"Egalitarian" or "Stratified" Society? Some Notes on Mortuary Practices and Social Structure
at Jericho in EB IV
Author(s): Gaetano Palumbo
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 267 (Aug., 1987), pp. 43-59
Published by: The American Schools of Oriental Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1356966 .
Accessed: 13/03/2012 11:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
The American Schools of Oriental Research is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research.
http://www.jstor.org
"Egalitarian"or
Some
Social
Notes
on
Structure
"Stratified" Society?
Practices
and
Mortuary
at
Jericho
in
EB
IV
GAETANO
PALUMBO
University of Rome
Rome, Italy
The concepts of egalitarian and stratified society are derived from theories of
cultural evolutionism, whose application to archaeological cases is often unsatisfactory because the outline of the ancient society is often simplistic. The review of
several articles concerning burial practices in Palestine and in Jericho is the basis on
which new interpretations of Jericho's archaeological evidence and inferences on its
social structure are made. Kenyon's hypothesis of different ethnic groups using the
cemetery is maintained, but the idea of social differentiation within these groups is
presented here, based on the presence of three different kinds of body treatment
(primary extended, primary crouched, secondary disarticulated), and on the variation of grave assemblages among and inside tomb groups. The model of pastoral
nomadism is accepted as the basis of discussion to explain Jericho society, and in a
wider perspective the Palestinian social landscape during EB IV. To this model, very
popular today and supported by many scholars, a variant has been added, that is,
social stratification in a pastoral society. Ethnographic and theoretical studies
confirm the tendency towards social stratification in many pastoral societies: this
theory, and the hypothesis of the existence of small, sedentary communities, could be
used to outline in a more satisfactory way the social organization in Palestine during
the EB IVperiod and the origins of the MB I urban culture.
INTRODUCTION
In
evolutionary theory, egalitarian, stratified,
and ranked societies are distinct stages in the
development of social complexity toward the
formation of the state.
According to Fried (1967: 29-36), the egalitarian
society is a type of political organization in which
there are no differences in access to the resources
that maintain life, and no craft or work specializations. It is a society based on kinship and reciprocity. The ranked society is characterized by
having relatively few positions of status, the succession to which depends upon birth. This society
maintains an egalitarian character, but the economy shifts from reciprocity to redistribution. Fried
introduces the "stratified society," which he differentiates from ranked societies on the basis of
unequal access to basic resources, exploitation
43
of segments of the society, and specialization of
work. In the anthropological literature, and especially in the works of Fried (1967) and Service
(1962; 1975), following an "evolutionary classification" approach, egalitarian societies are related
to "bands" or "tribes," while ranked or stratified
societies comprise "chiefdoms" and "states."Chiefdoms in particular are defined as having a centralized direction and hereditary hierarchical status
arrangements with an aristocratic ethos, yet no
formal legal apparatus of forceful repression (Service 1975:16).
Most of the reconstructions of past societies
over the last 20 years are based on Fried's and
Service's interpretations, because this evolutionary
theory usually provides a simple general model
that easily fits into archaeological cases. For this
reason, the reconstruction of a past society was for
a long time (and often still is) no more than a
44
GAETANO PALUMBO
process of labeling that culture with ready-made
definitions. One of the most difficult problems in
the theoretical reconstruction of an ancient society
stems from the sparseness of archaeological data.
It is also for this reason that the evolutionary
model has a strong impact on archaeological
theory. For many archaeologists it is sufficient
merely to classify a certain society as egalitarian,
ranked, or stratified, albeit based on a very limited
amount of data, since a satisfying explanation of
the society has already been given by the anthropologists. This approach leads to difficulties: the
evolutionary theory provides a model and the
archaeologists, instead of testing the model, are
content to let it stand, right or wrong; their work is
easier, but the outline of the ancient society is
simplistic.
The last few years have seen a revival of criticism
of these theories. For some authors, this analysis is
useful in "giving some idea of the general organization of prehistoric societies, but this procedure is
not necessarily instructive as to the society's specific organization and structure" (Goldstein 1981:
54). Sanders and Webster (1978) go into greater
depth with their criticism of the "unilineal paradigm," and they propose the use of a "multilineal
paradigm" more concerned with the process that
led to the formation of the state than with the
kinds of political societies. In spite of their premises, however, their theory is only a variant of the
evolutionary model and could be defined as "ecological evolutionism."
A nonevolutionary theory in this field is still
lacking, and therein lies another explanation for
the almost total acceptance of evolutionary theory
by archaeologists. Although there may be criticism
of the evolutionary model, this criticism never
deviates from the theory itself (Goldstein 1981;
Peebles and Kus 1977). Peebles and Kus, for
example, propose a cybernetic model of chiefdom,
criticizing Fried's (1967) and Service's (1962; 1975)
concepts of redistribution as main characteristics
of chiefdoms and ranked societies; yet the basic
definition of these kinds of political organizations
as defined by the "evolutionary classification
approach" does not change (this is true also for
Sanders' and Webster's multilineal approach).
Much more radical is the criticism of this approach
by Tainter, according to whom general categories
"not only ... have little meaning, but they are also
of little utility in monitoring variation and change"
BASOR 267
(1977: 331). Tainter's contribution to the social
analysis of past societies lies in his critical review of
the evolutionary theory, the main thrust of which
is a detailed measurement of social variation and
change (Tainter 1977; 1978). He proceeds, using
information and communication theories, to provide a probabilistic and statistical basis for the
measurements of structural complexity, organization, and rank differentiation in ancient societies.
His attention is focused primarily on mortuary
practices, as burials usually furnish a well-preserved
and undisturbed set of archaeological data; theoretical and applied study of mortuary practices
have also shown a great potential for the study of
past social structures.1
Together with the application of the theory, the
most difficult problem is perhaps the availability of
good and complete data (Forest 1983; Tainter 1978;
Ucko 1969). It is not generally expedient to use only
data from old excavations in this kind of analysis,
because they are usually incomplete, and the interpretations of those excavations are rarely concerned with the study of the social structure. Hence,
even in the most accurate and complete excavation
reports, there is a lack of important information for
our purposes, since at the time of the excavation
such data were considered redundant or too complex to be included in the reports. In any case,
many scholars do use these data, and, as long as the
information is fairly complete and is utilized with
caution, it is possible to obtain reasonably good
results (Forest 1983; Rothschild 1979).
This paper will concentrate on the analysis of
two recent studies dedicated to mortuary practices
and social structure at Jericho during EB IV. Both
are based on the same data and follow more or less
the same procedure, but their conclusions are
opposite (Palumbo, in press; Shay 1983). Critical
evaluation of these works will show how difficult it
is to base a range of inferences and hypotheses on
secondary data; it is not intended to discourage the
analysis of old excavations, however, but simply to
caution against the danger of an uncritical or
simplistic application of these data to prefabricated models.
The data which both Shay and I utilized are
those contained in the excavation reports of this
important Palestinian site (Kenyon 1960; 1965),
which contain the most complete data yet published on the cemeteries of Palestine. After the
analysis of burial customs at Jericho, we both
1987
MORTUARY PRACTICES AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE AT JERICHO
45
conclude with some inferences on the social struc- the burial assemblage occur essentially between
ture of that community. For Shay,
men and women, in the sense that crouched and
extended burial positions were not used for women.
... the relatively important social personae fulThis is one of her most important arguments in
filled most of the roles in the community.These
favor of the hypothesis of egalitarian society. In
roles,however-judging by the distributionof the
my article I tried to demonstrate that there are
funeraryfurniture-did not bringthem any parthree major groups of burials-primary extended,
ticular economic advantages.In terms of grave
primary crouched, and disarticulated-and that in
goods, there is little to distinguishbetweenthem
the crouched burial group the difference of placeand the rest of the community, nor did their
ment on the side corresponds with difference of
bodies receive exclusive treatment.This would
sex.
If this is true, we face a very complex pattern
suggest that there were no great social gaps in
of burial practices, in which not only sex, but also
Jericho in what must have been an egalitarian
status differences, are important.
communityduringthe IntermediateBronzeAge.
According to my hypothesis, the burials in
(Shay 1983:36).
crouched position represent a social status higher
than that represented by the disarticulated burials,
On the contrary, I state:
but lower than that of the extended burials. (I will
discuss this statement later.) Individuals buried in
... the presence of different types of grave goods
extended position are perhaps members of a ruling
and of body treatment. .. clearlyshows that this
is not an egalitariansociety,but ratherthat there
class, considering the care given to body treatment
and grave goods. Males are also in the majority, in
is a social structurein which both the differences
of age and sex and the affiliationto a "group"by
this case, although the presence of at least one
comparisonwith anotherwere so importantthat
female in extended position with the legs bent to
they were carried into burial customs.. .; therethe left side cannot be excluded.3 This fact, by the
fore this is-undoubtedly-a social structure
way, contradicts another statement in Shay's artiwherethe hierarchiesarefullyformed2(Palumbo,
cle, according to which burials in extended posiin press: 258-59).
tion have the legs bent only to the right.
Shay's theories, such as the existence of exogamy
It is clear that the archaeological data have been to explain the lack of women's burial (1983: 26used in two different ways, otherwise it would be 28), are also open to criticism since they are not
based on verifiable data, and in fact are not based
very difficult to explain the opposing views.
on data at all. Lacking supporting data, it is easy to
invent a theory and say it "may" be that that
A RESPONSE TO T. SHAY
condition existed. For example, the opposite could
Shay's analysis operates with an uncritical be inferred, that the lack of women's burials in the
acceptance of the data as presented in the Jericho cemetery is due to their low social position, and for
reports, which partially explains her conclusions. that reason many women were buried elsewhere in
She affirms, for example, that in the "crouched the settlement or buried in a way that left no traces
position ... the body was laid on its right side," (as in the case of children). On the other hand, the
and that "apparently both positions [crouched and richness of some female burials could indirectly
extended] were used solely for males" (Shay 1983: support the thesis that a stratified society existed at
30). Neither Kenyon nor Shay noted that the Jericho in that period. Both are reasonable theoburials in crouched position are on both the right ries, but they cannot be supported, as there are no
and left side, and that there is an important data to justify the inferences. This same criticism is
difference in the composition of the grave goods in applicable to other statements in Shay's article,
the two kinds of burials, the most important being such as the relation between "short treatment" and
that daggers or other weapons never appear among unusual illness.4 In this case, Shay's assumption
the grave goods of the bodies laid on the left side was based on only one example, a skeleton with a
(Palumbo, in press: 253). This observation alone is trephined skull (Shay 1983: 29). It appears that
enough to contradict Shay's theory, according to four other individuals represent this "short treatwhich the differences in the body treatment and in ment" in the Jericho cemetery, and none indicates
46
GAETANO PALUMBO
serious illness. All these bodies, even when partially disarticulated, seem to lie on the right side,
and all are concentrated in Area G of the cemetery.5 Yet it still seems impossible to make a
definite inference about the significance of this
treatment. Similarly, the interpretation Shay gives
for the only body that has traces of burning is, in
my opinion, unacceptable (1983: 29, Tomb M8).
In the paragraph on "Tomb categories," Shay
states that "the burial chamber (sic) for women
were usually to the west of the shaft and never east
of it" (1983: 29). Examples of female burials are
too few to support this remark. On the contrary,
the position of the chamber with respect to the
shaft appears to be arbitrary, except in Area P,
where most of the tombs have the burial chamber
clearly oriented to the southwest of the shaft.6 The
burials in crouched position on the right side were
generally found in chambers to the north, northwest, and northeast of the shaft, with a slight
majority of those oriented to the north and northeast, while the tombs containing burials in crouched
position on the left side were usually oriented to the
northwest, east, northeast, and south (Palumbo, in
press: fig. 1). Although a difference in orientation
of the chambers seems to exist, the difference
remains uncertain as the number of tombs containing burials in the crouched position on the left side
is far fewer than those with burials lying on the
right side. Shay also states that "all the crouched
burials (except that of Tomb G85) were oriented
eastward (mainly southeast but also northeast)
while only the extended burials (Tombs A128 and
L2) were oriented westward"(1983: 30). Again, the
sample analyzed was insufficientto achieve unequivocal results: only 24 percent of the burials in
crouched position published in the Jericho reports
were oriented eastward, while 55 percent were
oriented westward. If, moreover, we distinguish
between burials on the right and the left side, we
see that the burials on the left side can be oriented
both eastward and westward (42 and 41 percent,
respectively), while those on the right side are
oriented westward (60 percent) more frequently
than eastward (18 percent).
In the case of the extended burials there is no
unique pattern of orientation of the body. Of the
seven burials published,7three were oriented to the
southwest (43 percent), two to the west (29 percent), one to the northwest (14 percent), and the
orientation of the seventh is unknown (14 percent).
Before presenting my own interpretation of the
BASOR 267
data, two other assumptions made by Shay need
reconsideration. One concerns the size of the
Jericho population, estimated at about 100 individuals (Shay 1983: 27) on the basis of theories in
an article published 25 years ago (Howells 1960). It
is not clear what assumptions lie behind Shay's
evaluation of population size, since according to
Howells a good approximation in the measurement of a population is possible only if data
including age, sex, death rate, site size, and condition of recovery are available. My attempt to
determine the population size of Jericho has been
based on a very simple formula: P = N x A 8 where
N is the number of the burials, A the mean age at
death, and L is the length in time of the cemetery.
Using 356 for N,9 30 for A,'1 and 100 for L,1 the
result is 106, a figure close to that proposed by
Shay. However, using this same formula for the
EB I-III tomb groups yields an estimate of 52,
which is a very low number for the population of
an urban center like Jericho during EB II-III.
Even if this formula does work in theory, the lack
of information and the incomplete data make the
results unreliable. And if this is true for EB II-III
at Jericho, it is also true for EB IV. Neither the
figure of 106 nor 100 can represent an accurate
estimate of population size. It might be possible to
make some statistical corrections of potential
errors in the formula, but it is not possible to carry
out an accurate demographic analysis with the
data available for the Jericho cemetery.
Shay's methodology, based on Binford's (1962;
1971) approach, is also questionable. Binford's
proposal, while important, does not seem to be the
best one to adopt for the study of funerary practices, in that distinctions such as "technomic" or
"sociotechnic" artifacts are ideological ones that
can vary in space and time. More broadly, it is
questionable that componential analysis, as a
method of archaeological research, can be utilized
in the reconstruction of social structures.
JERICHO MORTUARY PRACTICES
REVIEWED
A methodological observation must be made at
the outset. It is not correct to infer an entire social
structure based only on data from a single sector of
the burial population (in my case the crouched
burials), even if continuous references are made to
the other sectors of the cemetery. It is also incorrect to assume that all tombs of a cemetery are
1987
MORTUARY PRACTICES AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE AT JERICHO
contemporary, especially if it is evident that the
cemetery was in use for almost 100 years. Diachronic study of a cemetery has shown that "a
society's practices for the disposal of the dead may
vary, sometimes considerably, even over short
periods of time ... [and] even in cemeteries produced by a single ethnic subdivision" (O'Shea
1984: 283; see also Forest 1983: 109).
Even the symbols of status used by a society may
vary or be modified during the period the cemetery
is in use. Unfortunately, the archaeological evidence of the Jericho cemetery is insufficient to
allow a chronological differentiation of the tombs,
but it is logical to assume that 100 years is long
enough to permit variations in funerary practices
and in the symbolisms used by the same society.
This factor should be taken into consideration in
the analysis, as well as variations due to "ethnicity." Ethnicity is perhaps the most difficult
factor to recognize (Kamp and Yoffee 1980; O'Shea
1984: 301) and requires the use of various classes of
archaeological evidence, including the funerary
practices and much more.
Whether or not the variations observed in the
Jericho cemetery are due to social, chronological,
or ethnic differences presents a question that is not
easy to answer, but some cautious inferences can
be made. For the moment it is possible to exclude
the chronological factor, because the grave goods
show a homogeneous pattern of use, and the
variations observed are more related to economic
or ethnic affiliations than to temporal differences.
Previously (Palumbo in press: 259), in attempting
to demonstrate that social stratification was present, I attributed all variations recorded in the
cemetery to the social factor, basing the inferences,
following Binford (1971) and Brown (1981), on the
negation of the existence of ethnicity. While not
disavowing the procedures of data collection nor
the results detailed there, it now seems apparent
that some of the features present in the tombs can
only be explained in terms of "ethnicity," a term
discussed below. Certain evidence-such as the
burials in crouched position in which males are
buried on the right side and females are buried
on the left, as well as child burials with grave
goods-is indicative of social stratification, in
which a certain social status is already present at
birth. Elsewhere I had argued that the communities
present in Palestine during EB IV were small
sedentary settlements with a social hierarchy and
an economy based on agriculture and pastoral
47
production. But the data do not easily support that
view (Palumbo in press: 260).
Very few EB IV settlements have been studied so
far, and often they are found not to be contemporary with the use of the cemetery (the occupation at Jericho can hardly be defined as "sedentary"
and it is later than the cemetery). Even if it could
be said that Jericho had a sedentary population, it
is not correct to infer that all of Palestine had the
same kind of settlement and social organization.
The theory's weakness consists in the formula:
stratified society = sedentary community, possibly
based on agriculture, with the implicit consequence
that nomadism is linked only to "egalitarian"
societies. The author has also stated this position,
which has been the standard assumption. A survey
of studies related to the social structure of contemporary nomads, however, is sufficient to show how
the supposed "egalitarianism" of these nomadic
societies is often a mere banality. Starting from
these studies, a new interpretation of the Jericho
social structure will be given here, but only after
reexamination of the archaeological data.
A NEW ANALYSIS OF THE
ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE
A statistical analysis based on the unweighted
pair group method using arithmetic averages
(Sneath and Sokal 1973), with the Gower coefficient, has been performed on the entire set of
published tombs of the Jericho cemetery.12 The
results of this average-linkage cluster analysis have
been plotted in four dendrographs, two with 206
tombs and two with 171. The first group are the
tombs that have been published, the second are the
tombs with complete data; for each one of these
groups, there is one dendrogram in which the
absence of a certain characteristic in each tomb of
the pair has been considered significant, and one in
which this absence has been ignored. The code
utilized to "describe"the tombs and their contents
is presented in Table 1. This code was developed to
facilitate comprehension of every characteristic of
the tomb from the burial itself to the rock-cut
chamber. Together with the "general" dendrographs, some dendrographs based on the comparison between single characteristics (i.e., grave goods
and burials, characteristics of the chamber and
burials, and so on) have been printed, but since
more analyses are scheduled, I will concentrate on
the discussion of the general ones.
GAETANO PALUMBO
48
TABLE 1. Variables Used
Burials
V 1 - Burial position:
V 2 - Side (side only):
V 3 - Flex direction:
(supine only)
V 4 - Facing (side only):
V 5-
V 6-
Kind of disarticulation:
Number of burials:
V 7 - Age:
Grave Goods
V 8 - Grave goods:
V 9 - Dagger:
V 10 - Javelin:
V 11 - Pin:
V 12 - Beads:
V 13 - Lamp:
V 14 - Pottery (open forms):
(0) Not on side
(1) Right
(2) Left
(0) Not flexed
(1) Right
(2) Left
(1) Entrance
(2) Wall
(1) Sparse
(2) Piled
(3) Partly
disarticulated
(1) One
(2) Two
(3) Three
(1) Child
(2) Adult
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
V 15 - Pottery (closed forms): (1) Absent
(2) Present
V 16 - Small jars:
(1) Absent
(2) Present
V 17 -Other:
V 18 - Bones of animals:
to Codify Jericho Tombs*
V 19 - Luxury goods:
(1) Side
(2) Supine
(3) Extended
(4) Disarticulated
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
BASOR 267
(1) Absent
(2) Present
Tombs
V 20 - Size of tomb:
V 21 - Orientation:
V 22 - Type:
V 23 - Small shaft type:
V 24 - Steps:
V 25 - Corridor:
V 26 - Blocking stone:
V 27
Entrance near roof:
V 28 - Square shaft:
V 29 - Lamp niche:
V 30 - Niche at bottom
of the shaft
V 31 - Irregularchamber:
V 32 - Two chambers:
V 33 - Platform:
(1) Very small
(2) Small
(3) Medium
(4) Large
(1) North
(2) Northeast
(3) East
(4) Southeast
(5) South
(6) Southwest
(7) West
(8) Northwest
(1) Shaft
(2) Small shaft
(3) Niche
(1) With blocking
stone
(2) Without blocking
stone
(1) Absent
(2) Step/s
(3) High step/s
(1) Absent
(2) Short corridor
(3) Long corridor
(1) Absent
(2) Blocking stone
(3) Blocking stones
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
(1) Absent
(2) Present
*The resulting code is composed of the numbers that appear here in parentheses (one for each variable); 0 is used when a variable
is unknown.
1987
MORTUARY PRACTICES AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE AT JERICHO
The dendrographs obtained are represented in
figs. 1-4. Their differences are apparent because
the clusters are homogeneous in all the analyses,
and they match perfectly. The clearest example is
with Cluster 9 of the first analysis, which corresponds with Cluster 4 of the second analysis and
Cluster 1 of the third and fourth analyses. These
clusters are crouched burials on the side, generally
the right, and each has a dagger as a grave good.
Most of the burials in crouched position are concentrated in this cluster, with a percentage that
varies from 41 to 62 percent, with a mean of 50
percent. The other 50 percent are sparser and
associated with other kinds of burials, but for the
most part there is a strong tendency for these kinds
of burials to be clustered.13Another good example
is seen in the burials of children and infants, which
are strongly clustered, and by the tombs of Area P,
which are always fairly isolated from the other
groups. To make the analyses more understandable, the cluster association among the four different "general"dendrographs is presented in Table 2.
The results of this statistical analysis partially
confirm Kenyon's typology, in that the strongest
correlations are between tombs of the same "group"
(e.g., "pottery," "outsize," or "dagger"type). But it
is also common to find clusters that are strongly
correlated according to different "types"of tombs,
in which the "significant characteristic"is given by
the kind of burial or grave goods associated with it.
Kenyon connected this typology with various tribal
groups that used Jericho as a common burial
ground (1960: 182), a hypothesis that has not been
accepted by many scholars. Dever (forthcoming)
holds that these differences may be chronological
or that they may reflect ethnic backgrounds or
patterns of political organization. But he rejects
the idea that social stratification existed in Jericho
during EB IV, since
within each single typologicalgroup... there is
reallyno artifactualevidenceof degreesof wealth
or social status: the tombs are entirely homogeneous. What we do encounteris rathermore
prosaicyet quiteexpected,that is, sex differentiation. Apart from the universaluse of pottery,
males are buried with weapons, females with
beads or awls (the rarechildren'sburialshave no
gravegoods).
For Jericho, however, it might be argued that
this is not the case. It cannot be excluded a priori
that the differences observed in the Jericho ceme-
49
tery are due to ethnic rather than chronological
factors, for the reasons explained above. However,
some details in the mortuary practices recorded at
Jericho suggest a social "differentiation" based on
wealth, because within each typological group is
evidence of some kind of differentiation: not all the
burials of the "dagger type" tombs are crouched,
and those that are disarticulated usually are without grave goods. Other burials that are crouched
do not always have the same grave goods. It is true
that differences are sometimes slight, but they do
exist, and they require attention.
Burials in crouched position are concentrated in
the "dagger type" tombs and in Area A of the
cemetery, but they are present in all other types of
tombs and areas, except in Areas H and N. Their
presence is interesting, as they may indirectly support the theory of social differentiation in the
Jericho society: burials in crouched position are
associated almost always with the "richest" grave
goods in the various types of tombs. All the
"pottery type" tombs with crouched burials in
Area G of the cemetery14 have a funerary assemblage composed of a lamp and at least one jar, with
or without handles, whereas only eight (28.5 percent) of the 28 disarticulated burials in the same
type of tombs and in the same area have grave
goods comparable to those of the crouched burials.
More convincing is the case of the "outsize type"
tombs of Area P: only three (16.5 percent) of the 18
disarticulated burials are provided with funerary
assemblages similar to that of tomb P5, a crouched
burial. Yet this is not an exception, because two
other crouched burials are found in "outsize type"
tombs (Tombs 01 and 04), and their grave goods
can be defined as being "very rich" for the average
of this period (also Palumbo in press: 255). The
presence of two crouched position child burials
with grave goods could be another indicator of
social differentiation in Jericho, since "egalitarian"
societies rarely show variations in the treatment of
children's bodies. The existence of a very small
sample of burials that are supine with the legs bent
to the right, to the left, or extended,'5 and with
grave goods generally "rich,"16 would probably
have to be connected with the variety of the social
structure of this community more than with a
different ethnic group. In the statistical analysis
these burials are never clustered, and those with
daggers are always situated in the cluster of
crouched burials on the right. Even if there are no
statistical differences between these two kinds of
I1
BASOR 267
50
PALUMBOBAO26
~~~~GAETANO
50
1 12
1 13
J141j 5 11
6a
1613I 6c
17I
8
Fig. 1. Average-linkage cluster analysis for the Jericho tombs. Inthis dendrogram absences of certain characteristics for each
pair of tombs have been computed. See the text for explanation.
la ~
11
21
3 114.1
4b31
Fig. 2. Average-linkage cluster analysis for the Jericho tombs. In this dendrogram absences of certain characteristics for
each pair of tombs have been ignored. See the text for explanation.
MORTUARY PRACTICES AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE AT JERICHO
1987
51
.25.20-
.15.10-
.05_
Ill
lIlil
lill
IIll
pI
*SilSS^^^I^III^^^^^O~
-.IPIII^i^^i
T~TT~~~~~~P)~~~C~C~~~~
9
D9
D0
|
I r,-I
II II
iIlsiPP
-^--
"
I
|10
^
|b
TOMB
CLUSTERNO.
CLUSTER
NO.
ib
la
0-
Fig. 1. continued.
.2520.1SL
.10.05-
c_<)7
.W _N
1
19
O=.3M33
<
1qD
W
zW
_~
JWWWN
b
W.
9=r
6
Fig. 2. continued.
n
..-
x)3
O,
rX - W
W
W
~
<-
t/
33
=3s
C,
11 7
M_r
I
1;- W
_g
11
)c)X.
I,
_ J)V "IOW V
- O.-1 oW
8
.-I
I--,
~~
-W
DW.
=
o-c=-Mr,
W0
-10c
o
9
cr
V
_
o
rW
t_
c7Wc
I onT
V WV
9w uJ
tOb
X* IOc
=
-
.
N _ = C: _ )
s~
|
I
0-
TOMB
CLUSTER NO.
GAETANO PALUMBO
52
BASOR 267
.25_
.20_
.15-
.10-
.05-
0WW-gN
-O DD-
W' --U- OP
D W:.
.-NaW_I,N
4
( :00.
1
I
N
'D N-
||
2a
V.
O
N
v-
--
;
3
|2bl
_
,
-
5
_N
-
O
4
1
Fig. 3. Average-linkage cluster analysis for the Jericho tombs (with complete data
only). In this dendrogram absences of certain characteristics for each pair of tombs
have been computed. See the text for explanation.
55'.40.30.25.20.15_
.10-
0_
I
1
la
II
lb
I
I
lc
II
I
2
Fig. 4. Average-linkage cluster analysis for the Jericho tombs (with complete
data only). In this dendrogram absences of certain characteristics for each pair
of tombs have been ignored. See the text for explanation.
1987
MORTUARY PRACTICES AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE AT JERICHO
.10_
.55
.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~_ed
=
.
.
3
C1
.I
W
C>
=
Cl
.3Wn
=n=
a: =
I
WW
0-C
xC : 7WC
,
5
Fig. 3. continueed.
r-T'
_ I
^...=W
J
J..~................
3b I I 4a|14ll
n
n:
I 3aWNV
ig
NN
13a
-on
Fig. 4. continued.
n
I
.....
5a I
n
nnnB
5a ]
I 3bIII I 4a I14b1
-I
I
I
-t
.05-,
.?0
TOMB
.............
T NO.
CLUSTER
6c
_nn
5b
0
| CLUSTER
NO.
53
GAETANO PALUMBO
54
BASOR 267
that cemeteries and tombs were intended by those
groups as "camps" and "houses for the dead," is
convincing, but it seems simplistic in that it considers these societies "egalitarian." It is true that
Fig. 4
Fig. 3
Fig. 2
Fig. 1
communities normally have simpler
nonsedentary
5B
5
1
10 C
of political and social organization than
patterns
4 A
3
8-9
6 A
sedentary and urban societies. It is also true that
4
2
5
5
this period there is very little evidence of
during
6 C
6
3 A
6 C
craft or work specialization, with the exception of
2 B
7
1B
3 B
some pottery or weapons-which are too "stan4B
1
9
1A
dard" not to have been produced by "professional"
2
3
1 A/I C
10
workers-and tombs such as those in Jericho's
3
C
2
11 A
Area P, which were clearly prepared by a group of
2 A
11 B
1 A
1C
specialized diggers. Evidence of long distance trade
is also missing. All these features are considered
*Onlyclusterswith a highdegreeof correlationareshown.
most important in the definition of a complex
society. If the idea of social stratification in a
pastoral society is to be argued, it is because the
body treatment, we still cannot exclude the possi- archaeological evidence at Jericho can be supbility that a symbolic distinction was involved. ported by various other ethnographic and theoretiBoth statistical analyses, with the evidence of cal studies of pastoral nomadism. A word of
strong clusters, and simple observation "by sight" caution is in order, however, about the analogies
of the variation in burial practices, indicate that between ancient and modern pastoral societies: the
fact that the camel was domesticated only at the
social stratification probably existed.
beginning of the first millennium B.C. means that in
EB IV the mobility of nomads and their raiding
AN INTERPRETATIVE MODEL:
STRATIFIED PASTORAL SOCIETY
capacity were far less significant than for "historical" nomads. Moreover, the ideology of modern
Nomadism has long been the last hope for many nomads and the sedentary peoples and states with
scholars to explain "obscure" historical cases. which they deal, is different from that of the
Because of the lack of evidence for cities in EB IV, ancient world, since Islam has changed many
many scholars believed nomads were responsible customs of those populations.
In studies devoted to the pastoral societies, two
for the collapse of the EB III urban civilization of
Palestine (Kenyon 1960: 185; Lapp 1966: 97-100). main theoretical views on the origins of social
The so-called "Amorite hypothesis" and other stratification among pastoral nomads become evi"Invasion hypotheses," were dismissed by Liverani dent: first, that social stratification is the result of
(1970), but only after some years was he followed external influences; and second, that social stratifiby other scholars. Today invasion theories are less cation is the result of internal developments. The
popular,.if not actually untenable, and are usually first "theory"(it would be better to speak of it as a
replaced by theories of pastoral nomadism (Row- general group of theories combined under this
ton 1974; 1976; Dever 1980), generally as part of a definition) is represented by such authors as Barth
"dimorphic society" with a delicate balance be- (1961), Bates (1971), Burnham (1979), Irons (1971;
tween sedentary and nomadic components.
1974; 1979), and Krader (1979). For these authors,
Dever (forthcoming) deals with the study of changes in social relations and the formation of
burial practices in EB IV as a "startingpoint" in the classes are related to the pastoralist's contact with
attempt to reconstruct the society of the period. It sedentary or state organizations and to factors
is one of the first studies in the archaeology of Syria such as encapsulation and warfare. For Digard
and Palestine in which a model derived from (1979), Dyson-Hudson (1980), and Swidler (1973),
modern ethnographic case studies is applied, indi- the changes are derived more from internal develcating a critical revival in this field of study. opment, such as differential access to basic reDever's model of pastoral nomadism, used to sources, including grazing rights and the role of
explain the EB IV burial practices, and his idea agriculture. According to Lattimore (1979), Marx
2. Cluster Association Among the Four
Dendrographs Presented in Figs. 1-4*
TABLE
1987
MORTUARY PRACTICES AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE AT JERICHO
(1978), and Salzman (1979), changes can derive
both from external pressures (especially encapsulation by the state) and internal factors such as the
importance of nonpastoral-especially agricultural
-resources. These two sets of theories operate on
different levels, the political and the economic. The
theories based on "external pressures" lay more
stress on political factors, even if the economic level
is involved. Irons, for example, insists on the
origins of social stratification as the result of the
ability of a political leader to act as an intermediary
between the nomads and the sedentary society,
citing the example of the development of social
complexity among the Yomut Turkmen and the
Basseri (Irons 1979). The origin of social stratification can occur either if the tribe is "encapsulated"
by a state, or if it "conquers"a sedentary society. In
the latter case, problems of administration will
arise, and it has been observed that there is a strong
tendency for the nomad chiefs to become purely
sedentary rulers (Irons 1979: 372). In the same
volume, Burnham reaches identical conclusions:
"Pastoral nomadism is an innately conservative
structural form and . . .tendencies toward class
relations would tend to emerge only in the context
of institutionalized pastoral-sedentary relations"
(Burnham 1979: 356). Burnham stresses the importance of the exchange of specialized food production between nomads and sedentary peoples
and the role played by local and long distance
trade, which was often managed by nomadic tribes.
According to Burnham, sedentarization of some
segments of the nomadic tribes can occur with
economically unsuccessful nomads or with very
rich nomads. He further agrees with Irons concerning the emergence of social stratification from the
role played by the chief as middleman between
nomads and sedentaries, both in a subordinate
relationship and in a relationship of conquest
(Burnham 1979: 356-59).
The theories based on "internal development"
stress the economic factors, especially the role
played by agriculture in the differentiation of
access to basic resources, a phenomenon considered by some scholars (Digard 1979: 136; Fried
1967: 190) as the seed from which social stratification develops. More convincing seems to be the
opinion presented in some articles by Marx and
Salzman. These scholars, too, are convinced that
nomads' relationship with sedentary peoples or
with the state plays a major role in the development of social stratification, but they do not dis-
55
miss the importance of nonpastoral resources in
the evolution of production and in the internal
specialization of the mechanism of food production. An interesting point raised by Marx is that
the nomads "are interested in destruction of agricultural settlement only up to a certain point; they
need the settlements in order to sell their animals
and produce and to purchase foodstuffs and industrial products" (Marx 1978: 68).
All the authors cited are in agreement when
considering the importance of the relations with
the sedentary component of Middle Eastern societies for the pastoral "mode of production." These
relationships can be of three types: domination,
subordination, and symbiosis, the last giving the
least rise to changes in the social structure of the
nomadic societies. Lattimore gives a reasonable
theory that, "the problems of the evolution or lack
of evolution in pastoral nomadism cannot be considered apart from, but must be studied in conjunction with the modes of development of any settled
society that comes within its range of action"
(Lattimore 1962: 333).
All these studies show how important is the
relation between the nomadic and sedentary components of Middle Eastern societies for a full
understanding of their economy and social organization. From this perspective, it does not seem
reasonable to conclude that the only economy and
the only mode of life in EB IV Palestine was
pastoral. The lack of urban centers during EB IV
does not mean that sedentary life was totally
absent. It is logical to assume that sedentary
villages based on agriculture and herding existed
during the period (Dever 1980: 57-58; Prag 1974:
102), especially in well-watered areas such as the
Galilee region and the Jordan Valley, while the
occupation in marginal zones was clearly seasonal
(Cohen and Dever 1979; Dever 1980: 57). The
urban centers of Syria (Tell Abu-Danne, Ebla, Tell
Fray, Tell Hadidi, Tell Touqan, Byblos, and
others) and the evidence of sedentary occupation
in Transjordan (Tell el-Hayyat, Khirbet Iskander,
Aro'er, Iktanu, Ader, Bab edh-Dhra') provide
another source of confrontation with which pastoral nomads of the Syro-Palestinian steppe had to
deal. The absence of a centralized power in Palestine returned their mobility to the nomads. This
situation clearly followed the collapse of the urban
civilization in EB III and did not cause it; many
ethnographers (Burnham 1979; Irons 1979) have
shown that after the conquest of a sedentary
56
GAETANO PALUMBO
population with a centralized power, the nomadic
conqueror develops a complex structure to administrate the population, causing another centralized
power to rise. This was not the case in Palestine,
where the absence of a central government, or of a
series of local powers, was clear. The reasons for
the collapse of the urban culture could rather have
been economic (Richard 1980: 25-26), the nomads
simply taking advantage of the weakening central
power to win new territory for their flocks and to
interrelate with the sedentary component of the
society from a stronger position.
In conclusion, if the model of pastoral nomadism
constituted an important step forward in the interpretation of EB IV society of Palestine, the
hypothesis of a complex social structure in this
same society and the presence of small sedentary
communities could better explain both the situation in Palestine during the EB IV period and the
origins of the MB I urban culture.'7
CONCLUSIONS
The social structure at Jericho has been the
point of departure for many inferences about the
society of all of Palestine. Yet returning to Jericho,
it is possible to summarize the results of the
analysis as follows: the differentiation observed in
the burial practices is more "horizontal" than
"vertical," in the sense that the various kinds of
body treatment "cut" the typological groups proposed by K. Kenyon. These groups exist, without
doubt, and the only explanation for their existence is that they belong to differentiated "ethnic"
segments of the society. "Superimposed" on this
"ethnic" differentiation was also a social differentiation, represented in the burial practices by the
BASOR 267
three types of body treatment and by variation
(even if it is not especially clear) in the composition
of the grave goods. Both characteristics are also
evident in the statistical analysis. Although the
statistical analysis is a good "test"for this hypothesis, it cannot be considered "proof," as the numbers are also subject to personally or ideologicallyoriented interpretations.
Problems of a social interpretation of the funerary practices are present in the "insufficiently
explicit attention given to the formation and transformation of the archaeological record, the inadequate treatment of symbolism, the relative neglect
of spatial patterning in the location of disposal
areas and the absence of a regional perspective in
the analysis of mortuary practices" (Chapman and
Randsborg 1981: 23).
This study is meant to answer some of the
statements contained in three articles concerning
burial practices in Palestine and, in particular, at
Jericho. It is not intended to provide new theories,
but rather to present a basis of discussion for
future research, with a new way to analyze the
Palestinian archaeological evidence.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express my gratitudeto K. Kintighof the
Arizona State Museum,Tucson, for his indispensable
help in the statisticalanalysisperformedon Jericho's
burialdata; and to W. G. Dever for readingand commentingon this paperand encouragingme to complete
the research.Specialthanksaredue to my friendsNancy
Rank and Jacob Tanenbaumfor "translating"into
Englishmy attemptsto writein this language.
NO)TES
'Some useful works concernedwith the theoretical
study of social structuresbased on burial data are:
Binford (1971), Brown (1981), O'Shea (1984), Saxe
(1970), and Tainter(1977; 1978). Studies more closely
directed toward an applicationof the theory to real
archaeologicalcases are the works of Brown (1971),
Forest(1983),Larson(1971),Peebles(1971),Rothschild
(1979),and Shennan(1975).Thisis not a completelist of
the studiesdevotedto this argument:see Chapmanand
Randsborg(1981) for a review of the most important
studiesrelatedto "thearchaeologyof death."
from Italianby the author.
2Translated
3Tomb M17 (Kenyon 1965: 157-60). It is the only
Jerichotomb with threeburials,one disarticulated,one
fully extended (which is the only one recordedin the
Jerichocemeteryin this period),and the thirdextended
with the legs bentto the left.
4Shaydefines"shorttreatment"as a burialthat occurs
after decompositionof the body, but before its total
disarticulation.
5Tombs G28, G40, G42, G53 (Kenyon 1960: 237,
240-42).
1987
MORTUARY
PRACTICES
AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE
6Kenyon 1965: tav. 38.
7The burials oriented to the southwest are those found
in Tombs G83, L6, and M17; those oriented to the west
and northwest are from Tombs A128 and L2 (west) and
M17 (northwest). One body whose orientation is unknown was found in Tomb G79.
8This formula is derived from Asch (1976: 47).
9This number also comprises the child and infant
burials: for this reason the result obtained cannot be
taken too seriously.
'OThisvalue is not obtained statistically, but is intended as an estimate "by sight." For a careful study of
the death rates and mean ages, see Asch (1976) and
Hassan (1981).
'One hundred years or less is the time estimated for
the use of the EB IV cemetery at Jericho (W. G. Dever,
personal communication).
12The program was compiled by K. Kintigh of the
Arizona State Museum, University of Arizona, Tucson,
AT JERICHO
57
and it has been run on a PRIME 550 system.
'3See, for example, Cluster 10 in the first analysis,
characterized by burials without grave goods, in which
ten burials in crouched position are associated with a
group of disarticulated burials.
14Tombs G8, G28, G36, G40, G42, G53, G85, and
G88. All the burials are crouched on the right side.
5Tombs A128, G83, L2, L6 (legs bent to the right);
Tomb M17 (two burials, see note 3); Tomb G79 (position of the legs not recorded).
'6Except for Tomb G79, where there are no grave
goods, all the burials with legs bent to the right have
daggers, pottery, and other objects, while the two other
burials have only pottery.
17MBI is here intended as the period called "MB IIA"
by Albright and "MB I" by Kenyon. The latter designation is becoming the most accepted (see Gerstenblith
1980: 74-75).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Asch, D.
1976
1981
The Middle Woodland Population of the
Lower Illinois Valley: A Study in Paleodemographic Methods. Evanston, IL: Northwestern Archaeological Program Scientific
Papers.
Barth, F.
Nomads of South Persia: The Basseri Tribe
1961
of the Khamseh Confederacy. New York:
Humanities.
Bates, D. G.
The Role of the State in Peasant-Nomad
1971
Mutualism. Anthropological Quarterly 44:
109-31.
Binford, L. R.
1962
Archaeology as Anthropology. American
Antiquity 28: 217-25.
1971
Mortuary Practices: Their Study and Their
Potential. Pp. 6-29 in Approaches to the
Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices, ed.
J. A. Brown. Memoirs of the Society for
American Archaeology 25. Washington: Society for American Archaeology.
Brown, J. A.
1971
The Dimension of Status in the Burials at
Spiro. Pp. 92-112 in Approaches to the Social
Dimension of Mortuary Practices, ed. J. A.
Brown. Memoirs of the Society for American
Archaeology. 25. Washington: Society for
American Archaeology.
The Search for Rank in Prehistoric Burials.
Pp. 25-38 in The Archaeology of Death, eds.
R. Chapman, I. Kinnes, and K. Randsborg.
Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Burnham, P.
1979
Spatial Mobility and Political Centralization
in Pastoral Societies. Pp. 349-60 in Pastoral
Production and Society, ed. L' Equipe ecologie et anthropologie des societes pastorales.
Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Chapman, R., and Randsborg, K.
1981
Approaches to the Archaeology of Death.
Pp. 1-24 in The Archaeology of Death, eds.
R. Chapman, I. Kinnes, and K. Randsborg.
Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Cohen, R., and Dever, W. G.
1979
Preliminary Report of the Second Season of
the "CentralNegev Highlands Project." Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental
Research 236: 41-60.
Dever, W. G.
1980
New Vistas on the EB IV ("MB I") Horizon
in Syria-Palestine. Bulletin of the American
Schools of Oriental Research, 237: 35-64.
forthFunerary Practices in EB IV (MB I) Palestine:
A Study in Cultural Discontinuity. In
coming
Love and Death: Essays in Honor of Marvin
Pope, ed. J. Martis.
58
GAETANO PALUMBO
BASOR 267
Digard, J. P.
Kamp, K. A., and Yoffee, N.
1979
De la necessite et des incovenients, pour un
1980
Ethnicity in Ancient Western Asia During the
Baxtyari, d' etre Baxtyari. Communaute, terEarly Second Millennium B.C.:Archaeological Assessments and Ethnoarchaeological
ritoire, et inegalite chez des pasteurs nomades
d' Iran. Pp. 127-39 in Pastoral Production
Prospectives. Bulletin of the American
and Society, ed. L'Equipe ecologie et anthroSchools of Oriental Research 237: 85-104.
pologie des societes pastorales. Cambridge: Kenyon, K. M.
1960
Excavations at Jericho I: The Tombs ExcaCambridge University.
vated in 1952-1954. London: British School
Dyson-Hudson, R.
of Archaeology in Jerusalem.
1980
Toward a General Theory of Pastoralism and
1965
Excavations at Jericho II: The Tombs ExcaSocial Stratification. Nomadic Peoples 7: 1-7.
vated
in 1955-1958. London: British School
Forest, J.--D.
of
in Jerusalem.
Archaeology
1983
Les pratiques funeraires en Mesopotamie du
L.
Krader,
millenaire
au
debut du troisieme.
cinquieme
1979
The Origin of the State among the Nomads of
Etude de cas. Paris: Editions Recherche sur
Asia. Pp. 221-34 in Pastoral Production and
les Civilisations.
Society, ed. L' Equipe ecologie et anthroFried, M.
des societes pastorales. Cambridge:
pologie
1967
The Evolution of Political Society, an Essay
Cambridge
University.
in Political Anthropology. New York: RanP. W.
Lapp,
dom House.
1966
The Dhahr Mirzbaneh Tombs: Three InterGerstenblith, P.
mediate Bronze Age Cemeteries in Jordan.
1980
A Reassessment of the Beginning of the MidPublications of the Jerusalem School 4. New
dle Bronze Age in Syria-Palestine. Bulletin of
Haven: American Schools of Oriental Rethe American Schools of Oriental Research
search.
237: 65-84.
Larson, L. H., Jr.
Goldstein,,L.
1971
Archaeological Implications of Social Strati1981
One-Dimensional Archaeology and Multification at the Etowah Site, Georgia. Pp. 58Dimensional People: Spatial Organization
67 in Approaches to the Social Dimensions
and Mortuary Analysis. Pp. 53-69 in The
of Mortuary Practices, ed. J. A. Brown.
Memoirs of the Society for American ArchaeArchaeology of Death, eds. R. Chapman, I.
Kinnes, and K. Randsborg. Cambridge:Camology 25. Washington: Society for American
bridge University.
Archaeology.
F
Lattimore, O.
Hassan,
1962
Inner Asian Frontiers of China. Boston, MA:
1981
Demographic Archaeology. New York: AcaBeacon.
demic.
1979
Herdsmen, Farmers, Urban Culture. Pp.
Howells, W. W.
479-90
in Pastoral Production and Society,
1960
Estimating Population Numbers through
ed.
L'Equipe
ecologie et anthropologie des
Archaeological and Skeletal Remains. Pp.
societes pastorales. Cambridge: Cambridge
158-209 in The Application of Quantitative
University.
Methods in Archaeology, eds. R. F. Heizer,
and S. F. Cook. Chicago: Viking Fund Pub- Liverani, M.
1970
Per una considerazione storica del problema
lications in Anthropology.
amorreo.
Oriens Antiquus. 9: 5-27.
Irons, W.
1971
Variation in Political Stratification among Marx, E.
1978
The Ecology and Politics of Nomadic Pasthe Yomut Turkmen. Anthropological Quartoralists
in the Middle East. Pp. 41-74 in The
terly 44: 143-56.
Nomadic Alternative, ed. W. Weissleder. The
1974
Nomadism as a Political Adaptation: the
Hague: Mouton.
Case of the Yomut Turkmen. American EthO'Shea, J. M.
nologist 1: 635-58.
1984
Mortuary Variability. An Archaeological In1979
Political Stratification among Pastoral Novestigation. Orlando: Academic.
mads. Pp. 361-74 in Pastoral Production Palumbo, G.
and Society, ed. L' Equipe ecologie et anthroin press Per un' analisi delle sepolture contratte del
pologie des societes pastorales. Cambridge:
Bronzo Antico IV di Gerico. Contributi e
Cambridge University.
Materiali di Archeologia Orientale 1: 249-63.
1987
MORTUARY
PRACTICES
AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE
Peebles, C. S.
1971
Moundville and Surrounding Sites: Some
Structural Considerations of Mortuary Practices. Pp. 69-91 in Approaches to the Social
Dimensions of Mortuary Practices, ed. J. A.
Brown. Memoirs of the Society for American
Archaeology, 25. Washington: Society for
American Archaeology.
Peebles, C. S., and Kus, S. M.
1977
Some Archaeological Correlates of Ranked
Societies. American Antiquity 42: 421-48.
Prag, K.
1974
The Intermediate Early Bronze-Middle
Bronze Age: An Interpretation of the Evidence from Transjordan, Syria and Lebanon.
Levant 6: 69-116.
Richard, S>.
1980
Toward a Consensus of Opinion on the End
of the Early Bronze Age in Palestine-Transjordan. Bulletin of the American Schools of
Oriental Research 237: 5-34.
Rothschild, N. A.
1979
Mortuary Behavior and Social Organization
at Indian Knoll and Dickinson Mounds.
American Antiquity 44: 658-75.
Rowton, M. B.
1974
Enclosed Nomadism. Journal of Economic
and Social History of the Orient 17: 1-30.
1976
Dimorphic Structure and Topology. Oriens
Antiquus 15: 17-31.
Salzman, P. C.
1979
Inequality and Oppression in Nomadic Society. Pp. 429-46 in Pastoral Production and
Society, ed. L' Equipe ecologie et anthropologie des societes pastorales. Cambridge:
Cambridge University.
Sanders, W., and Webster, D.
1978
Unilinealism, Multilinealism and the Evolution of Complex Societies. Pp. 249-302 in
Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and
Dating, ed. C. L. Redman. New York: Academic.
AT JERICHO
59
Saxe, A. A.
1970
Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices.
Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor: Dissertation Abstracts.
Service, E. R.
1962
Primitive Social Organization. New York:
Random House.
1975
The Origins of the State and Civilization.
New York: Norton.
Shay, T.
1983
Burial Customs at Jericho in the Intermediate
Bronze Age: A Componential Analysis. Tel
Aviv 10: 26-37.
Shennan, S.
1975
The Social Organization at Branc. Antiquity
49: 279-88.
Sneath, P., and Sokal, R.
1973
Numerical Taxonomy. London: Freeman.
Swidler, W.
1973
Adaptive Processes Regulating Nomad-Sedentary Interaction in the Middle East. Pp. 2341 in The Desert and the Sown, ed. C. Nelson.
Berkeley: University of California.
Tainter, J. A.
1977
Modeling Change in Prehistoric Social Systems. Pp. 327-51 in For Theory Building in
Archaeology, ed. L. R. Binford. New York:
Academic.
1978
Mortuary Practices and the Study of Prehistoric Social Systems. Pp. 105-41 in
Advances in Archaeological Method and
Theory, I, ed. M. B. Schiffer. New York:
Academic.
Ucko, P. J.
1969
Ethnography and Archaeological Interpretations of Funerary Remains. World Archaeology 1: 269-80.