has several layers of intensive occupation (e.g., the nearby Tell Beit Yerah, Tell Kinarot, Tell Ein Gev, and Beit Saida). Along the beaches, several quays and fishing installations were found (some submerged), mostly dated to the Roman period or later (Nun 1991). The Ohalo I and Ohalo II sites, together with the Haon and Ein Gev Epipalaeolithic sites, represent several settlement patterns, all different from the historic large mounds. The prehistoric sites were seasonal occupations, apart from Ohalo II that was occasionally occupied for up to a year. The Ohalo I beach did not serve as an occupation site, but rather as an atelier for stone tool production, for people who had their seasonal camps (Epipalaeolithic) or villages (Neolithic) away from the beach. These settlements were on higher grounds, away from the lake storms and the dangers of water level fluctuations. Only during very low water levels (Ohalo II) or for raw material procurement (Ohalo I) did prehistoric people work and discard stone implements on the shores. Otherwise, evidence for prehistoric occupation and even for fishing (which most probably always took place) is extremely scanty.

NADEL et al.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Ofer Bar-Yosef who carried out the first explorations at the site, and later supported the work in all possible ways. Thanks to D. Ben Ami who found the site, and to Zahi Lazar and the Rahamim family at Shaldag Beach, who were always supportive and helpful. We thank the geologists Shmuel Belitzky, Amotz Agnon, Nisim Hazan, Shmuel Marco and Motti Stein for their cooperation. We also thank all the volunteers and students who participated in the project. We are grateful to Guy Bar-Oz for the identification of the bones and for his useful advice. We also appreciate the helpful comments made by two anonymous reviewers. Fieldwork around the Sea of Galilee submerged beaches was supported by the Irene LeviSala CARE Archaeological Foundation, the L.S.B. Leakey foundation, and the National Geographic Society.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bartov Y., Stein M., Enzel, Y., Agnon A. and Reches Z. 2002. Lake levels and sequence stratigraphy of Lake Lisan, the late Pleistocene precursor of the Dead Sea. Quaternary Research 57: 9-21. Bar-Yosef O. 1975. Les gisements “Kébaran Géométrique A” d’Haon, Vallée du Jourdain, Israël. Bulletin de la Societe Prehsitorique Francaise 72(1): 10-14. 1978. Man – an outline of the prehistory of the Kinneret area. In Serruya C. (ed.), Monographiae Biologicae 32: 447-464. New York: The Hague. Bar-Yosef O. and Nadel D. 1988. Ohalo – a prehistoric site in the Sea of Galilee, Israel. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 21: 87-94. Bar-Yosef O. and Alon D. 1988. Nahal Hemar Cave. ‘Atiqot, English Series XVIII. Jerusalem: The Department of Antiquities and Museums. Belitzky S. and Nadel D. 2002. Late Pleistocene and recent tectonic deformations at the Ohalo II prehistoric site (19K) and the evolution of the Jordan River outlet from the Sea of Galilee. Geoarchaeology 17(5): 453-464. Ben-Arieh Y. 1965. The shift of the outlet of the Jordan at the southern shore of Lake Tiberias. Palestine Exploration Quarterly (January-June): 54-65. Campana D. V. 1989. Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone Tools. The Manufacture and Use of Bone Implements in the Zagros and the Levant. (BAR International Series 494). Oxford. Epstein C. 1998. The Chalcolithic Culture of the Golan. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Reports, N.4. Galili E., Weinstein-Evron M., Hershkovitz I., Gopher A., Kislev M., Lernau O., Kolska-Horwitz L. and Lernau H. 1993. Atlit-Yam: a prehistoric site on the sea floor off the Israeli coast. Journal of Field Archaeology 20: 133-157. Garfinkel Y. 1993. The Yarmukian culture in Israel. Paléorient 19(1): 115-134. 1999. The Yarmukians. Neolithic Art from Sha’ar Hagolan. Jerusalem: Bible Land Museum. Garfinkel Y. and Kolska Horwitz L. 1988. The Pre-Pottery Neolithic B bone industry from Yiftahel, Israel. Paléorient 14(1): 73-86. Gopher A. and Gophna R. 1993. Cultures of the eighth and seventh millennia B.P. in the Southern Levant: a review for the 1990s. Journal of World Prehistory 7(3): 297-353.

OHALO 1- SHALDAG BEACH

Gopher A. and Orrelle E. 1995. The Ground Stone Assemblages of Munhata, a Neolithic Site in the Jordan Valley – Israel (a report). Cahiers du Centre du Recherche Francais de Jerusalem No. 7. Paris: Association Paléorient. Goring-Morris A. N., Gopher A. and Rosen S.A. 1994. The Neolithic Tuwailan cortical knife of the Negev, Israel. In Gebel H. and Kozlowski S. (eds.), Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 1, pp. 511-525. Berlin: ex-oriente. Hazan N. 2002. Levels of Lake Kinneret / Lake Lisan. In Nadel D. (ed.), Ohalo II – a 23,000 Year-Old Fisher-Hunter-Gatherers’ Camp on the Shore of the Sea of Galilee, pp. 52-56 (Hebrew). Haifa: Hecht Museum. 2003. Reconstruction of Kinneret Lake Levels in the Last 40,000 Years. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem (Hebrew). Hazan N., Stein M., Agnon A., Marco S., Nadel D., Negendank J., Schwab M. and Neev D. 2005. The late Quaternary limnological history of Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee). Quaternary Research 63: 60-77. Kirkbride D. 1966. Five seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic village of Beidha in Jordan. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 98: 8-72. Lechevallier M. 1978. Abou Gosh et Beisamoun. Deux Gisements du viie Millenaire avant l’ere Chretienne en Israel. Mémoires et Travaux du Centre de Recherches Préhistoriques Francais de Jérusalem No.2. Paris: Association Paléorient. Marshall D. N. 1982. Jericho bone tools and objects. In Kenyon K. M. and Holland T. A. (eds.), Excavations at Jericho, Vol. IV, Appendix E, pp. 570-620. Jerusalem: The British School of Archaeology. Nadel D. 1991. Historic and prehistoric sites on the shores of Lake Kinneret. Qadmoniyot 93-94: 20-23 (Hebrew). 1993. Submerged archaeological sites on the shores of Lake Kinneret, Israel. ‘Atiqot (English Series) XXII: 1-12. 1994. Two Neolithic bone arrowheads from Shaldag Beach, Lake Kinneret. Tel Aviv, Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University 21(2): 186-193. Nadel D. and Gordon D. 1993. Patination of flint artefacts: evidence from Bikta, a submerged prehistoric occurrence in the Sea of Galilee, Israel. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 25: 145-162. Nadel D., Belitzky S., Boaretto E., Carmi I., Heinemeier J., Werker E. and Marco S. 2001. New dates from submerged late Pleistocene sediments in the Sea of Galilee, Israel. Radiocarbon 43(3): 11671178. Nun M. 1991. The Sea of Galilee. Water Levels, Past and Present. Published by Kibbutz Ein Gev: Tourist Department and Kinnereth Sailing Co. Rosenberg D. 2004. The Pestle: Characteristics and Changes of Stone Pounding Implements in the Southern Levant from the Early Epipalaeolithic through the Pottery Neolithic Period. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Tel Aviv University (Hebrew). Wright K. 1991. The origins and development of ground stone assemblages in late Pleistocene Southwest Asia. Paléorient 17(1): 19-45. 1993. Early Holocene ground stone assemblages in the Levant. Levant XXV: 93-111.

NADEL et al.

NEW DISCOVERY OF OLD MATERIALS Jurnal of The Israel Prehistoric Society 36 (2006), 99-108

New Discovery of old Material: Two Natufian Individuals from Nahal Oren Site VERED ESHED1 HAIM COHEN1 HILA ASHKENAZY2

Department of Anatomy and Anthropology, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel 2

Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University – Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, 91905

In the year 2000 a box (a block and sediment) containing two individuals in primary burial, in situ, was transported from the storage facility of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem to the Laboratory of the Department of Anatomy and Anthropology, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University (Fig. 1). The burials were suspected as deriving from the Natufian layers of the Nahal Oren site, Israel. There was no additional information concerning to which of the skeletons of this site they are related: Natufian layer (Noy1989) or Neolithic (Stekelis and Yizraeli 1963; Noy et al.1973), since a note with some reference regarding the burial was not attached. In general, about 50 skeletons were uncovered in the Natufian layers, containing two phases, with approximately the same number of skeletons in each phase (Noy 1989).

MATERIALS AND METHODS The Skeletal Material Two individuals in primary burial were excavated in the “box” mentioned above. The laboratory excavation contained several stages: 1. The skeletons were cleaned and prepared for excavation in situ with detailed documentation (Fig. 2). 2. Burial plans were drawn. Each skeleton was given an arbitrary designation (H-100 99

100

ESHED et al.

Figure 1: A box (a block and sediment) containing two individuals in primary burial, in situ, from Nahal Oren site, Israel.

Figure 2: Excavating and documenting the burial from Nahal Oren site (in the box) at the laboratory of physical anthropology, Tel Aviv University.

NEW DISCOVERY OF OLD MATERIALS

3. 4. 5. 6.

101

and H-200), and each bone was identified and given a running number per skeleton (wherever it was possible) (Fig.2). The stones and the flints artifacts were also plotted in. Digital photographs were taken before excavation and removal of the bones (Fig. 1). The bones of each individual were excavated and placed in a separate box. The excavated bones were cleaned. The skeletons were reconstructed and stored in anatomical position in a drawer.

Sex and age identification: Sex determination was based on the morphology of skull and long bones (Bass 1987), and the vertical diameter of the humeral head (Bass 1987). Age determination used the following criteria: metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium (Lovejoy et al. 1985); stages of tooth attrition (using standards modified from Hillson [1986] and Lovejoy [1985]); metamorphosis of the sternal end of the ribs (Loth and Iscan 1989); and closure of the sternal ends of the clavicles (Szlivassy 1980). The lithic collection from the burial is limited in size (43 pieces). Only six artifacts were defined as tools and an additional six show edge damage. Analysis focused on two main issues: the description of the general characteristics of the collections, such as broken vs. complete pieces (Table 1), and the organization of the collection into technological and typological categories, tools, cores, and debitage (Table 2). Table 1: General characteristics of the lithic assemblage. Artifact type Debitage Cores

Broken N

41.8

Tools

4.6

Artifacts with edge damage

11.6

Total

Table 2: General lithic classification. Artifact Type Core

2.3

83.7

Tools

13.9

Total

100

Debitage

ESHED et al.

102

RESULTS The Human remains The skeletons that arrived at Tel Aviv university (H-100 and H-200) matched the burial position of the individuals H-17 and H-18 respectively of the Nahal Oren plan (Noy 1989) (Fig. 3). The stones related to the interment were also identified in the plan. The bones identified for each skeleton are presented in Table 3.

Figure 3: The skeletons that arrived to Tel Aviv university (H-100 and H-200) matched the burial position of the individuals H-17 and H-18 respectively of Nahal Oren map site (Noy,1989).

NEW DISCOVERY OF OLD MATERIALS

103

Table 3: General skeletal description.* Bone not marked on the plan because it was beneath the upper layer bones. Bone type

Catalog number

Description Homo no. 17

Postcrani bone

Side bone

Hyoid

Clavicle

Right

The proximal end (sternal epiphysis) is missing

Body

Left

Four fragments: acromion, glenoid cavity, spine, body (dorsal sulci)

Radius

102

Left

Complete (the head is crushed)

Radius

Right

Shaft only

Vertebra

Lumbar only transverse process

Ribs

103

Pelvis

105

Left

Innominate bone (2 fragments, symphysis is missing), crushed

Femur

101

Left

Crushed Head, distal end and shaft fragments

Tibia

107

Patella

105

Few body fragments, and 1 costvertebral joint

Shaft toward the proximal end Left

Complete

Metacarpal

Three bones (one of them is complete)

Metatarsal

Two bones (only one is complete)

Phalanges

One foot phalanges (second phalanges)

Phalanges

Six hand phalanges: 3 first, 2 second and one third

Other

Few bone fragments

Skull Calvarium

100

Frontal, 2 parietal bones, occipital (only small right part), both temporal

Face

100

Nasal, right and left maxilla

Maxilla

100

Right: M1, Pm2, Pm1, C, Lateral I, both M2 and M3 are lost premortem Left: M2, M1 Pm1, Pm2, Lateral I, M3 is lost premortem Homo no. 18

Clavicle

205

Right

Sternal end is missing

Clavicle

202

Left

Complete

Vertebrae column + sternum

202

Fused in one peace: atlas, axis, 5 cervical, 8 thoracic + sternum (manubrium sterni + body) + other vertebrae fragments

ESHED et al.

104 Bone type

Catalog number

Scapula + humeral head

Right

Left

Scapula Ribs

Description

202

Fused in one peace: spine (not complete) glenoid fossa, coracoid + humerus head, body is missing Spine, only small medial part First rib complete + many other fragments

Humerus

207

Left

Shaft, both epiphyses are missing

Right

Proximal end + shaft + distal end (crushed)

208

Left

Fused in one peace: Radius: proximal end + shaft + humerus: distal end

Radius Radius + Humerus

Right

Shaft, both epiphyses are missing

Skull Calvarium

200

Crushed, all calvarium bones are presents

Face

200

Most of the face are missing

Mandible

200

Complete, the tip of the condyle is missing, all teeth are presents

Bone type

Catalog number

Maxilla

Other

200

(Homo no. 18 (continuation) Crushed, Right: Pm2, Pm1, C, central I, (lateral one is missing). Left: M2, M1, Pm2 (the crown is attrite), Pm2, C, lateral I, central I, (the canine and both of the Incisors are broken) Few skull fragments

Postcranial bone

Homo 17 and 18

Ulna

Shaft fragment

Scapula

Lateral end of spine

Other

Few bone fragments

Sex and age determination: Homo Number 100 (recognized as H-17) was identified as a male based on: 1) mastoid process is long and large, 2. the zygomatic process is very thick, and 3. inter-orbital breadth is wide (24 mm.) (Bass 1987) The age estimated was based on: 1. all long bones ephiphyses are present and the sternal ends of the clavicles are complete fused (Szlivassy 1980), 2. all teeth are permanent and the 3rd molar was lost pre-mortem (Ubelaker 1989), 3. dental wear (based on the maxillary teeth) is strong, and indicates an age range of 35-45, although some of the

NEW DISCOVERY OF OLD MATERIALS

105

teeth (left Pm1, M1) are attrited almost to the root in the lingual part. (Fig. 4), 4. degenerative changes in the auricular surface of the ilium narrow the range somewhat, suggesting an age at death of ca. 40-44 years (Lovejoy et al. 1985). Stature estimation according to the left radius (max. length: 225 mm.) is: 163 cm. (Bass, 1987). Thus, the individual appears to be an adult male age 40-45 years, with a height estimated at 163 cm. Homo Number 200 (recognized as H-18) was identified as a female based on: 1. the mastoid process is low and narrows (Schwartz 1995), 2. the mandible is gracile, narrow and has a smooth gonial region, and the mental trigon is rounded (Bass 1987), 3. the nuchal line is smooth, and 4. the vertical diameter of the humeral head is 40 mm. (Bass 1987). In terms of age, all long bones ephiphyses are present and the sternal ends of the clavicles are completely fused (Ubelaker 1989; Szlivassy 1980). The degeneratve changing of the sternal articulation of the clavicle indicates an age of over 40 years (Szlivassy 1980) and metamorphosis of the sternal end of the ribs gives a range of 33-42 years (Loth and Iscan 1989). Dental wear gave an age range of 40-50 years (Hillson 1986; Lovejoy 1985). Stature estimation was impossible since we lacked complete long bones. The individual appears to be an adult female, age 40-45 years.

Tooth attrition and tooth use as a tool Oblique wear (high attrition in one side of the tooth compared to low or moderate in the opposed side : in this case high attrition in the buccal cusps as compared to the lingual cusps in the mandible teeth, and high attrition in the lingual cusps as compared to the buccal cusps in the maxilla teeth was found. Oblique wear was observed in the maxilla teeth of Homo 17 (Fig.5) and in the maxilla and mandible teeth of Homo 18 (Figs 6, 7). In the mandible of Homo 18 the attrition is especially seen in the second premolar and in the first and second molar, on the left side. On the right side of this individual the oblique attrition is not dominant as in the left side (the second premolar of this side is missing pre-mortem) (Fig 8). In the maxilla this attrition is seen in the left first and second molars and in the right side in both premolars. In the Homo 17 maxilla, oblique attrition is observed on the left side on both premolars and in the first and second molars. In the right side it is observed on both premolars and in the first molar. This attrition is more dominatnt on the left side as seen also in the mandible of Homo 18. Central grooving in the left lateral incisor, canine, and the right lateral incisor, and perhaps in the first premolar (Fig 9) probably reflects tooth use as a tool.

ESHED et al.

106

FLINT ARTIFACTS General Characteristics Nine artifacts are burnt (21%), and the majority are broken (58%, Table 1). Only one complete core was retrieved with no signs of burning. None of the artifacts are abraded, suggesting that the collection did not suffer any kind of post-depositional wear.

Technological and typological categories Tools: The tool group was sorted using the Hours (1974) typological list including the later modifications (Belfer-Cohen 1988; Grosman 1997). This small assemblage was analyzed in comparison to the recent study carried out on the larger assemblage (Grosman in prep) retrieved from the site (1st and 2nd excavation seasons; Stekelis and Yizraely 1963; Noy et al. 1973). Although only six tools were identified (Table 4) The presence of a microlithic component suggests Epipaleolithic affiliation. The assemblage was retrieved from a Natufian context (see above), yet the tools are not indicative enough to assign it to this phase definitively. Significantly, the single burin, on a concave truncation, is one of the most frequent tool types in the Nahal Oren Natufian burin assemblage (Grosman in prep.). Table 4: Lithic tool types. Tool Type

End Scraper

Burin

Non Geometric Microlith

Varia

Total

Debitage: In general, most of the debitage subtypes found in other Natufian flint assemblages are present in our sample (Table 5). The frequency of the blades and bladelets is high (53.3% of the total debitage) considering the fact that Natufian debitage often displays dominance of flakes, while higher frequencies of blades and bladelets are found mostly in the tools. It is worth mentioning that one cortical piece is on a cylindrical-shaped nodule, found in many other Natufian collections. Summarizing, the debitage shows no indicative Natufian traits, given that dominance of blades and bladelets is a general Upper Paleolithic/Epipaleolithic trait and not specific to the Natufian. Similarly, the single exhausted bladelet core in our assemblage is generally Epipaleolithic in its affinities, but not necessarily Natufian.

NEW DISCOVERY OF OLD MATERIALS

107

Table 5: General classification of debitage. Blank Morphology

Flakes

20.0

Blades

33.3

Bladelets

20.0

Cortical piece

3.0

Core trimming elements

10.0

Burin spall

3.0

Fragments

10.0

100

Total

SUMMARY Two individuals in primary burial, flexed position from Nahal Oren site recognized as part of the Natufian period burials of the site. Forty-three flint artifacts were recovered in the burial, with only six artifacts defined as tools and six show edge damage. Due to the assemblage size, it is not possible definitively to assign the collection to a particular cultural entity, in particular to the Natufian. Nevertheless, the burin on concave truncation, the single bladelet core and the cylindrical cortical piece all suggest a general Natufian attribution, in particular similar to the assemblage from Nahal Oren. In this context, the attribution of the individuals to the Natufian period was based on the burial positions drawn in the cemetery (Noy 1989:54) and the flints artifacts accompanied the burial. The two individuals are adults, one male (H-17), aged 40-45 years, and height is 163 cm. and the other (H-18) a female, aged 40-45 years. The special oblique plane wear on the teeth of both the individuals is the pattern expected from near or actual tooth-to-tooth contact in chewing in which teeth shear and grind across each other, producing the lingual and buccal phase characteristic. Different foods could influence the obliquity of the wear plane angle. When the diet is rich in tough fibrous substances, teeth do not so often make contact during mastication, and there will tend to be less differential wear of the buccal and lingual cups. This reulsts in a flatter wear plane. On the other hand, more refined foods should contribute to highly oblique wear.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bass, W. M. 1987. Human Osteology. A Laboratory and Field Manual. 3rd edition Columbia: Missouri Archaeological Society. Belfer-Cohen, A. 1988. The Natufian settlement at Hayonim Cave: A Hunter â&#x20AC;&#x201C; gatherer band on the threshold of agriculture. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. Hebrew University Jerusalem.

108

ESHED et al.

Grosman, L. and Belfer-Cohen, A. 1997. The lithic assemblage of Salibiya I. Mitekufat HaEven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 27:19-41 Hillson, S. 1986. Teeth. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hours, F. 1974. Remarques sur l’utilization de listes – types pour du Paleolithique du Levant. Paléorient 2:3-18 Loth, S. R. and Iscan, M. Y. 1989. Morphological assessment of age in the adult: The thoracic region. In Iscan, M. Y. (ed.), Age Markers in the Human Skeleton, pp. 105-136. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas. Lovejoy, C. O., Meindl, R. S., Prysbeck T. R., and Mensforth, R. P. 1985. Chronological metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium: A new method for the determination of adult skeletal age at death. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68:15-28. Noy, T., Legge, A. J., and Higgs, E.S. 1973. Recent excavations at Nahal Oren, Israel. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 39:75-99. Stekelis, M., Yisraely, T. 1963. Excavations at Nahal Oren. Israel Exploration Journal 13:1-13. Szilvassy, J. 1980. Age determination on the sternal articular faces of the clavicula. Journal of Human Evolution 9:609-610. Ubelaker, D. H. 1989. Human Skeletal Remains. Excavation analysis interpretation (2hd. Edition) Washington D.C. Taraxacum.

THE BURIALS OF Prehistoric KFAR HAHORESH Jurnal of The Israel Society 36 (2006), 109-116

109

The Burials of Kfar HaHoresh – A Regional or Local Phenomenon? YOSEF GARFINKEL1

Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Kfar HaHoresh is a small Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) site located in the Galilee of northern Israel. One radiometric date was obtained: 8,650+50 bp (RTT-3733.1), which after calibration with a single standard deviation is 7,740-7590 B.C. The site is on a slope, facing westward. It was severely damaged in recent decades by modern agricultural and construction activities (Goring-Morris 1991, 2000; Goring-Morris et al. 1994-5, 1998, 2001). An area of ca. 450 sq m was excavated over the years and a number of straight walls and plastered surfaces were unearthed. Below the plastered floors, Neolithic burials of a large number of individuals were found, including plastered skulls. Animal carcasses were associated with some burials. The rich data on the burial customs cast shadow upon daily life at the site, and produced the following interpretation (Goring-Morris 2000:113-114): “…the site was primarily used as a secluded regional funerary center by village settlements located in the surrounding lowlands… As such it was probably visited periodically by kin from surrounding settlement(s), though the possibility exists that there may also have been permanent occupation by a few ‘Guardians’”. The large quantities of flint, animal bones and various ground stone tools were also integrated in the cultic scenario: “Of course, it is also quite likely that many such “everyday” items may also have been accorded symbolic and ritual significance”. In the same spirit a posthole in a plastered floor was interpreted as a base for a totem and roasting pits containing burnt animal bones “likely reflect more than mundane activities: they could perhaps reflect communal feasting” (Goring-Morris 2000:113-114). So far in the Neolithic of the Near East burials have always been associated with settlement sites. Thus, the claim for a “secluded regional funerary center” is rather revolutionary. 109

110

YOSEF GARFINKEL et al.

Notwithstanding the extremely important contribution of Kfar HaHoresh for the study of Neolithic burial customs, whether these burials represent a regional or local phenomenon is a legitimate question. Various aspects should be examined in evaluating this query: sampling size, sampling strategy, architecture, site formation process, material culture, and recently discovered burials at other Neolithic settlements. Sampling Size: The size of Kfar HaHoresh varies in different publications: 5-6 dunams (Goring-Morris 1991:80), 10 dunams (Goring-Morris et al. 1994-5:74) or 1-2 acre (that is 4-8 dunams) (Goring-Morris 2000:107). As one dunam equals 1,000 sq m the various sizes indicated rang from 4,000 to 10,000 sq m. So far ca. 450 sq m have been excavated, nearly 10% of the settlement. If the site size is 10,000 sq m only ca. 5% has been excavated. In other words, about 90-95 percent of the site remains unknown. Can one conclude that the entire area was used for burials? Clearly, a larger horizontal exposure is required to confirm such a proposal. Sampling Strategy: During the first season, before the manual work started, five trenches were cut from topsoil to bedrock by a mechanical device. Four of them, with a total length of ca. 85 m, were dug through Neolithic occupation debris (Goring-Morris 1991, Fig. 2). While cleaning the sections of these trenches, various burials and a plastered skull were found. These rich locations were then chosen for further excavation and yielded many burials. To the best of my knowledge, no other Neolithic site in the Near East has been tested in this way. Usually, excavations start from topsoil and randomly unearth whatever lies below. While the common sampling strategy produces a random sample, the strategy adopted at Kfar HaHoresh represents a deliberate focus on burials. This creates a methodological problem when comparing Kfar HaHoresh with other sites. In addition at a number of Neolithic sites, including Yiftahel, Munhata, and others, when a plastered floor was discovered it was usually not removed, and when removed, only 1020 cm were excavated below it. At Kfar HaHoresh, due to the deep mechanical sections, it became apparent that burials may lie deeper then previously known. This is perhaps the main lesson of Kfar HaHoresh to Neolithic excavations: burials can be found at significant depth below plastered floors. Architecture: Rectangular plastered buildings were found in various parts of the site. This type of plastered structure is the basic dwelling unit of the period and is known from sites located all over the Levant including Ugarit (de Contenson 1992), Byblos (Dunand 1973), Tell Ramad (de Contenson 2000), Tell Aswad (de Contenson 1995), Beisamoun (Lechevallier 1978), Yiftahel (Garfinkel 1987), ‘Ain Ghazal (Rollefson and Simmons 1988) and Jericho (Kenyon 1981). The same structures, with similar sizes and building techniques, are described at Kfar HaHoresh as: “mortuary installations” (Goring-Morris 1998:2), “plastered

THE BURIALS OF KFAR HAHORESH

111

surface”, “funerary structures” or “plastered funerary monuments” (Goring-Morris 2000: 110, 114, 115). Public and cultic buildings are known in the Neolithic of the Near East from a number of sites: the tower of Jericho (Kenyon 1981), the large rounded structure at Jerf el Ahmar (Stordeur et al. 2001), and the temples at Göbekli Tepe and Nevali Çori (Schmidt 1998; Hauptmann 1993). The architecture of Kfar HaHoresh, on the other hand, resembles ordinary and common dwelling units. Site Formation Processes: As can be seen in various published plans of Kfar HaHoresh, no complete structures were found. This is not an outstanding phenomenon as it is quite common to find missing walls in Pre-Pottery Neolithic B villages throughout the Levant: Ugarit (de Contenson 1992, Pls. XVII-XVIII), Byblos (Dunand 1973, Pls. VIII-XV), Tell Ramad (de Contenson 2000, Pls. VI1, VIII2), Abu Gosh (Lechevallier 1978, Pls. I, IV), Beisamoun (Lechevallier 1978, Pl. XXV), Yiftahel (Garfinkel 1987, Fig. 5), ‘Ain Ghazal (Rollefson and Simmons 1988, Pls. 1-3) and Jericho (Kenyon 1981, Pl. 118). Stones were a valuable raw material in these villages and were extensively used for the construction of foundations. The plaster industry of the period also required large quantities of limestone for the production of plaster. Instead of carrying tons of stones from outside the site, it was easier to remove stones from walls of old or abandoned buildings. Recycling of stones, or even parts of old plastered floors, seems to have been quite common, but has a devastating effect on the preservation of architecture. The topographic situation of Kfar HaHoresh must be taken into consideration as well. The fragmented architecture seems to have a pattern – the preserved walls are all located in the southeastern part of the structures, while the missing walls are in the west and north (GoringMorris 2000, Fig. 5). When this phenomenon is compared with the natural topography of the site, it became apparent that the preserved walls are located up-slope, while the missing walls are located down-slope (see topographic map in Goring-Morris 1991, Fig. 2). A similar phenomenon has been observed at the nearby site of Yiftahel, also located on an east-west slope. The eastern part of the building was found quite intact while the western part was poorly preserved (Garfinkel 1987, Fig. 5). This is also true of the plastered floors: while the southern and eastern parts are better preserved, the northern and western parts are missing. It seems that the survival of architectural elements at Kfar HaHoresh was mainly challenged by slope erosion, a natural post-depositional process. Three different site formation processes contributed to the widespread disappearance of architectural remains at Kfar HaHoresh: a. Robbing and reuse of stones during the Neolithic period. b. 9,000 years of slope erosion during which the northern parts of buildings were worn away. c. Recent damage by various modern activities.

112

YOSEF GARFINKEL et al.

But not all features of the site suffered equally from these destructive processes. Pits and sunken installations were not as severely affected as walls and floors. An unbalance picture resulted, in which the underground dimension of human activity, burials in this case, became over-emphasized. Burials in Other Neolithic Settlements: The main aspects of burials uncovered at Kfar HaHoresh have parallels in other Neolithic sites: a. Location under floors. Pre-Pottery Neolithic B burials were found under plastered floors in almost every site of that period including Jericho (Kenyon 1981), Yiftahel (Hershkovitz et al. 1986), Tell Ramad (de Contenson 2000), ‘Ain Ghazal (Rollefson and Simmons 1988:408-410) and Beisamoun (Lechevallier 1978:147-151). b. Concentrations with a large number of individuals. The number of individuals in some locations at Kfar HaHoresh appears to be quite high, but no quantitative data has yet been published. In Kenyon excavations at Jericho Stage XVIIA, “at least thirty” individuals were found (Kenyon 1981:78). In Beisamoun, below the floors of one building, nine individuals and two plastered skulls were found under room 188 and two additional individuals were found under room 150 (Lechevallier 1978:147-151). At Tell Aswad 25 individuals were found in a limited burial area (Stordeur 2003). At Ba’ja in southern Jordan a number of collective burials were excavated (Gebel and Hermansen 2001:17-18, 2004). In one of then three adults and nine infants were found (12 individuals altogether). The excavators concluded that: “Thus it would now seem that the collective burial found earlier in Area D is by no means unique. Rather, it has to be expected that each house unit has at least one small, chamber-like room in the basement containing a collective/the family burial” (Gebel and Hermansen 2004:15-16). c. Plastered skulls. These are now known from quite a number of sites: Jericho, Beisamoun, Tell Ramad, ‘Ain Ghazal and recently from the renewed excavations of Tell Aswad (Stordeur 2003). A different type of modeling was found at Nahal Hemar Cave (BarYosef and Alon 1988). d. Plastered skull in a plastered pit. One was reported from Tell Ramad (de Contenson 2000:56). e. Association of human skeletons and animal carcasses. Animal remains in graves are well known in prehistory, as early as the Middle Palaleolithic sites of Skhul and Qafzeh (McCown 1937; Vandermeersch 1989). In Natufian sites dogs were sometimes buried with the deceased (Davis and Valla 1978). This supports the view of the excavator of Kfar HaHoresh that “many specific aspects of PPNB ideological, ritual, and mortuary practices may be directly traced back some two to four millennia to the Early and Late Natufian” (Goring-Morris 2000:107). As to the Neolithic period itself, this custom was

THE BURIALS OF KFAR HAHORESH

113

reported from Çayönü (Özdo©an 1999:47, 53), Ba’ja (Gebel and Hermansen 2004:15) and quite recently at the Pottery Neolithic site of Tell ‘Ain el-Kerkh in northwest Syria (Tsuneki 2002). Here, under a thin plastered floor of a building (as at Kfar HaHoresh), a human infant was found together with infant suid, as well as a concentration of pig and cattle bones. A burial area inside a Neolithic village. A special area of the village dedicated to burials has been found at two sites. At Çayönü there is a building in which a few hundred burials were deposited (Özbeck 1988; Özdo©an 1999) and recently, a burial area was found at Tell Aswad with four plastered skulls and the remains of 21 individuals (Stordeur 2003).

Material Culture: Rich ritual paraphernalia and heavy investment in building decoration characterizes cultic activity in the Neolithic of the Near East, as known for example from Göbekli Tepe (Schmidt 1998), Nevali Çori (Hauptmann 1993), ‘Ain Ghazal (Rollefson 1983, 1986) and Nahal Hemar Cave (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988). Nahal Hemar Cave, as an example of cultic location outside a dwelling site, contained many symbolic items: masks, beads, anthropomorphic figurines, zoomorphic figurine, plastered statues, and modeled human skulls (Bar-Yosef and Alon 1988). Beside the skulls, no other human remains were found. Nahal Hemar Cave also produced a rather unique assemblage of flint and bone tools, which are fundamentally different from the typical assemblages unearthed at dwelling sites. The material culture at Kfar HaHoresh is, however, basically similar to contemporaneous settlements, “the chipped stone industry is not obviously much different from that of regular occupation sites” (Goring-Morris 2000:113). Enormous quantities of flint were found, over 120,000 in the first two seasons (Goring Morris et al. 1994-5, Table 1). Some exotic minerals were found, but “the overall picture in terms of quantity and variety is not particularly remarkable” (Goring-Morris 2000: 113). Recently, baked clay objects were examined by petrographic analysis and most were locally made (Biton 2004). Only one phenomenon has been considered to be an outstanding artistic expression, described as “depiction of the profile of an animal drawn with human and animal bones” (Goring-Morris et al. 1998, Figs. 3-4). I do not have the methodology to judge whether this bone arrangement was made intentionally or is an accidental distribution that happens to resemble an animal. In any case, such a display could have lasted a very short time, as exposed bones are quite fragile and would have been destroyed quickly by dogs, human trampling and the sun. This technique, if indeed practiced, would not have been suitable for extensive public rituals of a large community.

114

YOSEF GARFINKEL et al.

CONCLUSIONS On the one hand, Kfar HaHoresh produced architecture, material culture, and burials similar to those uncovered at other Pre-Pottery Neolithic B sites in the Levant. On the other hand, typical cultic paraphernalia (beside the plastered skulls) was not found. The site suffers from various depositional processes that removed large parts of its architecture. The location on a slope probably accelerates the natural erosion, at work continually for over 9,000 years. The underground burials better resist such processes and are thus better preserved. This situation creates the preliminary impression that the site functioned as a specialized regional cultic center. The aspects discussed above, and especially the new data on burials from two sites in Syria, Tell ‘Ain el-Kerkh (Tsuneki 2002) and Tell Aswad (Stordeur 2003), indicate that Kfar HaHoresh is not fundamentally different from other Pre-Pottery Neolithic B settlements. The impressive and extremely important new data on the burials, meticulously unearthed by Goring-Morris and his staff, represent the local community that lived and died at the site. Kfar HaHoresh, together with Tell Aswad and Çayönü, probably indicate that in every PrePottery Neolithic B village there was a burial area within the settlement.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bar-Yosef O. and Alon D. 1988. Nahal Hemar Cave (‘Atiqot 18). Jerusalem: Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums. Biton R. 2004. Baked Clay Objects from K H: Typological and Technological aspects. Abstracts of the Israel Prehistoric Society Meeting 2004:9 Contenson H. de 1992. Préhistoire de Ras Shamra (Ras Shamra-Ougarit VIII). Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Contenson H. de 1995. Aswad et Ghoraifé. Sites Néolithiques en Damascène (Syrie) aux IXéme et VIIIéme millénaires avant l’ère chrétienne. Beyrouth: Institute Français d’archéologie du ProcheOrient. Contenson H. de 2000. Ramad. Site Néolithique en Damascène aux VIIIe et VIIe millénaires avant l’ère chrétienne. Beyrouth: Institut Français d’archéologie du Proch-Orient. Davis S. J. M. and Valla F. 1978. Evidence for the Domestication of the Dog in the Natufian of Israel 12,000 Years Ago. Nature 276:608-610. Dunand M. 1973. Fouilles de Byblos V. Paris: Maisonneuve. Garfinkel Y. 1987. Yiftahel: A Neolithic Village from the Seventh Millennium B.C. in Lower Galilee, Israel. Journal of Field Archaeology 14:199-212. Gebel H.-G. K and Hermansen B.D. 2001. LPPNB Ba’ja 2001: A Short Note. Neo-Lithics 2/01:15-20. Gebel H.-G. K and Hermansen B.D. 2004. Ba’ja 2003: Summary on the 5th Season of Excavation. NeoLithics 2/04:15-18. Goring-Morris N. 1991. A PPNB Settlement at Kfar HaHoresh in Lower Galilee: A Preliminary Report of the 1991 Season. Mitekufat Haeven (Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society) 24:77-101.

THE BURIALS OF KFAR HAHORESH

115

Goring-Morris A. N. 2000. The Quick and the Dead: The Social Context of Aceramic Neolithic Mortuary Practices as Seen from Kfar Hahoresh. In Kuijt I. (ed.) Life in Neolithic Farming Communities. Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation (Fundamental Issues in Archaeology), pp. 103136. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Goring-Morris A. N., Goren Y., Horwitz L. K., Hershkovitz I., Lieberman R., Sarel J. and Bar-Yosef D. 1994-5. The 1992 Season of Excavations at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Settlement of Kefar HaHoresh. Mitekufat Haeven (Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society) 26: 74-121. Goring-Morris A. N., Goren Y., Horwitz L. K., Bar-Yosef D and Hershkovitz I. 1995. Investigations at an Early Neolithic Settlement in Lower Galilee. Results of the 1991 Season at Kefar HaHoresh. ‘Atiqot 27:37-62. Goring-Morris A. N., Burns R., Davidson A., Eshed V., Goren Y., Hershkovitz I., Kangas S. and Kelecevic J. 1998. The 1997 Season of Excavations at the Mortuary Site of Kefar HaHoresh, Galilee, Israel. Neo-lithics 98/3:1-4. Goring-Morris A. N., Boaretto E. and Weiner S. 2001. Radiometric Dating of the PPNB Mortuary Site of Kfar HaHoresh, Lower Galilee, Israel: Problems and Preliminary Results. Mitekufat Haeven (Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society) 31: 213-217. Hauptmann H. 1993. Ein Kultgebäude in Nevali Çori. In Frangipane M., Hauptmann H., Liverani M., Matthiae P. and Mellink M. (eds.) Between the Rivers and over the Mountains, pp. 37-69. Rome: Università di Roma. Hershkovitz I., Garfinkel Y. and Arensburg B. 1986. Neolithic Skeletal Remains at Yiftahel, Area C. Paléorient 12/1:73-81. Kenyon K. M. 1981. Excavations at Jericho, Vol. III. London: The British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem. Lechevallier M. 1978. Abou Gosh et Beisamoun, deux gisements du VIIe millénaireavant l’ère chrétienne en Israël. (Mémoires et Travaux du Centre de Recherches Préhistoriques Français de Jérusalem No. 2). Paris: Association Paléorient. McCown T. 1937. Mugharet es-Skhul: Description and Excavation. In Garrod D. and Bate D. (eds.) The Stone Age of Mount Carmel, pp. 91-107. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Özbeck M. 1988. Culte des crânes humains à Çayönü. Anatolica 15:127-138. Özdo©an A. 1999. Çayönü. In Özdo©an M. and Ba∑gelen N. (eds.) Neolithic in Turkey. The Cradle of Civilization, pp. 35-63. Istanbul: Arkeoloji veSanat Yayinlari. Rollefson G. O. 1983. Ritual and Ceremony at Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan). Paléorient 9/2:29-38. Rollefson G. O. 1986. Neolithic ‘Ain Ghazal (Jordan): Ritual and Ceremony, II. Paléorient 12/1:4552. Rollefson G. O. and Simmons A.H. 1988. The Neolithic Settlement at ‘Ain Ghazal. In Garrard A.D. and Gebel H. G. (eds.). The Prehistory of Jordan: The State of Research in 1986. (BAR International Series 396), pp. 393-421. Oxford (2 vols.) Schmidt K. 1998. Frühneolithische Tempel: Ein Forschungsbericht zum präkeramischen Neolithikum Obermesopotamiens. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin 130:17-49. Stordeur D. 2003. Des crânes surmodelés à Tell Aswad de Damascène (PPNB – Syrie). Paléorient 29/2: 109-116. Stordeur D., Brent M., der Aprahamian G. and Roux J. C. 2001. Les bâtiments communautaires de Jerf el Ahmar et Mureybet horizon PPNA (Syria). Paléorient 26/1:29-44.

116

YOSEF GARFINKEL et al.

Tsuneki A. 2002. A Neolithic Foundation Deposit at Tell Ain el-Kerkh. In Gebel H.-G. K., Dahl Hermansen D. and Hoffmann Jensen C. (eds.) Magic Practices and Ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic. (Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 8), pp. 133-143. Berlin: ex oriente. Vandermeersch B. 1989. Une sepulture moustérienne avec offrandes découverte dans la grotte de Qafzeh. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l’Académie des Sciences 270:298-301.

A BASALT FLOORSociety FROM36 LEVEL (PPNC) AT HAGOSHRIM Jurnal of TheCHIPPING Israel Prehistoric (2006),VI117-128

117

A Basalt Chipping Floor from Level VI (PPNC) at Hagoshrim DANNY ROSENBERG1 NIMROD GETZOV2

Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa 2

Israel Antiquity Authority

INTRODUCTION The site of Hagoshrim is situated at the northern margins of the Hula Basin (Israel map ref. 2923-2085), northern Israel, near Kibbutz Hagoshrim (Fig.1). It lies on a travertine ledge, elevated some 20m above the former level of Hula marshes, prior to their drainage in the 1950â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. The site was excavated in the past (Noy 1978; 1980) and has been subjected to intensive surface collection in the last fifty years1. Site size is estimated to be about eight hectares. During 1996-7 two salvage excavation seasons were conducted in anticipation of the repaving of the road leading from Qiryat Shmone to Mt. Hermon and the Golan Heights. The renewed excavations at the site on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority (Getzov 1999) concentrated in the South-Western margins of the site, and covered an area of ca. 0.2 hectares, in four excavation areas (E; N; W and M). Six levels were identified (VI-I). These were dated from the Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (hereafter PPNC, level VI) through Late Chalcolithic (Level I). Three levels (VI-IV) yielded most of the archaeological material: Level VI (PPNC); level V (Jericho IX) and level IV (Wadi Rabah).

This collection is stored at Kibbutz Maâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ayan Baruch Regional Museum. It was studied by one of us (D. R.), courtesy of A. Assaf the curator of the museum.

117

118

ROSENGERG et al.

Figure 1: Map showing the location of Hagoshrim and other PPNC sites in the Southern Levant

A BASALT CHIPPING FLOOR FROM LEVEL VI (PPNC) AT HAGOSHRIM

119

THE PPNC OF HAGOSHRIM PPNC Level VI remains were found mainly in excavation areas N and M, situated in the center of the excavation, and presenting three successive habitation stages (c-a) in which the earliest lay on virgin travertine. The excavations produced a wealth of archaeological material including architectural features such as straight walls, pits, and pavements. The interior surfaces of the latter are made of pounded limestone and broken pebbles, mainly of basalt for the courts and open surfaces (Figs. 2-3). Burials were also found in the PPNC level, as well as many flints, obsidian, stone and bone tools, and a large faunal assemblage (Haber 2001). Large numbers of stone implements were found in all excavation areas, and collected from the site surface as well (Rosenberg 2004; Rosenberg and Shlomi in press). This assemblage includes nearly 3000 stone items of which ca. 150 were retrieved from PPNC contexts. On the whole Hagoshrim stone assemblage is dominated by the use of basalt, mainly finegrained and compact. The second most frequent raw material in the assemblage is limestone, followed by sandstone, and with the rare appearance of more exotic raw materials. Among the PPNC finds, a unique feature, designated as Locus 131, was noted in the 1996 season, characterized by a thick concentration of basalt fragments. Locus 131 Locus 131 was exposed in Area M (Sq. G19), 40-50 cm below the present surface. It is comprised of a thick concentration of basalt fragments superimposed on a thin sandy layer. The latter covers a pavement made mainly of basalt pebbles, which lies above the travertine bedrock (Fig. 4). The basalt surface covered an area2 of more than 25 sq.m. It is 20-35 cm thick and its upper surface slanted due west. While most of the L. 131 matrix is of chipped basalt, a relatively small quantity of limestone and travertine fragments was also found, along with a few flint tools and bones. The sandy sediment between the basalt flakes and fragments is dark brownblack and it represents a relatively small portion of the matrix. This basalt concentration clearly represents a new phenomenon, distinct from any previously discovered fills, floors, or pavements at the site. In the north-eastern part of the square, a concentration of charcoals was found (L.133) incorporated in the upper part of the basalt layer. A sample of the charred material produced a

Excavations were halted before the entire surface was exposed, yet judging from the sections, the true area of this surface was considerably larger.

ROSENGERG et al.

120

Figure 2: Level C, building floor made of crushed limestone and the court pavement made of basalt fragments (note the turned over grinding stone near the wall)

Figure 3: A close-up on a basalt pavement (note the broken pebbles)

A BASALT CHIPPING FLOOR FROM LEVEL VI (PPNC) AT HAGOSHRIM

121

Figure 4: Sq. G29, Southern section, showing the L. 131

terminus ante quem for the surface of 6591-6469 Cal. BC3 (Segal and Carmi 2004: 125-126). A sample from the basalt mass collected during the excavation (15 liters weighing ca. 20 kg.) was taken for analysis. The sample was selected as representative of the entire basalt mass, which possibly amounts to hundreds of thousands of chipped basalt items. The Sample The sample taken from L. 131 includes 1196 basalt objects, as well as a few travertine and limestone fragments (n=31 and 9 respectively). The Basalts The majority of the basalts could be characterized as high quality â&#x20AC;&#x201C; compact and finegrained (rich in olivine) basalt. Rare appearances of porous basalt were also noted. Basalt sources bearing similar characteristics are found in abundance in the immediate vicinity of Hagoshrim, for example, in the Koren stream situated on the western margins of the site and on the slopes of the Golan Heights east of the site. Most of the core-blanks used for producing the waste material at L. 131 are hard to reconstruct or define, since most items are intensively flaked, shattered, or broken. Though relatively large boulders and cobbles were probably used as core-blanks, some small pebbles present in the sample and in the overall mass also appear to have been used.

RT 2828; Another sample (RT-2826) taken from the lower parts of layer VI produced a calibrated C14 date of 7045-6787 BC, being the terminus post quem for L. 131. Samples were tested at the Weitzmann Institute, Rehovot

122

ROSENGERG et al.

Figure 5: Flaked basalt items (1-3 flakes; 4. A thick fragment; 5-7. Elongated fragments/”blades”; 8. Fragment of a flaked disc)

A BASALT CHIPPING FLOOR FROM LEVEL VI (PPNC) AT HAGOSHRIM

123

While siliceous raw material such as flint tends to produce a clear bulb of percussion when a direct blow is inflicted on the raw material, the basalt typical of this assemblage, as well as other coarser rock types do not always produce such physical indications on the ventral face of the flaked or battered item. Their appearance depends particularly on raw material characteristics as well as hammerstone traits, flaking force and angle. Over 85% of the basalt artifacts in the sample are thus fragments and chips, bearing no clear signs of bulbs of percussion. Primary elements, flakes, elongated fragments, flaked (possibly tested) pebbles, and tool fragments were also found, altogether comprising less then 15% of the entire basalt assemblage. Table 1: Breakdown of the Basalt Sample from L. 131 Type

Primary Element Flakes

Flakes

Angular, Amorphous Fragments

Elongated Fragments

Chips

Flaked Pebbles

Broken Tools

Total

537

495

1196

1.84

6.94

44.9

2.59

41.39

0.25

2.09

100

Primary Element Flakes (n=22; 1.84% of the basalt assemblage) These are flakes with cortex or cortex-like texture that covers more then 60% of their dorsal face or at least one facet. Most of these have a relatively straight profile while others exhibits a more curved profile. The majority show a smooth, convex dorsal face. End terminations are missing or are thin and feather-like. A few of these are angular. Flakes (n=83; 1.84% of the basalt assemblage) Here we include items bearing a clear bulb of percussion, or items in which the direction of the terminal blow (the blow removing the item from the original blank) could be discerned (Fig. 5:1-3). However, the difficulties caused by the rough surface of the basalt, prevent a clear distinction between ‘fragments’ and ‘flakes’ in many cases. Thus, when analyzing basalt assemblages from a technological point of view, this distinction should be carefully approached. The flakes were divided between small flakes (25-35 mm across, Fig. 5:1) and larger flakes (35-95 mm, Fig. 5:2-3). Most of the small flakes are thin while the majority of the large flakes are relatively thick. Both small and large flakes are angular and have a straight or curved profile. It is hard to distinguish dorsal face scar patterns yet it appears that both unidirectional and multidirectional scars are present. In a few examples the striking platform is observable, but preparation of the latter is rarely represented. End terminations are thin, feather-like, missing or less frequently thick resembling over-shot.

124

ROSENGERG et al.

Angular, Amorphous Fragments (n=537; 44.9 % of the basalt assemblage) Fragments measuring between 20 and 115 mm were included weighing between 20 and 620 g. The vast majority of these fragments measure between 40 to 80 mm and weigh 50 to 400 g. These are mainly thick, angular fragments (Fig. 5:4), bearing no clear sign of a bulb of percussion. Many are cortical fragments, featuring one or more facets of the original blank. The majority of these fragments show 3-5 multidirectional scars, which occasionally cut the ventral face. This suggests reduction continued after the removal of the chunk from the original core-blank. In some examples it appears that reduction was performed prior to the detachment of the item. Scars sizes vary. Some are small and thin, seemingly related to detachment and include striking platform preparations; others are larger and thicker, possibly related to removal of earlier flakes or fragments from the original blank. Elongated Fragments (n=31; 2.59% of the basalt assemblage) These are elongated pieces, 23-73 mm long; 6-28 mm wide and 2-23 mm thick (Fig. 5:5-7). Three size groups were discerned including small fragments (with length ranging between 24 and 35 mm and width ranging between 7 and 13 mm; n=12), medium size fragments (ranging in length between 30 and 41 mm and 12-18 mm wide; n=11), and large fragments (ranging in length between 48 and 73 mm and 15-28 mm wide; n=8). No clear technological attribution of these elongated fragments could be made, thus their place in the production sequence is unclear. Nonetheless, it is clear that the majority seems to represent a spontaneous production of elongated blank, possibly by-products of the general production sequence, while a small number of these are definitive blades or bladelets (see Fig. 5:7), bearing a clear central dorsal ridge. Chips (n=495; 41.39% of the basalt assemblage) Here we include items smaller than 20 mm. While most of these are thin (4-8 mm), others are thicker and more angular. Presence of a clear bulb of percussions was noted in ca. 10% of the chips and some bear traces of cortex. Flaked Basalt Pebbles (n=3; 0.25% of the basalt assemblage) These pebble fragments, were broken by a single blow. Two of them are from elongated pebbles while one has an amorphous shape. The two elongated fragments are smoothed and could be broken polishers or burnishers, while the amorphous fragment has a rougher surface. Broken Tools (n=25; 2.09% of the basalt assemblage) These are fragments bearing at least one facet ostensibly worked (n=20); items bearing depression or concaved modification (n=4) and a preform of a chipped disc (n=1).

A BASALT CHIPPING FLOOR FROM LEVEL VI (PPNC) AT HAGOSHRIM

125

Most of the worked fragments (n=19) are broken pieces bearing at least one smooth or ground surface while one item is a fragment bearing apparent chipping marks. Here we include only pieces bearing a ‘clear’ worked surface, while additional fragments bearing partly smooth facet or showing only a small surface bearing smoothing were not included but noted among other groups. Of these, 13 are thicker and seven are relatively thin. While it is reasonable that many of these are in fact broken tools, representatives of some sort of grinding or burnishing implements, or fragments of unidentified worked tools, it should be stated that the morphology and surface textures of these items prevents a clear distinction between ‘worked’ items and items shaped and weathered by natural agents. The smooth surfaces in these fragments are flat, concaved or convex, and some surfaces seem more abraded then others. Pecking was also noted, yet its density and the level of penetration from the surface vary considerably. Four items in the tool fragment group are fragments designated as ‘items bearing depression’. These are too fragmentary to allude on their primary form, yet they could be assigned both to the small and crude vessels or small shallow bowls. An exception in this group is a fragment of a chipped disc (Fig. 5:8). This is broken by at least two blows (one of these broke the disc transversely). It is bifacially flaked and has a plano-convex cross-section. Though this is a relatively small fragment, the rounded periphery of the disc is evident. Chipped discs are present in many sites in the Hula basin and beyond, dated from the PPNB through the Chalcolithic (Rosenberg et al. forthcoming). Over 330 chipped discs were retrieved from the site of Hagoshrim; among theme over a hundred came from stratified contexts (Rosenberg and Shlomi in press). Of the latter, nearly seventy were found in PPNC contexts. Intriguingly, most of the PPNC discs found during the excavations were made of limestone, while basalt discs are less common. Other finds Travertine (n=31) and Limestone (n=9) fragments Travertine pieces are mostly small fragments though a few small pebble-like items were found as well. The travertine pieces range in size between 12-86 mm, weighing between 2 and 100 g. None of these have a regular shape or bear any sign of use or shaping. The limestone pebbles include six pebbles bearing a single scar (broken transversely), two pebbles that are more “exhausted” bearing several flake scars, and a single small pebble fragment. The pebbles range in size between 38 and 65 mm. Eight of these could have been used as hammerstones (three clearly shows battering marks), while one is made of a relatively soft limestone.

126

ROSENGERG et al.

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION The puzzling nature of L. 131 lies both in the characteristics of the material and the rarity of basalt chipping loci in the Southern Levant and the Near East as a whole (but see Shimelmitz et al. 2005; Rosenberg et al. forthcoming). No comparable basalt feature is known from any other Neolithic site in the area. Intensive concentration of production waste is usually regarded as characteristic of stone quarries (Burton 1984; Huckell; 1986; Jones 1984; Rรถder 1955; Rosen and Schneider 2001; Schneider 1993; 1994; 1996; 2000; Schneider et al. 1995; Shimelmitz et al. 2005; Wallace 1962). These quarry sites were also the initial reduction locations, where the quarried (or surface collected) stones underwent their first modification, reducing the original stone mass and volume during shaping of a preform or roughout. The finds from L. 131 suggest that during the mid parts of the 7th millennium (Cal BC) intensive basalt reduction was conducted at Hagoshrim. This chipping locus exhibits many similarities to production loci at quarry sites, mainly in terms of high find densities and production intensities and in the high frequency of fragments. The nearby Koren stream and the massive exposures of the Golan Heights, offer high quality sources for raw materials of different characteristics, morphologies, and sizes. This allowed craftsmen to modify coreblanks on-site permitting a greater degree of failure in production. That is, the presence of close, accessible sources of basalt near Hagoshrim may explain why the intensive basalt reduction took place within the site and not in a separate location. The broken basalt pebbles and many of the fragments noted in the sample suggest that original raw material pebbles/cobbles used in L. 131 as core-blanks were small and probably not suitable for the production of large tools. However, the majority of the fragments in the sample are extremely broken or flaked, indicating the possibility that such items were also manufactured in L. 131. This idea is supported by the relatively small quantity of cortical items in the sample. This could suggest that the initial shaping of the large quarried blocks was done elsewhere, possibly in a quarry site or at collection spots, leaving much of the cortical waste near the quarry localities and the primary modification loci, while the small core-blanks were reduced on-site. To sum up, it appears that at one locality (production area) at PPNC Hagoshrim a mass reduction and production of basalt items took place. Though it is hard to assert the primary function of this chipping/flaking floor or its exact dimensions, a few primary observations can be made: 1. L. 131 is exceptional feature within the widely excavated PPNC level (0.1 hectare of exposure), suggesting a particular (specialized?) production area within the PPNC habitation. 2. While the use of fire in L. 131 is evident, it could not be directly associated with the

A BASALT CHIPPING FLOOR FROM LEVEL VI (PPNC) AT HAGOSHRIM

127

splitting of basalt4. Thus, the charcoal concentration found on top of the stone mass might be related to cooking or other uses, and only few fragments bear apparent soot marks. 3. Pebbles and cobbles of limestone and basalt, observed in the field and in the sample, could be suitable candidates for hammerstones. It is possible that both hard limestone and basalt pebbles were used as percussion tools for the flaking of the original block. 4. Most of the items in the sample are debris items, including mainly large fragments and small chips. Debitage items and formal tools are rare. However, the fact that these items were not tested for use-wear analysis so far prevents a determination whether these are actually used pieces or unused broken fragments. The nature of the analyzed sample does not appear to indicate specific production activities of preforms or formal tools, rather it suggests that basalt pebbles and cobbles were brought to the site and worked within its perimeters. These may have been intensively worked at one center at the site, producing an abundance of fragments (and flakes), which frequently were used as paving material for the courts outside buildings. Though many sites present accumulations, floors and pavements which include basalt fragments, L. 131 at Hagoshrim Level IV is the first opportunity to pinpoint an actual locus where a mass of basalt was reduced within a Neolithic site in the Southern Levant. It is even more intriguing to note that the products of these chipping activities were used distinctively for the pavement making of buildings courts, separating the internal whitish floors of the buildings from that the external basalt-based pavements. Whether the reason for this phenomenon is merely functional5 or whether it supplies us with hints for symbolic distinction between internal and external spaces is unknown. However, it is likely that the worked basalt material used in the building courts of the PPNC level at Hagoshrim were produced in L. 131.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like express our thanks to D. Nadel, E. Orrelle and anonymous reviewers for their suggestions and remarks. R. Getzov conducted the operations in Area M and collected the studied sample from L. 131 and I. Rosenberg edited the figures.

However, following Röder’s (1955) experiments for cracking stones with the aid of fire, and experiments made by one of us (D.R.) for the use of fire for splitting basalt boulders from the vicinity of Hagoshrim, it is possible to suggest that fire could have been used for cracking basalt in L. 131. Crushed lime floors are possibly more convenient for bare foot walking, and at the same time helping in “lighting” the relatively dark spaces of buildings, reflecting more light then dark material. Furthermore, it seems that basalt-based pavements are more durable in rainy winter and

128

ROSENGERG et al.

REFERENCE Burton, J. 1984. Quarrying in tribal society. World Archaeology 16(2): 235–247. Getzov, N.1999. Ha-Goshrim. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 110: 2-3. Haber, A. 2001. The Faunal Analysis of Hagoshrim: Biological and Economical Aspects of Prehistoric Agricultural Societies and the process of domestication. Unpublished M. Sc. Thesis. Department of Zoology. Tel-Aviv University. Tel-Aviv (in Hebrew). Huckell, B. B. 1986. A Ground Stone Implement Quarry on the Lower Colorado River, Northern Arizona. Cultural Resource Series No. 3. Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona. Jones, K. L. 1984. Polynesian quarrying and flaking practices at the Samson Bay and falls Creek argillite Quarries Tasman Bay, New Zealand. World Archaeology 16(2): 248-266. Noy, T. 1978. HaGoshrim. Israel Museum News 14: 20. Noy, T. 1980. A limestone statuette from HaGoshrim. ‘Atiqot 14: 93-4. Röder, J. 1955. The quern-quarries of Mayen in the Eifel. Antiquity 29(114): 68-75. Rosen, S. A. and Schneider, J. S. 2001. Early Bronze Age milling stone production and exchange in the Negev: Preliminary report. Mitekufat Haeven 31: 201-212. Rosenberg, D. 2004. The Pestle: Characteristics and changes of stone pounding implements in the Southern Levant from the Early Epipaleolithic through the Pottery Neolithic period. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Tel Aviv University (in Hebrew). Rosenberg, D. and Shlomi, V. n.d. The Stone Assemblage of Hagoshrim – Continuity and change in the Neolithic of Northern Israel In: Getzov, N. (ed.) IAA Reports. Rosenberg, D., Assaf, A. and Gopher, A. forthcoming. The flaked stone discs industry of the Levant: Characteristics, attributes and chronology. Rosenberg, D., Shimelmitz, R. and Nativ, A. forthcoming. Stone bifacials production in the Southern Levant: A glance at the basalt quarry and workshop of Giv’at Kipod, Israel. Schneider, J. S. 1993. Aboriginal Milling-Implement Quarries in the Eastern California and Western Arizona: A Behavioral Perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Riverside. Schneider, J. S. 1994. Milling Implement quarrying and production bordering the Lower Colorado and Lower Gila Rivers: Archaeological, ethnographic, and historical evidence for an aboriginal industry. In Ezzo, J. A. (ed.) Recent Research along the Lower Colorado River. pp. 101-117. Tucson: Statistical Research, Technical Serious No. 51. Schneider, J. S. 1996. Quarrying and production of milling implements at Antelope Hill, Arizona. Journal of field Archaeology 23: 299-311. Schneider, J. S. 2000. Project background. In: Schneider, J. S. and Altschul, J. H. (eds.) Of Stones and Spirits. pp. 11-20. Tucson. Technical Serious 76, Statistical Research, Inc. Schneider, J. S., Lerch, M. K. and Smith, G. A. 1995. A milling-implement Quarry at Elephant Mountain, California. Journal of California and the Great Basin Anthropology 17(2): 191-221. Segal D. and Carmi I. 2004. Rehovot Radiocarbon Date List VI. Atiqot 48: 125-148. Shimelmitz, R., Rosenberg, R. and Nativ, A. 2005. Giv’at Kipod: A Basalt Quarry and a workshop for the production of bifacial tools in the Manasseh Hills, Israel. Neo-Lithics 1/05: 9-12. Wallace, W. J. 1962. Two basalt quarries in the Death Valley. Archaeology 15(1): 46-49.

BEISAMOUN - THEPrehistoric WADI RABAH Jurnal of The Israel SocietyOCCURRENCE 36 (2006), 129-137

129

Beisamoun - The Wadi Rabah Occurrence DANNY ROSENBERG1 AMMNON ASSAF2 RUTH EYAL3 AVI GOPHER3

Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, 31905 Mount Carmel, Haifa, Israel 2 3

Ma’ayan Baruch Museum of Prehistory of the Hula Valley

Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University, 69978, Tel Aviv, Israel

ABSTRACT The site of Beisamoun in the Hula Basin in Northern Israel is well known for its prehistoric finds dated mostly to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB). Nevertheless, this site also contains remains of the Pottery Neolithic (PN) Period, mostly of the Wadi Rabah culture. This paper briefly presents the Wadi Rabah aspect of Beisamoun. Though retrieved from the surface of the site, the amount and diversity of the finds suggests the existence of a substantial Wadi Rabah settlement on the western edge of the Hula marshes. The Wadi Rabah occurrence at Beisamoun is yet another northern manifestation of this cultural entity joining other Wadi Rabah sites in the Hula Valley indicating that the northern part of the Israeli rift valley was an important Wadi Rabah ‘province’.

THE SITE The site of Beisamoun is situated some 12 km south of the city of Qiryat Shmone, east of the Qiryat Shmone-Rosh Pinna highway at the base of the Naphtali Mountains (Fig. 1), some 400 m northeast of the Natufian site of Eynan and 5 km south of Tel Te’o. It covers an area ca. 400 dunams and is located on flat alluvial ground, 70 m a. s. l, at the border between the marsh and the dry land. The surface of the site was subjected to repeated plowing and turning 129

ROSENGERG et al.

130

Figure 1: A map showing the Beisamoun and other Wadi Rabah sites

BEISAMOUN - THE WADI RABAH OCCURRENCE

131

of the upper levels at least for the last hundred years. The temperatures are moderate, and the area receives approximately 600 mm of rainfall a year (see Eisenberg et al. 2001 for further discussion on the western Hula Valley settings). The catchment area of the site is diverse, including rich sources of fresh water (the Eynan spring and stream), the verge of the swamps to the east and the mountains to the west. A few gray stains on the surface of the site (A. Assaf pers. obs.) may suggest architectural features but this was not confirmed. The Wadi Rabah occurrence at Beisamoun is concentrated mainly in the southwestern parts of the greater Beisamoun site, spread over an estimated area of 30-40 dunams (based on the distribution of the Wadi Rabah finds). The site has been the subject of intensive surface collection by A. Assaf since the early 1960’s. Salvage excavation took place in early 1970’s, mostly at the PPNB occupation (Lechevallier 1978), situated some 250 m northeast of the Wadi Rabah occurrence.

THE FINDS The Wadi Rabah finds presented here were collected from the surface of the site over the years and stored at the Ma’ayan Baruch museum of prehistory of the Hula Valley. These include pottery sherds, flint tools and waste, and groundstone tools. A large portion of the finds, mainly pottery sherds and flint tools, could be typologically assigned to the Wadi Rabah culture.

Pottery Some 500 Wadi Rabah pottery sherds are present in the collection, including bowls, kraters, pithoi, holemouth jars and necked jar fragments (Figs. 2-4). The fabric is usually well levigated, cream or beige in color, and with small inclusions. All vessels are hand made. The bowls include carinated and hemispherical types, a few V-shape bowls and ‘minibowls’. Bowls display a variety of rim shapes including rounded, pointed, and flat, and they vary in size (Fig. 2:1-3). Some bowls had knob handles and a single possible strap handle is present as well. The kraters are characterized by upright walls and flat rims. Holemouth jars display diversity in size and opening diameter and have usually a rounded rim (Fig. 2:4-7). One of these bears a so-called ‘repair hole’ near the rim, perforated from the outside inwards (Fig. 2:6). The neck jars (Fig. 3:1-7) are mostly of the ‘bow-rim’ type, though straight-neck jars and jars with everted necks are also present. The bow-rim jars (Fig. 3:1-3) show various curvatures and neck heights. Rims are rounded or pointed. The few pithoi found have thick walls and a large estimated diameter (Fig. 3:8-9). They have flat, sometime slanting rims, occasionally protruding from the vessels’ profile both inside and outside. Bases are mostly flat and untreated. Handles include knobs (Fig. 4:1), sometime bulging from the wall or slanting upwards, and loop or strap handles.

132

Figure 2: 1-3: bowls; 4-7: Holemouth Jars

ROSENGERG et al.

BEISAMOUN - THE WADI RABAH OCCURRENCE

Figure 3: 1-3: ‘Bow-rim’ Jars; 4-7: Necked Jars; 8-9: Pithoi

133

134

ROSENGERG et al.

Figure 4: 1: Handle; 2-4: Decorated body shards

Surface treatment (Fig. 4:2-4) is dominated by red-orange and occasional brown slips on all vessel types, sometimes on the inside of the vessel. Black burnish was found on bowls, kraters and on the inside of one of the pithoi (Fig. 3:8). Paint, usually red shades, is not frequent, but a few fragments feature the typical red line (â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;lipstickâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;) on the rim area. Incisions include combed elements, nail-impressions, pointille and roulette impressions as well as various other elements and patterns (Fig. 4:2-4). These are sometime accompanied by red paint. Incision is mostly found on the outer walls, sometimes on inner walls, and in some cases on both inner and outer walls of the same vessel (Fig. 4:2, 4). As a whole the pottery has many of the characteristics of the Wadi Rabah assemblage. It should be noted that the numbers of both carinated vessels and Dark Face Burnished Ware seem to be relatively high, although this could be a result of a biased collection.

Flint and Groundstone The chipped lithic items collected from The Wadi Rabah occupation area include mainly tools and cores. Only a few of them can be typologically assigned to the Wadi Rabah assemblage. In most cases these are rectangular sickle segments (Fig. 5: 1-4) with backing and two truncations at the narrow ends, commonly made on short, thick blades. The working edge is serrated. Sheen is clear and is found on both the ventral and dorsal faces. The groundstone assemblage from Beisamoun is large and diverse. It was made mainly from basalt and limestone, with a few items on sandstone and unidentified raw materials. It includes both passive and active grinding stones, vessels/mortars, flaked and chipped disks, and other tools.

BEISAMOUN - THE WADI RABAH OCCURRENCE

135

Figure 5: 1-4 Sickle blades

DISCUSSION The finds presented here clearly demonstrate a Wadi Rabah occupation at the southwestern parts of Beisamoun. The exact nature of this occurrence and its chronological span, await further investigation, but its location is of special interest given the proximity to Tel Teâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;o and the fact that it is the southernmost Wadi Rabah site in the Hula Valley known to date. This occupation joins other sites attributed to the Wadi Rabah culture in the Hula Basin (Eisenberg et al. 2001; Getzov 1999; Gopher and Greenberg 1996; Kaplan 1993), the Upper and the Lower Galilee (Getzov in press; Gopher 1989; Gopher et al. 1992; Khalaily et al. 2003; Scheftelovitz 2003) and the fringes of the Jezreel Valley and the Menashe hills (Anati et al. 1973; Baruch 1987; Covello-Paran 1996; Gopher in press; Gophna and Shlomi 1997; Kaplan 1969; R. Kleter pers. com.; Mayer 1976; Meirhof 1982), reflecting the economic importance of the northern valleys of Israel in the Wadi Rabah settlement system. Wadi Rabah settlements flourished from Lebanon (Dunand 1973; Copland 1969) to the south-central parts of Israel (Galili and Weinstein-Evron 1985; Kaplan 1958; Marder et

136

ROSENGERG et al.

al. 1995; Rosenberg and van den Brink 2005; Rosenberg et al. 2004; and see Gopher and Gophna 1993; Gopher 1995) and in the Jordan valley (see Bourke et al. 2003; GustavsonGaube 1986). It seems that Beisamoun and other Wadi Rabah sites in northern Israel and particularly in the Hula Valley, suggest that this culture had an important center in this area. Furthermore, it seems fair to suggest that the Hula valley settlements may have played a role in bridging the northern Wadi Rabah sites and the southern settlements of this entity. The Wadi Rabah occupation at Beisamoun, though not yet thoroughly explored, could have been a significant site in this system.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to express our thanks to P. Shrago who made the photograph of the pottery, to R. Shimelmitz for drawing the sickle blades and to I. Rosenberg for drawing of Fig. 1 and preparing the plates for print.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Anati, E.; Avnimelech, M.; Haas, N. and Meyerhof, E. 1973. Hazorea I. Arcivi Vol. 5. Capo de Ponte: Edizioni del Centro. Baruch, U. 1987. The Early Bronze Age, Chalcolithic and Neolithic periods. In Ben-Tor, A. and Portugali, Y. (eds.) Tel Qiri, a Village in the Jezreel Valley (Qedem 24). pp. 274-299. Bourke, S.; Sparks, R.; McLaren, B.; Sowada, B.; Mairs, L.; Meadows, J.; Hikade, T. and Reade, W. 2003. Preliminary report on the University of Sydney’s Eighteenth and Nineteenth seasons of excavation at Pella (Tabaqat Fahl) in 1996/97. Annual of the Department of Antiquity of Jordan 47: 335-388. Copland, L. 1969. Neolithic village sites in the South Beqa’a, Lebanon. Mélanges de l’Université SaintJoseph 45: 83-114. Covello-Paran, K. 1996. Tel Yosef. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 106: 68 (in Hebrew). Dunand, M. 1973. Fouilles de Byblos V. Paris, Maisonneuve. Eisenberg, E.; Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R. 2001. The discovery of the site, the environmental settings, and a review of regional research. In: Eisenberg, E.; Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R. (eds.) Tel Te’o – A Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age Site in the Hula Valley, pp. 1-7. Jerusalem, IAA Reports 13, Israel Antiquities Authority. Galili, E. and Weinstein-Evron, M. 1985. Prehistory and palaeoenvironment of submerged sites along the Carmel Coast of Israel. Paléorient 11(1): 37-52. Getzov, N. 1999. Ha-Goshrim. Hadashot Arkheologiyot 110: 2-3. Getzov, N. in press. Other Finds from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods: Strata 20-16. In Getzov, N.; Abshalom-Gorni, D.; Tatcher, A.; Lieberman-Vander, R.; Smithline, H. and J. Stern, E. J. (eds.) Horbat ‘Uza 1991 – Final Report of the 1991 Excavations. Jerusalem, IAA Reports, Israel Antiquities Authority.

BEISAMOUN - THE WADI RABAH OCCURRENCE

137

Gopher, I. 1989. Horvat Galil and Nahal Betzet I: Two Neolithic sites in the Upper Galilee. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 22: 82-92. Gopher A. 1995. Early Pottery-Bearing Groups in Israel – The Pottery Neolithic Period. In Levy, T. E. (ed.), The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land, pp. 205-225. London, Leicester Press. Gopher, A. forthcoming. Village Comunities of the Pottery-Neolithic Period in the Menashe Hills, Israel. Archaeological Investigations at the Nahal Zehora Sites. Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University. Gopher A and Gophna A. 1993. Cultures of the Eight and Seventh Millennia BP in the Southern Levant: A Review for the 1990s. Journal of World Prehistory 7(3): 297-353. Gopher, A. and Greenberg, R. 1996. The Pottery Neolithic Levels. In Biran, A.; Ilan, D. and Greenberg, R. (eds.), Dan I, pp. 67-81. Jerusalem, Annual of the Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology, Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion. Gopher, A.; Sadeh, S. and Gophna, R. 1992. The pottery assemblage of Nahal Beset I: A neolithic site in the Upper Galilee. Israel Exploration Journal 42: 4-16. Gophna, R. and Shlomi, V. 1997. Some notes on Early Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age material from the sites of ‘En Jezreel and Tel Jezreel. Tel Aviv 24(1): 73-82. Gustavson-Gaube, C. 1986. Tell Esh-Shuna North 1985: A preliminary report. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan. 30: 69-113. Kaplan, J. 1958. Excavations at Telulyot Batashi in the Vale of Soreq. Eretz Israel 5: 9-24. (in Hebrew). Kaplan, J. 1969. ‘Ein El Jerba. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 194: 2-39. Kaplan, J. 1993. Kefar Gil’adi. In Avi-Yonah, M. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land (Vol. 3), pp. 860-61. Jerusalem, Israel Exploration Socaiety and Massada Press. Khalaily, H. 2003. Neolithic pottery. In Golani, A. Salvage Excavations at the Early Bronze Age site of Qiryat Ata, pp. 220-221. Jerusalem, IAA Reports 18, Israel Antiquity Authority. Khalaily, H.; Goren, Y. and Valla, F. R. 1993. A Late Pottery Neolithic assemblage from Hayonim Terrace, Western Galilee. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 25: 132-144. Lechevallier, M. 1978. Abou Gosh et Beisamoun. Deux Gisements du VII Millenaire Avant L’ere Chretinne en Israel. (Memoires et Travaux du Centre de Resherches Prehistoriques Francais de Jerusalem 2). Paris, Association Paléorient. Marder, O.; Braun, E. and Milevski, I. 1995. The flint assemblage of Lower Horvat ‘Illin: Some technical and economic consideration. ‘Atiqot 27: 63-93. Meirhof, E. 1982. Ein el-Jerba 1980 (preliminary report). Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 17: 79. (in Hebrew). Mayer, M. M. 1976. Chalcolithic sites in the vicinity of Kibbutz Gal’ed. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 14: 82. Rosenberg, D. and van den Brink, E.C.M. 2005. Qidron – A new site of the Wadi Raba culture in the Southern Shephelah of Israel. SER 2: 93-103. Rosenberg, D. Shimelmitz, R. and van den Brink, E.C.M. 2004. The Lithic Assemblage of Qidron – A Wadi Raba Site in Central Israel. Neo-Lithic 2/04: 30-34. Scheftelovitz, N. 2003. Pottery – Late Neolithic periods. In Scheftelovitz, N. and Oren, R. (eds.), Tel Kabri – Aharon Kempinski: The 1986-1993 Excavation Seasons, pp. 91-95. Tel Aviv, Emery and Clair Yass Publication in Archaeology Monograph Series no. 20.

138

ROSENGERG et al.

FAUNA THEPrehistoric SUBMERGED POTTERY SITE OF NEWE YAM Jurnal ofFROM The Israel Society 36 (2006),NEOLITHIC 139-171

139

Fauna from the Submerged Pottery Neolithic Site of Newe Yam, Northern Israel LIORA KOLSKA HORWITZ1 OMRI LERNAU2 EHUD GALILI3

Dept. of Evolution, Systematics and Ecology, The Hebrew University, Givat Ram, Jerusalem 91904 2

Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa 3

Marine Archaeology Branch, Israel Antiquities Authority. POB 180, Atlit

ABSTRACT As with other contemporaneous sites in this region, the animal economy at Pottery Neolithic Newe Yam was based on keeping of domestic sheep, goat, cattle and pigs primarily aimed at the production of meat. This mode of subsistence was supplemented by fishing and agriculture. The Pottery Neolithic economies represent the continuation of a subsistence tradition established in the preceding PPNC coastal sites such as Atlit Yam and Ashqelon, which probably represent the earliest sites in the Eastern Mediterranean to integrate fishing with agro-pastoralism.

INTRODUCTION Newe Yam is one of six inundated Pottery Neolithic sites associated with the Wadi Rabah culture, dating to the seventh millennium BP. The sites, located off the Carmel coast of Northern Israel (Figure 1), were submerged as a result of a rise in sea level following global warming in the early Holocene (Galili 1985, 2004; Galili and Weinstein-Evron 1985; Galili and Nir 1993; Galili et al. 1988, 1989, 1993, 1997; Prausnitz 1977; Raban 1983; Ronen 1983; Ronen and Olami 1978). Newe Yam, which falls in the Late Pottery Neolithic (uncalibrated 14 C dates – HV 4256: 6360±395 BP; RT 1723: 6390±70; RT 1724: 6565±70 – Galili 139

140

HORWITZ et al.

Figure 1: Map showing location of Newe Yam and other submerged Pottery Neolithic sites.

2004; Wreschner 1983), has been the focus of archaeological investigation since the late 1960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, when part of the site was exposed following a storm (Prausnitz 1977; Prausnitz and Wreschner 1971; Wreschner 1977, 1983). Following its discovery, a limited excavation was carried out in early 1968 focusing on the sea-shore. The small bone sample recovered during this salvage excavation and from collections along the sea-shore at this time, has been

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

141

described by Horwitz (1988). This sample contained a large proportion of unidentifiable fragments (NISP = 105 identified bones, 73 unidentified bones). Subsequently, over a seven year period (1989-1995), archaeological remains were collected from the submerged part of the site during underwater surveys carried out by members of the Underwater Unit of the Israel Antiquities Authority (Galili 1985, 2004; Galili and WeinsteinEvron 1985). During these surveys, animal bones as well as other archaeological remains, were hand-collected during dives such that the faunal sample primarily consists of large, relatively complete elements. In contrast to the excavated sample, most of the bones from the survey could be identified to body part and species (NISP = 386 bones), while only 54 represent non-diagnostic splinters. This report describes the faunal remains recovered to date both from the excavation and underwater surveys carried out at the site.

MATERIAL AND METHODS All terrestrial vertebrate remains were identified to skeletal element and species with reference to the zoological collections of the Hebrew University. The total number of identified bones per species (NISP) as well as their percentages are given in Table 1. Table 1: Species represented at Newe Yam Newe Yam Excavation1 NISP Sheep Goat

–

NISP 4

% 1

Newe Yam TOTAL NISP 4

% 0.8

1.9

1.8

Sheep/Goat

24.7

117

30.3

143

29.1

Cattle

27*

25.7

142

36.7

169

34.4

Pig

19.0

103

26.6

123

25.0

Dog

–

0.7

0.6

Badger

–

0.2

Gazelle

13.3

0.7

3.4

Fish TOTAL ID TOTAL NON-ID 1

–

Newe Yam Surveys2

15.0

1.5

4.4

105

100.0

386

100.0

491

100.0

127

Data from Horwitz (1988) – 1968 excavation. *The hartebeest bone noted in Horwitz (1988) has been re-identified as that of cattle and added to this bone count. 2 New data from Galili surveys (1989-1995).

HORWITZ et al.

142

The minimum number of individuals (MNI) was calculated for each species based on the most frequent bodypart (proximal epiphyses, distal epiphyses, shaft) taking side and age into consideration. Where possible, metrical and/or morphological criteria were used to distinguish wild from domestic animals. Diminution in the size of bones and teeth as well as changes in horncore shape, such as the presence of torsion, are commonly considered evidence of domestication (Horwitz 1989; Meadow 1989). Measurements were taken of bones and teeth following von den Driesch (1976) with a few additions which are noted where relevant. Measurements taken for all species are listed in Table 8. Bone modifications such as burning, animal damage and butchery marks were noted (Table 2). The data on cut marks (location, number and type) are given in a separate paper by Greenfield et al. (this volume). Table 2: Bones from Newe Yam with modifications (data given as numbers) Cattle/Aurochs N Cut /Chop

%/ NISP

Total Sheep/Goat N

%/ NISP

Pig/Boar N

Gazelle

%/ NISP

TOTAL

%/ NISP

33 (a)

Burnt

13 (b)

Gnawed

–

Bleached

0.5

–

Abraded

6.5

–

TOTAL

TOTAL NISP

169

136

123

23 74

(a) An additional 2 unidentified bone fragments exhibited cut marks (b) An additional 31 unidentified bone splinters were burnt

THE FINDS All animal bones recovered to date from Newe Yam are described in this report. As no marked differences were observed in the spectrum or relative frequencies of species from this assemblage and that previously published (Horwitz 1988), they were pooled to increase sample size. The ‘identified fraction’ of this combined assemblage comprised 491 identified bones and 127 unidentified bone splinters. The bones from Newe Yam are dark brown in colour due to the de-oxygenated environment in which they were deposited. They are generally well preserved, probably as a result of their rapid burial in the grey clay which covers the entire site. This is attested to by the fact that relatively few bones exhibit abrasion (rounding of edges) resulting from wave action or

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

143

weathering (bleaching, cracking) as a result of exposure to the sun. From the 1968 excavation and associated beach collection only 3 bleached bones were recovered and 5 abraded bones (3% of assemblage). This is a surprisingly low frequency considering that the site continues up onto the beach and includes the inter-tidal zone which would expose the bones to both wave action and being beached. From the survey, 19 abraded bones (4% of this assemblage) were found but no bleached ones giving a total of 23 (5%) abraded bones for the site. This low frequency of abrasion and absence of bleached material supports the contention that the site was rapidly covered and that minimal movement of material has occurred.

CATTLE Morphometry: Bones of cattle were slightly more common than those of sheep/goat in the survey sample, while the two species were equally common in the excavation sample. The domestic status of the cattle remains was established through comparison of the bone measurements with those of aurochs (Bos primigenius) from several mid-PrePottery Neolithic B (mid-PPNB) sites (Table 8, Figure 2). The size index (SI) method was used (Ducos 1968; Ducos and Horwitz 1998). This method is especially designed for assemblages with small samples of measurable bones, and enables the researcher to compare measurements from different bones (Meadow 1999). The equation used to calculate the size index is that developed by Ducos (1968) where: SI= x/Rf. Here x is the archaeological sample and Rf the comparable measurement taken on the reference specimen. The reference animals used for comparison are wild auroch from the Jura (France) (Chaix 1984), and are the same as those used in Ducos and Horwitz (1998). Only bones with fused epiphyses were measured. All samples are assumed to be derived from assemblages containing remains of both males and females. As illustrated in Figure 2, the cattle from Newe Yam are markedly smaller than the midPPNB specimens illustrated. The Mid-PPNB sample (N=18) has a mean of 0.79 and range of 0.69-0.99 compared to the PN sample from Newe Yam (N=20) with a mean value of 0.74 and a range of 0.65-0.83. It is assumed that if the shift in measurements was solely a manifestation of changes in sex ratio, i.e., with more females in the Pottery Neolithic, then one would expect a marked shift in the lower size range but not necessarily in the upper one, as some large males should still be represented. However, this is not the case for Newe Yam, and both the upper and lower size ranges and the mean are markedly lower than that for the mid-PPNB. A t-test (including tests for equal and unequal variances) carried out on the two samples found inter-period differences to be highly significant (P=0.00). Consequently, we may be confident that based on size, the Pottery Neolithic remains are those of domestic cattle (Bos taurus), although isolated, exceptionally large bones, such as a butchered left mandible, are suspected to be those of aurochs (Greenfield et al. this volume).

144

HORWITZ et al.

Figure 2: Size Index plots for cattle from Newe Yam compared to Mid-PPNB sites in the Southern Levant taken from Ducos and Horwitz (1988).

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

145

Skeletal Elements: Bones from all parts of the skeleton are represented in the assemblage (Tables 3 and 4). Cattle are primarily represented by cranial remains (especially teeth), followed by meat-rich upper limb bones and trunk elements. The predominance of cranial remains is undoubtedly due to the better preservation of teeth (Table 4), the most robust element in the skeleton. With regard to the post-cranial skeleton, no marked differences were found in the representation of upper fore and hindlimbs. Lower limb elements and feet, elements which are poor in meat, were the least numerous in the assemblage (Table 3). The low frequency of the small sized foot bones (phalanges) may be related to collection techniques such that they were missed during hand collection of the sample. This is substantiated by their even lower numbers for the smaller taxa – sheep/goat and pigs. Table 3: Body part breakdown for species represented at Newe Yam (data in %) N

Cranial

Upper Forelimb

Lower Forelimb

Upper Hindlimb

Cattle

169

Sheep/ Goat

156

Pig

123

Lower Hindlimb

Trunk

Feet

Cranial: skull, antler/horn, maxilla, mandible and loose teeth Upper Forelimb: scapula, humerus, radius, ulna Lower Forelimb: metacarpal, carpals Upper Hindlimb: pelvis, femur, tibia, patella Lower Hindlimb: metatarsal, calcaneum, astragalus, tarsals Trunk: atlas, axis, cervical, thoracic, lumbar and caudal vertebrae, ribs Feet: 1st, 2nd and 3rd phalanges

Table 4: Skeletal element representation at Newe Yam (data in numbers) P =Proximal, D= Distal, S = Shaft CATTLE Excavation

SHEEP/GOAT

Survey

Excavation

Survey

PIG Excavation

Survey

ELEMENT Horncore

–

Skull

–

Maxilla

–

Loose upper teeth

–

Mandible

–

Loose lower teeth

–

CRANIAL

HORWITZ et al.

146 CATTLE Excavation

SHEEP/GOAT

PIG

Survey

Excavation

Survey

Excavation

Survey

Atlas

–

Axis

–

Cervical vertebrae

–

Thoracic Vertebrae

–

Lumbar Vertebrae

–

Sacrum

–

Ribs

–

TRUNK Scapula Dist

–

Blade

–

Humerus Prox.

–

Dist.

–

Shaft

–

Radius Prox.

–

Dist.

–

Shaft

–

Ulna Prox.

–

Shaft

–

UPPER FORELIMB

Metacarpal Prox.

–

Dist.

–

LOWER FORELIMB

Pelvis Ischium

–

Ilium

–

Acetabulum

–

Femur Prox.

–

Dist.

–

Shaft

–

Tibia Prox.

–

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

CATTLE Excavation

147

SHEEP/GOAT

Survey

Excavation

Survey

PIG Excavation

Survey

Dist.

–

Shaft

–

UPPER HINDLIMB

Metatarsal Prox.

–

Dist.

–

Tarsals

–

Astragalus

–

Calcaneum

–

Metapodial Dist.

–

Prox

–

Shaft

–

LOWER HINDLIMB

1st Phalanges

–

2nd Phalanges

–

3rd Phalanges

–

FEET

142

128

103

TOTAL

In order to examine the impact of bone mineral, density-mediated attrition on the assemblage, % survivorship of each bone type in the skeleton was calculated following Lyman (1994:239 ff.) (Table 5). This calculation compares the observed quantity of a bone element in the assemblage to that expected in the skeleton taking the MNI counts per species into account. In the case of cattle at Newe Yam, an MNI estimate of 5 animals was calculated, such that each element in the skeleton was multiplied by 5. The resulting % survivorship values were then plotted against maximum bone mineral density values for bison, also taken from Lyman (1994: Tables 7.6 data and Table 7.10 for definition of the maximum density scan sites) (Figure 3). The assumption of this regression plot is that under adverse conditions of preservation, the most robust bones i.e. those with the highest bone mineral density values, will be represented in far higher frequencies than bones with low mineral density values i.e. more fragile remains.

HORWITZ et al.

148

Table 5: % Survivorship of post-cranial elements of cattle and sheep/goat at New Yam Dist = Distal, Prox = proximal CATTLE

N=169

MNI =5

SHEEP/ GOAT

N=170

MNI =5

N Observed

N Expected

% Survivorship

N Observed

N Expected

% Survivorship

Mandible

240

Atlas

ELEMENT

Axis

100

Cervical vertebrae

Thoracic Vertebrae

Lumbar Vertebrae

3.3

Sacrum

Ribs

140

Scapula Dist.

Scapula Blade

Humerus Prox.

–

Humerus Dist.

100

Humerus Shaft

Radius Prox.

Radius Dist.

–

Radius Shaft

Ulna Prox.

–

Ulna Shaft

–

Metacarpal Prox.

Metacarpal Dist.

Pelvis Ischium

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

149

CATTLE

N=169

MNI =5

SHEEP/ GOAT

N=170

MNI =5

% Survivorship

N Observed

N Expected

N Observed

N Expected

Pelvis Ilium

Acetabulum

Femur Prox.

–

Femur Dist.

–

Femur Shaft

Tibia Prox.

–

Tibia Dist.

Tibia Shaft

Metatarsal Prox.

–

Metatarsal Dist.

–

Tarsals

–

Astragalus

Calcaneum

Metapodial Dist.

Metapodial Prox.

–

Metapodial Shaft

–

1st Phalanges

2.5

2nd Phalanges

–

3rd Phalanges

7.5

–

The regression plots for the Newe Yam data show that there is no significant correlation between the two parameters (r2 = 0.014; P = 0.54) and that bone mineral density did not play a critical role in the creation of this assemblage. Other factors such as the size and hence visibility of the bones in the water during collection, or anthropogenic transport and selection during butchery/consumption, appear to have played a more important role. Indeed, the prevalence of meat-rich elements may reflect human selection for these parts. Ageing: Cattle were aged following dental eruption and bone fusion stages for late maturing breeds given in Grigson (1982). The raw data per age group are given in Table 6. In order

150

HORWITZ et al.

Figure 3: Scattergram showing % survivorship of cattle bones plotted against maximum bone mineral density values for bison taken from Lyman (1994: Tables 7.6 and Table 7.10).

to increase sample sizes, bones were placed into four age classes according to the timing of epiphyseal fusion. The proportion of animals surviving (% fused) in each age category was calculated. As shown in Figure 4, relatively few cattle died under 10 months of age (infant category) which would represent natural mortality, and ca. 60% survived to the sub-adult stage (20-39 months). There is then a drop in the number of animals kept into adulthood (circa 35%). This reflects a progressive cull with an emphasis on sub-adult animals slaughtered for meat. The sub-adult age range is the period when the rate of body weight being added begins to stabilise relative to food intake. The Newe Yam peak cull is slightly later than that currently practised currently in Israel under modern husbandry with surplus calves, especially males, slaughtered at about 1 1/2 years of age (Eitan in press). The earlier age at which culling takes place today may be related to the faster weight increase of modern improved breeds that makes it economical to slaughter them earlier. It may also reflect the higher market value today of veal relative to beef. The scanty data for age based on dental attrition (Grant 1982), provide limited support for the results obtained on bone fusion (Table 7). Only two isolated teeth belong to adult animals i.e. older than 40 months, while the complete jaws are all from juvenile or sub-adult animals. Modifications: Cut marks were found on 13 cattle bones and on one suspected aurochs jaw. Most are associated with primary butchery and activities relating to carcass division

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

151

(Greenfield et al. this volume). Burning was evident on only 2 cattle bones and one bone from the excavated sample was bleached (Table 2). Table 6: Bone fusion by species (ages after Silver 1969) Cattle

Sheep/ Goat

Upper F Age N Limit (months) 9

UF N

Total N

Upper Age Limit (months)

Pig F N

UF N

Total N

Upper F Age N Limit (months)

UF N

Total N

TOTAL

Key: F = Fused; UF = Unfused; prox. = proximal; dist. = distal Age classes for Sheep/Goat (Ovis/Capra): 7 months = scapula; 10 months = dist. humerus, prox. radius; 14 months = prox. phalanges; 21 months = dist. tibia, dist. metapodia; 33 months= prox. femur, calcaneum; 36 months = dist. radius, prox. ulna; 39 months = prox. humerus, dist. femur, prox. tibia; 54 months = vertebrae Age classes for cattle (Bos): 9 months = scapula; 15 months = dist. humerus, prox. radius; 18 months = prox. phalanges; 27 months = dist. tibia, dist. metapodia; 39 months = calcaneum; 42 months = prox. femur; 45 months = dist. radius, prox. ulna, prox. humerus, dist. femur, prox. tibia Age classes for pig (Sus): 12 months = scapula, prox. radius, prox. 2nd phalanges; 18 months = dist. humerus; 24 = dist. metapodials, dist. tibia, prox. 1st phalanges; 30 months = prox. calcaneum, dist. fibula; 36 months = prox. ulna; 42 months = prox. humerus, dist. radius, prox. femur, prox. tibia, prox. fibula; 48 months = vertebrae

Table 7: Age estimates based on dental attrition scores (lower jaws only). Data given represent the number of individual teeth within each attrition stage (a) Sheep/ Goat

deciduous m3

Corresponding Age (in months)

Payne stage Jaws Left Jaw 1

12-24

Left Jaw 2

12-24

HORWITZ et al.

152 (a) Sheep/ Goat

deciduous m3

Corresponding Age (in months)

Left Jaw 3

broken

12-24

Left Jaw 4

10/11

8/9

36-48

Right Jaw 1

7/8

36-48

Right Jaw 2

8/9

36-48

Loose teeth Left

7; 8/9

12-24; 12-24

Left

Left (b) Cattle

24-36

5/6; 8 deciduous m3

12-24; 36-48

Age (in months)

Grant Stage Jaws Left

erupting

8-13

Left

18-24

Left

J/K

32-33

Loose Teeth Left

F; K; N

Left

>13 C; F; G; G

Left (c) Pig

>24 J; K

deciduous m3

>40 Age (in months)

Grant Stage Jaws Left

erupting

Left

erupting

Left Left

broken D

Left

D/E

Left Left

Left

erupting

<13

<20 A

erupting

< 20

erupting

< 20

erupting

D D D

<20 < 20-20 < 20-20

broken

Right

erupting

Right

<20

Right

<20

Right

broken

<20

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

deciduous m3

153

Age (in months)

Right

<20

Right

<20

Loose Teeth Left

Left Right Right Right

O B

old adult <20

<20 ? C

>20

SHEEP/GOAT Differentiation between bones of sheep and goat is often difficult, especially when dealing with fragmented remains. In this study, distinction between these taxa followed criteria outlined in Boessneck (1969) and Prummel and Frisch (1986). In most cases this was not possible and the remains were placed in a joint â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sheep/goatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; category. Both sheep and goat are represented in the Newe Yam assemblage, and together comprise 32% of the assemblage, making them the second most common species at the site (Table 1). Unfortunately, only few of the bones could be identified to taxon, but those which could show a clear preference for goats (63% goats: 37% sheep). Morphometry: Few of the goat bones from Newe Yam could be measured (Table 8). Consequently, the size index method provided the most appropriate method for assessing metrical parameters of this assemblage. The tendency of the measurements indicates a clear reduction in size in the goats from Newe Yam compared to those from several mid-PPNB sites in the southern Levant (Figure 5). Mean values and ranges are markedly lower in the PN sample (N=24, mean = 0.91, range =0.84-1.0) compared to the Mid-PPNB sample (N=37, mean = 1.06, range =0.88-1.2). A t-test showed that these samples are significantly different (P=0.00), whether they were tested for equal or unequal variances. This trend is interpreted as reflecting the domestic status of the Newe Yam goats, a finding corroborated by fragments of male horncores from both the excavated sample and the surveys at the site which exhibit the torsion characteristic of domestic goats (Capra hircus). Only one measurement, that of a distal tibia, was larger than that of the reference animal, and as such may represent a large male or else a wild goat. Too few measurements could be carried out on the sheep remains to facilitate identification of their domestic status (Table 8). However, taking into consideration that the goats represent domestic animals, and that sheep were probably introduced into the Southern Levant as domesticates by the Late PPNB (Horwitz and Ducos 1998), it seems most likely that the

HORWITZ et al.

154 Newe Yam sheep remains belong to domestic animals. Table 8: Bone measurements for Newe Yam (in mm) (Measurements follow von den Driesch 1976, unless otherwise defined) Means have been calculated for fused bones only UF= unfused bone (a) CATTLE

NEWE YAM

Bone/ Measurement Code

Individual Measurements

Mean

Mandible 7

147.0

101.1

15a

71.6

15b

45.3

15c

32.7

Lower M1 L

25.9

12.8

30.8; 29.6

14.7

Lower M2 30.2

Lower M3

Upper M

35.9*

12.9*

30.2

20.7

Distal Scapula GLP

69.2; 63.2; 69.2; 63.2

66.2

52.1; 43.6; 52.1; 43.6

47.8

Distal Humerus Bd

79.9; 80.6

80.2

distal trochlea breadth

73.7; 73.7

73.7

distal trochlea height

32.8; 33.7

33.2

Radius GL

96.9 (UF); 146.1 (UF)

75.0 (UF)

75.0

39.9 (UF)

39.9

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

(a) CATTLE Bone/ Measurement Code

155

NEWE YAM Individual Measurements

Mean

Metacarpal GL Bd distal condyle width distal trochlea width distal trochlea height Distal Tibia Bd Dd Metatarsal GL SD distal condyle width distal trochlea width distal trochlea height Bp Dp Astragalus GL Bd Dl Atlas GL GB prox L Axis Ruff breadth Bone L 2 Total L 1st Phalanx GLpe Bd Bp 2nd Phalanx GLpe Bd Bp

142.7 (UF) 60.2; 56.6 (UF) 30.3; 26.8 (UF) 25.4; 24.1 (UF) 31.5; 30.9 (UF)

60.1 30.3 25.4 31.5

67.5; 60.0; 59.6 48.5; 45.6; 45.2

62.3 46.4

205.4 (UF); 28.8 (UF) 25.5 (UF); 24.3 (UF); 25.9 (UF) 20.3 (UF); 21.7 (UF); 21.9 (UF) 26.8 (UF); 29.1 (UF); 28.1 (UF) 48.5; 43.7 48.5; 41.4

43.7 41.4

61.0; 66.9 44.8; 37.5 36.1; 36.3

63.9 41.1 36.2

141.1; 94.0; 136.0 80.8; 88.4; 85.1 93.5; 94.8

123.7 84.7 94.1

71.0 73.3 93.5 61.4; 53.8; 59.3; 56.8; 58.7; 61.0 27.2; 28.0; 29.9; 27.5; 29.8; 30.2 28.6; 21.2; 23.2; 29.3; 28.7; 32.5

58.5 28.7 27.2

44.8; 38.2; 43.0; 39.0; 38.9; 44.8 35.7; 24.0; 30.0; 21.9; 25.7; 29.3 37.4; 30.7; 34.1; 25.4; 28.9; 37.4

41.4 27.7 32.3

HORWITZ et al.

156 (a) CATTLE

NEWE YAM

Bone/ Measurement Code

Individual Measurements

Mean

3rd Phalanx Lad

61.4; 62.4; 54.6

59.4

37.9; 33.2; 34.2

35.1

* previously identified as hartebeest, Horwitz 1988 (b) GOAT Bone/ Measurement Code

Individual Measurements

Mean

Scapula 130.7

130.7

GLP

31.0; 30.2

30.6

20.0; 20.9

20.4

SLC

20.7; 19.3

20.0

27.5; 29.2

28.3

15.5; 14.7

15.1

106.2

16.5

Radius

Metacarpal

distal condyle width

12.0

distal trochlea width

10.1

distal trochlea height

16.8

23.7

16.2

Tibia Bd

22.3; 27.3

24.8

16.6; 20.9

18.7

25.9; 26.8

26.3

17.3; 17.9

17.6

13.4; 15.2

14.3

Astragalus

Atlas width (minimal)

39.8

width (maximal)

54.3

neck width

46.1

Axis

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

157

Individual Measurements

Mean

Scapula GLP

33.8; 31.1

32.4

22.7; 23.0

22.8

SLC

22.5; 21.7

22.1

Distal Humerus Bd

26.7

distal trochlea breadth

26.3

distal trochlea height

12.6

Metacarpal GL

115.9

13.0

21.5

14.6

(d) PIG Bone/ Measurement Code

Individual Measurements

Mean

Lower decid m3 L

19.3; 20.5; 19.9; 21.2; 20.7; 21.3; 19.7; 19.7; 19.8

20.2

8.9; 8.8; 9.0; 8.5; 8.0; 9.2; 8.9; 8.7; 8.9

8.7

17.8; 16.9; 17.1; 17.7; 17.1; 17.4; 17.3; 15.8; 15.7; 16.0; 17.4; 15.9

16.8

11.1; 9.4; 10.6; 10.5; 14.7; 14.4; 10.1; 10.7; 10.4; 10.2; 11.3; 9.4

11.0

Lower M1

Lower M2 L

21.9; 21.6; 21.0; 21.9; 19.6; 20.1; 31.8

22.5

13.3; 14.5; 13.2; 16.3; 14.1; 12.7; 16.3

14.3

29.2

15.4

14.7; 14.6; 14.5; 14.2

14.5

12.1; 12.0; 12.3; 11.7

12.0

Lower M3

Upper decid m3

HORWITZ et al.

158 (d) PIG Bone/ Measurement Code Upper M

Individual Measurements

Mean

17.3; 16.6 (broken); 17.4; 17.1; 17.2; 18.5

17.3

15.0; 15.6; 14.4; 13.7; 14.4; 14.5

14.6

20.5; 20.7

20.6

17.0; 18.2

17.6

35.1

20.1

Upper M2

Upper M3

Distal Scapula GLP

41.2; 32.7

wild 41.2; dom 32.7

31.3; 20.0

wild 31.3; dom 20.0

28.7; 30.4; 22.7

wild 29.5; dom 22.7

36.3

wild 36.3

SLC Humerus Bd

36.6

distal condyle width

31.6

distal condyle height

17.3

Metacarpal III GL

17.2; 17.8

17.5

16.4; 14.0

15.2

13.1

Metacarpal IV Bp

16.4

13.7

27.9

24.9

40.3

21.1

20.4

Tibia

Astragalus

Calcaneum GL

73.9; 65.8

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

159

(d) PIG Bone/ Measurement Code

Individual Measurements

Mean

2nd Phalanx GL

24.5; 39.8; 23.4

wild 39.8; dom 23.9

16.0; 23.1; 13.7

wild 23.1; dom 14.8

14.5; 22.9

wild 22.9; dom 14.5

28.7; 15.4

wild 28.7; dom 15.4

28.6

wild 28.6

(e) GAZELLE

(f) DOG

Horncore

Canine inner L

14.7

Base L

8.5

outer L

17.0

Base B

6.8

26.6

distal condyle width

19.3

distal condyle height

11.0

base length

22.5

base breadth

34.3

base circumference

9.5

Humerus

Metatarsal dist. distal condyle width

9.0

distal trochlea width

10.0

distal trochlea height

15.6

17.9

15.3

(g) BADGER

Honey badger1 (Mellivora capensis)

modern specimen*

Mandible tooth row L

38.6

40.3

Ht. Infront of M2

13.2

14.1

Ht behind canine

14.2

16.9

M2 L

15.6

17.0

M2 B

7.5

8.5

Common Badger1 (Meles meles conescens)

Sex

Mean

Range

Mean

Range

Male Female

4 1

44.2 39.0

42.5-45.7

10 9

47.5 46.1

41.0-50.2 44.4-48.0

Modern specimen of common badger (Meles meles canescens) from The Hebrew University collection 1 Data from Mendelssohn and Yom-Tov 1999.

160

HORWITZ et al.

Skeletal Elements: With regard to skeletal element representation, cranial remains, particularly teeth, predominate. Meat-rich upper fore and hindlimb elements, as well as those of the trunk, are the next most frequent, and together comprise the same frequency as cranial remains. The remaining 7% of elements are composed of those poor in meat; lower fore and hindlimbs and feet. As for cattle, bone mineral density values for sheep taken from Lyman (1994: Table 7.6) were plotted against % survival frequencies for sheep/goat post-cranial elements (Figure 6). No significant correlation was found between them (r2=0.01; P=0.24) such that factors, other than bone density, must account for the observed patterning of skeletal elements. As in the case of cattle, the predominance of meat-rich elements suggests selection of prime caprine bodyparts for consumption.

Figure 4: Kill-off patterns of cattle, sheep/goat and pig (survival rate is calculated using % fused bones). Key: Cattle: Infant = <10 months; Juvenile = 11-20 months; Subadult = 21-39 months; Adult = 40+ months; Sheep/goat: Infant = <10 months; Juvenile = 11-21 months; Sub-adult = 22-36 months; Adult = 37+ months; Pig: Infant = <12 months; Juvenile = 13-25 months; Subadult = 26-36 months; Adult = 37+ months

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

161

Figure 5: Size Index plots for goats from Newe Yam compared to mid-PPNB sites in the Southern Levant taken from Ducos and Horwitz (1988).

162

HORWITZ et al.

Ageing: For sheep/goat, bone fusion and tooth eruption ages followed those given in Silver (1969: Table A), while dental attrition stages followed Payne (1973). Due to the small sample size, sheep and goats were examined together. Dental attrition in isolated teeth was scored and the corresponding age assessed on the basis of the complete mandibles. Plots of bone fusion based on data combined into four age classes (Figure 4) indicate that only some 30% of animals died in their first year and that by 21 months (juveniles), some 40% of the animals had been culled. According to Payne (1973), under conditions of traditional flock management, optimal cull age of caprines for meat production is 18-30 months which parallels the pattern reported here. At Newe Yam 37% of the herd were mature animals. Probably, this adult herd would have comprised more females than males as they could provide secondary products such as milk and wool as well as breeding stock (Payne 1973). Examination of dental attrition stages in mandibles and on isolated teeth, based on Payne (1973) (Table 7), indicates a similar trend to that reported for bone fusion, with some 60% of animals having been culled before adulthood. Six specimens represent immature animals aged less than 2 years while an additional specimen is aged 2-3 years. Four specimens

Figure 6: Scattergram showing % survivorship of sheep/goat bones plotted against maximum bone mineral density values for sheep taken from Lyman (1994: Tables 7.6 and Table 7.10).

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

163

represent adult individuals and fall into the age group 3-4 years. It is important to note that no specimens older than 4 years were documented in this sample, suggesting that even for the post-cranial remains, the majority of the adult animals represent individuals just older than 3 1/2 years, i.e., when long bone fusion is completed. Modifications: A right proximal sheep femur had small puncture holes on the femoral head, the result of carnivore activity. In addition, 5 sheep/goat bones, 2 goat and 2 sheep bones exhibited butchery marks (Greenfield et al. this volume). One bone from the excavated sample was bleached while another, from the survey, was burnt (Table 2).

PIG Based on NISP counts, pig was the third most common species in both the excavated and survey samples. However, this species gave the highest MNI estimate (from teeth) which was 12. This number is lower than that reported in Horwitz (1988: 103) where each sided element was counted separately. Pigs give a high return both in terms of litter size and in calories and fat. However, their low heat tolerance and reliance on water limits their mobility and offers indirect confirmation of the sedentary nature of Newe Yam (Zeder 1996). Morphometry: The majority of the Newe Yam pigs (Sus scrofa) are smaller than those known from mid-PPNB sites in this region. This is expressed by the lower size range that is even smaller than the smallest mid-PPNB specimens (Table 8), as well as in the quantity of measurements that fall in the lower range of the size index graph (Figure 7). For the PN (N=14), the mean for the size index graph was 0.97 (range 0.84-1.0) compared to the midPPNB (N=78) with a mean value of 1.2 (range 0.9-1.5). Despite the disparity in sample size, whether they were tested for equal or unequal variances, the t-test showed the PN and Mid-PPNB samples to be significantly different (P=0.00). However, as show in Table 8, some specimens are of comparable size to the mid-PPNB assemblages, indicating that wild boar are probably also present in the PN sample. This is borne out by the fact that 5 of the 14 measurements used to calculate the SI were larger than the reference animal, a European wild boar. Skeletal Elements: Cranial elements are by far the most abundant body part for pigs. As in the case of cattle and sheep/goat, the meaty upper limb and trunk portions are the next most common, while lower limbs and foot elements are scarce. Bone mineral density values are as yet unavailable for pig so it was not possible to assess the impact of density-dependent attrition on this sample. However, it seems feasible that it follows the same pattern as that documented for cattle and sheep/goat, suggesting that anthropogenic factors are probably responsible for the pattern of skeletal element representation of this species.

164

HORWITZ et al.

Figure 7: Size Index plots for pigs from Newe Yam compared to mid-PPNB sites in the Southern Levant taken from Ducos and Horwitz (1988).

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

165

Ageing: Pigs were aged with reference to bone fusion as given in Silver (1969: Table A), tooth eruption ages used were those for late maturing breeds given by Habermehl (quoted in Bull and Payne 1982: Table 1), while dental attrition stages followed Grant (1982). As illustrated in Figure 4 and Table 6, bone fusion data for pigs differs markedly from that for sheep/goat and cattle. It indicates that only some 30% of pigs had been slaughtered by the age of 36 months and that the majority survived into adulthood. Examination of the dental data (Table 7) reflects a different picture with only two adults in the assemblage, the remainder representing animals aged less than 20 months. The breakdown as given in Table 7 is: 3 animals aged circa 8 months, 1 aged less than 13 months, 4 aged less than 20 months and 3 aged circa 20 months. The discrepancy in age profiles obtained for bone fusion and dental wear may be related to the abundance of teeth and jaws of immature domestic pigs which could be aged relative to their more fragile post-cranial elements, as well as to the presence of wild boar in the sample whose robust, adult bones may dominate the post-cranial sample. As the dental data support the metric findings, namely that the majority of the pigs at Newe Yam represent domestic animals, we tend to follow the dental data rather than that based on epiphyseal fusion of the long bones. In the case of the pig, as it serves solely as a meat source, slaughter of immature animals at a time when their productive value is highest (relative to their food intake), is the most economic strategy. Modifications: Carnivore gnaw damage was observed on the gonial area of a left pig jaw. The damage included small-sized puncture holes which may have been made by a dog. Six pig bones and one wild boar bone exhibited butchery damage (Greenfield et al. this volume). A total of 9 pig bones showed evidence of burning and one, derived from the excavated sample, was bleached. Another 8, from both the excavation and survey, were abraded (Table 2).

CANID/DOG Two post-cranial bones and one canine tooth were identified as belonging to a canid, probably a domestic dog (Table 8). The two post-cranial elements were recovered during a dive, in the same general location and as such may be derived from the same adult animal. Remains of canids were not found in the excavated sample. Dogs (Canis familiaris) are relatively common in Terminal Neolithic (PPNC) and Pottery Neolithic sites off the Carmel coast such as Atlit Yam, Tel Hreiz and Kfar Galim (Dayan and Galili 2000; Horwitz et al. 2002), a finding which supports the identification of the Newe Yam remains as those of dog, as does the gnaw damage on a pig mandible and proximal sheep femur cited above. Despite the presence of cut marks on a nasal bone of a dog from Tel Hreiz (Horwitz et al. 2002), it is unclear whether this taxon served as a food source at this time. The small number of dog remains in PN sites would seem to negate this possibility.

166

HORWITZ et al.

WILD ANIMALS Few remains of wild animals were found in the assemblage attesting to the minor role played by hunting in the economy of the settlement (Table 1). A total of 17 mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella) bones were identified of which only 3 were collected during the survey, the rest are derived from the excavation. The latter include a left horncore of an adult male gazelle, which facilitated species identification, and two halved metapodial shafts used as tools (awls ?) with half of the distal condyle still present. One complete jaw of an adult badger was found during surveys at the site. Although the length of the jaw is similar to that of the common badger (Table 8), it is not clear whether this represents the honey badger, Mellivora capensis, or the common badger Meles meles, due to overlap in their size and biogeographical distribution (Mendelssohn and Yom-Tov 1999).

FISH A total of 22 bones and fragments of bones of fish were recovered from the site. Six bones were found by the Wreschner expedition and the rest were recovered during subsequent surveys (Table 1). These two groups of bones will be discussed together. They form a very small assemblage of bones, which allows little more than a descriptive report. Eight bones were identified belonging to three different kinds of fish. Among the unidentified bones there were two pterygiophores and one vertebra, which were damaged and eroded beyond taxonomic identification, while the rest were unidentifiable fragments. All the bones belonged to relatively large-sized fish. Four head bones belonged to the family Serranidae (Groupers), probably to the genus Epinephelus. These included: 1. A fragment of a large maxilla (one of the bones of the upper jaw). 2. A well preserved left quadrate measuring 12.8 mm across, allowing an estimation of the standard length of the live fish of about 63 cm. 3. A well preserved right hyomandibular bone with a measured height of 66 mm, corresponding to a standard length of about 71 cm. 4. A poorly preserved cleithrum. Two vertebrae belonged to the family Sparidae (Porgies): 5. One was a well preserved third vertebra of the genus Pagrus, measuring 14.1 mm (height) and 10.1 mm (length) and corresponding to a standard length of the live fish of about 42 cm. 6. The second was a poorly preserved vertebra at about the 11th position along the vertebral column, which could not be further identified. It measured 11 mm (height), 11.6 mm (breadth) and 12.7 mm (length), corresponding to a standard length of about 36 cm.

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

167

Two large vertebrae belonged to the family Carangidae (Jacks and Pompons) probably to the species Seriola dumerili (yellow tail). 7â&#x20AC;&#x201C;8. They seemed to fit together at about the 7th and 8th position along the vertebral column. They measured 31.4 and 30 mm (heights), 34.5 and 36.4 mm (breadths) and 35.0 and 33.1 mm (lengths), corresponding to a standard length of the live fish of about 120 cm. Groupers, Porgies and Jacks are families of marine fish. The first two have been found in most assemblages of excavated fish remains in Israel, while Jacks seem to have been less popular. Groupers are large, solitary, predatory fish attaining maximum sizes of about 100 cm. They inhabit sandy rocky bottoms of the continental shelf and feed on fish, cephalopods and crustaceans. The excavated bones described here belong to medium sized specimens, which are about the largest ones that can be caught with hook and line in shallow waters among off-shore rocks. Older, larger groupers move deeper and further from the coast. Jacks are migratory fast-swimming pelagic fish, common throughout the Mediterranean and the Eastern Atlantic. Some of them, like Seriola dumerili, may grow in size up to about 200 cm. Porgies are smaller fish, with about 20 species along the Mediterranean coast of Israel, among them some of the most esteemed fish in this area. The more important Porgies are Sparus aurata (gilthead) and several species of the genus Pagrus. At the time of its occupation, the site of Newe Yam was very close to the coast whereas today it is partially immersed in the waters of the Mediterranean, which has risen several meters since the early Holocene. This raises the possibility of contamination of the faunal sample with remains of more recent fish. However, the excavated fish bones were found in well defined archaeological contexts, embedded in the clay which covered the site and have therefore to be considered as human food remains. This is also true for remains of fish found in other inundated Neolithic sites in the same area (Horwitz et al. 2002).

CONCLUSION Based on the small bone sample available, it may be inferred that the animal economy was based on herding of domestic sheep, goat, cattle and pig. Animal husbandry at Newe Yam was primarily aimed at the production of meat. Few animals were kept into adulthood (30%-37%% for cattle and sheep/goat) and probably represent animals kept for breeding. Data on dental ageing for pigs indicate a high kill-off of immature animals â&#x20AC;&#x201C; identified as domestic, as well as mature individuals probably representing wild boar. Bones of sheep and goat (especially the latter) as well as cattle are represented in almost equal numbers of the assemblage, but due to the greater carcass weight, cattle provided significantly more meat than the other two taxa.

168

HORWITZ et al.

Pigs were another favoured food source and both domestic and wild animals were probably exploited. The abundance of pig remains as well as those of cattle reflect the availability of fresh-water close to the site. This is probably one of the reasons that fresh-water wells were constructed at the site, since Galili and Weinstein-Evron (1985) note that of all the swamps documented for the Carmel coast, those near Newe Yam were the most saline. Even if we include the tentative identifications of aurochs, boar and wild goat in the assemblage, hunting seems to have been of minor importance. The absence of arrowheads in the excavated sample (Prausnitz and Wreschner 1971; Wreschner 1977), may also be a reflection of this. In situ fish bones were found at Newe Yam indicating the integration of coastal resources in the diet. Indeed, the establishment of human settlements along the sea shore may have been associated with the potential for exploitation of marine resources (Galili et al. 2002). However, their relative importance in the diet at Newe Yam is difficult to gauge due to the paucity of these remains. A significant amount of fish bones has only been recovered in the earlier PPNC village of Atlit Yam, dated to the 8th millennium BC. Here 3842 fish remains were excavated, almost all of them recovered from one pit with an especially favorable taphonomic setting (Galili et al. 1993; Zohar et al. 1994). In contrast, in Pottery Neolithic inundated settlements in the same area, fish remains are scarce; only 8 identified bones in Newe Yam, 3 in Tel Hreiz, one in Kfar Galim and none in Kfar Samir and Megadim (Horwitz et al. 2002). This may be due to the small size of the faunal samples recovered from these sites, factors relating to bone preservation or faunal collection methods, rather than dietary preferences. However, a limited role for fishing in the Pottery Neolithic economy cannot be excluded (Horwitz et al. 2002). Body part frequencies for the four main pastoral animals (Table 3), as well as the large quantity of butchery marks associated with primary carcass dismemberment (Table 2; Greenfield et al. this volume), suggest that whole carcasses were butchered/consumed on site. Cut marks ranged from 6%-8% in sheep/goat, cattle and pigs, to a high 18% in gazelle. Cranial remains, especially teeth and jaws, predominate but this is no doubt due to teeth being the most robust and hence best preserved portions of the skeleton, while mandibles were easily visible to divers. For all domesticates, the meat-rich upper limb and trunk elements are the most abundant elements. Foot bones (phalanges) are under-represented for all species, especially for size sheep, goat and pigs. They may have been missed during the underwater surveys due to their small size. Examination of bone mineral density versus % survivorship, shows that density-related attrition played a minimal role in the pattern of skeletal element representation. Consequently, human selection of meat-rich elements over others may be primarily responsible for the observed pattern. This finding is supported by kill-off patterns which indicate that management of cattle, sheep/goat, and probably also

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

169

pigs was aimed at meat procurement, a management strategy characteristic of early domestic economies (Horwitz 1989). Few burnt bones were recovered from the site (1% of the identified sheep/goat and cattle sample respectively, but a high 7% pig and 6% gazelle bones) (Table 2). Burnt bones may reflect cooking activities but they may also be the result of proximity to hearths and accidental burning. The overall low frequency of burnt material at the site (3% of the identified remains) may be related to the fact that the hearth-like features containing ash, lithics and bones which have been found at other submerged sites off the coast such as Tel Hreiz (Horwitz et al. 2002), have as yet not been sampled at Newe Yam. In all aspects examined here, the Newe Yam sample closely resembles faunal assemblages recovered from four other submerged Pottery Neolithic sites located along the same stretch of coast (Horwitz et al. 2002). These settlements represent small, probably sedentary, villages which were engaged in herding and to a lesser extent in hunting. The extent of cultivation and fishing undertaken by these populations is unclear but it is evident that they were involved in both, and utilised coastal resources as well as the hinterland. With respect to the integration of agro-pastoralism and fishing, these villages represent continuity with preceding PPNC coastal sites such as Atlit Yam and Ashqelon, which perhaps represent the earliest fishing villages in the region (Galili et al. 2002). Following a rise in sea level, the coastal aquifer which they exploited became saline (Galili et al. 1988) and grazing and agricultural areas were perhaps inundated, disrupting their economic base and forcing them to abandon the settlements.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LKH would like to acknowledge that the late E. Wreschner and M. Prausnitz entrusted her with the analysis of the excavated material from Newe Yam.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Boessneck J. 1969. Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis aries LinnĂŠ) and goats (Capra hircus LinnĂŠ). In Brothwell D. and Higgs E. S. (eds.), Science in Archaeology, pp. 331-358. London: Thames and Hudson. Bull G. and Payne S. 1982. Tooth eruption and epiphyseal fusion in pigs and wild boar. In Wilson B, Grigson C and Payne S. (eds.), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, pp. 5571. (BAR British Series 109), Oxford. Dayan T. and Galili E. 2000. A preliminary look at some new domesticated dogs from submerged Neolithic sites off the Carmel coast. In Crockford S.J. (ed.), Dogs Through Time: An Archaeological Perspective, pp. 29-33. (BAR International Series 889), Oxford.

170

HORWITZ et al.

Driesch von den A. 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Cambridge: Peabody Museum Bulletin 1. Ducos P. 1968. L’Origine des Animaux Domestiques en Palestine. Publications de l’Institute de Prehistoire de l’Universite de Bordeux, Mémoire 6. Ducos P. and Horwitz L. R. K. 1998. The influence of climate on artiodactyl size during the late Pleistocene-early Holocene of the southern Levant. Paléorient 23 (2): 229-247. Chaix L. 1984. Note sur un aurochs (Bos primigenius Bojanus) subatlantique du Jura Gessien (Ain, France). Revue de Paléobiologie 3 (2): 185-190. Eitan N. in press. A survey of herds and grazing systems in the Ramat Bet Shemesh research area. In Dagan Y. (ed.), Ramat Bet Shemesh I. Landscapes of Settlement. Israel Antiquities Authority Monographs. Galili E. 1985. Clay Exposures and Archaeological Finds on the Sea Bottom between Haifa and Atlit. Unpublished MA Thesis, Haifa University (in Hebrew). Galili E. 2004. Submerged Settlements of the Ninth to Seventh Millennia BP off the Carmel Coast. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Tel-Aviv University (in Hebrew). Galili E. and Weinstein-Evron M. 1985. Prehistory and paleoenvironments of submerged sites along the Carmel coast of Israel. Paléorient 11: 37-52 Galili E. and Nir Y. 1993. The submerged Pre-Pottery Neolithic water well of Atlit-Yam, northern Israel and its palaeoenvironmental implications. The Holocene 3: 265-270. Galili E., Weinstein-Evron M., and Ronen A. 1988. Holocene sea level changes based on submerged archaeological sites off the northern Carmel coast in Israel. Quaternary Research 29: 36-42. Galili E., Weinstein-Evron M., and Zohary M. 1989. Appearance of olives in the submerged Neolithic sites along the Carmel coast. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 22: 95-97. Galili E., Weinstein-Evron M., Hershkovitz I., Gopher A., Kislev M., Lernau O., Horwitz L. K. and Lernau H. 1993. Atlit Yam: a prehistoric site on the sea floor off the Israeli coast. Journal of Field Archaeology 20: 133-157. Galili, E., Stanley, D. J., Sharvit, J. and Weinstein-Evron, M. 1997. Evidence for earliest olive-oil production in submerged settlements off the Carmel coast, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 1141-1150. Galili, E., Rosen, B., Gopher, A. and Horwitz, L. K. 2002. The emergence and dispersion of the Eastern Mediterranean fishing village: Evidence from submerged Neolithic settlements off the Carmel coast, Israel. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 15: 167-198. Grant A. 1982. The use of tooth wear as a guide to the age of domestic ungulates. In Wilson B, Grigson C and Payne S. (eds.), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, pp. 91-109. (BAR British Series 109), Oxford. Greenfield, H., Galili, E., and Horwitz, L. K. this volume. Patterns of animal butchery at Newe Yam. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society. Grigson C. 1982. Sex and age determination of some bones and teeth of domestic cattle: a review of the literature. In Wilson B, Grigson C and Payne S. (eds.), Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, pp. 7-23. (BAR British Series 109), Oxford. Horwitz L. K. 1988. Bone remains from Newe Yam a Pottery Neolithic site off the Carmel coast. Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 21: 99-108. Horwitz L. K. 1989. A reassessment of caprovine domestication in the Levantine Neolithic:Old questions, new answers. In Hershkovitz I. (ed.), People and Culture in Change, pp. 153-181. (BAR International Series 508i), Oxford.

FAUNA FROM THE SUBMERGED POTTERY NEOLITHIC SITE OF NEWE YAM

171

Horwitz L. K. and Ducos P. 1998. An investigation into the origins of domestic sheep in the southern Levant. In Buitenhuis H., Bartosiewicz L. and Choyke A. M. (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East III, pp. 80-95. Groningen: ARC-Publications 18. Horwitz, L. K., Galili, E., Sharvit, J. and Lernau, O. 2002. Fauna from five submerged Pottery Neolithic sites off the Carmel Coast. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 32: 147-174. Lyman, R. L. 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press. Meadow R. H. 1989. Osteological evidence for the process of animal domestication. In Clutton-Brock J. (ed.), The Walking Larder. Patterns of Domestication, Pastoralism and Predation, pp. 80-90. One World Archaeology 2. London: Unwin Hyman. Meadow R. H. 1999. The use of size index scaling techniques for research on archaeozoological collections from the Middle East. In Becker C., Manhart H., Peters J. and Schibler J. (eds.), Historia Animalium ex Ossibus. Internationale Archaologie, Studia Honoraria 8, pp. 285-300. Rahden (Westfalia): Leidorf. Mendelssohn H. and Yom-Tov Y. 1999. Fauna Palaestina – Mammalia of Israel. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Payne S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Aßvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23:281-303. Prausnitz M. W. and Wreschner E. E. 1971. Newe-Yam, a submerged Neolithic settlement. Qadmoniot 4: 120-121 (in Hebrew). Prausnitz M. W. 1977. The Pottery at Newe Yam. Eretz-Israel 13: 271-275. Prummel W. and Frisch H. 1986. A guide for the distinction of species, sex and body side in bones of sheep and goat. Journal of Archaeological Science 13: 567-577. Raban A. 1983. Submerged prehistoric sites off the Mediterranean coast of Israel. In Masters P. M. and Flemming N. C. (eds.), Quarternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology, pp. 215-232. London: Academic Press. Ronen A. 1983. Late Quaternary sea levels inferred from coastal stratigraphy and archaeology in Israel. In Masters P. M. and Flemming N. C. (eds.), Quarternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology, pp. 121-134. London: Academic Press. Ronen A. and Olami Y. 1978. Atlit Map. Jerusalem: The Archaeological Survey of Israel (in Hebrew with English summary). Silver I. A. 1969. The aging of domestic animals. In Brothwell D. and Higgs E. S. (eds.), Science in Archaeology, pp. 250-268. New York: Praeger Publishers. Wreschner E. E. 1977. Newe Yam – A submerged Late-Neolithic settlement near Mount Carmel. In Arensburg B. and Bar-Yosef O. (eds.), Eretz-Israel 13, pp. 259-270. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Wreschner E. E. 1983. The submerged Neolithic village “Newe-Yam” on the Israeli Mediterranean coast. In Masters P.M. and Flemming N. C. (eds.), Quaternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology, pp. 325-333. Academic Press: London. Zeder M. A. 1996. The role of pigs in Near Eastern subsistence: A view from the southern Levant. In Seger J. D. (ed.), Retrieving the Past, pp. 297-312. Indiana: Cobb Institute of Archaeology. Zohar, I., Dayan, T., Spanier, E., Galili, E. and Lernau, O. 1994. Exploitation of grey triggerfish (Balistes carolinensis) by prehistoric inhabitants of Atlit-Yam, Israel: a preliminary report. In van Neer W. (ed.), Proceedings of the 7th Meeting of the ICAZ Fish Remains Working Group, pp. 231237. Annales du Musée Royal de l’Afrique Centrale, Sciences Zoologiques 274. Tervuren: Musée Royal de l’Afrique Centrale.

172

HORWITZ et al.

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM Jurnal of The Israel Prehistoric Society 36 (2006), 173-200

173

The Butchered Animal Bones from Newe Yam, a Submerged Pottery Neolithic Site off the Carmel Coast HASKEL J. GREENFIELD1 EHUD GALILI2 LIORA KOLSKA HORWITZ3

Dept. of Anthropology, University of Manitoba, Fletcher Argue 435, Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V5, Canada 2

Marine Archaeology Branch, Israel Antiquities Authority, POB 180, Atlit

Dept. of Evolution, Systematics and Ecology, The Hebrew University, Givat Ram, Jerusalem 91904

ABSTRACT This report details the analysis of 32 butchered animal bones recovered in situ the from 7th millennium BP submerged Pottery Neolithic site of Neve Yam, located off the Mount Carmel coast. The analysis documents both taxa and skeletal element with evidence for butchering, in addition to the location of damage on the bone and the stage of the butchering process. The results of the analysis were compared to results from experimental cut mark research, enabling the butchering process to be reconstructed; including type of raw material used during the butchery process (stone or metal), and the state of the implement (e.g. sharp, dull, retouched, etc.). The bone assemblage from Newe Yam is extremely well preserved, with a higher percentage of butchered remains than found in most terrestrial assemblages. Butchering marks are predominantly found on bones of domestic animal (87.5%). The full range of butchery related activities (slaughter, disarticulation, filleting, skinning) are present indicating that slaughter and carcass division took place on-site. On the basis of light optical readings (and confirmed by SEM readings), all of the slice marks were made by stone tools.

173

174

HASKEL et al.

Most were made by unmodified flakes or blades, and the remainder (n=2) were made by unifacially retouched flakes or blades. Also, all chop marks (n=6) were made by stone tools.

INTRODUCTION

Examination of butchery damage on bones recovered from archaeological contexts not only documents how past human communities slaughtered and dismembered animals, but also provides information on whether the animal was hunted or scavenged, the nature of a society’s technological capacity (such as tool use), social structure and ethnic identity (for example: Binford 1981; Cope 2002; Greenfield 1999, 2000, 2004; Lyman 1987, 1994; Lupo 1994). This report presents and discusses the small sample of 32 butchered animal remains recovered from the submerged Pottery Neolithic (seventh millennium BP) site of Newe Yam. The site is located about 150 m west of the present coastline at latitude 32.6783 ((DMS – 32° 40’ 42N) and longitude 34.9319 (DMS – 34° 55’ 55E), at a depth of about 10 m below sea level (Galili 1985, 2004; Galili and Weinstein-Evron 1985; Wreschner 1983 for a description of the site and finds). The faunal assemblage collected from the site, comprises 491 identified bones and 127 unidentified bone splinters (Horwitz et al. this volume). It is derived from excavations carried out at the site by Wreschner (1983) as well as from hand collected samples retrieved during survey dives carried out at the site by the Underwater Unit of the Israel Antiquities Authority (Galili 1985, 2004; Galili and Weinstein-Evron 1985). The remains were recovered in situ and are associated with a number of architectural structures. No material dating to earlier or later periods was recovered from the site. Research on butchery damage was initially carried out separately by the two authors. Aside from identifying the bones (see Horwitz et al. this volume), Horwitz documented all forms of damage occurring including both animal and human induced damage. The latter includes burning, bone artifact manufacture and butchery damage (such as slice and chop marks). Greenfield conducted a specialized analysis of butchering technology as part of a larger investigation on the transition from a stone to a metal based butchering technology in the Levant (e.g. Greenfield 2004). The objective of the latter analysis was to document the raw material (stone or metal) used during the butchery process as well as the state of the implement (e.g. sharp, dull, retouched, etc.). It is concerned with those butchering marks that can be defined as slices made by knife-like implement (see Methods section below). It is not concerned with other marks, such as those made by chopping or sawing through a bone (unlike the examination carried out by Horwitz). For the purposes of this work, Horwitz and Greenfield pooled their identifications for each bone. Where modifications were noted by only one researcher, this is noted.

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

175

METHODS Horwitz Study (LKH in text) In order to identify butchery and other damage, Horwitz examined all identified bones and bone splinters, first with the naked eye and then under magnification with a binocular microscope (25x) using artificial light, or, if the bone was too large, using a hand-held illuminated magnifying glass. For each bone, the type of butchery damage, location and number of marks were noted. Each butchered bone was photographed including close ups of the damage. Two types of butchery damage were observed in the Newe Yam assemblage: slice and chop marks. Slice marks on bones result from the process of cutting through or removing soft tissues such as muscles using a sharpn implement. A slice mark may be defined as an elongated, relatively narrow, linear striation. Although cross-sectional shape shows some variation, they usually are V-shaped in cross section with flat regular sides and fine parallel striations within the main groove (Fisher 1995; Greenfield 1999, 2000, 2002a, 2002c; Lyman 1987, 1994). Chop marks are broad and short linear grooves that generally have a V-shaped cross section. They are caused by a heavy blow to a bone with an implement. The edges are usually straight with the edge opposite the direction from which the blow was struck having a higher profile than the other as a result of the angle (Fisher 1995; Lyman 1987). No striations are evident within the groove. In some instances, edges or portions of bones may be removed by chopping. This leaves a relatively straight edge.

Greenfield Study (HJG in text) Each bone fragment in the assemblage was individually examined in order to identify butchering marks on them. These were readily identifiable to the naked eye and quite easy to distinguish from tooth and other marks. Characteristically, they appeared as relatively short straight incisions in the bone. A low power hand-held magnifying glass was used to survey the surface of each bone in the assemblage enhancing the ability to discover butchering marks. When suspected cut marks were identified, the specimen was further examined under a medium power light optical microscope. Several bones with seemingly potential cut marks were rejected for inclusion in the butchering analysis after microscopic examination since they were deemed to be caused by non-butchering sources, such as gnawing, scratching, root etching, etc. Microscopic examination of the entire surface of each bone was not conducted, even though it may have located a higher number of butchering marks, because of limits in the nature of sample, time, and finances. Once butchering marks were identified, the bone and the butchering marks were drawn to scale (1:1), and subjected to a detailed analysis (including identification of taxon, its domestic status, symmetry, part of the element, etc.).

176

HASKEL et al.

Once the basic zooarchaeological description of the specimen was completed, the more specialized butchering analysis began. This was conducted in two parts: in the laboratory at The Hebrew University where the specimens were stored (or accessible) and in the University of Manitoba Anthropology Laboratory. As stated above, in the Hebrew University laboratory, the cut mark was examined under a light optical microscope. At this time, a tentative identification of the raw material of the implement used in the butchering process was made whether it was a stone or metal implement. Then, if the butchering implement was ascertained to be a stone tool, the analyst had to determine if the cut mark was made by an unmodified or retouched flake. The analyst and at least one assistant had to come to agreement in order for identification to be made. This ensured a level of accuracy not normally reached in such studies. Then, it was determined if the cut marks represented slaughtering, skinning, or butchering activities. The second part of the analysis was conducted at the University of Manitoba. While in Israel, a silicone mold of the cut mark incision was made in order to further study the mark in a Scanning Electron Microscope. The original bone was then returned to the curatorial facility (The Hebrew University, Dept of Evolution, Systematics and Ecology) for long-term storage with the remainder of the faunal collection. The silicone molds and drawings were brought back to the University of Manitoba for further analysis where each mold was further examined by the analyst and another assistant. The methodology for distinguishing between stone and metal cut marks is based on experimental research conducted by the author. This is discussed at length elsewhere (Greenfield 1999, 2000, 2002a, 2002b, 2002c, 2004). Most of this work is not relevant for the Pottery Neolithic period since this is a period without metal butchering tools. On the basis of the cut mark analysis, there is no evidence for metal cut marks in the assemblage. More significantly, however, is our ability to distinguish types of stone tools used in the analysis. In general, chipped stone tools have a pattern, which is summarized below. Unretouched unifacially produced blades or flakes create a groove with one side rising steeply and smoothly and the other side rising more gradually (Fig. 1a). The gradually rising side will have one or more striations running parallel to the apex of the cut. It is possible to distinguish between unmodified and retouched chipped stone tools. 1. A unifacially retouched tool will have lateral striations on one side. It will tend to have one side that rises more sharply than the other (Fig. 1b). 2. A bifacially retouched tool will have lateral striations on both sides. The cut mark will be very wide and will begin to lose its integrity, and may resemble a mark made by a scraper (Fig. 1c). 3. Stone scraper cut marks resemble that of the scallop-edged metal knives. They are very shallow, with slowly sloping edges, and the appearance of a wave-like pattern along one side. The other side tends to be smoother. The bottom of the groove tends to be relatively horizontal, with only a slight slope to the side where it rapidly descends (Fig. 1d).

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

177

Figure 1: Template for distinguishing types of stone tool cut marks in cross-section: (a) profile of chipped stone blade-unretouched (b) profile of chipped stone blade-unifacial retouch (c) profile of chipped stone blade-bifacial retouch (d) profile of chipped stone scraper

TAPHONOMY OF THE ASSEMBLAGE Taphonomy is the study of the processes that have modified an assemblage since the time it was created until the moment of analysis (Lyman 1994). Some changes are cultural, others animal induced or natural. Weathering and carnivore gnawing are among the most prevalent among the latter changes, while cultural modifications can include burning, butchering, tool making, cut marks and other human activities. Each process relevant to the assemblage from Newe Yam will be described in turn.

Weathering The Newe Yam bones were recovered at a depth of 1-5 metrers on the sea bed. Until their exposure following storms, they had been covered with a layer of grey mud which in turn had been covered by sand (Galili 1985, 2004). Two types of weathering were identified. The distinguishing criteria between these are: Light â&#x20AC;&#x201C; surface discolored, but still smooth (Fig. 2); Medium â&#x20AC;&#x201C; compact surface slightly pitted (depressions in cortex due to pressure or pits due to acidity of the soil, lightly eroded and cracked (Fig. 3). The butchered bone assemblage from the site was in variable condition, ranging from 40.7% lightly weathered to 59.2% medium

HASKEL et al.

178

Figure 2: Lightly weathered bone â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Slice mark, specimen #30/93-9/81.

Figure 3: Medium weathered bone â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Slice mark, specimen #21/94-51/63.

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

179

weathered (Table 1). None of the bones were heavily weathered and only a few were abraded and water-worn (Horwitz et al. this volume). Although cut marks were relatively clear in this bone sample, weathered bones had many more cracks, which sometimes made it difficult to distinguish them from cut marks. Consequently, only those marks that clearly fitted the criteria outlined above were included in the analysis. Table 1: Stages of weathering and frequency of bones (NISP). Weathering ?

Total

15.6%

Light

34.4%

40.7%

Medium

50.0%

59.3%

Grand Total

100.0%

NA – not applicable. %1 – of all butchered fragments. %2 – of only light and medium weathered fragments.

Burning Although burnt bones were found in the assemblage (Horwitz et al. this volume), no evidence of burning was found in the butchered bone assemblage, but some bones were naturally discolored.

Canid Gnawing Only two bones with canid gnawing were found in the entire collection: an Ovis aries epistropheus (specimen #30/93-10/137), with evidence of canid gnawing and a puncture mark (Fig. 4), and a Sus scrofa (pig) mandibular gonion also was canid gnawed (Horwitz et al. this volume). Only the former had butchering marks on it as well.

Bone Tools A few of the bone tools were accidentally included in the general animal bone collection, which are discussed here. Most of the bone tools were separately curated and not analyzed by either of the authors. Of the bone tools identified in the general collection, only one was included in the analysis (below) since some of the modifications on this piece related to butchery damage. For the bone tools, the cut marks observed were in most cases related to bone tool production (e.g. specimen #21/94-57/22: a Bos taurus proximal end and shaft of a tibia; specimen #30/93-9/133: large mammal rib fragment made into a possible spatula; and specimen #21/94-57/21: a bone point).

180

HASKEL et al.

Figure 4: Canid puncture marks on an Ovis aries epistropheus, specimen #30/93-10/137.

Some of the bones were chopped in half and then modified for tool production (e.g. specimen #21/94-46/31, a halved gazelle distal metatarsal with a smoothed inner shaft; and specimen #21/94-46/33, a halved gazelle proximal metatarsal shaft, smoothed on the inner surface of the shaft). One fragment, specimen #30/93-9/116: a pig mandible with gonion removed behind the M3, showed possible signs of initial butchering and subsequent tool production modification and was possibly used as a tool for scraping). A Bos taurus distal shaft of a scapula had butchering marks and evidence of use wear polish (specimen #21/94-45/107). It had a high degree of polish on it, but no other evidence of use as a tool (such as morphological modification). Otherwise, none of the bones with clear butchering related marks exhibited tool production marks. The butchering and tool production assemblages appear to be more or less mutually exclusive.

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

181

ASSEMBLAGE DESCRIPTION A detailed description of the damage evident on each of the bones studied in this sample is presented in Appendix A.

Sample Size Cut and/or chop marks from butchering activities were found on a total of 32 animal bones and bone fragments. This is a very small fraction of the total animal bone sample; 5.1% of the total NISP of the site (NISP = 618) and 6.5% of the identified portion of the sample (NISP= 491). Only one bone with cut marks could not be identified to species (only to genus). Based upon size and age, there was no evidence that any of the bones with butchering marks were articulated with each other or came from the same individual. Indeed, no articulated bones were present in the butchered sample. A few specimens identified by LKH could not be relocated by HJG. However, they were included in some of the results discussed here since they add to the collection in interesting ways. Unfortunately, their analysis is not fully comparable with the other material described in this reprt.

Taxon Representation Butchery damage was observed on the complete range of taxa identified at the site (Table 2). For the most part, they were domestic animal (90.3%), with only one wild species (gazelle) definitely identified and two tentatively identified as wild taxa â&#x20AC;&#x201C; aurochs and boar. It was often difficult to distinguish between wild and domestic forms of the same taxa from isolated bones, even when pieces could be measured. Based on metrical parameters and robusticity, Horwitz et al. (this volume) determined that the vast majority of the cattle at the site were Bos taurus. HJG identified one bone in the cut-marked sample as Bos primigenius based on size differences and development of muscle attachment areas (specimen #30/939/144,148). Since most of the pig remains were immature, LKH was cautious in identifying them as wild or domestic. Both authors nonetheless agree that both domestic and wild forms are present. HJG identified only one certain wild pig based on size and muscle attachment differences with comparison to the other specimens (specimen #30/93-9/145). All of the domestic specimens appeared to fall within the size range of domestics, havingd thinner bone walls or smaller muscle attachment areas than found typically in wild specimens. The quantity of bones with butchering marks in each taxon follows their relative importance in the site. As such, there is no evidence to support selection of a particular species for specialized butchery. Among the cut-marked remains that were identified to a specific wild or domestic taxon, the most common species was Bos taurus (45.2%). Initially, it would appear that domestic pigs are the next most common taxon (19.3%). However,

HASKEL et al.

182

the combined total of domestic Ovis/Capra, Ovis and Capra remains are much higher (25.8% â&#x20AC;&#x201C; if the Capra sp. specimen is included, the frequency is 3.13% higher). In particular, when the Ovis/Capra remains are allocated to either Ovis aries or Capra hircus categories on the basis of the proportions implied by the identified remains, the percentages change dramatically. Ovis aries becomes the third most common taxon in the assemblage (17.2%) and Capra hircus the fourth (8.6%). The remaining taxa are of wild animals, of which each is represented by a single specimen: Gazella gazella, Bos primigenius and Sus scrofa fer. (3.3% each). The distribution is summarized below by part of the skeleton. The number of slice marks on each bone was also recorded in order to monitor degree of bone damage from butchering activities. When an index was calculated from the number of butchered bones per species relative to the number of slice marks per bones, then cattle remains have relatively more butchery damage per bone (7.8) than either pig or sheep/goat (4.1 respectively). Table 2: Distribution of bones with butchering marks by taxon (NISP).

Domesticatiion (final)

Taxon

Unknown

Capra sp.

3.1%

Domestic

Bos taurus

43.8%

Wild

Total

% all

% identified taxa

% of ovicaprines divided between taxa

45.2%

Capra hircus

3.1%

3.2%

8.6%

Ovis aries

6.3%

6.5%

17.2%

Ovis/Capra

15.6%

16.1%

Sus scrofa dom.

18.8%

19.4%

Domestic Total

87.5%

90.3%

Bos primigenius

3.1%

3.2%

Gazella gazella

3.1%

3.2%

Sus scrofa fer.

3.1%

3.2%

Wild Total

9.4%

9.7%

100.0%

Grand Total

Location of Butchering Marks At Newe Yam, cut marks are present on a variety of skeletal elements represented in the assemblage (Tables 3 and 4). Cranium â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Skinning marks were found on the frontal bone of a Gazella gazella cranium, immediately below the horn core (specimen #30/93-9/80).

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

183

Mandible – The largest number of bones with butchering marks were found on mandibles (n=9; Table 4). Cut marks are often found on more than one location on any single mandible, and often marks from several different activities were found on a single jaw. They include disarticulation of the mandible from the cranium, filleting of the tongue and other soft tissue, skinning, and marrow extraction (Table 3). A number of taxa, both domestic and wild, are included: Bos taurus (specimen #’s 30/93-24/54, 30/93-9/324, 30/93-9/325-333, 21/94-94/ 234, and 30/93-9/81); ?Bos primigenius (specimen #30/93-9/144,148), and domestic and wild pigs, Sus scrofa dom. (specimens #30/93-9/116; #30/93-979 or 99) and ?Sus scrofa fer. (specimen #30/93-9/145). In this assemblage, relatively more marks were found on the mandible than all other elements combined. This is unusual when compared to other assemblages (Greenfield 2002b, 2005a). Atlas/Axis – Three incidences of cut marks were found on the atlas and axis vertebrae. Butchering marks were found on the atlas of two Bos taurus specimens (specimen #30/939/77 and 21/94-44/122), and one instance of a Capra hircus axis (specimen #30/93-10/137). The marks are associated with slaughtering or disarticulation of the vertebral column from the cranium. Ribs – Only one mark was found on the distal shaft of an Ovis/Capra rib reflectting filleting (specimen #16/37-46). Scapula – Two scapulae with slice cut marks were found – a Bos taurus (specimen #21/ 94-45/107) and Sus scrofa dom. (specimen #21/94-45/52). A third scapula belonging to Ovis/ Capra (specimen #21/94-39/78) had a chop mark relating to removal of the distal portion of the bone. In the case of the cattle and pig bones, the cut marks are found on the distal shaft. Given their location, the slice marks probably represent filleting of meat from the bone, while the chop mark reflects dismemberment or division of the limb. Humerus – Two Bos taurus humerus specimens had butchering marks. One bone (specimen #21/94-51/47) had slice marks on the distal shaft and was cut vertically through the distal epiphysis to remove the medial condyle. The former was for limb disarticulation since it cut the muscle on the lateral face 4 cm above the distal epiphyseal line. The latter was possibly for marrow extraction. A second cattle distal humerus (specimen #30/93-9/130) was chopped. The epiphysis was chopped through, vertically in half, at right angles to its axis to remove the medial epicondyle. This damage may be associated with division of the carcass into smaller pieces of meat. Radius – Two radii had cut marks: a Capra hircus radius (specimen #30/93-9/147) and a Bos taurus radius (specimen #30/93-9/82). In both cases, the cut marks were found on the shafts. In the former case, they were found on the proximal shaft, two-thirds of the way up the proximal shaft on the caudal face near the medial edge. In the latter case, they were found on both the proximal and distal shaft, extending 10 cm in either direction from the midline on the lateral half of the cranial face. Both are probably filleting-related marks.

HASKEL et al.

184

Innominate – A large range of taxa (n=5) exhibited butchering marks on the innominate. Slice marks were found on a single bone from each of the following taxa and specimens: Bos taurus (specimen #21/94-51/63), Sus scrofa indet. (specimen #30/93-9/100 - probably domestic) and Sus scrofa dom. (specimen #21/94-57/15). The slice cut marks all appear to be on the ischium. They are probably related to filleting of the meat from the innominate or separation of the femur from the innominate. An additional two specimens had chop marks. An Ovis aries innominate (specimen #26/92-21) had a chop mark bisecting the acetabulum, which reflects dismemberment of the innominate region. A right innominate (acetabulum) fragment of Bos taurus (specimen #21/94-47/128) was also chopped, with the tuber coxae removed as well as a small portion of the crest of the ilium. Femur – Butchering (slice) marks were found on two bones – one on a femur shaft fragment from a probable Ovis/Capra (30/93-9/95) and one from a Capra species indeterminate (specimen #30/93-9/167). Marks found on the middle of the proximal shaft of this element were probably to remove meat from the limb. Metatarsus – A single Bos taurus metatarsus exhibited slice marks (specimen #21/9457/14). The marks were found 10 cm in either direction from the midline over the distal and proximal shafts and probably reflect sinew removal. Astragalus – Two astragali, one from an Ovis/Capra (specimen #21/94-45/54) and one identified as Ovis aries (specimen #30/93-10), had slice marks. The marks were found on the medial face of the first astragalus, and the cranial face of the second. Both were related to dismemberment of the lower limb. Calcaneum – A calcaneus of Sus scrofa dom. had slice marks (specimen #26/92-21/82). These were related to dismemberment of the lower limb. Table 3: Distribution of slicing cut marks incidences by location on element (Number of incidences). The number of incidences on a single bone may be more than one, accounting for differences in frequency. Element Astragalus

Location – part of bone

Sub-location

Location – face

Border (closest)

Middle to proximal end

(blank)

Medial

Caudal half

Total 1

Midshaft

Middle

Cranial

Entire

Calcaneus

Distal shaft

1 cm from distal end

Lateral

Entire

Cranium

Frontal

On rise, just below the base of the horncore

Entire

Femur

Proximal shaft

Along entire length

(blank)

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

Element

Location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; part of bone

Sub-location Lateral to lesser trochanter

Humerus

Innominate

Mandible

185 Location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; face Caudal

Border (closest)

Total

Lateral half

Distal shaft

4 cm above Lateral distal epiphyseal line

Cranial edge

The epiphysis has been halved by chopping vertically through at right angles to its axis to remove the medial epicondyle

(blank)

Cut vertically through the acetabulum

(blank)

Ischial distal shaft

Below obturator foramen

Medial

Middle

Ischium

Below acetabular lip

Ventral

Middle

Midshaft

Middle

Lateral

Middle

Tuber coxae removed as well as a small portion of the crest of the ilium

(blank)

Aboral to m3

(blank)

From Superior to inferior border

(blank)

Lingual

Near superior border

Articular process

Base

Medial

Posterior

Below pm3

(blank)

Buccal

Near inferior border

Lingual

Near superior border

Coronoid process

Base

Medial

Gonion removed behind the M3

(blank)

Chopped behind M3

(blank)

HASKEL et al.

186 Element

Location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; part of bone Horizontal ramus

Sub-location Base

Location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; face Inferior

Border (closest)

Total

Below diastema

Below LM3

Below PM4

Below vertical ramus

Middle of diastema (where right and left (meet

Juncture with vertical ramus

Lateral

Middle

(blank)

Lateral

Below PM4

Neck of gonion

(blank)

Oral

Entire

On alveolus

Under M2

Lateral

(blank)

On vertical ramus

behind M2 (M3 not yet erupted)

Lateral

Anterior half

Oral to PM3

(blank)

From Superior to inferior border

(blank)

Shaft of vertical ramus

6 cm below hinge

Medial

Posterior

Metatarsus

Proximal and distal shaft

10 cm either direction from midline

Medial

Cranial edge

Radius

Proximal and distal shaft

10 cm either direction from midline

Cranial

Lateral half

Proximal shaft

2/3 of the way up the shaft

Caudal

Medial

Rib

Distal shaft

Middle

Lateral

Middle

Scapula

Distal portion of the scapula cut off

(blank)

Distal shaft

At base of crest

Lateral

Middle

From proximal end to midline of distal shaft

Lateral

Caudal half

Midshaft

Midline

Ventral

Middle

(blank)

At cranial edge

Ventral

Right medial 1/3

Middle

Lateral (right)

Middle

V-Atlas V-Epistropheus Grand Total

1 43

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

187

Table 4: Distribution of bones with butchering marks by taxon and element (NISP) State of domestication ? Element

Astragalus

Domestic

Wild

Grand Total

Capra sp.

Bos taurus

Capra hircus

Ovis aries

Ovis/ Capra

Sus scrofa dom.

Bos primigenius

Gazella gazella

Sus scrofa fer.

Calcaneus

Cranium

Femur

Humerus

Innominate

Mandible

Metatarsus

Radius

Rib

Scapula

V-Atlas

V-Epistropheus

Grand Total

Types of Butchery Actions Conclusions as to the type of butchery activity represented are based upon studies, such as Binford (1978, 1981) and Lyman (1994), as well as personal observation of modern slaughterers and butchers that related marks at particular locations to specific activities. The number of incidences is used to calculate frequencies in this section since more than one activity may be represented on the same bone. Hence, the difference in frequencies between those cited earlier for NISP. Most of the specimens were slice or cut marked (n=35), while far fewer were chop marked (n=8). When these are analyzed with respect to their location on the bone, several phases of butchering activities are apparent in the Newe Yam database. Often, more than a single activity is represented on the same bone. For example, HJG Sample 3 (specimen #30/93-9/144,148) has at least two different activities associated with it (filleting and skinning). For purposes of this analysis, taxon is ignored since there are so few specimens. The breakdown of butchery actions includes the following (Table 5):

HASKEL et al.

188

Table 5: Distribution of different types of butchering activities (Number of incidences). More than one activity may be present on any single bone. Butchery type Type of butchering activity

Chop No.

Slice %

Grand Total

No.

Disarticulation

0.0%

25.7%

Dismemberment

62.5%

0.0%

Filleting

0.0%

51.4%

Marrow extraction

25.0%

0.0%

Sinew removal

0.0%

2.9%

Skinning

0.0%

11.4%

Slaughter

0.0%

8.6%

Toolmaking and dismemberment

12.5%

0.0%

Total

100.0%

Disarticulation – Nine incidences (25.7% of all slice-marked specimens) have cut marks related to disarticulation of the limbs into large units. Dismemberment (or division) – Six specimens with dismemberment chop marks were identified, representing 75.0% of the chop marks. These divide the carcass into smaller units. Filleting – Most of the cut marks appear to be related to meat filleting (51.4%). This was also the largest (N=18) category of marks. Filleting involves the removal of specific cuts of meat (e.g. tongue) from the bone. Marrow Extraction – Two chop marks representing marrow extraction were identified (25.0% of chopped bones). Sinew Removal – One specimen with evidence of sinew removal (2.9% of slice marks) was found. Skinning – Four specimens with skinning-related cut marks were found (11.4% of slice marks). Primary Slaughter – Three specimens with evidence of initial slaughter were identified (8.6% of slice marks). Two were atlas vertebrae and one an axis. The atlas vertebra had marks on the ventral face. While the Newe Yam butchered bone sample is small, it appears that the full range of butchery related activities are represented at the site indicating that on-site slaughter and carcass division took place.

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

189

Types of Stone Tool Cut Marks

On the basis of light optical readings (and confirmed by SEM readings), all of the slice marks were made by stone tools (Figs. 5 and 6a-b). Whether NISP or number of incidences is used to calculate the relative frequency of the different types of stone tools used in the butchery process, most of the incidences described above (n=23 or 95.8% of NISP; n=30 or 93.7% of slice mark incidence) were made by unmodified stone flakes or blades (Fig. 5; Table 6). Two slice mark incidences (6.2%; or NISP=1) were made by retouched flakes or blades. Based on the SEM readings, they appear to be unifacially retouched (Fig. 6a-b). The rest could not be clearly distinguished or were chop marks. Eight chop marks were found, all of which appear to be made by stone tools given the criteria set forth by Mathieu and Mayer (1997). Table 6: Distribution of slicing butchering marks by worked (or retouched) or unworked lithics (NISP and Number of incidences). The number of incidences on a single bone may be more than one. Sum of NISP Unworked/retouched ?

No.

Sum of # fragments %

Unworked

No.

95.8%

93.8%

Unifacial retouch

4.2%

6.3%

Not applicable

Total

8 100.0%

Figure 5: SEM of unretouched stone blade/flake slice cut marks, specimen #30/93-9/144,148 (HJG sample 3).

100.0%

190

HASKEL et al.

Figure 6a and 6b: SEM of retouched stone blade/flake slice cut mark, specimens 30/ 93-9/324 and 21/94-45/12,53,61 (HJG samples #9d and #5, respectively).

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

191

CONCLUSIONS It is possible to piece together the pattern in butchering activities at the site by extrapolating across species, even though the data are very few. In total, 32 sliced and unambiguously chopped bones (with impact marks) were identified. Most of the slice marks were made by unmodified flakes, haphazardly made, or blades. Only a few marks were made by retouched tools. When all taxa are lumped together, all of the stages of butchering and dismemberment were present at the site. Due to the small sample size, it is not possible to determine this pattern for each taxon separately. The butchery patterns exhibited at Newe Yam are similar to those documented at the only other site analysed in a similar manner – the Neolithic levels from Jericho (Tel es-Sultan) (Greenfield 2005a). One of the problems with small sample sizes is that it is hard to obtain a statistically significant pattern. Only relatively large samples can provide enough reliable data to draw definitive conclusions. Nonetheless, the Newe Yam data allow us to draw some tentative conclusions with regard to butchery practices in the Pottery Neolithic and provide an important contribution to our understanding of the subsistence economy and stone tool technology at this time.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS HJG would like to acknowledge the hospitality of the late Professor Eitan Tchernov who allowed him access to the laboratory at the Hebrew University (Dept of Evolution, Systematic and Ecology). Thanks must also be extended to Dr. Rivka Rabinovich, Miriam Belmaker, and the other members of the Eitan’s lab for their constant support and help during the analysis; to Elizabeth Arnold, Tina Jongsma, Avi Schwartz and Matthew Singer for helping HJG during the data collection in Israel; and. to Tina Jongsma, the external reviewers, and Steve Rosen who made important constructive comments upon the manuscript. HJG’s research was funded by grants from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada and by the University of Manitoba (UM/SSHRC).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Binford L. R. 1978. Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. New York: Academic Press. Binford L. R. 1981. Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. New York: Academic Press. Boesseneck J., Müller H. H., and Teichert M. 1964. Osteologische unterscheidungsmerkmale zwischen Schaf (Ovis aries Linné) und Ziege (Capra hircus Linné). Kuhn Archiv. Band 78, Heft 12. Cope C. R. 2002. Palestinian butchering patterns: their relation to traditional marketing of meat. In Buitenhuis H, Choyke A., and Al-Shiyab A. H. (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East V (Proceedings of the ICAZ-SW Conference), pp. 316-319. Groningen: ARC Publicaties 64.

192

HASKEL et al.

Fisher J. W. 1995. Bone surface modifications in zooarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2 (1): 7-68. Galili E. 1985. Clay exposures and Archaeological Finds on the Sea Bottom between Haifa and Atlit. Unpublished MA Thesis, Haifa University (in Hebrew). Galili E. 2004. Submerged Settlements of the Ninth to Seventh Millennia BP off the Carmel Coast. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Tel-Aviv University (in Hebrew). Galili E. and Weinstein-Evron M. 1985. Prehistory and paleoenvironments of submerged sites along the Carmel coast of Israel. Paléorient 11: 37-52 Galili E., Rosen B., Gopher A. and Horwitz L.K. 2002. The emergence and dispersion of the Eastern Mediterranean fishing village: evidence from submerged Neolithic settlements off the Carmel Coast, Israel. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 15 (2): 167-198. Greenfield H. J. 1986. Paleoeconomy of the Central Balkans (Serbia): A Zooarchaeological Perspective on the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age (ca. 4500 1000 B.C.). Oxford: BAR International Series 304 (2 vols.). Greenfield H. J. 1999. The origins of metallurgy: distinguishing stone from metal cut marks on bones from archaeological sites. Journal of Archaeological Science 26 (7): 797-808. Greenfield H. J. 2000. The Origins of Metallurgy in the Central Balkans Based on the Analysis of Cut Marks on Animal Bones. Environmental Archaeology 5: 119-132. Greenfield H. J. 2002a. Distinguishing Metal (Steel and Low-Tin Bronze) from Stone (Flint and Obsidian) Tool Cut Marks on Bone: An Experimental Approach. In Mathieu J. (ed.), Experimental Archaeology: Replicating Past Objects, Behaviors, and Processes, pp. 35-54. Oxford: BARInternational Series 1035. Greenfield H. J. 2002b. Faunal Remains from the Early Bronze Age Site of Titris Höyük, Turkey. In: Buitenhuis H., Choyke A., and Al-Shiyab A. H. (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East V (Proceedings of the ICAZ-SW Conference), pp. 252-261. Groningen: ARC Publicaties 64. Greenfield H. J. 2002c. Origins of metallurgy: A zooarchaeological perspective from the Central Balkans. In Harrison R., Gillespie M., and Peuramaki-Brown M. (eds.), Eureka: The Archaeology of Innovation (Proceedings of the 27th Annual Chacmool Conference), pp. 430-448. Calgary: The Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary. Greenfield, H. J. 2004 The butchered animal bone remains from Ashqelon, Afridar – Area G. ‘Atiqot 45: 243-261. Greenfield, H. J. 2005a The origins of metallurgy at Jericho (Tel es-Sultan): a preliminary report on distinguishing stone from metal cut marks on mammalian remains. In Buitenhuis H., Choyke A.M., Martin L., Bartosiewicz L., and Mashkour M. (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East VI (Proceedings of the ICAZ-SW Conference), pp. 183-191. Groningen: ARC-Publicaties 123. Greenfield, H. J. 2005. Sexing fragmentary ungulate acetabulae. In D. Ruscillo (ed.), Recent Advances in Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones. Oxford: Oxbow Press, pp. 68-86. Horwitz L. K. 1988. Bone Remains from Neve Yam: A Pottery Neolithic Site off the Carmel Coast. Mitekufat Haeven (Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society) 21: 99-108. Horwitz L. K., Lernau O. and Galili E. Fauna from the Pottery Neolithc site of Newe Yam. Mitekufat Haeven (Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society). This volume. Lupo K. D. 1994. Butchering marks and carcass acquisition strategies: distinguishing hunting from scavenging in archaeological contexts. Journal of Archaeological Science 21: 827-837.

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

193

Lyman R. L. 1987. Archaeofaunas and butchery studies: A taphonomic perspective. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 10: 249-337. Lyman R. L. 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mathieu J. and Meyer D. A. 1997 Comparing axe heads of stone, bronze, and steel: studies in experimental archaeology. Journal of Field Archaeology 24: 333-351. Wreschner E. E. 1983. The submerged Neolithic village â&#x20AC;&#x153;Newe-Yamâ&#x20AC;? on the Israeli Mediterranean coast. In Masters P. M. and Flemming N. C. (eds.), Quaternary Coastlines and Marine Archaeology, pp. 325-333. Academic Press: London.

194

HASKEL et al.

APPENDIX A: DETAILED BONE BY BONE DESCRIPTION OF BUTCHERY DAMAGE (HJG = Greenfield; LKH = Horwitz) Comments concerning age of the specimens are based on a combination of observations on epiphyseal fusion, bone porosity and density, muscle markings and size (see also Horwitz et al. this volume). Where observations were made by only one of the authors, this is noted.

Domestic Cattle (Bos taurus) (N=14) 1. Specimen #30/93-9/81 (HJG sample #25): Half of a left mandible (including the premolar and molar region, horizontal ramus). One parallel slice mark was found on the lateral face of the alveolus, beneath the M2. It was made by an unretouched stone flake/blade and it was for filleting or massetter removal. 2. Specimen #21/94-44/122 (HJG sample #23). This is a complete atlas vertebra with both the cranial and caudal epiphyses fused, indicating that it derives from a middle aged adult. The piece has one slice mark, in the form of a wide groove, running perpendicular to the long axis of the bone, on the midshaft, along the midline, on the middle of the ventral face. The activity probably represented by this mark is primary slaughter using an unworked flake/blade. 3. Specimen #21/94-94/234 (HJG sample #22): A left mandible (vertical ramus and hinge) of subadult/adult with 3 parallel slice marks on the body of vertical ramus, 6 cm below the hinge. They are on the posterior half of the medial face, are narrow and made of unretouched stone blade/flake. The activity represents disarticulation or removal of mandible. 4. Specimen #30/93-245/54 (HJG sample #1): Butchery damage was found on a fragment of the horizontal ramus (minus the alveolus) of the mandible. More than a quarter of the original bone was preserved. The shaft was fused (no porosity) and adult in size, and the muscle markings were developed to a medium state, all of which indicate that it belonged to an adult (probably middle-age). Four slice marks parallel to the long axis of the bone were found on the juncture with the vertical ramus, in the middle of the lateral face. The marks are probably the result of disarticulation of the mandible from the cranium. It was made by an unmodified stone tool blade or flake (not retouched). 5. Specimen #30/93-9/325-333 (HJG sample #12): A left mandible from an immature animal aged 6-18 months based on the state of dental eruption (deciduous m3 present, M1 erupted and just in wear, but M2 unerupted). Cut marks are observed on four localities on the ramus: a. The first group shows are two perpendicularly oriented slice marks on the inferior face of the base of the horizontal ramus parallel to each other on the lateral face of the

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

195

gonion just below the mandibular condyle. This may be associated with removal of the masseter. b. The second group is located on the border of the alveolus immediately behind the third molar â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the cut marksy are parallel to each other and at right angles to the mandibular corpus. c. The third group is located adjacent to the second but on the lateral aspect of the ramus below the ascending ramus. The second and third group of cut marks probably relate to the dismembering process, i.e. the removal of the mandible from the skull. d. A fourth group of two perpendicularly oriented slice marks was found on the inferior face of the horizontal ramus, below the diastema. The latter may be associated with skinning. 6. Specimen #30/93-9/324 (HJG sample #9): Butchery damage was found on large fragment of the anterior half of a left mandible of an adult cow with M2 and M3 present and in wear. Both the symphyseal and gonion portions of the corpus have been chopped off. More than half the mandible was present. The mandible was adult size, and the M3 was half-way worn down, all of which indicate that it belonged to a middle-aged adult. Five loci of slice/chop marks were found: a. A group of four perpendicularly oriented marks was found on the lingual face of the mandible, below the PM3. b. A second group of three perpendicularly oriented slices were also found on the lingual face near the superior border of the mandible, and aboral to M3. c. A single perpendicularly oriented chop mark extended from the superior to the inferior border, aboral to M3. This is associated with the removal of the ramus and gonion. d. A fourth group of two perpendicularly oriented slices was found on the buccal face near the inferior border, below the PM3. e. The last mark is a perpendicularly oriented chop mark located on the buccal face, extending from the superior to the inferior borders, and immediately oral to the PM3. This is associated with removal of the diastema. Different tools were used in these various groups reflecting the fact that they are not the result of the same phase of butchering. The thin slice marks in groups (a) and (b) were made by an unmodified stone blade or flake, while the wider mark in group (d) appear to reflect the presence of a retouched blade. The slice marks on the lingual face (a and b) appear to be related to filleting of the tongue, while the one on the buccal face (4) is probably related to skinning or disarticulation of the mandible from the cranium. The chop marks in groups (c) and (e) are either an attempt to extract marrow since they are located at the points for easy extraction or else as preparation for use of the bone as a handle into which a lithic tool could be hafted.

196

HASKEL et al.

7. Specimen #30/93-9/77 (HJG sample #15) and #21/94-44/122 (HJG sample #23): Slice marks were found on the ventral aspect of these atlas vertebrae. They are probably associated with slaughter or severing the vertebral column from the head. 8. Specimen #21/94-4/107 (HJG sample #17): A fragment of a left scapula blade with a section of the caudal border preserved near the neck of the scapula. However, less than a third of the complete bone is present. The spinous process has been removed by chopping as well as a concoidal flake of bone adjacent to the spine and near the neck of the scapula. This damage may reflect dismemberment activities. However, as the boneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surface is extremely smooth and polished it may have served as an implement such as a shovel and the removal of the spine was associated with artiefact preparation. Six perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found on the distal shaft, near the base of spine, in the middle of the lateral face. They were narrow grooves, made from unretouched stone blade/flake. and probably reflects filleting activities. 9. Specimen #30/93-9/130 (HJG sample #37): A right distal humerus with the lateral epicondyle. The epiphysis has been halved by chopping vertically through at right angles to its axis to remove the medial epicondyle. This damage may be associated with division of the carcass into smaller pieces of meat. 10. Specimen #21/94-51/47 (HJG sample #18): A left distal humerus with the lateral epicondyle present. The epiphysis has been chopped vertically through at right angles to its axis to remove the medial epicondyle. Six perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found on the distal shaft, 4 cm above distal epiphyseal line, on the cranial edge of the lateral face. They were narrow grooves, made from unretouched stone blade/flake, and probably reflect disarticulation or division of the carcass into smaller pieces of meat. 11. Specimen #30/93-9/82 (HJG sample #19): A complete infant radius shaft with the proximal epiphyseal line still visible and the distal epiphysis unfused, but the proximal is fused. There are 20 fine multiple slice marks on both the proximal and distal shafts, extending for about 10 cm in either direction from the midline of the shaft, on the lateral half of the cranial face. They are narrow grooves made by an unretouched stone flake/ blade. All the marks represent damage resulting from filleting. 12. Specimen #21/94-51/63 (HJG sample #21): An innominate (ischium shaft), left side, subadult/adult, with 20 perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found on the midshaft of the ischium, in the middle of the lateral face. They were narrow and made by an unretouched stone flake/blake. They represent filleting activities. 13. Specimen #21/94-57/14 (HJG sample #16): A complete left metatarsal shaft with unfused distal epiphyses, with four concentrations of cut marks along the medial aspect of the shaft. Most marks are perpendicular to the long axis of the bone. The largest concentration (n=40) is found 10 cm in either direction from the midline of the shaft, on the cranial edge of the medial face. This may be related to sinew removal. It was made

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

197

by an unretouched flake/blade. The cut marks can be divided into several groups, as follows. a. The first group comprises 11 slice marks located near the distal epiphysis. b. The second group is comprised of 7 slice marks located near the mid-shaft. c. The third group is made up of 3 long and deep slice marks located near the proximal end of the bone. d. The fourth group is adjacent to the proximal epiphysis and comprises three short parallel slice marks at right angles to the axis of the long bone. The first three groups of marks are probably associated with filleting while the last group probably represents skinning activities. 14. Specimen #21/94-47/128 (HJG sample #36): A right innominate fragment with less than half the complete bone present. A small portion of the crest of the ilium and iliac tuberosity has been removed by chopping either during dismemberment or division of the carcass into smaller pieces of meat. Aurochs (Bos primigenius) (N=1) 1. Specimen #30/93-9/144,148 (HJG sample #3): Butchery damage was found on a fragment of the posterior half of a left mandible of a cow, probably aurochs (Bos primigenius). Most of the anterior half and part of the heel of the mandible are present. The mandible is of an adult (probably middle-age), since all of the permanent teeth are erupted and in wear, and the muscle markings are developed to a medium state. Six loci of slice marks were found: a. A group of seven perpendicularly oriented marks was found on the inferior face of the base of the horizontal ramus, below the M3. b. A group of three perpendicularly oriented slices were also found on the on the inferior face of the base of the horizontal ramus, at the juncture with the vertical ramus. c. A group of five perpendicularly oriented marks was found on the lateral face of the horizontal ramus, below the PM4. d. A group of two perpendicularly oriented slices was found on the inferior face of the horizontal ramus, below the PM4. e. A group of six perpendicularly oriented slice marks was found on the inferior face of the horizontal ramus, below the diastema. f. There is a single perpendicularly oriented slice mark on the inferior face of the horizontal ramus in the middle of diastema where right and left sides meet. Each mark was made with an unmodified stone tool blade or flake (not retouched). The placement of the different slice marks appears to reflect different phases of butchering: (a) filleting, (b) skinning, (c) skinning, (d) skinning or filleting (e.g. tongue removal), and (e) skinning.

198

HASKEL et al.

Domestic sheep (Ovis aries) (N=2) 1. Specimen #30/93-10 (HJG sample #26): A complete, left domestic astragalus (juvenile) was found with 2 perpendicular slices on the middle of the body across the entire cranial face. They were narrow grooves made by an unretouched stone flake/blade for disarticulation. 2. Specimen #30/93-10/137 (HJG sample #10): This is a nearly complete axis. The combination of medium muscle marks, all epiphyses fused, and adult size, leads to the conclusion that it belonged to a robust male. One perpendicularly oriented slice mark was found in the middle of the right lateral face (along the base of the arch). LKH also notes the following not observed by HJG: Two fine slice marks are located on the ventral surface of the body perpendicular to the orientation of the bone. In addition, a single chop mark, orientated at a slight angle to the right axis of the bone, is present on the articular process. All the marks are probably the result of disarticulation of the cranium from the vertebral column. The mark on the lateral face was made by an unmodified blade or flake. Domestic Goat (Capra hircus) (N=1) 1. Specimen #30/93-9/147 (HJG sample #13): A complete right subadult radius had five cut marks along the lateral border of the shaft below the proximal epiphysis, and one perpendicular slice mark 2/3 of the way up the on proximal shaft, on the medial half of the caudal face. These are made by unretouched stone flakes/blades and are probably associated with filleting activities. Goat (Capra sp.) (N=1) 1. Specimen #30/93-9/167 (HJG sample #27): A right proximal femur of a goat (probably domestic), with two transverse cut marks, perpendicular to the shaft, on or just below the lesser trochanter. There is also evidence of carnivore damage (furrows and tooth punctures) on the proximal epiphysis. The butchery damage may be the result of filleting. Domestic Sheep/Goat (Ovis/Capra) (N=5) 1. Specimen #16/37-46 (HJG sample #4): This is a right rib shaft fragment. More than a half of the original bone was preserved. The shaft was porous and not of adult size indicating that it was probably from a juvenile. Two diagonal slice marks were found in the middle of the distal shaft, in the middle of the lateral face. Several fine cut marks were also noted on the medial aspect of the shaft cf. intercoastal removal. The marks are probably the result of filleting disarticulation activities and intercostal removal. They were made by an unmodified stone tool blade or flake (not retouched). 2. Specimen #21/94-39/78 (HJG sample #28): A right scapula with the distal portion of

THE BUTCHERED ANIMAL BONES FROM NEWE YAM

199

the scapula chopped off at the neck. It was probably the result of carcass division and dismemberment. 3. Specimen #26/92- 21/? (HJG sample #29): A left pelvic acetabulum which has been chopped vertically through the acetabulum. It is probably the result of carcass division and dismemberment. 4. Specimen #30/93-9/95 (HJG sample #6): Cut marks were found on a shaft fragment of a femur of a medium-sized mammal (possibly Ovis/Capra), aged to the subadult/adult class. Less than a quarter of the original bone was preserved. Twelve perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found along the entire length on the proximal shaft. They are probably the result of filleting of meat and were by unmodified blades or flakes. There is also a single, superficial cut mark on the distal end of the shaft. 5. Specimen #21/94-45/54 (HJG sample #14): A right juvenile astragalus with 4 parallel cut marks with a perpendicular orientation, on the medial aspect (noted by LKH) and 10 perpendicularly oriented slice marks from the middle to the proximal end on the caudal half of the medial face. They are narrow and made by unretouched stone flake/blades. They are probably associated with dismemberment. Gazelle (Gazella gazella) (N=1) Of the three gazelle bones recovered during the surveys, only one (33.3%) had cut marks (Table 2). 1. Specimen #30/93-9/80 (HJG sample #30): Left side of an adult, male gazelle cranial fragment (frontal and horn core) with two cut marks, perpendicular to the long axis of the cranium (parallel to each other and to the orientation of the horn), located on the anterior aspect of the frontal bone, just below the base of the horn core. These probably represent skinning marks. Wild boar (?Sus scrofa fer.) (N=1) 1. Specimen #30/93-9/145 (HJG sample #2): Cut marks were found on the fragment of the posterior portion of a right mandible of a pig, possibly wild. The mandible was not porous but adult in size, and the muscle markings were developed to a medium state, all of which indicate that it belonged to an adult (probably middle-age). Two clusters of slice marks were found. One was found near the base of the coronoid process, on the medial face close to the anterior border. A second slice mark diagonal to the long axis of the bone was found at the base of articular process on the medial face, near the posterior border. The two are clearly related to the same activities and are probably a result of disarticulation of the mandible from the cranium. The marks were made by an unmodified stone tool blade or flake (not retouched). The mandible was perpendicular chopped behind the M3 to remove the gonion by a wide but sharp stone axe.

200

HASKEL et al.

Domestic pig (Sus scrofa dom.) (N=6) 1. Specimen #30/93-9/116 (HJG sample #35): A domestic pig mandible with gonion removed behind the M3. It was possibly also used as a tool for scraping. 2. Specimen #21/94-45/5212,52,53,61 (HJG sample #5): Butchery damage was found on a complete distal shaft fragment of a left scapula of an adult domestic pig. Fourteen perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found along the entire length on the lateral face (near the caudal border). They were very wide hack-like marks, indicating that the blade was relatively dull, contrary to all of the other samples where the blades appeared to be fresh and sharp. They are probably the result of filleting of meat. It could not be determined if they were from modified or unmodified blades. 3. Specimen #30/93-9/100 (HJG sample #7): Slice marks were found on a shaft fragment of the right ischium of the innominate of a domestic pig, possibly of an adult based on the degree of porosity and size of bone. Less than a quarter of the original bone was preserved. Seven perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found along the middle of the medial surface on the body of the ischium. There are also 5 slice marks along the edge adjacent to the crista illiopectinea. The marks are probably the result of filleting of meat. Those on the ventral medial surface were made by unmodified blades or flakes. 4. Specimen #21/94-57/15 (HJG sample #8): Butchery damage was found on a fragment of a left innominate (including the acetabulum and parts of the shafts of the ilium, ischium, and pubis) of a domestic pig. More than three quarters of the original bone was preserved. The bone belonged to a middle aged adult male (Greenfield 2005b) based on fusion, size and muscle markings. Three perpendicularly oriented slice marks were found along the middle of the ventral surface of ischium (below the acetabulum). There are seven deep slice marks on the ventral surface of the ilium below the acetabulum. All these marks are probably the result of filleting or disarticulation of the limb and were by unmodified blades or flakes. 5. Specimen #26/92-21/82 (HJG sample #20): A nearly complete domestic pig calcaneus from a juvenile had a single slice marks along the distal half of the body, 1 cm from the distal end, extending across the entire the lateral face. It was narrow and made by an unretouched stone flake/blade. These marks were related to dismemberment of the lower limb. 6. Specimen #30/93-9/79 or 99 (HJG sample #24): A left domestic pig mandible (including the premolar and molar regions, horizontal ramus, and the posterior half) from a young subadult (M3 not yet erupted). Five parallel slice marks were found on the vertical ramus, behind the M2, on the anterior half of the lateral face. They were narrow grooves made by sharp stone flake/blades for massetter removal or filleting.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM Jurnal of The Israel Prehistoric Society 36 (2006), 201-229

201

Test Excavations at Rogem Be’erotayim in Western Negev BENJAMIN SAIDEL1 TALI ERICKSON-GINI2 JACOB VARDI3 STEVEN A. ROSEN3 EDWARD MAHER4 HASKEL GREENFIELD4

1 2

East Carolina University

Israel Antiqujties Authority 3

Ben-Gurion University

University of Manitoba

INTRODUCTION (B.A.S., T. E-G.) The previously unrecognized site of Rogem Be’erotyaim was discovered during the course of the systematic survey of Archaeological Survey Map of Israel 156 by Tali Erickson-Gini (IG 0983/0222) (Erickson-Gini 2000; Erickson-Gini and Saidel 2001). Test excavations of the large oval shaped stone structure were undertaken in order to provide information on the date and function of this construction. The material culture recovered provides evidence for occupations from the EBIb and EBIV/MBI periods with evidence for contact, either direct or indirect, with Pre-dynastic Egypt. The results of our fieldwork are presented below.1

This research was funded by a grant from the American School for Prehistoric Research at Harvard University. The Department of Anthropology at Harvard University was the institutional sponsor for the project.

201

SAIDEL et al.

202

SITE DESCRIPTION (B.A.S., T. E-G.) Located approximately 10 km south of Tel Nissana (Fig 1) in the Negev, Rogem Be’erotayim is situated near the junction of two important tracks running through the area, the Darb el Shur, and the Darb el Ghaza. The former extended from Be’er Sheva to Kadesh Barnea, while the latter ran between Aqaba and Gaza, more or less along the present Egyptian-Israeli border (Woolley and Lawrence 1915: 1, Map 1, 44 ; Roll 1983: 139, 146; Meshel 2000:100, Fig.1). Rogem Be’erotayim is positioned on a low hilltop overlooking a tributary of Nahal Be’erotayim. Below Rogem Be’erotayim there are two concentrations of structures and enclosures, dated by surface finds to the EBIV/MBI period (Erickson-Gini 2000:111*-112*). The nearest sources of water are two wells situated approximately 1 km to the east at the foot of the community of Mizpe Ezuz. In Arabic these wells are known collectively as Bir Berein, whereas in Hebrew they are identified as Be’er Aharon and Be’er Moses, respectively (e.g., Survey of Egypt and War Office 1914; Survey of Israel 1984). These wells are most likely the site of “Berain” referred to in the Nessana Papyri (82:1:8) (Erickson-Gini and Saidel 2001:72). The surface of Rogem Be’erotayim is covered by rock fall. The structure is oval in shape with its long axis in a northeast-southwest direction and, excluding the enclosures,

Figure 1: Aerial photograph of Rogem Be’erotayim and vicinity (scale 1:5,000). Inset, the location of Rogem Be’erotayim in the western Negev.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

203

Figure 2: Plan of Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim as surveyed and drawn by J. Rosenberg.

it measures approximately 35 m. in length and 18 m. in width (Fig. 2). The shape of the structure is defined by an oval retaining wall made of fieldstones. The height of this wall varies depending upon the ground level such that, for example, the difference in elevation between the surface and the top of the eastern enclosure varies between 2.00 and 2.48 m (Fig 2). This enclosure, as well as those on the south and west sides, either abut or are attached to the sides of the oval structure, but additional fieldwork is necessary to determine the actual stratigraphic relationship between the enclosures and the primary structure. A midden measuring approximately 7 x 15 m, is located to the west of this site (Fig. 2). In contrast to the surrounding desert pavement, this deposit is characterized by sandy-yellow sediments that contain small fire cracked rocks. Pottery from the EBIV/MBI period was found down slope from this midden.

SAIDEL et al.

204

FIELDWORK (B.A.S., T. E-G) Excavations were conducted in 2 x 2m units (Fig. 3) to facilitate spatial analyses of the artifacts and to make allowances for exposing architecture. Initial excavations in squares K9 and K10 were conducted in 10 cm spits to a depth of 0.30 m and all sediments were sieved through 2-3 mm mesh. These sediments were sterile and sieving was not conducted in other squares until material culture was encountered. The stratigraphy in square M9 was composed of a thick topsoil layer of reworked loess that rested on top of a layer containing stone fall and loess (Fig. 4). Both layers were yellowbrown in color. No clear stratigraphic breaks between these layers were evident and they were combined (Fig. 4). Underneath the layer of stone fall and loess was a layer comprised of gray silty and ashy sediments that rested on top of bedrock. The depth of the ashy sediments varied depending on the surface of the bedrock. Since artifacts were found in these sediments, this layer was sieved in its entirety. In Trench 1, a similar stratigraphic sequence was unearthed in squares K8b/d, K9, and part of K10 (Fig. 5). Since the ashy sediments in these squares contained material culture they were completely sieved. In squares K10 and K11 the stratigraphic sequence is incomplete

Figure 3: Inset of Trench 1 and square M9 as surveyed and drawn by J. Rosenberg.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

205

Figure 4: South Section (“B”) of square M9. The light color dashed line demarcates the line of the stone fall. Drawn by B.A. Saidel

Figure 5: South and East sections (“A”) in Trench 1. Drawn by B.A. Saidel

SAIDEL et al.

206

because excavations in these squares did not reach bedrock. A circular wall of a small structure was exposed in K10 (Figs. 3, 5). The sediments found inside this structure were brown and sandy in texture. Fieldstones, stone chips, and flat stones, perhaps roof collapse, were found on top of these sediments. In square K11 excavations defined the exterior face of the oval wall, which encircles this site (Fig. 3). This wall is made of unhewn fieldstones stacked one on top of another. The exterior slope adjacent to this wall is steep and the artifacts found in K11 may reflect the intentional dumping of trash.

POTTERY (B.A.S., T. E-G) The ceramic assemblage from Rogem Be’erotayim consists of 413 sherds, of which 34 (7.64%) were diagnostic. The diagnostic pottery includes bases (9 , 26.4%), rims (14, 41.1%), and combed decorated body sherds (11, 32.3%). Sorting the diagnostic and undiagnostic pottery by fabric demonstrates that the assemblage is comprised, in the following order, of holemouth vessels (246, 60%), EBIV/MBI flat bottom storage jars (75, 18%), EBIV/MBI cup-bowls (37, 9%) and miscellaneous vessels (55, 13%) (Table 1). Table 1: The ratios of diagnostic to body sherds for holemouth vessels and Early Bronze Age IV/Middle Bronze I vessels. Vessel Type

Body Sherds

Diagnostic Sherds

Ratio of Undiagnostic to Diagnostic Sherds

Misc. fabric

27.5 to 1

Holemouth Vessel

246

82 to 1

EBIV/MBI Cups

9.25 to 1

EBIV/MBI Flat Bottom Storage Jars (FBSJ)

3.94 to 1

FBSJ combed sherds

6.81 to 1

FBSJ Rim sherds

37.5 to 1

FBSJ Bases

15:1

Pottery from the Early Bronze Age Ib-II is limited to three diagnostic sherds. A rim and base appear to be from the same type of holemouth jar (Fig. 6:9, 14). Examples for this type of vessel are found in Early Bronze Age contexts in strata IV, III, and II at Tel Arad (Amiran 1978, Pl. 8:31, 32, Pl.20:7, Pl.46:1). Also present in the assemblage is a rim sherd from an Egyptian wine jar dated in Egypt from Naqada III to early Dynasty I (Needler 1984:197, Plate 12:45, 198) (Fig. 6:13).2 This type of vessel is termed “S” or Smooth Ware (Needler 1984:196), and falls into Van den Brink’s Type III (1996:145, Fig. 2:IIb.9, IIb.10) and Type

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

Figure 6: The pottery unearthed at Rogem Be’erotayim. See table 2 for a description of the wares.

207

208

SAIDEL et al.

N storage jars (Van, den Brink 1996:146, Fig. 3: Na.22). Both imported and local copies of this storage jar are present in EBIb contexts in the southern Levant (e.g., Amiran and Van den Brink 2002; Braun et al. 2001).2 Petrographic analysis of the sherd from Rogem Be’erotayim indicates that it was made in Egypt (D. Master personal communication, 2002). The majority of the diagnostic pottery is dated to the EBIV/MBI period (Table 1). There is one example of a holemouth cooking pot. This rim sherd has two ridges along the shoulder (Fig. 6.1). Parallels for this type of vessel are present at the EBIV/MBI sites of Har Yeroham and in Cave G23 at Jebel Qa’aq¥r (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:114, Fig. 69:28; Gitin 1975: 52*, Fig 2.2). Also present is either a pithos or very large storage jar, 24 cm in diameter (Fig. 6.7). If this vessel is a pithos then there are parallels with examples found at Ein Ziq (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:177, Fig. 109:6, 251:1). Alternatively, if this sherd is from a large storage jar, there are parallels found at the sites of Be’er Resisim (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:219, Fig. 137:4) and Har Yeroham (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:248:1, 5). There are two different types of EBIV/MBI cup-bowls in this assemblage. One type has a rounded base with an everted rim (Fig. 6:3). An example of this form is present at Horvat Arnon (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:110, Fig. 65:1; 241:9) (Table 1). The other type of cup bowl has an everted rim and straight sides (Fig 6:4). This form is present at a number of EBIV/MBI settlements in the Negev Highlands such as Har Sadeh (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:99, Fig. 4, 5), Mash’abbe Sadeh (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:127:Fig. 78:1) and Nahal Boqer (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:133, Fig. 82: 2, 3). The majority of diagnostic sherds unearthed at Rogem Be’erotayim are bases (Figs. 6.8, 10, 11), rims (6.5, 6), and combed decorated body sherds (Fig. 6.15 )3 from EBIV/MBI flat bottom storage jars. Parallels for the rims are present at Ein Ziq (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:175, Fig. 107:1, 4, 6, 176, Fig. 108:1, 2), Har Saayad (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999: 100, Fig. 57:4, 8, 10), and Mash’abeh Sadeh (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:127, Fig. 78:11, 12). Parallels for the bases of are found at Ein Ziq (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:175, Fig. 107:8,9; 176, Fig. 108) and Masha’abeh Sadeh (Cohen and Cohen-Amin 1999:128, Fig. 79:2).

The majority of serekhs found in Palestine are incised on this type of container (Van den Brink and Braun 2002, Appendix A). Note only one of the 75 comb decorated body sherds are illustrated in this report (Fig. 6:15).

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

209

Table 2: description pottery Form

Illustration

Description

Holemouth Cup

Fig. 6.1

Ware: charred appearance: brown (7.5YR4/2); tiny to medium white inclusions

Jar

Fig. 6.2

Ware: Yellowish red (5YR5/6); tiny white and gray inclusions; micaceous; self slip

Cup

Fig. 6.3

Ware: Yellowish red (5YR5/6); numerous small to large white inclusions; numerous tiny grary inclusions; micaceous; self slip or unslipped.

Cup

Fig. 6.4

Ware: Reddish yellow (5YR6/6); Occassional medium white inclusions; surface treatment unclear due to light film over entire sherd

Storage Jar Rim

Fig. 6.5

Ware: Yellowish Red (5YR5/6); numerous tiny white inclusions; surface treatment unclear; light film over entire sherd; combed decoration on upper shoulder below neck

Storage Jar Rim

Fig. 6.6

Ware: Very Pale Brown (10YR8/3); numerous tiny and occasionally large white inclusions; Surface treatment: Pink Slip (7.5YR7/4)

Storage Jar

Fig. 6.7

Ware: Reddish Yellow (5YR7/6); numerous tiny to medium light and dark gray and medium white inclusions; Surface treatment: Very pale brown slip (10YR7/3); combed decoration on upper shoulder below neck

Storage Jar, flat base

Fig. 6.8

Ware: Very pale brown (10YR7/3); occasional tiny gray inclusions; unslipped

Holemouth Storage Fig. 6.9 Jar base (probably belongs to 6.14

Ware: Brown (7.5YR5/4); numerous tiny to medium light gray inclusions; occasional large light gray and white inclusions; charred exterior; medium coarse texture. Charring appears to be post depositional

Storage Jar, flat base

Fig. 6.10

Ware: Brown (7.5YR5/3); numerous tiny to medium white inclusions and occasional large white inclusions; reddish brown interior core; gray exterior core; Surface treatment: Very pale brown slip on exterior (10YR7/4)

Storage Jar, Flat base

Fig. 6.11

Ware: Dark fabric; ware and surface treatment unclear due to light film over entire sherd

Storage Jar Rim

Fig. 6.15

Ware: Reddish Yellow (5YR6/6); medium course texture; numerous tiny to large white inclusions; tiny gray inclusions; traces of a gray core; Surface treatment: Very pale brown slip (10YR7/3); course texture; combed decoration

Storage Jar Rim

Fig. 6.12

Ware: Brown (7.5YR5/4); numerous tiny to medium light gray inclusions; occasional large light gray and white inclusions; medium coarse texture

Egyptian Wine Jar

Fig. 6.13

Ware: Reddish brown (5YR5/4); well levigated fabric; tiny white and dark gray and occasional medium dark gray inclusions; gray core Surface treatment: Reddish Brown (5YR5/4)

SAIDEL et al.

210 Form

Illustration

Description

Holemouth Storage Fig. 6.14 Jar

Ware: Brown (7.5YR5/4); numerous tiny to medium light gray inclusions; occasional large light gray and white inclusions; charred exterior; medium coarse texture

Cup

Not Illustrated

Ware: Reddish yellow (5YR6/6); numerous tiny white inclusions; slightly micaceous; Surface treatment: Pinkish gray (7.5YR7/2)

Holemouth Jar Base

Not Illustrated

Ware: Brown (7.5YR5/4); numerous tiny to medium light gray inclusions; occasional large light gray and white inclusions; medium coarse texture; charred exterior

LITHIC ASSEMBLAGE (J.V. AND S.A.R) The lithic assemblage from Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim is comprised of 224 artifacts, of which 206 are on flint and 18 on quartz. The most common type of flint (70 of 132 flakes) is smooth and light gray in color with occasional white stripes.

Waste (163) Cores (5): The cores are amorphous with no standardization. Four are classified as flake cores and the fifth shows a borderline blade removal, along with flake removals. The cores are on flint of varying shades of gray, four on light gray flint and the fifth on a darker shade of gray. Two cores have white spots and gray stripes, while there is one core on grainy flint. Two cores have two striking platforms, two have three striking platforms, and one has four striking platforms. Average maximal dimension is 7.29 +/-2.43 cm. Flakes (133): Flake morphology is not standardized, in accordance with the amorphous nature of the cores. Hinge fractures are present on 29 flakes (21.8%), also reflective of the expedient nature of the assemblage. In general flakes are small, with average width and thickness dimensions of 3.42+/-1.15 cm and 2.99+/-1.08 cm respectively. These small sizes accord with the small size of the cores. Most of the flakes are on light gray flint (70, 52.63% of the flakes), or dark gray flint (13, 9.77%). One large group of flakes is made on white flint (29, 21.8%) and two more flakes are on whitish gray flint. Sixteen flakes are on brown flint, 11 on light brown (8.27%) and 5 on dark brown (3.75%). Three flakes show signs of burning and are brownish purple. Ten flakes are on coarse grainy flint. In general, the remaining flakes are on smooth, fine-grained material, although many show minor impurities such as spots or stripes. Blades (6): The artifacts in this class are technically blades, with length twice width, but in fact they are not technologically distinct from the flakes and likely are part of a flake continuum, and not a separate technique. Three are on white flint and three on light gray, two of these have white inclusions. All are on fine-grained flint. Average dimensions are length=5.07+/-0.81 cm and 2.2+/-0.55 cm.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

211

Bladelets (19): This groups consists of pieces whose length does not exceed 3.0 cm and whose width rarely exceeds 1.0 cm, with average dimensions of length=2.776+/-0.498 and width=0.9+/-0.288 cm. In spite of the small sample size, there is little homogeneity in the group. The range of raw material is relatively great, with 11 pieces of light gray flint, three of white flint, two on white gray flint, two of brown flint, and one of striped purple-gray flint. One piece is on coarser raw material. Two pieces show hinged ends. Microburin (1): One microburin, made on fine-grained white flint is probably an epipaleolithic intrusion. Quartzite pieces (16): It is difficult to determine whether these are the result of intentional flaking or breakage, although some appear to show ventral faces. They appear to have been brought into the site.

Tools (43) Microdrills (10, 23.2%) (Fig. 7): These are manufactured on bladelets, with abrupt lateral retouch creating narrow elongate points. All are of smooth, fine-grained flint. Six are light gray in color, and four of these show white patina. One piece is white, two are of light brown flint, and one is on dark gray flint. Two are broken, or perhaps incomplete. Three are double shouldered, three are single shouldered, and two are triangular in shape (see Rosen 1997a:70, fig. 3.27). Average dimensions are length=1.641+/-0.448 cm, width=0.961+/-0.234 cm, and thickness=0.341+/-0.079 cm.. Borers (3, 6.9%): These pieces are manufactured on flakes. For most, the point was produced by retouched a notch or two, resulting in a point and a shoulder (or two shoulders). One borer is on gray flint with white spots and patina. Another is on light gray flint, and has ventral retouch, which also covers the bulb of percussion. The final borer is on dark brown flint and retains cortex. Average dimensions are length = 3.45+/-0.463 cm, width = 1.66+/0.488 cm, and thickness = 0.663+/-0.321 cm. Notches (5, 11.6%): All of these pieces show at least a single notch (deep, intentional retouch forming a concavity). Two pieces are of dark brown, coarse flint. Three pieces are on fine-grained flint, one light gray, one light brown, and one white. Average dimensions are length=2.95+/-0.87 cm, width = 1.82+/-0.63 cm, and thickness = 9.76+/-0.26 cm. Denticulates (2, 4.6%): Two (flat) denticulates are on dark gray flint. One retains cortex. Retouched Pieces (17, 39.5%): This is a technologically heterogeneous group with nonstandardized retouch and morphology. Eight pieces are on flakes, nine on chips, and one is on a massive flake (8.53x5.47x2.2 cm). This piece also retains cortex. Average dimensions for the retouched flakes as a whole are length=3.69+/-2.75 cm, width=2.51+/-1.24 cm and thickness = 0.84+/-0.53 cm. Of the nine retouched chips, most appear to be broken pieces of unclassifiable tools. Average dimensions are length=2.19+/-0.25 cm, width=1.20+/-0.28 cm and thickness=0.56+/-0.23 cm.

212

Figure 7: Microlithic drills from Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim.

SAIDEL et al.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

213

Massive Denticulates (2, 4.6%): One large denticulate is on a wadi cobble of gray purple flint covered with cortex on the dorsal surface. It measures 10.53x5.58x3.15 cm. The second is on a large white-gray flake. It measures 10.25x5.4x2.84 cm. Massive Scrapers (2, 4.6%): One massive steep scraper, measuring 7.6 x 5.75 x 3.8 cm, is on a wadi cobble covered with brown patina. It may be intrusive. The second massive scraper, on a large primary flake, measures 12.5x9.2 cm in length and width. The ventral face of this artifact is concave and it retained fragments of copper adhering to it. Retouched Blades (2, 4.6%): One broken blade with edge retouch measures 1.5 cm in width and 0.32 cm in thickness. A second retouched blade is backed and may be intrusive. It measures 3.3x1.3x0.53 cm. Varia (8): These artifacts are not included in the tool counts. One small natural limestone “ball” was recovered. It measures 3.41 cm in diameter. One broken piece of limestone shows retouch. The eight hammer stones are on rounded wadi cobbles and show signs of pecking. All measure greater than 8 cm in diameter.

SUMMARY In general, tool production is ad hoc, reflected in the heterogeneity of the raw materials, and the lack of standardization in both waste and tools. Most tools are small (with the exception of the massive scrapers). Several lines of evidence suggest that lithic production is local. The raw materials used to produce the flakes and tools is similar to that of the cores and can be found in the vicinity of the site. The presence of knapping waste, both cores and other waste, indicates local production. Although no blade cores were found, the blades recovered are actually borderline flakes and could have derived from the cores. The presence of bladelets, from which the microdrills could have been produced, suggests that these tools too were produced on the site, even though no obvious cores were found relating to bladelet manufacture. The high number of microdrills suggest bead production (Rosen 1994-5:155-6, 1997a; 1997b). The dominance of the double shouldered type is similar to similar assemblages of microdrills at the Camel Site and Rekhes Nafha (e.g., Rosen 1994-5; Saidel 2002:46, 48) and contrasts with other ‘drill sites” (see Rosen 1997b), suggesting an Early Bronze Age attribution.

214

SAIDEL et al.

FAUNAL REPORT (E.M.)4 The fauna is presented in terms of minimum number of individuals (MNI) per species. The number of identifiable bones (NISP) relates to the number of elements that could be positively identified per species. Bone mass was also recorded for both identifiable and unidentifiable remains. Age determinations based on epiphyseal fusion rates rely on work done by Silver (1969) and dental attrition scores were examined in accordance with Payne (1973). Due to the morphological similarities between sheep and goat bones, they were combined to form an ovicaprine category. In some cases, however, preservation of the articular ends of some bones allowed for the distinction between sheep and goats, a procedure that followed guidelines set forth by Boessneck (1969) and Prummel and Frisch (1986). At present it is not possible to differentiate males from females because none of the elements with diagnostic criteria were present. Taxonomic identifications were verified by consulting the comparative skeletal collections housed in the Department of Evolution, Systematics, and Ecology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Givat Ram. The rigorous sieving program employed at Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim had two immediate affects on the composition of the faunal assemblage. Both the sample size and diversity increases and a greater number of unidentifiable fragments were recovered relative to those that could be positively identified. A total of 1414 animal bones and bone fragments were recovered, of which only 170 (12%) were taxonomically recognizable. This relatively low identification rate is likely related to the fragmented preservation state of the assemblage that was augmented once all sieved fragments were incorporated. Bone mass also demonstrates the dominance of unidentified material compared to the identifiable remains. With a combined mass of 1160 grams, 789 grams of bone could not be identified, while only 371 grams were identifiable. However, the decision to sieve these deposits has been a fruitful one, as the small bones of lizard, bird, and fish (Table 3) surely would have been overlooked had hand collection been the sole method of recovery. The significance of the presence of these animals will be addressed below. Based on the remains from this site that could be aged, it appears that the ovicaprines killed at Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim were mainly exploited for secondary products such as dairy, hair, wool, etc., and with a minor interest in meat acquisition. The limited data regarding long bone epiphyseal fusion currently available from Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim indicates a mortality

I would like to thank Benjamin Saidel for inviting me to study the fauna from Rogem Be erotayim. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Justin Lev-Tov, Arlene Fradkin, David Reese, and Haskel Greenfield for their valuable input on earlier manuscripts. Liora Horwitz assisted with some of the faunal identifications, and I thank her for her expertise.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

215

profile dominated by mature ovicaprines. Since jaws with associated molars were not found, only a few dental attrition scores could be carried out. These were done on isolated ovicaprine mandibular molars. Based on Payne’s (1973) system, three first molars indicated very mature animals, possibly as old as ten years. Readings from two premolars suggested that they belonged to animal(s) around eight years of age. Table 3: Composition of Bronze Age fauna from Rogem Be’erotayim in descending order of NISP abundance. Species

NISP

MNI

Medium Sized Mammal

981

–

UID

263

–

Ovicaprine

145

Sheep Fish

Goat

Gazelle

Spiny Tailed Lizard

Unidentified Bird

1414

Total

That ovicaprines were not primarily valued for their meat suggests that alternative sources of protein were important contributions to the local cuisine. The lone gazelle bone (Gazella) demonstrates that hunting wild game was a practice that endured despite the cultural reliance on domestic animals. The inhabitants of Rogem Be’erotayim also acquired protein from fish. Jaw bones, head bones, and vertebrae are useful when taxonomically identifying fish remains. These elements also represent the most common anatomical parts of the fish that are regularly collected from archaeological deposits (Casteel 1976; Colley 1990). Unfortunately, the fish remains from this site do not include any of these elements, as they appear to be rib fragments. At this juncture, the exclusive presence of ribs suggests that the fish were decapitated prior to their transport. Furthermore, the absence of vertebra suggests that consumers may have acquired, or even preferred their fish to be filleted, where strips of fish meat would have been removed in such a manner that excludes the vertebral column, and dried. The discovery of additional ichthyofaunal material from future investigations would undoubtedly add to our understanding of fish preparation in the ancient southern Levant. Reptile and bird remains have also been identified. The presence of a spiny tailed lizard (Uromastyx), identified by Liora Horwitz, does not appear to be a late intrusive element since it exhibits the same degree of weathering seen on the rest of the bones from the assemblage.

216

SAIDEL et al.

Uromastyx could have occurred at the site after its abandonment, but may be related to local culinary preferences. The latter suggestion must be given some consideration since ethnographic data recorded among the historic Bedouin, such as the Rwala, describes how lizards were prepared for meals (Musil 1928:41).5 The exact taxonomic identification of the bird bone has yet to be defined, but it is likely that birds were culturally exploited to a minor extent.

SUMMARY A rigorous recovery system at Rogem Be’erotayim has produced a fairly abundant yet fragmentary faunal assemblage. The animal remains recovered from the Bronze Age suggest ovicaprine herding strategies that were geared toward the production of secondary products, and to a lesser extent, meat. Other species such as fish, birds, and possibly reptiles, may have also been consumed. Since little emphasis was placed on the local acquisition of ovicaprine meat, other animals may have filled this need, thereby representing alternative sources of protein. As further investigations generate additional faunal material suitable for analysis, the economic structure in antiquity will be better defined.

SLICE MARKS AND EVIDENCE FOR BUTCHERING TECHNOLOGY (H.G) Bones were examined for butchering marks in order to determine if the animals were butchered or skinned with stone or metal tools. Of the 1414 animal bones and bone fragments, only six exhibited cut marks (0.42%). This is similar to other contemporary assemblages from the immediate and larger region from which there is comparative data (Titris Höyük – 0.34%; Afridar – 0.25%: Greenfield 2002, 2004). While this may appear to be a small fraction of recovered remains, it is a common fraction in sieved samples. Unsieved or haphazardly collected samples tend to have a larger fraction of butchered remains simply because most bones with preserved butchering marks tend to come from larger bones, overrepresented in preferentially collected samples and butchered marks tend to be easier to identify on larger bones (Payne 1972; Lyman 1994). In sieved samples, an abundance of small and very small fragments is recovered, most of which do not have any cut marks on them, lowering the identification rate. The condition of the animal bone sample from Rogem Be’erotayim is superior to most other arid zone campsites in the area (personal observation); however, this collection is not

5. For an account of the hunting and cooking of the spiny tailed lizard among traditional societies in Oman, see El Mahi (2002).

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

217

as well preserved as those assemblages from tells in the region (e.g. Greenfield 2004, 2005). All, except one, of the bones with cut marks have been classified as exhibiting medium weathering (compact surface slightly pitted/cavitated, depressions in the cortex due to pressure or pits due to acidity of the soil, and cracked). The remaining single sample had light weathering (surface is discolored, but not pitted). There was no evidence of calcium carbonate encrustation, a common problem on many assemblages from the region and period (e.g. Greenfield 2004). Most animal remains from sites such as Rogem Be’erotayim in this area, regardless of time period, and for the Bronze Age in particular, are more poorly preserved. While there is a growing record concerning animal exploitation strategies for this time period and region, there is very little information available regarding butchering practices and the nature of the butchering implements. Most discussions of tools from these periods ignore potential uses of implements for slaughtering and butchering animals. In this report, some information on butchering practices as well as the nature of the implements used in the butchering of animals at Rogem Be’erotayim will be presented. This information is particular important since it sheds further light on a little understood domain of animal exploitation practices on the periphery of early complex societies in the region.

Identification methodology In order to identify bones with butchering marks on them, each bone fragment was individually examined. Butchering marks made by a knife are relatively easy to distinguish in this period from tooth and other marks (as a result of weathering). They are described as slicing, as opposed to chopping marks made by an axe. The nature of the activity leaves a relatively clear signature for even the naked eye – relatively short straight incision in the bone. Once butchering marks were identified, the bone and the butchering marks are drawn to scale (1: 1), and subjected to a detailed analysis including taxon, state of domestication, symmetry, and part of the element. The cut mark is then examined under a light optical microscope and a tentative identification of the nature of the raw material of the implement is made – stone or metal. Subsequently, a silicone mold of the incision is made in order to further study the mark in a Scanning Electron Microscope. The original bone was then returned to the project director for long-term curation with the rest of the faunal collection. The methods used to determine whether the cutting implement was made of stone or metal are outlined in Greenfield (e.g., 1999, 2004) and will be briefly summarized here (Fig. 8). Metal knife blades produce a very uniform pattern, which can be summarized as follows: (a) Metal knives produce sharp V-shaped or hard-cornered |_| grooves that meet at a distinct apex at the bottom of the groove (Fig. 8 a, b); (b) Metal tools make more uniform patterns on the bone, often removing material in the groove more effectively. They leave either no

SAIDEL et al.

218

Fig. 8: Profile of characteristic metal and stone tool cut marks: a. profile of metal blade – sharp flat-edged b. profile metal blade – dulled flat-edged c. profile of metal blade – serrated-edge (saw-like) d. profile of chipped stone scraper e. profile of chipped stone blade – unretouched f. profile of chipped stone blade – unifacial retouch g. profile of chipped stone blade – bifacial retouch

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

219

striations or striations of a more uniform depth and spacing than stone tools; c) In general, metal knives produce a cleaner and more even slicing cut (except for serrated-edge blades (Fig. 8 c). By contrast, chipped stone tools have a different pattern, summarized as follows: (a) Chipped bifacial tools (blades or flakes) create a groove with one side rising steeply and smoothly and the other side rising more gradually (Fig. 8 e), except for scrapers (Fig. 8 d); (b) The gradually rising side will have one or more striations that run parallel to the apex of the cut; (c) A retouched tool may leave lateral striations on both sides of the apex, depending on whether it was unifacially or bifacially retouched (Fig. 8 f, g); (d) Stone tools produce a shallower, less even cut mark.

Data description Since the sample is relatively small, each bone will be described in detail. Sample 1 (Fig. 9) is the proximal end of a domesticated sheep radius (right side). Less than a quarter of

Figure 9: SEM microphotograph of Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim cut mark sample 1 made by a stone tool (unmodified flake or blade), magnification 100x

220

SAIDEL et al.

the original bone was found and only the medial half of the proximal end was preserved. It probably belonged to relatively young adult based on epiphyseal fusion (distal fused) and muscle markings (light). Two slice cut marks are found on the proximal shaft approximately 1 cm below the proximal articular end on the medial face at the caudal border. The marks on this bone are the result of the disarticulation of the joint between the proximal radius and the distal humerus. Sample 2 (Fig. 10) is the proximal end (caput and neck) of a domesticated sheep/goat femur (right side). Less than a quarter of the original bone was found and only the medial half of the proximal end was preserved. It probably belonged to relatively young adult based on epiphyseal fusion (proximal fused) and muscle markings (none). Four cuts are found on the caput, which are located across the entire caudal face. The marks on this bone are the result of the disarticulation of the joint between the proximal femur and the innominate.

Figure 10: SEM microphotograph of Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim cut mark sample 2 made by a stone tool (unmodified flake or blade), magnification 100x.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

221

Sample 3 (Fig. 11) is the proximal shaft of a domesticated sheep/goat rib (right side). Less than a quarter of the original bone was found. It probably belonged to relatively young adult, based upon the state of fusion of the shaft. Two cut marks were found on the proximal shaft immediately below the neck of the rib on the lateral face near the caudal border. The marks are probably the result of the removal of flesh along the rib cage (filleting). Sample 4 is the anterior face of the proximal shaft of a domesticated sheep/goat tibia (right side). Less than a quarter of the original bone was found. It probably belonged to indeterminate subadult/adult (the shaft was fused and dense, however, muscle marking were absent). Four cut marks were found in the middle of the proximal shaft and the cranial face and on the border with the medial face. The marks are probably the result disarticulation of the tibia-femur joint. By cutting at this location, it is possible to disarticulate the joint without cutting directly into it.

Figure 11: SEM microphotograph of Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim cut mark sample 3 made by a stone tool (unmodified flake or blade), magnification 100x.

222

SAIDEL et al.

Sample 5 is the dorsal quarter of the cranial end of a lumbar vertebra of a domesticated sheep. It probably belonged to a young adult because the bone was adult sized, not porous, and had light muscle markings. It was the only bone with cut marks to be lightly weathered. All the other samples have medium weathering. One cut mark was found on the upper half of the vertebral arch in the middle of the left lateral face. The marks are probably the result of the removal of flesh along the rib cage (filleting). Sample 6 is found on a very small fragment from the shaft of a rib from a medium sized mammal (e.g., sheep/goat). It belonged to an indeterminate subadult/adult. Six slices were found on the shaft, but the face could not be determined. The marks are probably the result of the removal of flesh along the rib cage (filleting). Based on the above evidence, it is apparent that some stages of butchering are taking place at the site: limb dismemberment and filleting. There is no evidence for slaughter or skinning, however. The absence of such evidence is not necessarily an indication that animals were not slaughtered or skinned at the site since the assemblage is small and only a small section of the site has been excavated. It is unlikely to find all stages of the butchering process in the same part of the site. Such conclusions will require further testing of other areas of the site. While some of the bones with cut marks could not be securely identified to a specific taxon, it is very likely that all the butchered remains derive from domesticated sheep or goat. This was somewhat surprising given the range of taxa identified at the site by Maher (above). It is difficult to draw behavioral conclusions about this at this time given the problem in spatial sampling discussed above. In general, all the cut marks were identified as the result of stone tools probably stone flakes or blades (see Rosen 1997a). This can be clearly seen in the SEM photographs of the cut marks (e.g., Figs, 9-11). There is no evidence for metal tool cut marks on the bones. None of the bones exhibited any of the evidence for tool or ornament modification, polish, gnawing by rodents and/or dogs, burning, and pathologies. Based upon size and age, there was no evidence that any were articulated or came from the same individual. The evidence from the cut marks on the animal bones from Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim do not provide evidence for the presence of early butchering metal technology at the site. Stone tools, a common element of the material culture at the site (see above section by Vardi and Rosen), were the only implements used in butchering animals at Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim. This is of import given the significance attributed to the metals trade for arid zone populations in the southern Levant during the EBA. If there is any trade in metals during this period, it is not filtering down to the supposed merchants of the trade in the form of metal butchering implements. This would imply that the occupants of the site were either not involved in the metal trade and/or that a functional metal butchering technology had not yet been adopted in this area by the end of the EBA.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

223

A further surprise appeared on one of the cut mark molds. Outside of the cut mark, but in close proximity since the molds are only 2 cm across, the spectrographic analysis of minerals on the mold identified tin in the spectrum (Figs. 12-13). There is no possibility that the sample could have been contaminated from any of the preparation processes for the SEM since there is no tin in any of the compounds or the molds. All of the other molds from the site were examined in the same manner. No other evidence of tin was found, although there was extensive evidence for gold and some evidence of iron (Figs. 12-13). Gold is expected given that the molds are covered by gold palladium, while iron is also not surprising given that it is endemic in the soils from the region. Could the tin have naturally occurred in the soil? Tin is not native to the area. There are sources in the Taurus Mountains in Turkey and there are some sources in Egypt. While

Figure 12: Spectrographic analysis of Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim cut mark sample 5 indicating the presence of tin (Sn) on the silicone mold. Note the presence of iron, in addition to the expected silicone, gold, and palladium in the analysis. A small quantity of iron is also present (Fe), probably normal background noise from the soils at the site.

224

SAIDEL et al.

Figure 13: Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim Sample 4: Spectrographic analysis of iron (Fe) and nickel (Ni) found on the silicone mold. Note the presence of iron, in addition to the expected silicone, gold, and palladium in the analysis.

there might be some minor outcroppings in present day Israel or the Sinai Peninsula, there is little evidence for them in the record. Hence, this may be interpreted as early evidence of the tin trade, especially given the lack of local sources for tin. The only hypothesis that can be reasonably put forward as to why the fragment of tin may be on a bone that was clearly butchered by a stone blade/flake is that tin was being processed at the site in some manner (e.g. breaking it up, melting, etc.) in anticipation of it being transported elsewhere. Rogem Beâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;erotayim is on an important trade route leading off the Darb el Ghaza to the Negev.

COPPER METALLURGY (A.S.) A wadi cobble measuring 15cm x 10cm was recovered in square K11. The stone showed three concentrations of green-copper coloring on the fractured surface. It was speculated that the coloration was the result of copper processing. Similar copper colorings on wadi

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;EROTAIM

225

cobbles found in direct association with copper processing in various Chalcolithic sites in the Southern Levant including Abu Matar and Shiqmim (unpublished reports). There are two main ways that copper coloration can occur on stone tools. The first is through the process of crushing copper ore, either for beneficiation (the process of concentrating the ore prior to smelting) or for preparation prior to carving (i.e., malachite pendants), typically leaving impacted copper ore on the surface of the working tool. Second, at least in early copper production in the Southern Levant, the crushing of copper slag containing high amounts of entrapped metallic copper will leave streaks of metallic copper on the surface of the tool. Over time the metallic copper corrodes back to a copper mineral and appears green. The purpose of the investigation was to see if there was any copper remaining on the surface and if it could be identified. Three samples of the coloration were scraped off the surface of the stone tool and mounted on a carbon taped stub to be placed into the SEM for analysis. A Jeol XL-30 SEM with an EDS analytical system was used for the analysis. The machine was run at 20 KV and scans were set for 30 sec. None of the three samples showed any signs of a copper peak under analysis. This should not be surprising as the staining was extremely thin and the EDS system is not specifically designed to detect trace amounts of materials (elemental concentrations below ~ 0.8 wt% for copper) (WDS is preferred but the cost involved is much higher). Although the SEM could not detect copper outright, it is the opinion of the investigator that the coloration observed is a result of copper staining, but more likely from copper ore processing than from metallic copper streaking. Further analysis on a WDS system may reveal the concentration levels of the copper present but it is not recommended based on the value of the information obtainable and the cost involved in running a WDS scan.

VARIA (B.A.S.) Aside from lithics and pottery, additional small finds include a worked ceramic body sherd, a marine shell and fragments of ostrich eggshells. The body sherd was reworked in order to form a tang or grip on one side. Its opposite side is semi-circular in shape and was retouched in the same manner as a stone tool. The marine shell, identified as Cerastoderma glaucum, a type found in the Mediterranean Sea, was unearthed in square M9 (D. Bar-Yosef 2004 pc). The ostrich eggshell fragments were unearthed in squares K9 (N= 25), K11 (N=1), and M9 (N=56). These fragments were found in association with microlithic drills and are interpreted as evidence for the manufacture of beads (e.g., Rosen 1994-95; Saidel 2002:48-49).

226

SAIDEL et al.

SITE FORMATION PROCESSES (B.A.S.) The differential preservation of pottery types has chronological implications. Body sherds from holemouth vessels are the largest ceramic class at Rogem Be’erotayim. As a result of the friable nature of this pottery, however, very few diagnostic sherds from holemouth vessels have survived (Table 1). In contrast, the better firing of flat bottom storage jars and cups resulted in the better preservation of diagnostic sherds from these containers. Therefore, it is relatively easy to identify chronologically diagnostic pottery from the EBIV/MBI, such as the flat bottom storage jars and cups, while it is difficult to date holemouth vessels to a specific time period within the EBA. That is to say, chronologically diagnostic sherds dated to EBIV/MBI may be over represented in the Rogem Be’erotayim assemblage. Information contained in the section drawings demonstrates that the ashy layer was not stratigraphically sealed until the site was abandoned. Following the abandonment of Rogem Be’erotayim windblown loess accumulated unevenly against the exterior faces of walls leaving other portions of the ashy sediments exposed (Figs 5, 7). This layer was stratigraphically sealed when the stone architecture began to collapse. For example, in Trench 1 and Square M9 the stone architecture collapsed in an east-west direction onto exposed portions of the ashy sediments. In the west section of Trench 1 the stone walls collapsed in a northeast-southwest direction. The most parsimonious explanation is that the architecture collapsed during the EBIV/MBI period. However, if this site was occupied towards the end of this period, it is possible that the stone walls fell onto this layer after the EBIV/MBI period.

CONCLUSIONS The presence of a Naqada III-Dynasty 0-1 Egyptian Wine Jar at Rogem Be’erotayim is one of a number of Egyptian artifacts found in the Negev Highlands (e.g., Yekutieli 2004: 166-168). Yekutieli has suggested that the presence of Naqada III/Dynasty 0-1 artifacts in this region is evidence that mobile pastoralists had some sort of contact with an Egyptian colony (Yekutieli 2004:164-165) and the material here tends to support this. Whether the EBIb occupation extended into the EBII is impossible to ascertain given the limited material culture assemblage. The presence of EBIV/MBI pottery in the ashy sediments at Rogem Be’erotayim represents the reoccupation of the site. As a working hypothesis the extent architecture in Trench 1 is provisionally attributed to the EBIV/MBI. The section drawings for the southern sides of Trench 1 and square M9 indicates that some portions of the architecture collapsed into an open space or courtyard. Faunal remains provide evidence for a varied subsistence strategy during the Early Bronze Age and EBIV/MBI periods. The presence of fish vertebrae is evidence for the transportation

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

227

of fish fillets to this arid zone settlement. The inhabitants also exploited ovicaprines for their secondary products and then butchered them when they out lived their usefulness. The metals trade is traditionally believed to have been an important factor in the socio-economic organization of arid zone pastoralists in the EBII and EBIV/MBI periods (Beit-Arieh 2003:442; Ilan and Sebbane 1989:154-158; Cohen 1992:120, 123, 127). The possibility that the inhabitants of Rogem Be’erotayim were involved in the transportation of copper and possibly tin needs to be further investigated before any substantial conclusions can be drawn. In sum, the socio-economic organization of the inhabitants of Rogem Be’erotayim was based on multiple activities, such as animal husbandry, exchange, and small craft production. Further investigations are necessary in order to expand on, and test these preliminary conclusions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank with appreciation the following colleagues for their advice and assistance, Eliot Braun, Mordechai Haiman, the late Ornit Ilan, Omri Learnau, Laura Mazow, Samuel Wolff, and Yuval Yekutieli. The site plan was drawn by J. Rosenberg and the pottery was illustrated by Marina Zeltser. Photographs of the chipped stone were taken by Altar Fogel of BenGurion University.

REFERENCES Amiran R. 1978. Early Arad: The Chalcolithic Settlement and Early Bronze City: First-Fifth Seasons of Excavations, 1962-1966. Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. Amiran, R., van den Brink, E. C. M. 2002. The Ceramic Assemblage from Tel Ma’ahaz, Stratum I (Seasons 1975-1976). In van den Brink, E. C. M., Levy, T. E. (eds.), Egypt and the Levant: Interrelations from the 4th through the early 3rd Millennium BCE. pp. 273-279. London: Leicester University Press Beit-Arieh, I. 2003. Archaeology of Sinai. The Opher Expedition. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University and the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology. Boessneck J. 1969. Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis aries Linne) and goat (Capra hircus Linne). In Brothwell D. and Higgs E. S. (eds.), Science in Archaeology. pp. 331-58. London: Thames and Hudson. Braun E., Van den Brink E. C. M., Gophna R., and Goren Y. 2001. New evidence for Egyptian connections during a Late Phase of Early Bronze I from the Soreq Basin in South-Central Israel. In Wolff S. R. (ed.), Studies in the Archaeology of Israel and Neighboring Lands in Memory of Douglas L. Esse. pp. 59-97. Chicago & Atlanta: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, American Schools of Oriental Research. Casteel R. W. 1976. Fish Remains in Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies. London: Academic Press.

228

SAIDEL et al.

Cohen, R. 1992. The Nomadic or Semi-Nomadic Middle Bronze Age I Settlements in the Central Negev. In O. Bar-Yosef and A. Khazanov (eds.), Pastoralism in the Levant: Archaeological Materials in Anthropological Perspectives. pp. 105-131. Madison: Prehistory Press. Cohen R. and Cohen-Amin R. 1999. Ancient Settlement of the Central Negev. Jerusalem: The Israel Antiquities Authority. Colley S. M. 1990. The Analysis and Interpretation of Archaeological Fish Remains. In Schiffer M. B. (ed.), Archaeological Method and Theory. pp. 207-254. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press (Volume 2). El Mahi A. T. 2002. The spiny-tailed lizard: A constituent of the occasional diet of traditional inland societies in Oman. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 32: 31-46. Erickson-Gini T. 2000. Map of Be’erotayim Survey. Hadashot Arkheologiyot/ Excavations and Surveys in Israel 112: 111*-112*, 141-142. Erickson-Gini T. and Saidel B. A. 2001. Be’erotayim; Bir Birein. In Negev A. and Gibson S. (eds.), Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land. pp. 71-72. New York and London: Continuum. Gitin S. 1975. Middle Bronze I ‘Domestic’ Pottery at Jebel Qa’aqir: A Ceramic Inventory of Cave G23. Eretz-Israel 12: 46*-62*. Greenfield H. J. 1999. The origins of metallurgy: distinguishing stone from metal cut marks on bones from archaeological sites. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 797-808. Greenfield H. J. 2002. Faunal remains from the Early Bronze Age site of Titris Höyük, Turkey. In Buitenhuis H., Choyke A. M., Mashkour M., and Al-Shiyab A. H. (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East V (Proceedings of the ICAZ-SW Conference). pp. 252-261. Groningen, Netherlands: Rijksuniversitit. Greenfield H. J. 2004. Report on the butchered animal bone remains from the Afridar suburb (Area G) of Ashkelon (license 1963), Israel. ‘Atiqot 45: 243-261. Greenfield H. J. 2005. The origins of metallurgy at Jericho (Tel es-Sultan): a preliminary report on distinguishing stone from metal cut marks on mammalian remains. In Buitenhuis H., Choyke A. M., Martin L., Bartosiewicz L., Mashkour M. (eds.), Archaeozoology of the Near East VI (Proceedings of the 6th Sixth International Symposium on the Archaeozoology of Southwestern Asia and Adjacent Areas Conference). pp. 183-191.Groningen, The Netherlands: Rijksuniversitit. Ilan, O. and Sebbane M. 1989. Copper Metallurgy, Trade and the Urbanization of Southern Canaan in the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. In de Miroschedji, P. (ed.), L’Urbanisation de la Palestine à l’âge du Bronze ancien: Bilan et Perspectives des Recherches Actuelles, Actes du Colloque d’Emmaüs (20-24 Octobre 1986). pp. 139-162. Oxford: BAR International Series. 527(i). Lyman, R. L. 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Meshel, Z. 2000. Sinai: Excavations and Studies. Oxford: BAR International Series 876. Musil A. 1928. The Manners and Customs of the Rwala Bedouins. New York: American Geographical Society. Needler, W. 1984. Predynastic and Archaic Egypt in the Brooklyn Museum. Wilbour Monographs 9. New York: The Brooklyn Museum. Payne, S. 1972. Partial Recovery and Sample Bias: The results of some sieving experiments. In Higgs, E. S. (ed.), Papers in Economic Prehistory. pp. 49-64. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Payne S. 1973. Kill-Off patterns in sheep and goats: The mandibles from Asvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23: 281-303.

TEST EXCAVATIONS AT ROGEM BE’EROTAIM

229

Prummel W. and Frisch H. J. 1986. A guide for the distinction of species, sex, and body side in bones of sheep and goat. Journal of Archaeological Science 13: 567-577. Roll I. 1983. The Roman road system in Judaea. The Jerusalem Cathedra 3: 136-161. Rosen S. A. 1994-5. Microlithic drills from the Camel Site, Mitzpeh Ramon. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society 26: 148-158. Rosen S. A. 1997a. Lithics After the Stone Age: A Handbook of Stone Tools from the Levant. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. Rosen S. A. 1997b. Beyond milk and meat: Lithic evidence for economic specialization in the Early Bronze Age Pastoral Periphery in the Levant. Lithic Technology 22: 99-109. Saidel B. A. 2002. The excavations at Rekhes Nafha 396 in the Negev Highlands, Israel. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 325: 37-63. Silver A. (1969). The aging of domestic animals. In Brothwell D. and Higgs E. S. (eds.), Science in Archaeology. pp. 283-302. London: Thames and Hudson. Survey of Egypt and War Office United Kingdom. 1914. El Kossaima, Africa Sheet North H36, K1. 1: 125,000. War Office. Survey of Israel. 1984. Nissana 17-IV. 1:50,000. Israel, 1:50,000, Survey of Israel. Van den Brink, E. 1996. The Incised Serekh-Signs of Dynasties 0-1, Part I: Complete Vessels. In Spencer, J. (ed.), Aspects of Early Egypt. pp. 140-158. London: British Museum. Van den Brink, E., Braun, E. 2002. Wine Jars with Serekhs From Early Bronze Lod: Appellation Vallée du Nil Contrôlée, But for Whom? In van den Brink, E.C.M., Yannai, E. (eds.), In Quest of Ancient Settlements and Landscapes. pp. 167-192. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University. Woolley L. and Lawrence T. E. 1915. The Wilderness of Zin. With a chapter on Greek Inscriptions by M. N. Tod. London: Palestine Exploration Fund. Yekutieli, Y. 2004. The Desert, the Sown and the Egyptian Colony. Ägypten und Levant 14: 163-171.

230

SAIDEL et al.

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES Jurnal of The Israel Prehistoric Society 36 (2006), 231-244

231

Reaping with Flint Sickles: From Prehistory to Early Historic Ages HAIM WINTER1

Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Flint sickles, or dispersed sickle blades, have been recovered from archaeological excavations in the Levant repeatedly from the end of the 19th century. Hafts of bone or wood, in some cases with the blades still in the groove, have also been recovered (e.g., Fig. 1). Use-wear analyses have established that these tools were used for reaping cereals or grasses (e.g., Anderson 1980, 1998; Unger-Hamilton 1984). In Canaan, wild cereals were utilized as early as the late upper Palaeolithic period, for example at Ohalo 2, ca. 23 ka BP (Nadel 2004:136; Piperno et al. 2004:670) and composite flint sickles were used at least as early as the Natufian period (e.g., Turville-Petre 1932:272, pl. XXVII; Garrod & Bate 1937:31, 37, pl. XIII). Over time the sickle blade morphology changed from plain blades to serrated and denticulated blades, to Cananean blades, and finally to large geometric sickle segments (Rosen 1997:134 - 149). Other types and subtypes, such as elongated reaping knives, also existed, and some assemblages contained a variety of different types, as at Middle Bronze Age Tel Nami (Winter n.d.: 44). Development was not linear and morphology, cutting edge retouch, and hafting differed according to period and location. This tendency is demonstrated in the transition from the early Pottery Neolithic, the Yarmuqian culture, to the late Pottery Neolithic, Wadi Rabah and succeeding Chalcolithic cultures. The deep denticulation of the Yarmuqian sickles was replaced by finer forms of retouch or serration. Furthermore hafting methods also changed over time, from straight bone hafts, as at el-Wad and Kebara (Fig. 1:1-2), to slightly curved bone hafts, as at Nahal Hemar (Fig. 1:3), to straight or slightly curved wooden hafts (e.g., Fayum, Fig. 1:4), and finally to angled hafts as reported from Italy and Egypt (Fig. 1:5-7). Regrettably, no similar hafts have been recovered in Canaan or Phoenicia.

231

232

HAIM WINTER

Figure 1: Archaeological composite sickles by haft type: 1. el-Wad, Fragment of bone sickle haft with two sickle blades still in the grove, length ~ 7.5 cm. (Natufian, Garrod & Bate 1937:31, 37, pl. XIII); 2. Kebara, bone sickle haft of with grove. Length ~ 38 cm. (Natufian, Turville-Petre 1932:272, pl. XVII); 3. Nahal Hemar, Slightly curved bone sickle haft with three blades, length ~ 27 cm. (Neolithic, Bar-Yosef & Alon 1988:16-19, pl. V); 4. Fayum,Wooden sickle haft with three of four blades still in grove (Neolithic, Caton- Thompson & Gardner 1934:34); 5. Kahun (Petrie 1890:26, pl. IX/22); 6. Kahun (Spurrel 1891:54, pl.VII/27); 7. Solferino (Vayson 1919:418).

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES

233

The majority of the published studies of flint sickles carried out in the past (See Rosen 1997 and references) have dealt with the morphology of sickle blades and use-wear; it seems that the question of the relation between sickle blade morphology, hafting methods, and efficiency is still open. Did, changing settlement patterns, growing populations, increased utilization of cereals followed by advanced farming methods, and the ”industrialization” of flint knapping, require innovations resulting in higher efficiency? The aim of this study was to find possible answers to these questions.

METHODOLOGY This study investigates the relation between the morphology of sickle segments, cutting edges, hafts and efficiency. It was decided to carry out a small scale harvesting experiment, in several stages, in order to establish a data base for the analysis, find an efficiency factor, and possibly find out if morphological changes were inevitable following the introduction of new kinds of cereals or domestication of wild species. Experiments comparing the relative efficiency of metal and flint sickles reaping larger areas of modern cereals were carried out in the past (Steensberg 1943: 23 [reported by Gilead 1973:171]), demonstrating that only iron sickles were significantly more effective than those of flint. Although wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum) was apparently preferred species of the earliest experiments in plant cultivation (e.g., Piperno et al. 2004:670; Weiss et al. 2004: 9552), large stands of wild barley could not be located and plants were dispersed in small patches, in many cases with an admixture of other species, mainly oats (Avena). Harvesting of large areas and measuring the ratio “area/time”, as per Steensberg, was therefore not feasible. The experiment was carried out in four stages on different species and at different locations. The order of work is illustrated in Figs. 2-3. The illustrations refer to a right-handed reaper using a Type A sickle with a straight handle and the angled Type C. Pictures are from stage 2. Work with a Type B sickle is identical to work with a Type A sickle. Work on Stage 1, a first trial, started early in spring, reaping modern wheat still in a green state. Modern wheat was the only species with large and dense enough stands to provide good practical reaping experience. The intention was to gain some experience in reaping in order to carry out later the main experiment on wild species. Stage 2 was carried out a month later on wild barley, as appropriate small plots of these plants were located. Stages 3 and 4 were carried out shortly later in order to confirm findings from Stage 2. The results from Stage 1 were disregarded in the statistical analysis for several reasons, including the inexperience of the reaper, the difference between the modern cereal harvested and the probable ancient crops, the need for correction of the form of Sickle Type C (in light

HAIM WINTER

234

Figure 2: Reaping with sickle Type A.

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES

235

Figure 3: Reaping with sickle Type C.

236

HAIM WINTER

of difficulties in harvesting), and finally, the methodological difficulties in measuring the time span for cutting a single small sheaf with a limited number of cutting motions. In light of this experience a different type of measurement was adopted for Stages 2-4. For each cycle of 60-120 seconds of uninterrupted reaping, the number of ears and number of cutting motions were counted and recorded. Mean values from repeated reaping episodes or cycles were used in the analysis in order to calculate an efficiency factor for each type of sickle and establish the database for the discussion and possible conclusions. The limited scope of the study did not allow experiments with all the varieties of sickles and work was carried out with three sickles, reconstructed by the author, representing the most characteristic and indicative types. The types are summarized as follows: Type A (Fig. 4:1-4) is a straight wooden haft, similar to Fayum sickle haft (Fig. 1:4), with four blades with a plain cutting edge, similar to Yiftahel hafted sickle segment (Khalaila et al. 2005:378, Fig. 4). The actual process of reaping can be described in three basic steps: a. Grasping a sheaf with the left hand (Fig. 2:1). The size of the sheaf is determined by the size of the palm and the density of the plants, b. Inserting the sickle kept in the right hand (Fig. 2: 2) and preparing to cut the sheaf. Closed fingers turn towards the sickle blades, and c. Cutting the sheaf with 3-4 motions (Fig. 2:3) in order to disconnect all the stalks. The direction of the sickle pressure is lateral, from the right towards the left hand and vice versa. The force that can be applied is limited. The action could be defined as a kind of “shearing” action. Type B (Fig. 4:5-7) is a slightly curved wooden haft with five serrated blades, morphologically similar to Pottery Neolithic A sickle segments. Reaping steps are similar to those of Type A. Even though the reaping stages are similar, with a sickle Type A, 3-4 motions are needed in order to disconnect all the stalks, sickle Type B needed fewer cutting motions and the output increased (Table 6). Type C (Fig. 4:8-11) is an angled jawbone of a cow with a wooden handle (cf. the Kahun and Solferino sickles, Fig. 1:5-7) and three large geometric flint sickle segments fixed in the groove. The Stage 1 experiment proved that the blunt extremity and protruding rightangled geometric sickle segment fixed in haft Type C (marked X in Fig. 4:8) hindered and slowed reaping. This disadvantage was corrected in Stages 2-4. Reaping steps comprise three movements: a. Separating a larger sheaf by inserting the sickle into the thicket (Fig. 3:1). The sickle is kept in the right hand; b. Grasping the larger sheaf with the left hand (Fig. 3: 2). The left hand pushes the sheaf with greater power forwards against the sickle blades, thus enabling an effective disconnection of all the stalks. Closed fingers turn towards the sickle blades, and c. Cutting the sheaf with 1-2 motions in order to disconnect all the stalks (Fig. 3: 3). This action could be defined as a “push – pull” action, and appears to be more efficient in and of itself. It should be mentioned that jawbones of cattle fit perfectly for inserting large geometric sickle segments (Fig. 5) and sickles are strong and durable. The question of

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES

237

Figure 4: Experimental sickles and archaeological sickle segments: 1. Experimental Sickle Type A; Samples of blades with plain cutting edge similar to Type A cutting edges: 2. Ain es-Sukhun (Winter 2005, Fig. 436/10); 3. Huzuk Moussa (Winter 2005, Fig. 420/2); 4. Tel Nami (Winter n.d., Fig. 13/e); Samples of blades with a serrated cutting edge similar to type B cutting edges: 5. Huzuk Moussa (Winter 2005, Fig. 420/5); 6. Tel Nami (Winter n.d., Fig. 13/l); 7. Experimental Sickle Type B; 8. Experimental Sickle Type C, used in Stage 1, before removal of protuberance (marked with x); 9. Experimental Sickle Type C used in Stages 2-4, after removal of protuberance; Samples of large geometric segments similar to type C sickle segments: 10. Tel Nami (Winter n.d., Fig. 13/q); 11. Tel Nami (Winter n.d., Fig. 13/r).

238

HAIM WINTER

Figure 5: Section of a cow mandible reconstructed with four large geometric sickle segments.

whether angled only wooden hafts, or also jawbones of cattle, were used for hafting is still open. Before beginning the discussion of the results of the experiments, several qualifying aspects need to be addressed. First, due to the difficulties of locating large and dense wild plant concentrations (and the decision to restrict the experiment proper to wild cereals), reaping episodes were limited in duration. Although the relative measurements of reaping efficiency are probably reasonable, the inexperience of the reapers would suggest that the absolute numbers are less than what might have been achieved by more experience harvesters. Finally, again as above, only three forms of sickle were tested, leaving much room for further experimentation. In essence, although it was not possible to replicate ancient conditions, this small scale experiment and study should, at least, point to processes and basic facts. It should be considered as a preliminary work.

RESULTS The basic data for the experiment stages are summarized in Tables 1-5. The mean of the data from Stages 2, 3, and 4 were used in order to compare the three sickle types and establish a scale for the comparison of efficiency. All types were used similarly at each stage and on each density of the vegetation, so mean values should demonstrate differences of efficiency. For the comparison an efficiency factor â&#x20AC;&#x153;Fâ&#x20AC;? was derived based on combining the number of ears per second and the number of ears per cut. The mean values of these variables are presented

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES

239

in Table 6 for each of the sickle types. The values from sickle Type A were used as reference figures in order to establish the efficiency factor F. Table 1: Summary of experimental stages. Stage 1

Location

Date

Ein Shemer

Crop

10/04/2006

State

modern wheat

green

Hazorea

17/05/2006

wild barley

mostly dry

Bnai Brit St., Haifa

25/05/2006

wild oats

mostly dry

Mount Carmel Park

31/05/2006

low density wild barley

dry

Hazorea

31/05/2006

dense 75% wild oats, 25% wild barley

dry

Table 2: Stage 2 summary. Sheaf no.

Sickle type

Time sec.

No. of ears

No. of cuts

Ear/sec.

Ear/cut

130

375

2.88

5.00

High density of wild barley

120

346

2.88

4.94

High density of wild barley

120

212

1.77

3.26

Sloped area, medium density of wild barley

120

323

2.69

4.68

Medium density of wild barley

Total

Remarks / Crop

490

1256

279

120

357

2.97

5.49

High density of wild barley

120

375

3.12

6.15

High density of wild barley

240

732

126

Total 7

120

377

3.14

6.85

Some thorny plants disturbed the reaping

120

490

4.08

10.21

High density of wild barley

120

512

4.27

8.83

High density of wild barley

343

3.81

7.80

Medium density of wild barley

450

1722

205

Total

HAIM WINTER

240 Table 3: Stage 3 summary. Sickle Type

Time sec.

No. of ears

No. of cuts

Ear/sec.

Ear/cut

Remarks / Crop

120

253

2.11

3.89

High density of wild oats

120

314

2.62

4.62

High density of wild oats

Total

240

567

133

120

345

2.88

6.90

Medium density of wild oats

256

2.84

5.33

Medium density of wild oats

210

601

Total 5

120

614

5.12

15.35

High density of wild oats

120

568

4.73

12.62

High density of wild oats

440

1182

Total

Table 4: Stage 4a summary. Sheaf no.

Sickle Type

Time sec.

No. of ears

No. of cuts

Ear/ sec.

Ear/cut

Remarks

190

3.17

4.42

Low density of wild barley

238

3.97

4,58

Low density of wild barley

324

4.98

8.1

Low density of wild barley

Table 5: Stage 4b summary. Sheaf no.

Sickle type

Time sec.

No. of ears

No. of cuts

Ear/sec.

Ear/cut

Remarks

206

3.43

4.2

Dense vegetation

364

6.07

11.37

Dense vegetation

586

9.77

17.24

Dense vegetation

Examination of Table 6 suggests that Type C sickles are more efficient than the others. The three efficiency factors were compared through a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), resulting in a statistically significant difference (f = 10.352, p = .001). An accompanying Scheffeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Post-Hoc test, summarized in Table 7, shows clearly that Type C is, indeed, more efficient while Types A and B are not distinguished statistically from each other.

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES

241

DISCUSSION Although the impact of social, ethnic, symbolic, or iconographic influences on morphology and style (Rosen 1997:147) should not be underestimated, and the carved animal heads on sickle hafts from Kebara and el-Wad reflect this, objective economic reasons are the main factor for ongoing technological development and pave the way for improvements and innovations. Although development is not always linear, “material need is the father of innovation”, and generally, development was from the less efficient to more efficient types. Higher efficiency was necessary to meet the expanding utilization of cereals and the short time span between the ripening of the ears and the dispersal of the seeds. The differences in the outputs of the three types of sickles indicate an increase in the efficiency for type B and a remarkable increase for Type C (Table 6). The main advantage of Type C sickles is the larger sheaf per cutting motion thus increasing the number of harvested ears per time unit. Even though Type B sickles have a serrated cutting edge, as a result of the smaller sheaves the output was remarkably lower. Table 6: F - Efficiency factor according to mean values of stages 2, 3 and 4. Sickle

Ears/sec. a

Ears/cut b

Combined sickle efficiency factor a+b

F 1

Type A

2.69

4.39

7.08

Type B

3.64

6.64

10.28

1.45

Type C

4.98

10.28

15.86

2.24

Table 7: Homogeneous groupings of sickle types based on Scheffe’s Post-Hoc test. Type

Subset for alpha = .05 1

Type A

6.4524

Type B

10.2796

Type C

Sig.

15.8622 .2050

1.00000

Type A fits dispersed, low density, patches of probably wild cereals. Type B and its increased output seemingly indicate an expanding utilization of cereals and maybe the onset of domestication. Type C sickles are fit for dense, systematically sawn, fields and indicate an organized agriculture. Indeed, the general output varies according to the density of the plants. However, in both sparse vegetation and dense vegetation, the output of the three types still shows the higher efficiency of Type B and especially of Type C (Table 8).

HAIM WINTER

242

Table 8: Comparison of the efficiency of the three types of sickles, reaping plots with high and low densities of vegetation. Stage 4 4a – Sparse vegetation

Type A ears/sec.

Type B ears/sec.

Type C ears/sec.

3.17

3.97

4.98

4b – Dense vegetation

3.43

6.07

9.77

Increase of number of ears

4a < 4b + 8.2 %

4a < 4b + 52.9 %

4a < 4b + 96.2 %

To date, we do not know where large geometrics (probably reflecting the introduction of the angle sickle – Type C [cf. Mozel 1983; Rosen 1986; Friedman 1991, 1993]) first appeared, but they appear early in the second millennium both in Canaan (Rosen 1997:135) and further north and Egypt. Hafts from Canaan do not survive, but the hafts from Egypt demonstrate the method clearly. It seems no coincidence that the introduction of large geometric sickle segments occurs just at this point of time. Seemingly larger cultivated areas and increased crops demanded improved tools in order to increase efficiency collecting the grain before the dispersal of the kernels. Type C, with large geometric sickle segments and angled hafts were used in Egypt at least as early as the Middle Kingdom (Petrie 1890:26, pl. IX/22; Fig. 1:5) and reliefs and frescoes show that such sickles were used for harvesting regular sawn fields. The new order established with the onset of the Middle Kingdom (XIIth dynasty, about 2000 BC) reorganized agriculture, dried the marshes of the Fayum depression by canalization and dykes (Wolf 1955:71), and reclaimed large areas of arable land through irrigation. Large geometric sickles segments with angled hafts may well have been part of this agricultural intensification. During this period, economic relations between Egypt, Sinai, Canaan, and Phoenicia were re-established and consolidated. (e.g., Giveon 1978:73-76; also see Wolf 1955:71). Giveon considers that the remarkable number of artefacts, and their context and distribution, confirm Egyptian rule in parts of Canaan. In this situation, no doubt, innovations could spread easily throughout the whole area. Even though the database of the experiment is rather limited, the indications are clear. The changes of morphology and modes are related to changes in efficiency, which may be tied to changes in exploitation of cereals, the transformation to early domesticate species, and to later agricultural intensification. The results of the experiment point to a generalized, possible model of the process (Table 9).

REAPING WITH FLINT SICKLES

243

Table 9: Model of flint sickle development. a - Wild cereals and grasses >>

Plain cutting edge >>

straight to slightly curved haft >>

low output

b - Early intentionally planting of cereals >>

Serrated or retouched cutting edge >>

straight to slightly curved haft >>

moderately improved output

c - Established agriculture and Serrated cutting edge >> angled haft >> larger fields of cereals >>

considerably higher output

SUMMARY AND CONCLUDING REMARKS The process of an expanding utilization of cereals and a developing agriculture, and the process of innovations and improvements in sickle segment morphology and hafting methods point to a parallel development. Social structures, settlement patterns, tradition and iconographic variations could have a certain influence on morphology and style but harvested species and objective economic reasons directed the development from less to more efficient types of sickles. The first major improvement was the introduction of serrated or retouched cutting edges, thus improving efficiency and output. The introduction of more efficient angled sickle hafts with large geometric sickle segments, at the onset of Middle Bronze Age, with well established intensive agriculture, confirm the close relationship between sickle segment morphology, hafting methods, and the increasing utilization of cereals. Even though the database of this small-scale experiment is rather limited it provides further evidence for this process.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to all those who helped me to carry out this study. A. Zertal arranged the permit to reap the modern wheat and helped with the crew of the Manasseh Survey, M. Artzy allowed to cite still unpublished material, S. Lev Yadun identified the plants, D. Kaufmann prepared the statistical analysis, S. Rosen read the early manuscript and made important remarks, M. Weinstein-Evron and D. Nadel helped locating items of the bibliography and last but not least O. Cohen who helped reaping.

REFERENCES Anderson, P. C. 1980. A testimony of prehistoric tasks: diagnostic residues on stone tool working edges. World Archaeology 12 (2):181-194. Anderson, P. C. 1998. History of Harvesting and Threshing Techniques for Cereals in the Prehistoric Near East. In: Damania A. B., Valkoun J., Wilcox G. and Qualset C. O. The Origins of Agriculture

244

HAIM WINTER

and Crop Domestication, International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Aleppo, Syria, pp. 145-159. Bar-Yosef, O. and Alon, D. 1988. Nahal Hemar Cave. Atiqot XVIII: 16-19 (English series): Jerusalem. Caton-Thompson, G. and Gardner, E. W. 1934. The Desert Fayum. London: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. Friedman, E. 1991. Flint Tools from Area E/2. In: Giveon S. (ed.), The first Excavation Season at Tel Harasim 1990, Preliminary Report, pp. 34-37 (Hebrew). Bar Ilan University. Friedman, E. 1993. Flint Tools from Areas E/3 and D/2. In: Giveon S. (ed.), The third Excavation Season at Tel Harasim 1992, Preliminary Report, pp. 24-30 (Hebrew). Bar Ilan University. Garrod, D. A. E. and Bate D. M. A. 1937. The Stone Age of Mount Carmel 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Gilead, D. 1973. Flint Tools of the Middle Bronze Age from Har Yeruham and Tell Nagila. In: Y. Aharoni (ed.), Excavations and Studies, pp. 133-141 (Hebrew). Tel Aviv University. Giveon, R. 1978. The Impact of Egypt on Canaan – Iconographical and Related Studies. Freiburg: Universitaetsverlag. Khaleila, H., Marder, O., Sklar-Parnes, D., Eisenberg, E., Milevski, I. and Le Dosseur, G. 2005. Two Hafted Tools from Recent Excavations of PPNB Sites from the Southern Levant. Mitekufat Haeven 35: 371-380. Mozel, I. 1983. A Reconstructed Sickle from Lachish, TEL AVIV 10: 182-185. Nadel D. 2004. Wild barley harvesting, fishing, and year-round occupation at Ohalo II (19.5 KY, Jordan Valley, Israel). In: Section 6: The Upper Palaeolithic (General Sessions and Posters), Edited by Le Secrétariat du Congrés. Acts of the XIVth UISSP Congress, University of Liege (September 2001). BAR International Series 1240, pp.135-143. Petrie, W. M. F. 1890. Kahun, Gurob and Hawara. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, and Co. Piperno, D. R., Weiss E., Holst I. and Nadel D. 2004. Processing of wild grains in the Upper Palaeolithic revealed by starch grain analysis, Nature 430: 670-673. Rosen, S. A. 1986. Note on the Gezer Flint Caches. In: W. G. Dever (ed.), Gezer IV, pp. 259-263. Jerusalem: Hebrew Union College. Rosen, S. A. 1997. Lithics after the Stone Age. Walnut Creek, CAL.: Alta Mira Press. Spurrell F. C. J., 1891. The stone implements of Kahun. In: Petrie W. M. F., Illahun, Kahun, and Gurob 1889 – 90, pp. 51-56 and plate VII. London: David Nutt. Steensberg, A. 1943. Ancient harvesting implements. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseets skrifter. Turville-Petre, F. 1932. Excavations in the Mugharet El-Kebara. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 62: 271-276. Unger-Hamilton, R. 1984. The formation of use-wear polish on flint: beyond the “deposit versus abrasion” controversy. Journal of Archaeological Science 11:91-98. Vayson, A. 1919. Faucille prehistorique de Solferino. L’Anthropologie 29. Weiss, E., Wetterstrom, W., Nadel, D. and Bar-Yosef, O. 2004. The broad spectrum revisited: Evidence from plant remains, (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America) 101, no.26: 9551-9555. Winter, H. 2005. The flint artefacts. In: A. Zertal, The Manasseh Hill Country Survey 4, pp. 566 – 647 (Hebrew). Haifa University and Security Ministry publishing Houses. Winter, H. n.d.. The Flint Assemblages of Tel Nami, Area G, Area D1 and Area O, in press. Wolf , W. 1955. Die Welt der Aegypter. Zuerich: Fretz & Wasmuth Verlag A. G. (German).

BOOKof REVIEW Jurnal The Israel Prehistoric Society 36 (2006), 245-247

245

Book Reviews Silvia Schroer and Othmar Keel 2005. Die Ikonographie Palästinas/Israels und der Alte Orient (IPIAO). Eine Religionsgeschichte in Bildern. Band 1. Vom ausgehenden Mesolithikum bis zur Frühbronzezeit. Freiburg: Academic Press Fribourg, 2005. Pp. 392 (hardback). ISBN 3-7278-1508-6 Reviewed by Yosef Garfinkel, Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University This publication is the first in a series of five books dedicated to the iconography of the Southern Levant, sometimes with references to other parts of the ancient Near East, from a biblical (Old Testament) point of view. In a way, it aims to replace Pritchard’s classical publication of 1954 (second edition 1969): The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. The series is organized in chronological order, and accordingly, the first book deals with the earliest periods, from the Natufian culture of the Epi-Paleolithic (termed here, anachronistically, ‘Mesolithic’) until the end of the Early Bronze Age. In absolute chronology the period dealt with by the current book lasted for ca. 10,000 years, from the 12th millennium BC till the end of the 3rd millennium BC. The later four books in this series will deal all together with a period of less then 2,000 years. The entire set of five books will be an excellent pictorial companion to Biblical studies. The book starts with a methodological introduction which serves for the entire series (pp. 11-33). Here the authors’ principles are presented to the readers. I found this part of the work most interesting, but it is not always clear how these methodological points are actually integrated into the analysis of the data in the rest of the book. This aspect will be elaborated upon after a brief description of the book. The survey of the artistic images deals with a number of representative objects from each of the following periods: Epi-Paleolithic (4 items), Neolithic (46 items), Chalcolithic (91 items) and finally the Early Bronze Age (262 items). In the earlier periods these are mainly human and animal representations on figurines, statues, and rock engravings. The Chalcolithic and Bronze Age artifacts are usually more sophisticated, and also include metal objects, pottery and seals. For each item the book supplies a useful text, indicating relevant aspects like place of discovery, archaeological context, materials used, manufacturing techniques, state of preservation, size, description, parallel images and bibliography. In addition there is a high quality drawing for each item. No photographs are included. The geographical focus is the Southern Levant but occasionally relevant images are presented from various other regions (Syria, Mesopotamia, Anatolia and Egypt) as can 245

246

YOSEF GARFINKEL

be seen on the map given at the very beginning of the book. This is a correct approach, viewing the entire Near East as a cultural milieu and not as isolated regional units. Maps of the Southern Levant with the location of the sites mentioned are provided at the beginning of each main period. The maps and the drawings of the artifacts are well done, providing the book with an elegant appearance. Thus, the book is enjoyable not only for professionals but for the general public too. As this book review is written to the readers of Mitekufat Haeven, Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society, I will try to place it now in the context of prehistoric studies, although it was not intended for this purpose by its authors. The 50 Natufian and Neolithic artifacts are not only a brief introduction to students and scholars of the Bible and Ancient Near East, but according to the book, present the earliest roots of Biblical iconography. In a similar way, Moorey (2003), in his Schweich Lectures at the British Academy, when dealing with clay figurines from the Biblical royal cities of Jerusalem and Samaria (8-6 centuries BC), started his study in the Neolithic period. As mentioned above, it is not always clear how the methodological points presented in the introduction are actually integrated into the analysis of the data. For example, figurines of birds and goats are compared to texts from the Song of Songs. But the same can be done with images of birds and goats of the Paleolithic cave art of France and northern Spain. In other words, the main methodological problem is our ability to connect remote prehistoric phenomena with Biblical contexts. Scholars from various disciplines, like prehistory, archaeology, history, art history, Semitic languages and Biblical Studies will reject such possible connections. Indeed, the relevance of Neolithic art to the later urban societies of the Bronze and Iron Ages has not been recognized by the leading authorities of the previous generations. For example, “The prehistoric clay figurines of men and animals do not differ in character from similar artless objects found throughout Asia and Europe. A history of art may ignore them, since they cannot be considered the ancestors of Sumerian sculpture” (Frankfort 1955: 2), and “for this early period we cannot assume the existence of concepts of anthropomorphic deities similar to those later known in the cultures of the ancient Near East” (Porada 1965). However, the idea that we do have continuity from the prehistoric era into the urban cultures of the ancient Near East can no longer be ignored, as was the case in the earlier days of research. These old concepts are falling apart as new rich data from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods rapidly accumulate. As early as 1962 Amiran pointed out a connection between the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B plastered statues of Jericho and the myth of the creation of man in the Sumerian and Biblical texts. In 1994, I discussed the phenomenon of ritual burial of cultic objects, and pointed out to a long list of features that appeared in the Neolithic period and were continually practiced in later periods, some of them even today (Garfinkel 1994). Moorey did the same in the above mentioned study. Thus, the work of Schroer and Keel clearly reflect a paradigm shift in art history research of the ancient Near East. Nevertheless, there is still much work to be carried out, methodologically or in specific case studies, in order to establish convincing relationships between the prehistoric era and the historical periods. Although the symbols and art of the Neolithic most certainly changed

BOOK REVIEW

247

meaning in the contexts of later urban societies and mere material continuities are trivial, the real issue is understanding the changing meanings and functions of the symbols through the millennia. This is a challenge future studies will have to confront. In conclusion, the five books will be the best collection of art images put together from the ancient Near East. Schroer and Keel should be congratulated for taking such an enormous task upon themselves, and for the high quality of the graphics. This will be a most welcome working tool to anybody who would like to see the available artistic data associated with the Biblical world.

Amiran R. 1962. Myths of the Creation of Man and the Jericho Statues. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 167:23-25. Garfinkel Y. 1994. Ritual Burial of Cultic Objects: The Earliest Evidence. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 4:159-188. Frankfort, H. 1955. The Art and Architecture of the Ancient Orient. Baltimore: Penguin Books. Moorey, P. R. S. 2003. Idols of the People. Miniature Images of Clay in the Ancient Near East. The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy 2001. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pritchard J. B. 1954 (second edition 1969). The Ancient Near East in Pictures Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Porada, E. 1965. Ancient Iran. The Art of Pre-Islamic Times. London: Methuen.

248

YOSEF GARFINKEL

Notes to the Authors 1. The Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society covers all field of research pertaining to the prehistory and so-called proto-history of the southern Levant, up to the end of the Bronze Age. Papers covering later periods will be considered if they are of special interest (for instance, if they present research methods applicable also to prehistoric periods). 2. Submission of manuscripts. All material for publication, including books for review, should be sent to editors: Erella Hovers/ Anna Belfer-Cohen, Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, ISRAEL. Please supply email, telephone and fax numbers. THREE COPIES OF MANUSCRIPTS SHOULD BE SUPPLIED, ALONG WITH PHOTOCOPIES OF ARTWORK. Manuscripts should be typed on one side only, double-spaced with wide margins. Notes and footnotes preferably should be avoided. Revised manuscripts submitted in final form may be sent by email (hovers@h2.hum.huji.ac. il), but must be accompanied by hard copies of all text and graphics. Text should be typed in Word. 3. Language. Papers in English or French will be considered. 4. References should be cited in the text by the author’s name and date (e.g., Rak 1993). If more than one paper is cited the references should be listed alphabetically (e.g., Alony 1979; Kuhn and Bar-Yosef 1999). Papers co-authored by more than two writers should be cited using the first author’s name, followed by et al. (e.g., WoldeGabriel et al. 2001). Several works by the same author should be separated by a comma (e.g., Bar-Yosef 1994, 1997, 1998a, b). References should be listed alphabetically according to the author’s name, date of publication, title, etc., at the end of the paper, thus: Book: Zohary M. 1962. Plant Life of Palestine. New York: The Ronald Press Company. Paper in Journal: WoldeGabriel G., Haile-Selassie Y., Renne P.R., Hart W.K., Ambrose S.H., Asfaw B., Heiken G. and White T.D. 2001. Geology and palaeontology of the Late Miocene Middle Awash Valley, Afar rift, Ethiopia. Nature 412: 175-178. Book in a series: Goring-Morris A.N. 1987. At the Edge. (BAR International Series 361). Oxford (2 vols.) Edited volume: Akazawa T., Aoki K. and Bar-Yosef O. (eds.), 1998. Neandertals and Modern Humans in Western Asia. New York: Plenum Press. 249

Paper in an Edited volume: Martin G. 2000. Statis in complex artefacts. In Ziman J. (ed.), Technological Innovation as an Evolutionary Process, pp. 90-100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Unpublished dissertation: Hawkins A.L. 2001. Getting a Handle on Tangs: Defining the Dakhleh Unit of the Aterian Technocomplex â&#x20AC;&#x201C; A Study in Surface Archaeology from Dakhleh Oasis, Western Desert, Egypt. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Toronto. 5. Style. All pages, beginning with the title page and including table and figure captions, should be numbered consecutively. Words in languages foreign to the main body of text should appear in italics (e.g., i.e., ibid., et al., etc.). 6. Illustrations, whether photogrgraphs or drawings, should be numbered consecutively in their order of mention in the text. Captions should be listed on a separate sheet. Only highquality copies of artwork should be submitted initially. Original, high quality line drawings and photographs will be required for printing. Digital graphic files (such as artwork and diagrams) saved as EPS or TIFF format are preferred. Line drawings should be saved as bitmap at 600 dpi, pictures should be save as grayscale at 600 dpi. The name of the file should be the same as it appears in the text. 7. Abstracts. A short abstract should be submitted with the paper. 8. Hebrew Summary. Papers should be submitted with Hebrew summary, which should be in the order of up to 5% of the length of the original paper. The Hebrew summaries will be published at the end of the issue in which the full paper appears. Summaries may also be submitted in English or French for translation.

250

Ô·‡‰ ˙ÙÂ˜˙Ó ‰È¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯ÙÏ ˙ÈÏ‡¯˘È‰ ‰˙ÂÓÚ‰ Ï˘ ˙Ú‰ ·˙Î

®≥∂© Â¢Ï

∫Í¯ÂÚ

ÔÊÂ¯ ·ÈËÒ

‰È¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯ÙÏ ˙ÈÏ‡¯˘È‰ ‰˙ÂÓÚ‰ ≤∞∞∂ ¨Â¢Ò˘˙

˙Â¯ÂÓ˘ ˙ÂÈÂÎÊ‰ ÏÎ ‰È¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯ÙÏ ˙ÈÏ‡¯˘È‰ ‰˙ÂÓÚÏ Ú·˘ ¯‡· ¨ÈÙ¯‚ ·ÂˆÈÚ ÈÙÒ ∫·˘ÁÂÓÓ „ÂÓÈÚ

ÌÈÈÈÚ‰ ÔÎÂ˙ µ

‰Ó„˜‰ ÔÊÂ¯ ·ÈËÒ

∑

ÌÈ¯Ó‡Ó ÔÓ¯˜‡ Ô¯Â‡Â È˜ÒÈÏÓ Ï‡È¯‡ ¨ÈÏÈÊ¯· È¯ÓÂÚ Ï‡¯˘È ¨‰ÏÙ˘‰ ÌÂ¯„· ÔÂ˙Á˙ ˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏÙ ¯˙‡ ∫·¯ÚÓ ‰˘Ó ¯ÙÎ

≥π

¯Ï„ ÏÎÈÓÂ Ï„ È„ ‰Î‡ÏÓ‰–˙È· ¯˙‡ ÏÚ ÈÙÂÒ Á¢Â„ ∫‚„Ï˘ ÛÂÁ ≠ I ÂÏ‰Â‡ ˙¯ÈÎ· È˙ÈÏÂ‡È≠È˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏÙÈÙ‡‰

ππ

ÈÊÎ˘‡ ‰ÏÈ‰Â Ô‰Î ÌÈÈÁ ¨„˘‡ „¯Â Ô¯Â‡ ÏÁ ¯˙‡Ó ÌÈÈÙÂË ÌÈË¯Ù È˘ ∫Ô˘È ¯ÓÂÁ ÏÚ ÌÈ˘„Á ÌÈÈÂÏÈ‚

±∞π

Ï˜ÈÙ¯‚ ÛÒÂÈ ø˙ÈÓÂ˜Ó Â‡ ˙È¯ÂÊ‡ ‰ÚÙÂ˙ ≠ ˘¯ÂÁ‰ ¯ÙÎÓ ˙Â¯Â·˜‰

±±∑

±≤π

¯ÙÂ‚ È·‡Â ÏÈÈ‡ ˙Â¯ ¨ÛÒ‡ ÔÂÓ‡ ¨‚¯·ÊÂ¯ È„ ‰·¯ È„‡Â ˙ÚÙÂ‰ ≠ ÔÂÓÒÈÈ·

±≥π

ÈÏÈÏ‚ „Â‰‡Â Â‡¯Ï È¯ÓÂÚ ¨ıÈ·Â¯Â‰–‰˜ÒÏÂ˜ ‰¯Â‡ÈÏ Ï‡¯˘È ÔÂÙˆ ¨ÌÈ ‰ÂÂ Ï˘ ÌÈÓ· ‰ÒÂÎÓ‰ ÈÓ¯˜ ˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ¯˙‡‰Ó ‰Â‡Ù

±∑≥

ıÈ·Â¯Â‰ ‰˜ÒÏÂ˜ ‰¯Â‡ÈÏÂ ÈÏÈÏ‚ „Â‰‡ ¨„ÏÈÙÈ¯‚ Ï˜Ò‰ ‰ÒÂÎÓ ÈÓ¯˜ ˙ÈÏÂ‡È ¯˙‡ ¨ÌÈ ‰ÂÂÓ ÌÈÁÂ·Ë‰ ÌÈÈÁ‰ ÈÏÚ· ˙ÂÓˆÚ ÏÓ¯Î‰ ÛÂÁ· ÌÈÓ

≤∞±

¯‰Ó „¯‡Â„‡ ¨ÔÊÂ¯ ·ÈËÒ ¨È„¯Â ·˜ÚÈ ¨ÈÈ‚–ÔÂÒ˜È¯‡ ÈÏË ¨Ï„ÈÈÒ ÔÈÓß‚· „ÏÈÙÈ¯‚ Ï˜Ò‰Â ·‚‰ ·¯ÚÓ· ÌÈÈ˙Â¯‡· Ìß‚Â¯· ˙Â¯ÈÙÁ‰

≤≥±

¯ËÈÂ ÌÈÈÁ ˙ÂÈ¯ÂËÒÈ‰‰ ˙ÂÙÂ˜˙‰ ˙È˘‡¯Ï ‰È¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯Ù‰Ó ∫¯Âˆ ÈÏ‚Ó· ¯Èˆ˜

≤¥µ

µ™

˙È¯·Ú· ÌÈ¯Èˆ˜˙

‰Î‡ÏÓ‰–˙È· ¯˙‡ ÏÚ ÈÙÂÒ Á¢Â„ ∫‚„Ï˘ ÛÂÁ ≠ I ÂÏ‰Â‡ ˙¯ÈÎ· È˙ÈÏÂ‡È≠È˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏÙÈÙ‡‰ Ï„ È„ ¯Ï„ ÏÎÈÓ ‰ÂÚ· ÆßÓ ≠≤±≤–Î Ï˘ ‰·‚Ï „¯È ˙¯Î· ÌÈÓ‰ ÒÏÙÓ ¯˘‡Î ¨±π∏∂ ˙˘· ‰Ï‚˙‰ I ÂÏ‰‡ ¯˙‡ ‰˜È„· ˙Â¯ÈÙÁÂ ÌÈÙÂÒÈ‡ ¯˙‡· ÂÎ¯Ú ÔÎÓ ¯Á‡Ï ÆÏ„Â ÛÒÂÈ–¯· È¢Ú ÈÂ˘‡¯ ÛÂÒÈ‡ Í¯Ú ÂÊ ÂÏ„Â‚˘ ÁË˘ ÏÚ ÂÚ¯˙˘‰ ÌÈ‡ˆÓÓ‰ Æ‰¯˙‡· ˙È‚ÂÏÂ‡ÈÎ¯‡ ‰·Î˘ ‰‡ˆÓ ‡Ï Í‡ ¨˙Â·¯ ˙„Â·Ú ˙‡ ÌÎÒÓ ‡Â‰Â ¨ÈÙÂÒ Á¢Â„ ‰ÂÂ‰Ó ¯Ó‡Ó‰ ÆßÓ ≠µ±≤–Î Ï˘ ‰·‚ „Ú ¨¯¢Ó ≥¨∞∞∞–Î Æ˙ÂÂ˘‰ ÛÂÒÈ‡‰ ˙ÂÂÚ· ¯˙‡· Â‡ˆÓ˘ ÌÈ„È¯˘‰ ÔÂÂ‚ÓÂ ¨ÌÈÓ„Â˜ ÌÈÓÂÒ¯Ù ¨‰„˘‰ ‰ˆÂÙ˙‰ ÈÓ‚„Â ‰Ï‡ ÌÈ„È¯˘ Ï˘ ˙Â˜È„· ÆÌÈÂ˘ ÌÈÏ„‚· Ô·‡ ÈÏ‚ÚÓ ¯ÙÒÓ ÂÏ‚˙ ÁË˘· Â‡ ˙ÈÓÂ¯ ‰ÙÂ˜˙© ÌÈ¯ÁÂ‡Ó Ô·‡‰ È·Ó ÈÎ ÌÈ„ÓÏÓ ¯Ó‡Ó· ÌÈ¯‡Â˙Ó‰ ˙ÏÊ·‰Â ¯Âˆ‰ ÈÏÎ Ï˘ Æ˙È¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯Ù‰ ‰ÙÂ˜˙Ï ÌÎ¯‡˙Ï ÔÈ‡Â ®¯˙ÂÈ ˙¯ÁÂ‡Ó ÈˆÁ Ï˘ ‰¯Âˆ ¯˙‡‰ Ï˘ ÈÂÙˆ‰ Â˜ÏÁ· ÛÂÁÏ ‰˙È‰ ¨ÍÂÓ ‰È‰ Ì‚‡· ÌÈÓ‰ ÒÏÙÓ˘ ÌÈ˘· ¨ÔÂÈÏÚ‰ Ô˜ÂËÒÈÏÙ‰ ÔÓ ÌÈˆÚ È„È¯˘ ‰Ê ¯ÂÊ‡· Â‡ˆÓ Ì‚‡‰ Ï˘ ÏÙ˘‰ ‡È˘· Æ‰Á¯ÊÓ ËÏÂ·‰ È‡ ‰ÏÈÓÂ Ï˘‡ Ï˘ ÌÈ·Ú ÌÈÙÚÂ ®·ÏÂ„© ÏÂ„‚ ÚÊ‚ Ï˘ ÒÈÒ· ÂÏÏÎ ÂÏ‡ ÆÈ‚ÂÏÂ‡ÈÎ¯‡ ¯˘˜‰ ‡ÏÏ ‰˙Â‡· ÈÎ ‰‡¯ Æ®ÏÂÈÎ ‡ÏÏ© ÂÓÊ ÈÙÏ ±∂¨µ∞∞–Î ÌÏÈ‚Â ®C±¥© ÂÎ¯‡Â˙ ÌÈ„È¯˘‰ Æ˙È¯ÂÒ ÆÌ‚‡‰ ÛÂÁ ‰È‰ ®¯˙ÂÈ Â‡ ˙ÂÁÙ© Ô‡ÎÂ ÍÂÓ ‰È‰ ÌÈÓ‰ ÒÏÙÓ ‰ÙÂ˜˙ ÌÈËÈ¯ÙÂ ¨„Á‡ „ˆÓ ÌÈ„Á ÌÈˆÙÁ ÏÏÂÎ ®ÌÈËÈ¯Ù ¥∏∑± Ï˘ Ì‚„Ó ˜„·© ¯Âˆ‰ ÏÂÏÎÓ ÌÈ··˘˘ ˙Â¯ÓÏ ¨ÏÂÏÎÓ· ÌÈ‚ˆÂÈÓ ˙Â˙ÈÒ‰ È·Ï˘ ÏÎ ÆÈ˘ „ˆÓ ‰·Ú ‰ÈËÙ ÈÏÚ· ÌÈÏ‚ÏÂ‚Ó ¨ÌÈ·‰Ï‰ ÈÈÚ¯‚ Ï˘ ÚˆÂÓÓ‰ Í¯Â‡‰ ¯˘‡Î ¨„‡Ó ÌÈÏÂ„‚ ÌÈÈÚ¯‚‰ ÔÓ ÌÈ·¯ ÆÌÈ¯È„ ÌÈ¯ÈÚÊ ÌÈÂ˙ ¯Â‡Ï Æ„‡Ó ÌÈÏÂ„‚ ÌÈ·‰Ï ÏÚ ÌÈ˙˙ÂÒÓ ÌÈ·¯ ÌÈÏÎ ÔÎ ÂÓÎ ÆÓ¢Ò ±∏Æµ ‡Â‰ ¨‡Ó‚Â„Ï ÌÈ˘Â‚Â ÌÈ˜ÂÏÁ ˙¯Âˆ· ÔÈÓÊ ‰È‰ ¯˘‡ ¯Âˆ ˙Â˙ÈÒÏ ‰Î‡ÏÓ ˙È· ‰È‰ ÌÂ˜Ó· ÈÎ ‰‡¯ ¨‰Ï‡ ÆÌÈÏÂ„‚ ÔÓ ‰‡¯‰ ÏÎÎ ¨ÌÈÎÂ¯‡ ÌÈ·‰Ï ÏÚ ÌÈ¯Á‡ ÌÈÏÎÂ ‰ˆ˜ È„¯‚Ó ÌÈËÏÂ· ÌÈÏÎ‰ ÔÈ· ÌÈ˙ÈÏÂ¯˜ÈÓ Ï˘ ÔÂÂ‚Ó Æ®¯˙ÂÈ ÌÈÓÂ„˜ Ì‚ ÈÏÂ‡ Ï·‡ ¨˙È¯ËÓÂ‡È‚ ˙È¯‡·Î© ˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏÙÈÙ‡‰ ÌÈÊÙ¯Ë© ˙È¯ËÓÂ‡È‚‰ ˙È¯‡·Î‰ ˙‡ ˙ÂÁÙ‰ ÏÎÏ ˙ÂÏÏÂÎ‰ ¨˙ÂÈ˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏÙÈÙ‡ ˙ÂÈ˘Ú˙ Û˜˘Ó È„ÂÁ ¨ıÁ È˘‡¯ ¨Ï‚Ó È·‰Ï ÌÈÏÏÂÎ ÌÈÈ˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ÌÈÏÎ‰ Æ®ÌÈÂ¯‰Ò© ˙ÈÙÂË‡‰Â ®ÌÈ·ÏÓÂ Ì‰Ï˘ ÌÈÒÂÙÈË‰ ÔÂÂ‚ÓÂ ¨¯˙ÂÈ· ÌÈÁÈÎ˘‰ Ì‰ Ï‚Ó‰ È·‰Ï ÆÌÈ¯¯·Â˘Ó ÌÈ·‰ÏÂ ÌÈÈÙ–Â„ ¨˙ÈÁ 5*

ÂÁÈ¯È© ÈÓ‡¯˜‰ ˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰Â ·¢˜˜‰ ÔÓ ˙ÂÈ˘Ú˙ ÏÚ ÌÈ„ÈÚÓ ®˙ÈÁ‰ È„ÂÁÂ ıÁ‰ È˘‡¯ ÈÒÂÙÈËÂ© Æ®‰·¯ È„‡Â Ì‚Â IX Æ¯˙ÂÈ· ıÂÙ‰ ÒÂÙÈË‰ ‡Â‰ ÈÏÚ‰ ¯˘‡Î ¨ÛÂÒÈ‡‰ ˙ÂÂÚ ÍÏ‰Ó· Â‡ˆÓ ˙ÏÊ· ÈËÈ¯Ù ˙Â‡Ó ÏÚ ‰‡¯‰ ÏÎÎ ÌÈ„ÈÚÓ È˙Â·¯˙ ÍÂÈ˘Ï ÌÈ˙È‰ ÌÈÏÎ‰ ÈÒÂÙÈË ÆÌÈ¯Á‡ ÌÈÏÎÂ ˙Â¯Ú˜ Ì‚ Ì˘È Æ¯ÁÂ‡Ó‰Â ÌÂ„˜‰ ÈÓ‡¯˜‰ ˙ÈÏÂ‡È· ÌÈÏÎ ¯ÂˆÈÈ ÏÚ Ì‚ ÂÓÎ ¨‰ÓÂ„˜ ˙È˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏÙÈÙ‡ ‰È˘Ú˙ ¨ÌÈ·¯ ÌÈÏÎ Ï˘ ˙ÂÓÏ˘‰Â ˙Â„Á‰ ¨Ï„Â‚‰ Ì‚ ÂÓÎ ¨ÌÈ‡ˆÓÓ‰ Ï˘ ÔÂÂ‚Ó‰Â ˙ÂÏÂ„‚‰ ˙ÂÈÂÓÎ‰ ‰‡¯ ÆÌ‚‡‰ ÛÂÁ Ï‡ ÌÈ¯Á‡ ÌÈ¯˙‡Ó ÌÈˆÙÁ‰ Ï˘ ÏÂ‚Ï‚ ÏÚ ‡ÏÂ ‰¯È·Ò ˙Â¯Ó˙˘‰ ÏÚ ÌÈ„ÈÚÓ „ÁÂÈÓ‰ ÌÂ˜ÈÓ‰ ÆÌÈ˘ ÈÙÏ‡ ÍÏ‰Ó· ˙ÂÈ¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯Ù ˙ÂˆÂ·˜Ï ‰ÎÈ˘Ó „˜ÂÓ ‰ÂÂÈ‰ ‚„Ï˘ ÛÂÁ ÈÎ ˙ÂÈÂÓÎÂ ¨®Ì‚‡‰ ÔÓ ‡ˆÂÈ‰ Ô„¯È‰© Ì¯ÂÊ ÏÁ ¨˙ÂÈÂÙˆ ˙ÂÁÂ¯Ó Ô‚ÂÓ‰ ÁÂÂ ·Á¯ ı¯ÙÓ ÏÏÎ È„È¯˘ Â‡ˆÓ ‡Ï ‰˜È„· ˙ÂÏÚ˙Â ˙Â¯Â· ˙Â¯˘Ú·Â ¯Á‡Ó Æ˙ÏÊ·Â ¯Âˆ ≠ ÌÏ‚ È¯ÓÂÁ Ï˘ ˙ÂÏÂ„‚ ÈÙ ÏÚ ‰‡¯ ¨ÌÂ˜Ó ÏÎÓ ÆÏ·‚ÂÓ ¯˙‡‰ ÈÙÂ‡ ¯ÂÊÁÈ˘ ¨ÁË˘‰ ÈÙÏ ˙Á˙Ó ˙ÂÈ‚ÂÏÂ‡ÈÎ¯‡ ˙Â·Î˘ Æ˙ÂÎÂ¯‡ ˙ÂÙÂ˜˙ Í˘Ó· Ô·‡Â ¯Âˆ È˙˙Ò ¯Â·Ú ‰Î‡ÏÓ ˙È·Î ˘ÓÈ˘˘ ¯˙‡· ¯·Â„Ó ÈÎ ÌÈ„È¯˘‰ ÌÈÎÓÂ˙ ®Ï˘ÓÏ ¨Á¢Ú· ˙ÂÓˆÚ© ·Â˘ÈÈ ˙ÂÓÂ˜Ó· ÌÈÁÈÎ˘‰ ÌÈ„È¯˘Â ˙È‚ÂÏÂ‡ÈÎ¯‡ ‰·Î˘ ¯„Ú‰ ¯˙ÂÈ· ÍÂ¯‡‰ È¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯Ù‰ Ûˆ¯‰ ÏÚ· ¯˙‡‰ Â‰Ê ¨‰˘ÚÓÏ Æ‰Î‡ÏÓ ˙È·· ¯·Â„Ó ÔÎ‡ ÈÎ ‰ÚË· ˙·‰Ï ‰·¯ Â˙ÓÂ¯˙ ¨Ì‡˙‰· Æ®‰Î‡ÏÓ ˙È· ‡Ï‡ ·Â˘ÈÈ ‰Ê ‰È‰ ‡Ï˘ ˙Â¯ÓÏ© ˙¯Î‰ ·È·Ò I ÂÏ‰‡ ¨ÔÂ‡‰ ¨·‚ ÔÈÚ È¯˙‡· ÌÈÙ˜˙˘Ó Ì‰˘ ÈÙÎ ¨Ì‚‡‰ ·È·Ò ÌÈÈ¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯Ù‰ ·Â˘ÈÈ‰ ÈÓ‚„ ÆII ÂÏ‰‡Â

‰·¯ È„‡Â ˙Â·¯˙ Ï˘ ·Â˘ÈÈ‰ ≠ ÔÂÓÒÈÈ· ‚¯·ÊÂ¯ È„ ÛÒ‡ ÔÂÓ‡ ÏÈ‡ ˙Â¯ ¯ÙÂ‚ È·‡ ÂÎ¯‡Â˙˘ ¨ÌÈÈ¯ÂËÒÈ‰¯Ù‰ ÌÈ‡ˆÓÓ· „‡Ó ÚÂ„È Ï‡¯˘È ÔÂÙˆ· ‰ÏÂÁ‰ Ô‚‡·˘ ÔÂÓÒÈÈ· ¯˙‡‰ ÂÎÈÂ˘˘ ÌÈ·¯ ÌÈ„È¯˘ Â‡ˆÓ ¯˙‡· ¨˙‡Ê ˙Â¯ÓÏ Æ®PPNB© ß· ÈÓ¯˜–Ì„˜‰ ˙ÈÏÂ‡ÈÏ ¯˜ÈÚ· ˙‡ ‰¯ˆ˜· ‚ÈˆÓ ‰Ê ¯Ó‡Ó Æ‰·¯ È„‡Â ˙Â·¯˙Ï ¯˜ÈÚ·Â ®PN© ˙ÈÓ¯˜‰ ˙È˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ‰ÙÂ˜˙Ï ÈÙ· ‡Â‰ ‰·¯ È„‡Â ˙Â·¯˙Ï ÍÈÂ˘˘ ‡ˆÓÓ‰ Ï˘ Â¯Â˜Ó˘ ˙Â¯ÓÏ ÆÔÂÓÒÈÈ·· ‰·¯ È„‡Â ·ÈÎ¯Ó Ï˘ ÌÈÈ·¯ÚÓ‰ ÌÈÈÏÂ˘· ÌÈÈ˜˙‰ ·Â˘Á ‰·¯ È„‡Â ¯˙‡˘ ÌÈÚÈˆÓ ÂÂÂÈ‚Â ‡ˆÓÓ‰ ˙ÂÓÎ ¨ÁË˘‰ ˙Â·¯˙ Ï˘ ÛÒÂ ÈÂÙˆ ÈÂËÈ· ÂÈ‰ ÔÂÓÒÈÈ·· ¯ÁÂ‡Ó‰ ÈÓ¯˜‰ È˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ¯˙‡‰ Æ‰ÏÂÁ‰ ˙ÂˆÈ· ‰˙È‰˘ ˙Â·È˘Á‰ ÏÚ „ÈÚÓ ‡Â‰ ¨‰ÏÂÁ‰ ˜ÓÚ· ÌÈ¯Á‡ ‰·¯ È„‡Â È¯˙‡ ÌÚ „ÁÈÂ ¨‰·¯ È„‡Â Æ‰·¯ È„‡Â ˙Â·¯˙· Ï‡¯˘È· ¯·˘‰ ˜ÓÚ Ï˘ ÈÂÙˆ‰ ˜ÏÁÏ

ÌÈÓ· ‰ÒÂÎÓ‰ ÈÓ¯˜ ˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ¯˙‡‰Ó ‰Â‡Ù Ï‡¯˘È ÔÂÙˆ ¨ÌÈ ‰ÂÂ Ï˘ ıÈ·Â¯Â‰–‰˜ÒÏÂ˜ ‰¯Â‡ÈÏ Â‡¯Ï È¯ÓÂÚ ÈÏÈÏ‚ „Â‰‡ ˙È˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ‰ÙÂ˜˙‰ ÔÓ ÈÓÈ–˙˙‰ ¯˙‡· Â‡ˆÓ˘ ÌÈÈÁ‰ ÈÏÚ· ˙ÂÓˆÚ ÏÂÏÎÓ ‚ˆÂÓ ‰Ê‰ ¯Ó‡Ó· Â˙Â‡· ÌÈ¯Á‡ ÌÈ¯˙‡Ï ‰ÓÂ„· Æı¯‡‰ ÔÂÙˆ· ÏÓ¯Î‰ ÛÂÁÏ Ì˜ÂÓÓ ¯˙‡‰ ÆÌÈ–‰ÂÂ· ˙ÈÓ‡¯È˜‰ ÔÂÎÈ˙‰ ÌÈ‰ È„È ÏÚ ‰ÒÂÎ ‡Â‰ ®¯ÈÓÒ ¯ÙÎ ¨ÌÈ„‚Ó ¨ÌÈÏ‚ ¯ÙÎ ¨ÊÈÈ¯Á Ï˙ ¨ÌÈ–˙ÈÏ˙Ú© ¯ÂÊ‡ Æ‰Â¯Á‡‰ ˙ÈÂÁ¯˜–ÔÈ·‰ ‰ÙÂ˜˙· ˙ÈÏ‡·ÂÏ‚‰ ˙ÂÓÓÁ˙‰‰ ˙Ú· ¨‰ÏÂÚ‰ Â‰ÂÊ Ô‰Ó ¨˙ÈÓÈ–˙˙ ‰¯ÈÙÁÂ ÌÈ¯˜Ò ÍÏ‰Ó· ÂÙÒ‡˘ ˙ÂÓˆÚ ∂±∏ ‰ÂÓ ÌÈ–‰ÂÂ· ÏÂÏÎÓ‰ ÌÈ„·¯ÂÓ ‰·˘ ˙ÈÒ¯Á ÍÂ˙· ¨·ËÈ‰ ÌÈ¯„‚ÂÓ ÌÈÈ‚ÂÏÂ‡ÈÎ¯‡ ÌÈËÒ˜ËÂ˜· Â‡ˆÓ ˙ÂÓˆÚ‰ Æ¥π± ‰ÈÏ· ÈÓÈÒ Â‡¯‰ „·Ï· ˙ÂËÚÓ ˜¯Â ®Bleached© ˙Â·ÏÂÓ ˙ÂÓˆÚ Â‡ˆÓ ‡Ï Æ¯˙‡‰ È„È¯˘ ˙È¯ÚÊÓ ‰˙ÈÈ‰ ÚÂ˜˘‰ ¯˙‡· ÌÈˆÙÁ Ï˘ ‰ÊÂÊ˙‰˘ ¨˙Â¯È‰Ó· ‰ÒÂÎ ¯˙‡‰˘ ˜ÈÒ‰Ï Ô˙È Ô‡ÎÓÂ ÆÌÈ‚„ ˙ÂÓˆÚ Ï˘ÓÏ ÂÓÎ ¨¯˙ÂÈ ¯ÁÂ‡Ó ¯ÓÂÁ È„È ÏÚ Ì‰ÂÊ ‡Ï ÏÂÏÎÓ‰˘Â ¨˙ÈÏÓÈÈÓ ¨‰ÙÂ˜˙ ‰˙Â‡Ó ¯ÂÊ‡· ÌÈ¯Á‡ ÌÈ¯˙‡·˘ ÂÊÏ ‰ÓÂ„ ‰˙ÈÈ‰ ÌÈ–‰ÂÂ· ÌÈÈÁ ÈÏÚ· ˙ÏÎÏÎ È„È¯˘ Æ˙Â‡Ï˜ÁÂ ‚È„ ˙ÙÒÂ˙· ÌÈ¯ÈÊÁÂ ¯˜· ¨ÌÈÊÈÚ ¨ÌÈ˘·Î Ï˘ ÌÈ˙ÈÂ·Ó ÌÈ¯„Ú ÏÚ ‰ÒÒ·˙‰Â ¯˜·‰ ÈÎ ‰‡¯ Ï˜˘Ó· ÌÈÏ„·‰‰ ÏÏ‚· Æ®≥≤•© Ô‡ˆ Ì‰È¯Á‡Â ®≥¥•© ¯˙ÂÈ· ÌÈÁÈÎ˘‰ Ì‰ ¯˜· È˙Ï· ÌÈÒÁÈ· ˙ÂÓˆÚ‰ ÏÂÏÎÓ· ÌÈ‚ˆÂÈÓ‰ ÌÈÊÈÚ‰Â ÌÈ˘·Î‰ ¯˘‡Ó ¯˘· ¯˙ÂÈ ‰·¯‰ ˜ÙÈÒ ÌÈ¯ÈÊÁÂ ¯Á‡Ó ÆÏÂÏÎÓ‰ ÔÓ ≤µ• ˙ÂÂ‰Ó ÌÈ¯ÈÊÁ ˙ÂÓˆÚ Æ®≥∑• ÌÈ˘·Î ª∂≥• ÌÈÊÈÚ© ÌÈÂÂ˘ ÍÎ ÏÚ ‰ÚÈ·ˆÓ ˙ÈÒÁÈ ‰Â·‚ ¯ÂÚÈ˘· ÌÈ–‰ÂÂ· Ì˙Â‡ÈˆÓ˘ ‰‡¯ ˙Â„ÂÂ ÈÈÁÏ ÌÈÓ‡˙ÂÓ ÌÈ‡ ÆÌÈÈ˙˘·È ÌÈÈÁ ÈÏÚ· Ï˘ ÌÈ¯˙Â‰ µ• ˙‡ ÌÈÂÂ‰Ó ÌÈ‡·ˆÂ ˙È¯È‚ ¨·ÏÎ ÆÚ·˜ ·Â˘È· ¯·Â„Ó˘ Ω ÌÈÈ˙ÈÈˆ–Â Sparidae Ω ÌÈÈÒÂ¯ÙÒ ªSerranidae Ω ÌÈÈ¯˜„© ÌÈ È‚„ Ï˘ ˙ÂÁÙ˘Ó ˘ÂÏ˘ ÌÈÏÂ„‚ ÌÈË¯ÙÏ Ô·Â¯ ˙ÂÎÈÈ˘ ÌÈ‚„‰ ˙ÂÓˆÚ ÆÏÂÏÎÓ· ÌÈ¯˙Â‰ ¥• ˙‡ ÌÈÂÂ‰Ó ®Carangidae ‰¯È„ ˙È˘ÈÏ˘‰ ¨Ï‡¯˘È· ÌÈÈ‚ÂÏÂ‡ÈÎ¯‡ ÌÈ¯˙‡· ˙ÂÁÈÎ˘ ˙ÂÂ˘‡¯‰ ˙ÂÁÙ˘Ó‰ È˙˘ Æ˙ÈÒÁÈ Æ˙ÈÒÁÈ ‰È‚ÂÏÂÙ¯ÂÓ‰ ¨Ï„Â‚‰ ÏÚ ÌÈÂ˙ ˙¯ÊÚ· ‰Î¯ÚÂ‰ ÌÈ¯ÈÊÁÂ ÌÈ˘·Î ¨ÌÈÊÈÚ Ï˘ ˙ÂÈ·‰ ˙‚¯„ ÔÙÂ‡· ÔË˜ ‰È‰ ˙ÂˆÂ·˜‰ ˙˘ÂÏ˘ È‚Èˆ Ï˘ Ì‰·Â‚ ÆÌÈÈÁ‰ ÈÏÚ· Ï˘ ‚¯‰Ø‰˙ÂÓ˙‰ ÏÈÙÂ¯ÙÂ ˙È˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ‰ÙÂ˜˙‰ ÔÓ ¯ÂÊ‡ Â˙Â‡· ÌÈ¯˙‡· Â‡ˆÓ˘ ÌÈÈÁ ÈÏÚ· Ì˙Â‡ Ï˘ ÌÏ„Â‚Ó È˙ÂÚÓ˘Ó 8*

ÈÓ‡¯È˜–Ì„˜‰ ˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ÈÙÏ ‰Ê ¯ÂÊ‡· ÂÚÈÙÂ‰ ‡Ï ˙Â˙ÈÂ·Ó ÌÈ˘·ÎÂ ¯Á‡Ó Æ˙ÈÓ‡¯È˜–Ì„˜‰ ¯˜· Â¯Á· Â·˘ ÏÈ‚‰ ˙ÚÈ·˜ Æ˙Â˙ÈÂ·Ó ˙ÂÈÁ· ¯·Â„Ó ÌÈ–‰ÂÂ· ÌÓ‡˘ ÁÈ‰Ï Ô˙È ¯ÁÂ‡Ó‰ ÌÚ ¯˘· ˙˜ÙÒ‡Ï ÌÈ¯ÈÚˆ ÌÈÈÁ ÈÏÚ· ˙¯ÈÁ·Ï ÌÈ‡˙Ó‰ Ì‚„ ‰ÏÚÓ ‰ËÈÁ˘Ï ÌÈ¯ÈÊÁÂ Ô‡ˆ ‰˙ÂÓ˙‰ ÏÈ‚ Ì‚„Ó ËÏÂ· ÔÙÂ‡· ‰Â˘ ‰Ê ‰ËÈÁ˘ Ì‚„ Æ„·Ï· ˙ÂËÚÓ ˙Â¯‚Â·Ó ˙ÂÈÁ Ï˘ ‰˙ÂÓ˙ ÈÏÚ·· ¯·Â„Ó ÌÈ–‰ÂÂ· ÈÎ ‰Á‰‰ ˙‡ ˘˘‡Ó ‡Â‰Â ¨Ú·Ë· Â„ÂˆÈ˘ ÌÈÈÁ ÈÏÚ· ÈÏÂÏÎÓ Ï˘ ÆÌÈ·˘Â˙‰ È„È ÏÚ ÂÏÙÂË˘ ÌÈ˙ÈÂ·Ó ÌÈÈÁ Æ¯˘·· ÌÈ¯È˘Ú ÛÂ‚ È˜ÏÁ ¯˜ÈÚ· ÌÈ‚ˆÈÈÓ ÏÂÏÎÓ· Â‡ˆÓ˘ Ô‡ˆÂ ¯˜· Ï˘ „Ï˘‰ È˜ÏÁ ˙ÂÙÈÙˆ Ï˘ ˙ÂÂ˘ ˙Â‚¯„Ó ˙Ú·Â‰ ˙ÂÓˆÚ ˙Â„È¯˘Ó ÈÁÎÂ‰ ÏÂÏÎÓ· ÚÙ˘ÂÓ ÂÈ‡ ‰Ê ‚ÂˆÈÈ ˙ÂÁÈÎ˘ ÈÎ ‰‡¯ Æ‰ÈÈÏ· ÈÎÈÏ‰˙Ó ˙ÈÒÁÈ Ô‚ÂÓ ‰È‰ ÏÂÏÎÓ‰ ¯ÂÓ‡Î˘ ÌÂ˘Ó ¨˙ÂÓˆÚ‰ ˜ÊÂÁÂ ÌÈÎÈÏ‰˙ÓÂ ®ÌÈÓÏ ˙Á˙Ó ¯ÓÂÁ‰ ÛÂÒÈ‡ ˙Ú·© ÔÏ„Â‚Ó ¯˙ÂÈ ‰Ê ‰¯˜Ó· ‰ÚÙ˘Â‰ ÂÏ‡‰ ˙ÂÓˆÚ‰ Æ‰ÎÈ¯ˆ‰Â ‰ËÈÁ˘‰ ÔÓÊ· ‰ÚÒ‰Â ‰¯ÈÁ· Ï˘ ÌÈ‚ÙÂ¯Ë‡ ˙Â¯ÂÒÓ Ï˘ ˙ÂÈÎ˘Ó‰‰ ˙‡ ˙‚ˆÈÈÓ ˙ÈÓ‡¯È˜‰ ˙È˙ÈÏÂ‡È‰ ‰ÙÂ˜˙· ÌÈ–‰ÂÂ Ï˘ ‰ÏÎÏÎ‰ ÌÈ–˙ÈÏ˙Ú ÂÓÎ ÌÈÈÓ‡¯È˜–Ì„˜ ÌÈ¯˙‡· ¯˙ÂÈ ˙ÂÓ„˜ÂÓ ˙ÂÙÂ˜˙· ˙ÂÓÈÈ˜ ÂÈ‰˘ ‰ÈÁÓÂ ÌÂÈ˜ Â‚ÊÈÓ˘ ÔÂÎÈ˙‰ ÌÈ‰ Á¯ÊÓ· ÌÈÂ˘‡¯‰ ÌÈ·Â˘È‰ ˙‡ ‰‡¯‰ ÈÙÎ ÌÈ‚ˆÈÈÓ˘ ÌÈ¯˙‡ ¨ÔÂÏ˜˘‡Â Æ‰˜Ó ÏÂ„È‚Â ˙Â‡Ï˜Á ¨„ÈÈˆ ¨‚È„

10*