UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones
5-1-2012
Environmental Adaptations at Neolithic Ghwair I
as seen from a Zooarchaeological Perspective
Doss F. Powell
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations
Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons
Repository Citation
Powell, Doss F., "Environmental Adaptations at Neolithic Ghwair I as seen from a Zooarchaeological Perspective" (2012). UNLV
Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. 1611.
http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations/1611
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Scholarship@UNLV. It has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Theses,
Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
ENVIRONMENTAL ADAPTATIONS AT NEOLITHIC GHWAIR I AS SEEN
FROM A ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
by
Doss F. Powell, Jr.
Bachelor of Arts
The University of Georgia
1998
Master of Arts
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
2001
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the
Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology
Department of Anthropology
College of Liberal Arts
The Graduate College
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
May 2012
THE GRADUATE COLLEGE
We recommend the dissertation prepared under our supervision by
Doss F. Powell, Jr.
entitled
Environmental Adaptations at Neolithic Ghwair I as Seen from a
Zooarcheological Perspective
be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology
School of Community Health Sciences
Alan Simmons, Ph.D., Committee Chair
Barbara Roth, Ph.D., Committee Member
Levent Atici, Ph.D., Committee Member
Andrew Bell, Ph.D., Graduate College Representative
Ronald Smith, Ph. D., Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies
and Dean of the Graduate College
May 2012
ii
ABSTRACT
ENVIRONMENTAL ADAPTATIONS AT NEOLITHIC GHWAIR I AS SEEN
FROM A ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
By
Doss F. Powell, Jr.
Dr. Alan Simmons, Examination Committee Chair
Professor of Anthropology
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Understanding the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) environmental adaptations,
subsistence patterns, and lifestyles in the southern Levant is pivotal in investigating the
consequences of the human transformation from the exploitation of wild resources to the
production of food through domestication or, the "Neolithic Revolution". At the most
fundamental level, this investigation provides a comprehensive zooarchaeological study
of the archaeological faunal assemblage from Ghwair I, a Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
(PPNB) community in southern Jordan, in effort to explore local exploitation patterns
and refine our understanding of the community’s social and economic systems. This type
of investigation enhances our current understanding of the spatial organization, village
life, and the eventual abandonment of villages at the end of the PPNB.
This research was designed to address the following questions: (1) What were the
economic strategies and adaptations utilized at Ghwair I during the PPNB? (2) Was
Ghwair I an autonomous village structured to meet local subsistence demands and
focused on self-sufficiency, or was it part of a regional system? and (3) What role did the
subsistence strategies play in social organization of the community at Ghwair I?
iii
The combined results of an extensive archaeological investigation at Ghwair I and
a comprehensive zooarchaeological analysis that integrates faunal taxonomic
identification, quantification, assemblage composition and characterization, has yielded
the following interpretations:
1) The macrofaunal assemblage at Ghwair I reflects a pastoral animal economy
focused heavily on goat herding, supplemented with exploitation of a range of
other wild species. Ecological degradation is not suggested.
2) The inhabitants of Ghwair I appear to have made a deliberate choice to rely on
goats over other animal resources available in their environmental zone. The
presence of wild animals in the assemblage indicates their availability to the
community as a resource, even if they were only utilized on a limited bases or
for special occasions.
3) Social complexity and differentiation within the community is implicated by
the unequal distribution to aurochs across the community and suggests that
aurochs was primarily utilized during feasting to build and maintain solidarity.
4) The presence and location of cache of several goat skulls, a Bos primigenius
skull, and a very well preserved horn core suggests their use as dedicatory
items for an associated infant burial, thus hinting at a level of social
complexity that included ascribed status and some level of inequality within
the community that was heredity based.
This investigation confirms that Ghwair I was a developed and socially complex
community and provides researches with data to explore new ideas about human
adaptations during the PPNB in the southern Levant.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research would not have been possible without the support and guidance of
Dr. Alan Simmons. As my advisor, Dr. Simmons allowed me the opportunity to work in
Jordan for two wonderful field seasons, provided me with support to conduct my
research, and allowed me unlimited access to his personal library. I wish to thank Dr.
Mohammad Najjar, co-director of the Ghwair I project, for his direction, support, and
friendship during our excavations at Ghwair I. Additionally, special thanks goes out to
my committee members, Dr. Barbara Roth, Dr. Levent Atici, and Dr. Andrew Bell for
their guidance, patience, and direction during the investigation that facilitated my
completion of the dissertation program. In addition, I like to thank Dr. Barbara Roth for
providing me insight, mentorship, and the necessary “prodding” that motivated me to
finish this dissertation. She also proved to be a great friend when my family needed her
the most during Sophie’s birth and surgery. I have appreciation for Dr. Paul Croft for his
mentorship and friendship over the past few years as I conducted my research analysis in
Cyprus. Dr. Croft providing me access to his preliminary data from Ghwair I and full
access to his faunal reference collection at Lemba Research facility in Cyprus. Most of
all I am indebted to Dr. Croft for his patience with me as I tried to “properly sort things
out” at night when he was trying to enjoy his evening on the porch.
Special thanks goes to the funding agencies for the Ghwair I Project. Primary
funding was through grants from the National Science Foundation (SBR-9708241) and
the National Geographic Society (6033-97), with additional funding from the Brennan
Foundation. Susan Thompson and the International Studies Abroad Program provided
financial assistance for UNLV students to participate on the project. Without her help,
v
my research abroad would have never happened. This research was also funded by
grants from the Graduate Students Association that made some of the radiocarbon dating
possible for Ghwair I.
Above all I would like to thank Marie Powell, Sophie Powell, Amanda Barrier,
Cindy Shortridge, Wayne Shortridge, and “Indy” for their unfailing support and
encouragement that made the completion of this dissertation a reality. Without my
family’s words of encouragement I might never have made it this far. I am grateful that
my mother, Cindy, always stressed the importance of education and my happiness.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES .............................. 1
Background ................................................................................................................ 1
Research Questions and Objectives ........................................................................... 3
The Role of Zooarchaeology in the Investigation ...................................................... 5
Economic Organization .............................................................................................. 6
Dissertation Structure ............................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 2 CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT OF THE
SOUTHERN LEVANT ........................................................................... 11
Paleoenvironmental Conditions ............................................................................... 13
Cultural Entities ....................................................................................................... 16
Natufian ............................................................................................................ 16
Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period ............................................................................. 19
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Complex (ca. 10,500/10,200-9,500/9,200 BP) .......... 20
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Complex / Final PPN (ca. 9,500/9,200-7,750 BP)..... 25
Environmental and Cultural Context of the Wadi Faynan Region .......................... 37
Wadi Faynan 16 ................................................................................................ 39
Wadi Fidan I ..................................................................................................... 42
Ghwair I ............................................................................................................ 44
CHAPTER 3 GHWAIR I: ANALYTICAL METHODS ............................................... 54
Taxonomic Identification ................................................................................. 55
Total Number of Fragments ............................................................................. 57
Element Representation .................................................................................... 57
The Frequency of Taxa ..................................................................................... 58
Minimum Number of Elements ........................................................................ 62
Minimum Animal Units.................................................................................... 62
Age Determination ........................................................................................... 63
Sex .................................................................................................................... 65
Bone Modifications .......................................................................................... 65
Horizontal and Vertical Clustering of Fauna .................................................... 67
Study Implications ............................................................................................ 67
CHAPTER 4 TAXONOMIC IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE
FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGE ..................................................................... 68
Equidae ............................................................................................................. 70
vii
Bos primigenius ................................................................................................ 76
Caprines and Capra sp. ................................................................................... 83
Gazella sp. ...................................................................................................... 101
Sus scrofa ........................................................................................................ 105
Other Taxa ...................................................................................................... 108
Aves ................................................................................................................ 112
Bone Modifications ........................................................................................ 113
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................. 114
Local Exploitations and Environmental Implications .................................... 114
Social Implications ......................................................................................... 119
Implications of Economic Adaptations .......................................................... 122
Conclusions .................................................................................................... 124
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................... 129
VITA .............................................................................................................................. 157
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
Table 13
Table 14
Table 15
Table 16
Table 17
Table 18
Table 19
Table 20
Table 21
Table 22
Table 23
Table 24
Table 25
Table 26
Table 27
Table 28
Table 29
Table 30
Levantine Pre-Pottery Neolithic Chronologies............................................... 12
Ghwair I Faunal Assemblage: Total Number of Fragments by Taxon .......... 72
Ghwair I Taxonomic Distribution by % NISP ............................................. 73
Comparative Equidae Measurements from Selected PPN Sites.................... 74
Equidae body parts/NISP distribution at Ghwair I ....................................... 74
Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Equidae ......................... 75
Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Equidae Long Bone Specimens ........................ 76
Bos primigenius Body Parts/NISP Distribution ............................................ 79
Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Bos primigenius ............. 80
Comparative Bos primigenius Measurements From Selected PPN Sites...... 81
Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Bos primigenius Long Bone Specimens ........... 82
Comparative Capra Measurements from Selected PPN and LN Sites ......... 88
Caprine Body Parts/NISP Distribution.......................................................... 89
Capra sp. Body Parts/NISP Distribution..................................................... 89
Frequency of Major Skeletal Elements in a Single Mature Skeleton............ 90
Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Caprines......................... 91
% Survivorship of Caprine Skeletal Parts ..................................................... 92
Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Capra sp. ...................... 95
% Survivorship of Capra sp. Skeletal Parts ................................................ 96
Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Caprine Long Bone Specimens ...................... 100
Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Capra sp. Long Bone Specimens ................. 101
Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Gazella sp. ................ 103
Gazella sp. Body Part/NISP Distribution .................................................. 104
Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Gazella sp. Long Bone Specimens ............... 104
Sus scrofa body parts/NISP distribution at Ghwair I .................................. 106
Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Sus scrofa .................... 107
Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Sus scrofa Long Bone Specimens................... 108
Vulpes vulpes Body Part/NISP Distribution ................................................ 110
Felis sp. Body Part/NISP Distribution ....................................................... 111
Lepus Body Part/NISP Distribution ............................................................ 111
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
% Skeletal Parts in the Ghwair I Assemblage for Caprines........................... 93
Scatter Plot of Bone Density and %MAU for Caprine.................................. 94
Scatter Plot of Bone Density and %MAU for Capra sp................................ 94
% Skeletal Parts in the Ghwair I Assemblage for Capra sp.......................... 97
x
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Background
The Neolithic period of the Near East has long been the focus of studies on
emerging social, political, ritual, and economic complexities associated with increased
sedentism and the consequences associated with transitioning from a foraging lifeway to
one focused on agriculture. Tremendous change and profound shifts in social
organization, technology, health, diversity, and economic innovations occurred as a
consequence of the shift to a more sedentary lifeway focused on agriculture (Simmons
2007; Twiss 2007a, 2007b). Until recently, research in the Near East has been concerned
primarily with both descriptive objectives and theoretical issues related to the emergence
of food production. These goals have traditionally focused on defining the temporal
sequence for the region (Bar-Yosef 1981; Moore 1985; Rollefson et al. 1992) or have
concentrated on recovering representative cultural materials, changes in material culture,
and subsistence strategies through the different cultural periods. These methods have
resulted in a relatively coarse-grained reconstruction of the changing social and economic
systems during the early Neolithic (Banning 1998; Bar-Yosef & Meadow 1995; GoringMorris & Belfer-Cohen 1998; Rollefson 1996, 2001).
In the quest to define the “first farmers” and subsequent expansion of village life
in the Near East, the level of organizational variability in village life has typically been
overlooked or minimized, especially during the Pre-Pottery Neolithic (PPN) which is
usually dated from 10,500 ~ 7,750 BP, uncalibrated (note: all dates in this dissertation are
1
presented as uncalibrated in conventional radiocarbon years BP)(Kuijt 2000:6). Focused
on broader research goals of description, documentation, and modeling of the transition
from foraging to farming, researchers have spent considerable attention on the EpiPaleolithic and the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA; 10,500/10,200 ~ 9600/9200 BP).
This has highlighted the emergence of the first sedentary communities within the Jordan
Valley and the subsequent socially and economically complex villages of the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic B period (PPNB; 9500 ~ 7,750 BP) with true domestic economies (Bar-Yosef
1991; Bar-Yosef & Belfer-Cohen 1989a, 1991; Bar-Yosef & Meadow 1995; Byrd 1994;
Flannery 1973; Goring-Morris & Belfer-Cohen 1998; Hayden 1995; Price & Gebauer
1995; Simmons 2007; Smith1998).
Previous attempts to understand the social and economic context of the transition
to full blown village life, as well as further modeling of this transition, are constrained by
several problems. First, until recently, researchers have just begun to understand the
spatial organization of human behavior within small to medium size villages, especially
located in the peripheral zones of southern Levant (Becker 1991; Banning and Byrd
1988; Byrd 1994; Bienert and Gebel 1998; Gebel et al. 1988; Henry 2004; Mithen et al
2000; Simmons and Najar 1996, 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2003, 2006;
Twiss 2003, 2007). Many of the earlier investigations of villages from this period are
largely geographically limited to sites in the northern portion of the southern Levant due
to a lack of comparative research on medium village settlements outside of this
geographical area. Thus, it has not been easy to reconstruct the temporal and spatial
interrelationships between the mega sites to the north with the more environmentally
peripheral sites in the south, nor delineate what the periphery sites might inform us with
2
regards to the social and economic organization of PPNB settlements on both a local and
regional scale.
Research interest in the southern portion of the Levant for the past two decades
has been driven by a renewed interest in the social, ritual, and economic variability of
smaller communities in more marginal environments (Banning 1998; Finlayson and
Mithen 2007; Mithen et al. 2000; Simmons 2007; Twiss 2007). It is this renewed interest
that provided the stimulus and rationale for this dissertation’s comprehensive
zooarchaeological investigation of the archaeological faunal evidence from Ghwair I in
order to explore local fauna exploitation patterns and refine our understanding of the
community’s social and economic systems at a local level and on a broader regional
level.
Research Questions and Objectives
Ghwair I, a PPNB community located in Wadi Feinan of southern Jordan firmly
dated by a series of radiocarbon determinations to between 8880 to 8390 BP, provides an
opportunity to improve our understanding of the social context of the food production
and use during the PPNB and add to our current understanding of the spatial
organization, village life and the eventual abandonment of villages at the end of the
PPNB. Central to the successful evaluation and refinement of our understanding of early
village life at Ghwair I is the ability to: (a) define the economic adaptations; (b) assess
the extent to which the community’s adaptations occurred as a local event for that
specific area; and, (c) investigate the role and extent of social and economic activities
were interrelated and their role, if any, in the apparent abandonment of the community
3
toward the end of the PPNB. With this in mind, the research was designed to address
several critical questions: (1) What were the economic strategies and adaptations utilized
at Ghwair I during the PPNB? (2) Was Ghwair I an autonomous village structured to
meet local subsistence demands and focused on self-sufficiency and risk mitigation, or
was it part of a regional system focused on supporting larger sites within this “system”?
(3) What role did subsistence strategies play in social organization of the community at
Ghwair I?
Some researchers have hypothesized that desert-edge communities overexploited
local resources and were forced into major economic re-adaptation in these so-called
“peripheral” regions (Bar-Yosef and Belfer Cohen 1989a; Renfrew 1986; Gebel 2002).
Changing climatic patterns starting with the Younger Dryas have been hypothesized as a
factor impacting people during the early stages of developing agricultural subsistence
economies on through the PPNB (Bar-Yosef and Meadow 1995:44). Increasingly arid
landscapes would have forced desert-edged communities to change their cultivation
technologies, herding strategies, resource exploitations, and water management.
Ultimately, the research adds to our understanding of whether the occupants of Ghwair I
and other sites in the Wadi Faynan contributed to environmental degradation and
abandonment of the area. In addition, these critical questions seek to further our
understanding of the social processes during the PPNB and the range of variation of
social and economic practices within PPNB communities of the southern Levant, and the
extent to these are identifiable within the archaeological record.
4
The Role of Zooarchaeology in the Investigation
The first goal of the investigation centers on the economic adaptation at Ghwair I
by examining the animal remains recovered. It attempts to expand our understanding of
the animals’ biological behavior and to reconstruct their environmental habitat while
putting them into the social and economic context of the site.
To meet the stated goals, this dissertation integrates the following aspects of
zooarchaeological analyses and techniques:
(1) Faunal Taxonomic Identification and Quantification
(a.)
Taxonomic Identification
(b.)
Number of Identified Specimens
(c.)
Minimal Number of Individuals
(d.)
Minimum Number of Elements
(2) Faunal Assemblage Composition and Characterization
(a.)
Skeletal Abundance
(b.)
Differential Survivorship
(c.)
Bone Density and Survivorship
(d.)
Bone Modifications / Alterations (Non-Human)
(e.)
Age Profiles
While working within this framework, several interesting challenges emerge.
First, due to the limited knowledge of the ancient geographic distribution of the different
species and their reduction or even extinction in recent years, the determination of the
species present in the area during the PPNB is an important purpose in itself. Secondly,
5
only until recently has an interest developed in the area and therefore previous
zooarchaeological studies in Wadi Faynan region are limited. It is therefore an important
aspect of this research to examine what degree of human control and for which species
the inhabitants of Ghwair I attained. Collectively, these data will provide some details of
the environment during the PPNB in this area of the southern Levant. This will add to
our knowledge base and development of a critical regional comparative perspective on
the interface between environmental and cultural change.
Economic Organization
The Epi-Paleolithic and the PPN has long been the focus of studies on emerging
economic and social complexity. As noted earlier, the rush to define earliest centers for
the origins of agriculture and interaction spheres, the high level of organizational
variability had been lost in the shuffle until researchers began discussing Super-Regional
Concepts in 2003 and 2004 (Rollefson and Gebel 2004, Simmons 2004).
During the Super-Regional discussions, a consensus was reached that we need to
better understand the regional variability and complexity of “Neolithization” in the Near
East. Newer investigations at Göbekli Tepe (Schmidt 2003) in Turkey, Cyprus
(Simmons 2004), and several Jordanian “Mega-Sites” (see Rollefson 2000) do not appear
to be fully explainable within the past theoretical frameworks such as the “Levantine
primacy” paradigm that focused on the idea of a “core zone” in the Levant as the center
of development for critical innovations and transmitted these innovations by diffusion of
one kind or another to the rest of western Asia (Watkins 2003). Likewise, the cultural
history paradigm developed early on by Childe and later expanded by Kenyon is not
6
suitable for explaining the situation during Late Epi-Paleolithic and PPN in the Levant
and the “koine” model was to simplistic and masked distinctive variability at the local
level (Rollefson and Gebel 2004:21). In addition, a few models had suggested that
Levantine communities were connected in relations of economic interactions. Those
models are built on the theoretical Core/Periphery model developed by Wallerstein
(1974) to explain modern world economic systems and adapted to Near Eastern
archaeology by scholars such as Algaze (1986, 1989, 1993, 2004). Within this
framework, much of the distinction in pre-modern systems revolves around an economic
system of tribute and redistribution (Simmons and Najjar 2001). The idea is that surplus
is redistributed from centralized communities through elaborate systems of trade. There
is a pattern of unequal exchange and exploitation that develops between the core and
periphery where the core communities are the beneficiaries of elite commodities at the
expense of the periphery communities, resulting in implied dependency relationships as
well.
Some researchers, such as Simmons and Najjar (2001), began offering alternative
explanations for the distinctions in size between these communities and concluded that it
is more likely that settlements arose independent and self-sufficiently in a wide variety of
environmental settings to produce their own essential materials. It was becoming clearer
that the introduction and establishment of a new means of production during the
formative period of the PPNB would have entailed major transformations social and
economic organization of individual settlements and the way communities would have
expressed their identity (Asouti 2004).
7
The consensus by researchers in the region for now is to focus on a bottom-to-top
approach to describe the character of local adaptations and change in order to gain a
better understanding of the Near Eastern Neolithic from a regional perspective. One
notable concept proposed is the idea of “community network,” were the focus is on
descriptions and explanations of local and sub-regional cultural systems in order to flesh
out regional variability and developmental trajectories (Rollefson and Gebel 2004:22).
Developing this concept requires subsistence studies to broaden their approach from
investigating and testing models relating to origins of agriculture to broader scope of
subsistence related studies to address social organization, settlement patterns, ritual
expressions, and the rationale for the exploitation of resources at a local level. While the
Neolithic should not be defined solely in terms of the means of production (cf. Cauvin
2000), it can not be ignored that domesticate plants and animals formed an important part
of the economies of the Neolithic village life during the PPNB and was an intricate part
of the changes occurring in the socio-cultural and ideological domains that define the
Neolithic. Cultural manipulation of animals and domestication would have afforded
more than food in that they could bind communities together through implementation of
risk-aversion strategies, feasting, and rituals at the local level (Asouti 2004:23). Some
communities could have exhibited features more socially and economically complex,
particularly those positioned to control some form of production and/or exchange of
goods by centralization, while others could have retained an essentially community based
or autonomous character. Therefore, detailed analyses of the production, preparation, and
consumption of plants and animals helps develop our understanding of the local social
8
organization and relationships and form reference points for inter-regional comparisons
later.
Unfortunately, understanding of medium and smaller communities in the southern
Levant or more marginal areas has been hindered by the lack of research on the local
economic systems, particularly in the agro-pastoral communities of the PPNB. While
long-distance trade networks have been one area of interest in the past research,
household and village level production is poorly understood and severely limits our
understanding of economic systems that ultimately laid the foundation for what became
urbanization later on in the Neolithic.
To address the level of autonomy of community of Ghwair I and if the possibility
exist of its role in a regional “core-periphery” hierarchal system, this study concentrates
on assessing the extent to which the adaptations occurred as a local event structured to
meet local needs, the nature of production, and the focus of their economic system.
Evidence for social organization and complexity may be gleamed through the
consideration of food processing, spatial distribution of food production and consumption
behaviors, and the examination of animal exploitation/use practices in the community. In
addition, social complexity and/or differentiation within the community are explored
through consideration of the extent of differential access that different household groups
had to particular animals or food items. To address the research questions, this
investigation examines the fauna remains from Ghwair I to define the economic
organization in the village with respects to herd management and/or animal production
systems.
9
Dissertation Structure
This dissertation follows the logical progression of the faunal taxonomic
identification and quantitative analysis of the Ghwair I fauna assemblage to provide
supporting lines of evidence leading to a greater understanding of the local economic and
social complexities during the PPNB in the southern Levant. Chapter 2 sets out the
cultural and environmental context of the southern Levant in general and then elaborates
on Ghwair I’s place in the Wadi Feinan tributary system. In addition, Chapter 2 reviews
the archaeological investigations at Ghwair I and it’s neighboring PPNA and PPNB sites.
Chapter 3 outlines the methodological framework and analytical approaches for the
faunal analysis used in this dissertation. Chapter 4 presents the results of the taxonomic
identification and analysis of the faunal assemblage. Chapter 5 expands on the
interpretations of analysis by through discussion and concluding thoughts with reference
to the research questions being asked.
10
CHAPTER 2
CULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT
OF THE SOUTHERN LEVANT
The earliest expression of the Neolithic in the Levant and is referred to as the PrePottery Neolithic (PPN), or Aceramic Neolithic. The PPN emerges from the Natufian
cultural complex (ca. 12, 800-10,200 BP) around 10,500 BP and is marked by increased
settlement size and economically characterized by the shift from an essentially huntergatherer strategy to one of food production through domestication of plants and animals
(Simmons 2007).
The PPN has typically been divided into three chronological phases originally
based on Kenyon's (1957) sequences at Jericho in the Jordan Valley during the 1950s.
The three primary phases are the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA), Pre-Pottery Neolithic
PPNB, and the end of the PPN/Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (PPNC) (Bar-Yosef 1995, 1998;
Bar-Mathews et al. 1999; Rollefson 1989; Simmons 2007; Weiss 2000) (Table 1). The
PPN phases are typically characterized and defined by settlement patterns, economy,
social organization, and material culture, primarily architecture and artifact typologies
(Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002; Simmons 2007). Following the PPN phases is a series of
sequences containing ceramics, referred to as the Pottery Neolithic (PN) with various
subdivisions (Kafafi 1982; Stekelis 1973)
The term “Levant” is generally recognized as a geographical area comprising
only a portion of the Near East. The geographical area is dominated by four longitudinal,
north-south trending topographical features, each with different geomorphological,
climatic, faunal, and floral characteristics. The area borders the eastern edge of the
11
Mediterranean Sea, bounded in the north by the Taurus and Zagros mountains. To the
east is the Euphrates River and to the south is the Negev and Arabian Deserts. The
geographical land features of the Levant are located within the present-day political
boundaries of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Israel. The diverse climatic and highly
variable topographic zones in the area also contain large quantities of fossil marine
materials that have given rise to limestones (Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007).
Table 1. Levantine Pre-Pottery Neolithic Chronologies.
Note: All dates in Conventional Radiocarbon Years Before Present (BP) Uncalibrated.
Phase
Years Ago BP
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A
(PPNA)
10,500/10,300 – 9,500/9,200
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
(PPNB)
9,500/9,200 – 8,000
End of PPN/ Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (PPNC)
8,000 – 7,750
The present study focuses on the archaeological site of Ghwair I, a small and
richly preserved PPNB community, that is located in the remote Wadi Feinan region of
Jordan in the southern Levant. Geographically, Ghwair I is located approximately 200
kilometers southwest of Amman, Jordan and 120 kilometers north of Aqaba in the Wadi
Feinan region, a transitional zone between the Dead Sea Valley and the Jordanian
Plateau. The settlement is situated on a hillside at an elevation of 290-320m above sea
level with a spectacular view of Wadi Feinan; the site covers approximately 1-1.2 ha.
The area is a degraded step desert, with unstable soils and Saharo-Arabian vegetation, or
12
open xeromorphic scrub, sparsely dispersed across the landscape with some salt-tolerant
flora flourishing where the groundwater is saline (Colledge 1994; Horowitz 1979).
Arid plant regimes (Saharo-Arabian) typically cover areas where annual
precipitation is less than 400 mm (Zohary 1973). This is certainly the case in the Wadi
Feinan drainage system, where annual rainfall ranges between approximately 50 and 150
mm, with an average of 70.7 mm (Levy et al., 2001). Even though the area is extremely
arid, it has been noted that large episodes of precipitation can occur during the winter
months. Impacted by current precipitation regimes, the modern flora distributions
include evergreen oak in abundance above 1100 m in elevation; pistachio and juniper
occur at elevations above 600 m.; and areas below 200 m are typically semi-desert
shrubland and pseudo-savanna (Simmons and Najjar 2003). Since flora have specific
ecological niches and water requirements, a suite of variables that include moisture,
temperature, humidity, and soil quality in addition to the annual precipitation levels limits
their distribution.
Paleoenvironmental Conditions
The vast environmental heterogeneity of the Near East has had a major impact on
human behavior in the region. This has led to recent emphasis on reconstructing the
paleoenvironmental conditions in an effort to gain a better understanding of human and
environment interactions and the role environment actually played as a variable in the
transition to agriculture and the subsequent fluorescence of village life (Bar-Yosef and
Meadow 1995). The primary sources of information used to characterize and reconstruct
environmental conditions include fossil pollen cores, glacial records, deep-sea cores, lake
13
level fluctuations, and sediment studies (Baruch and Bottema 1991; Bar-Yosef 1998,
2001; Goldberg 1986). Despite the quantity of work done in the Levantine portion of the
Near East, there is no single paleoenvironmental sequence that encompasses the region
due to the mosaic nature of the environmental condition. As a result, there is high
variability in the climatic/environmental sequences occurring at the local level
throughout the span of the Neolithic (Henry 1989).
One of the most comprehensive reviews of paleoenvironmental conditions for the
area east of the Jordan Rift was provided by Henry (1989) and spans the time range from
80,000 to 5,000 BP. Henry (1989) draws on information pertaining to site-specific
conditions to reconstruct episodes of wet and dry. During the terminal Pleistocene and
early Holocene, the landscape of the Eastern Mediterranean region typically was not like
today’s degraded step desert with Saharo-Arabian vegetation or open xeromorphic scrub.
Between ca. 21,000 and 17,000 BP, a series of climatic events left the entire region cold
and dry with the exception of the hilly costal areas (Bar-Yosef 1998). Based on the
current palynological, paleobotanical, and geomorphological data, it appears the
Mediterranean coastal plains and hilly areas enjoyed increased winter precipitation and
were covered by oak-dominated parkland and woodland (Bar-Yosef 1998). The parkland
and woodland forest provided some of the highest biomass foods that were exploitable by
humans (Bar-Yosef 1998; Simmons 2007). Between 17,000 and 15,000 BP, climatic
conditions appear to have changed and the environment became moister and warmer.
This climatic change is indicated in the archaeological deposits by the presence of greater
amounts of arboreal pollen and greater alluvial depositions.
14
Around 15,000 BP, there was a sudden increase in oxygen isotope levels that
were associated with a short cooling and aridification event (Bar-Yosef 1998). These
were typically found within aeolian deposits and contained higher frequencies of steppe
and desert plant pollens (Bar-Yosef 1998). Moister conditions return around 13,000 BP,
as evident in the archaeological deposits by the higher frequencies of arboreal pollens
(Bar-Yosef 1998). This wet, mesic period persisted to about 11,000 BP and was
followed by a period of increased aridity, also referred to as the Younger Dryas (BarYosef 1995:44).
The emergence of the Holocene brought about a warmer interglacial period.
Early Holocene environmental conditions appear to have been mostly dry with some
moist periods during the Neolithic (9000-8500 B.P.) The gradual processes of
desertification within the southern Levant resulted in a gradual expansion of the steppe
zone (Henry 1989). This process stabilized by 8,000 B.P., with the rainfall patterns
predominant during the Neolithic only slightly higher then those of today.
Within this environmental context, mobile hunters and gatherers had made the
transition to a sedentary lifestyle during which settled village life and plant cultivation
became commonplace by the end of the PPNA (Simmons 2007). Initially, there was a
diverse subsistence strategy in which both wild and domesticated plant and animal
species were exploited. During the PPNB, increased sedentism, increased population
size, domestication of plants and animals, and the proliferation of expanding villages
were ushered in (Bar-Yosef 1981). The associated economic, technological, social, and
symbolic transformations occurring during this period heavily influenced how humans
interacted with their environment and each other (Simmons 2007). These
15
transformations and interactions were manifested in material culture, primarily in the
public architecture, lithic materials, burial practices, ceremonial objects, and the
domestication of both plants and animals in the region.
Cultural Entities
Natufian
Between 13,000 and 10,000 years ago, the limited emergence of sedentary village
life began in the Levant and involved a culmination of trends that included changes in
settlement patterns, subsistence strategies, and social organization. The Natufian culture
is the archaeological entity that bridges this transformation that involved complex
changes in human lifeways, specifically from a foraging lifeway to one mostly sedentary
focusing on domestication of plants (Barker 2000; Belfer-Cohen and Bar-Yosef 2000).
The Natufian culture was originally defined by Garrod (1932) following her
excavations at Shukba Cave and later Neuville (1934) in the Judean Desert on the basis
of the lithic, bone, ground stone industries, and burials uncovered during their
excavations (Simmons 2007). Natufian sites stand out from preceding archaeological
entities primarily in their material culture. Settlement size, the dwelling structures,
burials, art objects, lithics, elaborate bone industry, profusion of groundstone, and objects
of personal adornment define the complexity of Natufian culture and their socioeconomic system (Bar-Yosef 1998).
Initially, Natufian communities were mobile hunter-gatherers, but some Early
Natufian aggregations in the core Mediterranean area were more permanent settlements.
By the Late Natufian period (11,000-10,500/10,300 BP), however, mobility was the norm
again, with the exception of some large Middle Euphrates settlements. Where
16
aggregation into more permanent settlements can be shown, Natufians became more
specialized in their food procurement strategies and focused on intensive collection wild
plants (Belfer-Cohen and Bar-Yosef 2000). The archaeological evidence supports the
extensive exploitation of legumes, cereals, various nuts, and fruits (Hillman 2000). There
is a proliferation of tools for the processing, and cooking of the resources that supports
the idea that the Natufians harvested and processed wild cereals and legumes (Bar-Yosef
2002). Evidence from large sedentary settlements such as Abu Hureyra also suggest that
they were sustained by a combination of intensive exploitation of wild cereals/grasses
and the exploitation of key faunal resources through fishing, fowling, and hunting
(Hillman 1996). Making the transition into intensive exploitation of wild resources and
the accompanying technological developments have led to some scholars to define the
Natufian as a “complex” society of specialized foragers/hunter-gatherers (Henry 1985).
As noted by Belfer-Cohen and Bar-Yosef (2000), the same complexity that
promoted sedentism, population growth, and intensified resource exploitation ultimately
makes complex groups fragile and facilitates the collapse or failure of sedentary foraging.
As cooler and dryer conditions (Younger Dryas 10,800 – 10,300 B.P.) returned, the yield
of C3 plants (i.e., wild cereals) decreased and the lake levels receded (Barker 2000).
During this climatic regime the steppelands were a resource-poor environment and led
some Natufian groups to respond by moving and diversifying their subsistence strategies.
On the other hand, some communities responded by engaging in cultivating activities in
areas with perennial water sources (Barker 2000). Within this environmental context,
social and technological transformations of the Natufian culture played a major role in
the emergence of early Neolithic farming communities (Baharav 1983; Bar-Yosef 1983,
17
1998; Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen 1992; Bar-Yosef and Meadow 1995; Belfer-Cohen
1991; Henry 1989; Smith 1994).
Based on current interpretations, there appears to be a dichotomy in Natufian sites
based primarily on their size and material culture. Smaller sites seem to have minimum
architecture, bone, and groundstone assemblages (Bar-Yosef 1983). Yet these smaller
camps have a high concentration of lithics and seem to be located primarily in marginal
environments (Belfer-Cohen and Bar-Yosef 2000). In contrast, larger Early Natufian
sites with domestic structures, burials, large quantities of groundstone and lithic
assemblages have been interpreted as base camps or “hamlets” (Bar-Yosef 2002). Most
of these sites are located in woodland-parkland belt that is dominated by oak and
pistachio forest with a high frequency of cereals as herbaceous undergrowth (Bar-Yosef
2002). These base camps are architecturally characterized by pithouses, 3-6 meters in
diameter, that had stone retaining wall foundations in the lower portions that supported
the circumference of the dwellings (Bar-Yosef 2002). While the circular form and
foundations were common features of Natufian pithouses, the upper walls and ceiling
lacked the labor investment that is reflected in latter circular structures of the PPNA with
solid mud brick walls. Natufian circular structures probably consisted of wood and brush
materials with occasional wattle (Bar-Yosef 2002).
Natufian material culture is also characterized by the lithics, groundstone, and
bone and horn-core industries. The groundstone tools include bedrock mortars, cupholes,
and pestles with some of the boulder mortars weighing up to 100 kg and 80 cm deep.
Archaeometric analyses indicate that some of the basalt was transported over a distance
of 100 km from the source (Weinstein-Evron et al. 1995). Microscopic analyses have
18
also shown that some of the groundstone was used not only for more than just food
processing, but also for crushing burned limestone and red ochre (Weinstein-Evron and
Ilani 1994).
Lithic assemblages are typically characterized by the production of small short
and wide bladelets and flakes, exhausted cores, and microliths/geometrics that comprise
40% or more of every assemblage (Bar-Yosef 2002). Natufians utilized long bone shafts,
teeth, and horn-cores of gazelles, wolves, deer, and birds to make tools that were used for
hide working, basketry, spears or arrows, hooks, and hafts for sickle blades (Campana
1989, 1991; Bar-Yosef 1991). Beads and pendants were also made from animal bones
(Pichon 1983). The intensification of artistic activities and personal adornment could
have functioned as a means to mitigate or alleviating secular stress caused by intensive
social interactions (Bar-Yosef 1998).
Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period
As noted before, researchers typically propose subdividing the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic, characterized by diagnostic stone tool technology, the development of plant
and animal domestication, and the first aggregate villages, into three periods termed the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA, approximately 10,500/10,300 ~ 9,500/9200 BP), the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB, approximately 9,500/9,200 ~ 8,000 BP), and the end of
PPN, or the PPNC (PPNC, approximately 8,000 ~ 7,750 BP) in the southern Levant.
Many researchers further subdivide the PPNA into the Khiamian and the Sultanian (Kuijt
and Goring-Morris, 2002). The PPNB in the southern Levant, on the other hand, is
typically divided into a modified scheme proposed by Cauvin (1977, 1987) that
19
delineates the PPNB period into the Early PPNB (9,300 ~9,000 BP), the Middle PPNB
(9,000 ~ 8,500 BP), Late PPNB (8,500 ~ 8,000 BP). The chronological division referred
to as the Final PPNB (8,000~ 7,750 B.P.) is ignored by some researchers in favor of the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic C (PPNC) (Garrard et al. 1994; Rollefson 1989; Rollefson and
Köhler-Rollefson 1993).
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A Complex (ca. 10,500/10,300 - 9,500/9,200 BP)
The emergence of the Pre-Pottery Neolithic occurs quite abruptly from the Final
Natufian and is typically delineated by the cultivation of plants, although clear
domestication is not demonstrated. It was suggested in the past that the PPNA should be
viewed as “derived Natufian” complex based on similarities in lithic assemblages
(Prausnitz 1966). This argument was based in part on several findings that suggest
cereal cultivation during the Late Natufian. Morphologically domestic rye has been
identified at Abu Hureyra from ca. 11,000 BP years ago and both einkorn rye and barley
have been identified at Mureybet as early as 10,500 BP years ago (Hillman 2000).
The PPNA period is marked by changes in artifacts, settlement distribution,
economics, and social behavior. Some components of chipped stone assemblages, such
as microlothic technology, from the PPNA reflect a continuation with the preceding
Natufian culture and remained prominent throughout the rest of the PPNA (Simmons
2007). Based on earlier studies of lithic assemblages, the PPNA in the southern Levant is
often divided into separate archaeological entities, the Khiamian and Sultanian (BarYosef 1996). The Khiamian has been interpreted as a transitional short-term stage
leading to fully farming communities of the Sultanian period (Belfer-Cohen and Bar20
Yosef 2000). The Khiamian industry is delineated by microliths, which include small
lunates and sickle blades, with a focus on medium-size blades over bladelets and an
increase in perforators in the assemblages (Bar-Yosef 1991, 1996). The Sultanian
assemblages, while having an abundant michrolithic element, are delineated by an
emphasis on blade production and bifacial flaking (Crowfoot-Payne 1983, Bar-Yosef
1991). Among the projectile points, el-Khiam points are the most distinctive and
considered diagnostic for the Sultanian period (Gopher 1994). These small, doublenotched tools, typically referred to as projectile points, may actually been used as drill or
perforators based on microwear analysis of the Khiam points from Dhra`(Finlayson et al.
2003). Regardless of their use, their frequency and style distribution across the region
suggest that there was a high level of communication between communities throughout
the region (Bar-Yosef 1991).
PPNA domestic architecture is characterized by semi-subterranean oval or
rounded structures, usually 4-5 meters (13-16 feet) in diameter, whose foundations are
usually stone and whose upper walls were slightly inward-leaning and typically made of
adobe, mud brick, or wattle-and-daub (Bar-Yosef 1991; Mazar 1990). Wooden beams
and plaster were also used in construction, and roofs are thought to have been flat (BarYosef 1991). They had wooden doorjambs and a few steps with wooden treads leading
down to the floor. These structures were often isolated, but some were subdivided or
partitioned (Bar-Yosef 1991). Some structures had storage facilities of mud, limestone
bins, and paved oval hearts with fire-cracked rocks and outside the houses were
limestone slabs pocked with cup-holes (Bar-Yosef 1991). Grain storage bins associated
with individual houses and each household seems to have supplied most or all of its own
21
needs. Some researchers have interpreted the increasing amount of open space between
houses as reflective of a decreasing emphasis on kinship relations (Bar-Yosef 1991).
There was great diversity in site size during the PPNA and some researchers have
argued that this may reflect a settlement hierarchy during the PPNA (Banning 1998;
Kuijt 1994). Small sites outside the very fertile areas are usually thought to represent the
seasonal camps of hunter-gatherer bands, while ones within the better watered areas are
interpreted as bands’ gathering camps (Bar-Yosef 1991). Bigger sites are considered
villages. It appears that most of these large sites were occupied year-round. Even if the
inhabitants did practice short-term mobility, the investment in building and storage
indicates that people meant to use the site many times over many years. Interestingly
enough, such architectural investments are also found at smaller sites such as Iraq edDubb, which raised questions as to whether such sites were indeed used only seasonally
(Bar-Yosef 1991).
PPNA communal architecture in the Levant includes a large stone tower and wall
at Jericho. The early village at Jericho was one of many similar ones in the PPNA, but it
grew rapidly and became unusually large with an estimated range from 400 to 2000
inhabitants (Kenyon and Holland 1981). The inhabitants built a wall around the village.
The first wall was at least 4 m (13 feet) high and 1.8 m (6 feet) thick at the base, built of
stacked stones. (Kenyon and Holland 1981). These dimensions represent the minimum
measurements based on preservation since the top has been eroded away and we do not
know how much is missing. Within the confines of the wall there is the remaining
portion of a circular stone tower, 9 m (30 feet) in diameter, and 8.2 m (27 feet) high
(Kenyon 1957). A doorway at the base leads to an internal corridor and has a stairway of
22
20 steps. The step stones and roof stones are up to a meter long and were hammered into
shape. The interior was roughly plastered with mud. Later, a large ditch or moat was cut
into the bedrock outside the wall, 9 m (30 feet) wide by 3 m (9 feet) deep.
The function or purpose of these structures is still debated. Some have argued
that the walls were built for a defensive posture (Kenyon 1957), for protection from
threats of flooding and silt buildup (Bar-Yosef 1991), and the tower may have had some
ceremonial/religious function (Mazar 1990). Regardless of function, the implications of
the town wall and tower are significant. Their construction was absolutely
unprecedented and such monumental or public architecture implies at some level of
designs there were project managers, directors, and architects with authority or some
level of power over others, even if that authority was based solely on persuasiveness.
This is clearly an indicator of change in social organization emerging during the PPNA.
Such architectural construction also implies surplus of grain to support all the labor
during building episodes, suggesting that some people may have had control of this
surplus. Yet, PPNA burials all contain relatively few, simple goods and no significant
delineation of individuals with lots of wealth. Ritual behavior during the PPNA shows
continuity with the preceding Natufian and burials are common at most sites and tend to
contain single, flexed adults. The adult burials tend to have the crania removed
postmortem and typically little or no grave goods. The comparative abundance of burials
near the Jericho tower has led some to interpret the tower as having special ritual
significance (Kuijt 1996).
From an economic perspective, subsistence practices during the PPNA were
based on intensive resource exploitation and the development of surpluses. While there
23
is some debate whether or not morphologically domesticated plants were present during
the PPNA, the major implication of the archaeological evidence is that many of the plant
species were used in a domestic sense (Simmons 2007). As noted by Simmons (2000),
PPNA communities had acquired the knowledge and understanding of how to obtain
maximal output from key resources, and significance of plant resources in their diet is
highlighted by the evidence that there was an increase in the number of sites that
contained ground stone implements suggesting they were used for grinding and
pounding, increased food storage. There is even evidence of structures that may have
served as silos (Wright 1994, 2000).
Archaeological evidence also supports that early PPNA communities
supplemented their collection or cultivation of cereals and legumes with wild seeds,
fruits, and a variety of animals through hunting, trapping, and even fishing where
practical (Belfer-Cohen and Bar-Yosef 2000). Our current understanding of the faunal
record suggests that animals had not been domesticated for food until the PPNB where
the emphasis was on caprines. During the PPNA in the southern Levant, gazelle (Gazella
gazella) was the primary source of animal protein based on relative frequencies in the
archaeological assemblages (Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007). In addition, other wild
mammals exploited to a lesser degree included wild goats and sheep (Capra aegagrus
and Ovis orientalists), deer (Cervus sp.), pig (Sus scrofa) and occasionally aurochs (Bos
primigenius) (Bar-Yosef 1998; Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007; Kuijt 2000; Twiss
2003). In addition, gazelle dominated many of these faunal assemblages, even more so
than reflected in the Natufian assemblages (Tchernov 1994). Smaller animals, such as
24
birds of prey and foxes, contributed to the diet or were used for symbolic purposes (Kuijt
and Goring-Morris 2002; Simmons 2007).
By the end of the PPNA, the overall trend suggests that mobile hunters and
gatherers completed the transition to a more sedentary lifestyle, and that plant cultivation
possibly became more commonplace. Initially, there was a diverse subsistence strategy
in which both wild and soon to be domesticated plant and animal species were being
exploited.
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Complex / Final PPN (ca. 9,500/9,200 – 7,750 BP)
The Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) was ushered in by dramatic developments
that included definitive morphological domestication of plants and animals, elaboration
of ritual and social behavior, public architecture, widespread sedentism and the
subsequent increase in populations, widespread exchange networks, and the proliferation
of expanding villages (Bar-Yosef 1981; Simmons 2007).
One of the major innovations in material culture delineating the transition from
the PPNA to the PPNB is architecture. While some groups in the desert continued to
build rounded structures similar those of the PPNA (Kuijt and Goring-Morris 2002),
most structures shifted from circular or oval to well-formed multi-roomed rectangular
structures took over in the villages of the central Mediterranean zone and were well
established by the Middle PPNB (MPPNB, dating from 9300~8300BP) (Simmons 2007).
The new and highly standardized rectangular structures or “pier-houses” can be classified
into two forms (Banning 1998; Byrd and Banning 1988). At `Ain Ghazal, Jericho,
Beidha, and Beisamoun, for example, these rectangular stone and mudbrick buildings
25
were typically 20~30 m2 in area, and identified by entrances at one end with internal
partitions and symmetrical arrangements of posts or piers (Twiss 2003). Some of these
structures had open internal space just opposite of the entrance with a central hearth
(Banning and Byrd 1988; Rollefson 2001; Rollefson and Simmons 1986; Simmons
2007). Observed variations in living space and the layout designs were most likely due
to periodic and labor-intensive remodeling episodes that resulted in entire rooms being
altered or demolished (Banning and Byrd 1988; Ladah 2003). These rectangular
structures had floors and sometimes walls that were coated with thick white lime plaster
and had recessed basins that appear to serve as indoor fire pits. The walls were typically
constructed of fieldstones, one to two coarse deep, and filled with a combination of mud
and irregular stones (Simmons 2007). The floors were constructed with a colored plaster
topcoat and even occasionally covered with woven mats based on the impressions in the
plaster (Rollefson and Simmons 1987; Simmons 2007). What really stands out is the
level of standardization reflected in these structures (length, width, and layout) and
frequency that they were remodeled. Another noteworthy feature is the occurrence of
niches that are frequently found in walls of these structures, implying some form of
domestic ritual behavior (Twiss 2003). When size of the structures and their associated
artifact density are considered, it appears that these structures housed small nuclear
families and were at the core of their daily activities (Banning 1998; Rollefson 1997).
The second form of PPNB architecture is the “Corridor Building”. These
structures were possibly two story houses with the lower story defined by central
corridors dispersing into bins or workshops (Twiss 2003). It has been hypothesized that
these lower stories could have supported upper levels of the “Pier House” form or some
26
other multiple stories as indicated by wall heights and internal stairways at `Ain Ghazal,
Ba'ja, Basta, Beidah, and Ghwair I (Banning and Byrd 1988; Gebel and Hermansen
2000; Rollefson 1997, 2001, Ladah 2003, Simmons 2007). Thus, the “Corridor
Building” form may have simply been the lower basement of the structures with an
intended design focused on storage given the limited access, lighting, and internal space.
This implies that there may be a trend toward increasingly more compartmentalization
and delineation of space during the PPNB to facilitate increased storage, production, and
food preparation within a more privatized setting. (Kuitj and Goring-Morris 2002; Ladah
2003).
During the PPNB the fluorescence of village life is also highlighted by new levels
of population aggregation and the variability in site size, ranging from smaller ephemeral
hunting sites to sizable agricultural villages housing upwards of couple of thousand
people (Kuijt 1995; Rollefson and Köhler-Rollefson 1989). The emergence of larger
settlement sites (“mega-sites”) such as `Ain Ghazal and Basta, which are up to 12 ~ 13
ha, followed by sites such as Wadi Shueib that range in size between 10 ~ 12 ha, and
sites such as Jericho that are estimated to cover upwards of 4 ~ 5 ha, all attest to the
changes in social complexity that are occurring. It seems plausible that some of these
villages may have served as earliest presence of settlements that functioned as centers to
facilitated social, economic, and religious activities in the region, as indicated by a cache
of finely painted plaster statues and caches of material remains from `Ain Ghazal
(Rollefson 2000) and the location of such communities along ancient trade routes for
exchange such as hypothesized about the growth of Jericho as a regional center for
minerals and bitumen trade (Anati 1962).
27
Public architecture and the implications of power to mobilize work forces to
facilitate building and maintenance of such structures become more evident during the
PPNB (Simmons 2007). Two levels at Beidha each contained decorated buildings placed
near the center of the village that had oversize hearths with associated middens
suggesting some form of use in communal activities (Banning 1998). Adding to the
evidence of possible communal structures is the delineation of several PPNB
constructions at 'Ain Ghazal that have been identified as "cultic shrines and temples" by
Rollefson (2001).
Ritual space and practices are also addressed through mortuary analysis of burials
during the PPNB. It is quite common during the PPNB to find burials beneath the floors
of the houses of single flexed adults whose skulls were removed after skeletonization had
occurred (Rollefson 2001). The majority of these burials lack significant grave goods
and some of the skulls were plastered and even adorned with seashells or bitumen to
represent eyes and hair (Rollefson 2001). It has also been suggested that the skulls were
retrieved shortly after death during some form of periodic festival in which survivors
retrieved the skulls and decorated, and deposited in groups in abandoned houses or under
plastered floors (Banning 1998). This may suggest that some form of ancestor cult was
emerging during the PPNB (Hershkovitz and Gopher 1990; Kenyon 1953a, 1953b) or
that these mortuary practices served to bind households together in the community (Kuijt
1995, 2000b). This would imply that households served as the basic social, economic,
and ritual units during the PPNB. One interesting pattern is that subfloor burials makeup
a very limited subset of the population and typically excludes infants and small children
(Twiss 2003). Other burials have also been discovered in a variety of contexts such as
28
middens and between buildings with a high degree of variation in their position and
arrangement suggesting the possibility of social differentiation, status, health, or even
cause of death (Rollefson 1983, 1986, 2000; Rollefson and Simmons 1987). Kuijt (1995)
argues that in the PPNB ritual elites were administering and controlling the
mortuary/ritual practices that served to integrate communities both socially and
politically.
Figurines abound during the PPNB and some of the figurines have been found in
contexts that suggest their use was ritual in nature, since some of the zoomorphic and
anthropomorphic figurines were decapitated. During the analysis of two aurochs
figurines at `Ain Ghazal, it became apparent that they were intentionally pierced with
chert flakes and bounded with twine (Rollefson 1983, 1986, 2000; Rollefson and
Simmons 1987). These aurochs may have been used ritually to invoke some form of
magic before being deposited in a sub-floor pit in the corner of the house. Other aurochs
figurines were found decapitated or beheaded. As noted by McAdams (1997:136) these
figurines suggest that the images of bulls were bound, mutilated, and decapitated. Some
of the human figurines seem to be intentionally decapitated as well, possibly paralleling
human burials or used to ritually “disarm” or control their power before deposition into
pits (McAdams 1997). Human figurines with indications of sex are typically female and
are crafted carefully and modeled with sagging breast and wide hips (Banning 1998),
which has led some researchers to refer to them as “'mother goddesses” or fertility
figurines. Thus the associated aurochs are interpreted as masculine elements for some
form of a cult (Cauvin 2000).
29
Both Jericho and `Ain Ghazal have yielded clustered caches of stylized human
statues made of reed and plaster materials (Rollefson 1983, 1986, 2000). They typically
stand between half a meter and a meter tall, and typically have very simple bodies with
comparatively detailed faces. What is unusual is that several have six fingers/toes per
limb, while some from `Ain Ghazal have two heads per body (Rollefson 2000). Banning
(1998) has noted that polydactyl is used as a marker of special individuals or witches in
some ethnographic cultures, and that such an idea in the past may be why the condition is
so common in the PPNB statues. Other potential ritual objects in the form of stone
masks have been recovered from several sites (Bar-Yosef 1985; Perrot 1979). The masks
are solid and heavy, leading Banning to conclude that they were intended to be hung as
totems (Banning 1998).
The PPNB exchange networks and craft production are well established through
the material remains in the archaeological record. Patterns in long-distance trade items
such as Anatolian obsidian, Dabbah marble (greenstone), Wadi Rum carnelian, Wadi
Dana copper ore, Dead Sea shells and coral, Mediterranean shells, and jade axes as well
as similarities in material culture all attest to exchange networks that indicating a
complex interaction sphere (Bar-Yosef and Belfer-Cohen 1989; Simmons 2007; Twiss
2003). PPNB people produced a wide assortment of well-made artifacts, in addition to
tools produced in a more ad hoc manner. Lithics include sickle blades, axes, long-bladed
knives, burins, borers, scrapers, and a variety of arrowheads (Mazar 1990; Quintero
1996; Rollefson 2001), many of which were made by pressure flaking. These tools
display high levels of variation, and required considerable skill to produce and maintain
(Quintero and Wilke 1995). Typical assemblages during the PPNB tend to be blade30
dominated. Although PPNB assemblages include a variety of points, Byblos points have
the highest frequency of occurrence in most assemblages and traditional Amuq points
(Cauvin 1968) gradually increase in significance over the course of the PPNB.
One of the interesting distinctions in the chipped stone technology between the
PPNA and the PPNB is the emergence of naviform core-and-blade technology as well as
the presence of bidirectional blades. By the Middle PPNB, lithic technology reflects a
dual character that satisfies relatively undemanding needs and centers on sophisticated
blade production techniques (Rollefson 1998). The naviform blade technique requires
elaborate core preparation and maintenance as well as a narrow range of chert qualities
(Quintero and Wilke 1995).
During the PPNB, groundstone vessels are finer and more diverse in their shape
and size than previously produced in the PPNA period, thus providing tantalizing
evidence of the sophisticated craft industry that was established and flourishing during
the PPNB (Simmons 2007). Various saddle and trough querns, grinding slabs, stone
bowls, and platters are common as are miniature bowls and plates, globular bowls,
platters, handstones and querns, and large milling tools (Simmons 2007). At Beidha,
some of the grinding slabs weighed as much as 52 kg and some of the platters were up to
1 m in diameter (Simmons 2007). Ground implements such as palettes, bowls, axes, and
implements referred to as “gaming boards” are also frequent in the archaeological record
(Simmons 2007). In addition, it has been suggested that the bins at Beidha's corridor
buildings functioned as workshops for the lithic and craft production, as well as work
areas for food processing activities (Kirkbride 1966). Similarly, sites like Ba'ja have
been interpreted as production and distribution centers for goods such as sandstone rings,
31
with manufacture possibly occurring at the level of "specialized households" (Gebel et al.
1997).
With regards to subsistence economy of the PPNB, an agricultural lifeway was
firmly established with considerable regional variation. Botanical remains from PPNB
sites include such species as barley (Hordeum spontaneum), winter wheat (Triticum
aestivum), emmer (T. dicoccum), peas (Pisum sativum), lentils (Lens culinaris), and
chickpeas (Cicer sp.). Analyses of sickle blades and their gloss from 'Ain Ghazal
suggests that the majority of plants still displayed wild morphological characteristics,
primarily with regards to the spikes, rachis, and their propensity to shatter at maturity.
Even though there is evidence from Nahal Hemar and Nevali Cori during the Early
PPNB (Nesbitt 2002) for domesticates, it has been suggested that it was not until the
Middle and Late PPNB that plants were morphologically identifiable on a large scale as
domesticates (Quintero et al. 1997). It also appears that domestication of individual
species were temporally and geographically independent events (Simmons 2007). The
primary economic focus was mixed and included cereals, peas, and lentils. An example
of the variability in focus crops is seen at `Ain Ghazal where a strong argument has been
made for legumes as the dominant aspect of the economy based on the high frequency of
peas and lentils in the botanical remains recovered at the site (Rollefson 2001). At other
sites, there is evidence that pistachios, acorns, and barley bulbs were all significant at
some level in the region during the PPNB (Simmons 2007).
As for animal domestication and exploitation, there appears to be a shift away
from hunting gazelles as the primary meat source in the southern Levant by the MPPNB
and a more focused exploitation of goats, possibly a direct result of overexploitation of
32
gazelles during the Natufian and PPNA periods. There may be a direct correlation
between the decline in gazelle and the increasing trend of sedentism /population growth
(Horwitz et al. 1999). As hunting intensity increased during the Natufian and the PPNA,
a concurrent shift also occurs towards more extensive exploitation of smaller animals and
marine resources in addition to intensified gazelle hunting (Carruthers and Dennis 2007).
These two shifts are thus a direct consequence of sedentism and the subsequent
population increases in the region, as suggested by an increase in sites (Cohen 1977;
Davis 2005). As a result, these new population levels were possibly the driving force
during the PPNA and PPNB behind the need to adopt husbandry (Cohen 1977; Davis
2005). In the southern Levant, population level continued to rapidly rise and the carrying
capacity of the environment in many areas was exceeded during the Late PPNB. With
gazelle populations too scarce, groups began to exert more control over their
environmental resources. During the MPPNB and the LPPNB interval, morphological
characteristics were possibly being selected through some form of cultural manipulation
that eventually led to the suite of characteristics that are used today to define and
delineate domesticate animals from their wild progenitors in the archaeological record
(Davis 2005). Subsistence strategies continued to include hunted protein sources to
supplement the domesticated resources and included a wide variety of species such as the
aurochs, boar, gazelle, Mesopotamian fallow deer, ibex, and onager. Some have
suggested that the reliance and intensification of domesticates ultimately contributed to
the decline of the PPNB through environmental degradation (Rollefson 1998).
The end or ultimate fate of the PPN is an increasingly complex problem for
archaeologists. The PPNB lasted approximately a thousand years and culminated with
33
the apparent abandonment of larger villages and a marked change in settlement patterns
throughout the region around 8000BP (Moore 1985; Simmons 1997; 2007). Substantial
architectural projects ceased and larger communities in the Jordan Valley were
abandoned. The few sites that have continued occupation through the Late PPNB and
into the PN are considered anomalies. There is a decline in standard of living for some
sites during the transition from the Late PPNB/Final PPN Period to the PN (ca.
8000/7500 ~ 6000 BP) (Simmons 2000). The collapse of the PPNB cultural complex and
the abandonment of many villages may have been linked to internal social factors. As
populations grew, economic and social organization became increasingly elaborate and
existing social strategies may have failed to meet the new demands and new social
strategies to relieve social stress where needed (Twiss 2003).
The line of evidence utilized for this model is the developments in site size and
architecture. Initially the standard architectural pattern during the LPPNB was still
focused on the rectangular multi-roomed buildings with plastered walls and floors. So
the most dramatic development during the Late/Final PPNB is the steady increase in site
size as the number of rooms in each structures increased while the overall size of each
room decreased (Simmons 2007). Population estimates for the MPPNB sites are around
700 people per site while the LPPNB/Final PPN estimates are above 3000 people per site
with estimations for Basta as high as 4,116 people (Kuijt 2000).
During the MPPNB domestic buildings began to show a considerable degree of
formal subdivision and compartmentalization with hearths in the floor, and distinct areas
for storage, processing, and craft production (Byrd 2000). This suggests that there is a
trend toward greater use of internal space at the domestic level instead of all domestic
34
activities occurring in open space or the public’s view. The rooms with hearths were the
most secluded space in domestic structures and suggest that consumption may have been
more private at the residential level to reinforce enculturation within the nuclear families
and lineage, while food preparation was a social event in the open arena or areas between
households. Facilities for communal storage, milling, and feasting typically would have
been placed between household groups in community spaces or courtyards well within
the public view, making food preparation highly visible and a social event in the
community. This would have facilitated the sharing of grinding slabs, large fire pits,
milling/cooking ware, and the sharing of labor by work groups (Wright 2000).
By the LPPNB, however, population levels continued to rise and this led to
greater stress on the social fabric as the PPNB cultural complex no longer held
communities together and relieved social stress as certain household vied for more access
to power and to resources (Twiss 2003). Standardization in domestic architecture
declined and community-level mortuary practices decreased in frequency (Kuijt 1996).
By the end of the LPPNB, architectural and ritual symbolic structures that had promoted
an egalitarian social fabric had disappeared (Kuijt 1996). Larger milling tool assemblages
are found in domestic structures and more specialized cooking facilities begin to show up
in domestic structures (Wright 2000). This suggested that food preparation was shifting
from the public arena to a more private event within the household. Wright (2000)
suggests that there is an overall intensification and privatization of food preparation and
consumption during this period.
In addition, increasing floor space at the household level would have served as a
coping mechanism for the increasing social tensions resulting from crowding, increased
35
demand for resources, and increasing demands for access to lands suitable for
agricultural practices (Byrd 1994; Simmons 2007). The domestic architectural increases
imply a change or shift in the nuclear family’s autonomy. The increasing settlement size
could have required the establishment of centralized authority for negotiating social order
within and between households (Byrd 2000).
During the LPPNB/Final PPN there is also a distinct drop in the quality of
architectural elaborations and increase in the reuse of LPPNB structures. This pattern of
decline or labor/resource investment can be seen in the drop in quality of the plaster used
in the domestic structures at `Ain Ghazal (Simmons 2007). Artifacts likewise became
less sophisticated and the frequency of symbolic/ritual items such as plaster statues and
skulls of the PPNB decreased in frequency. Lithic production shifted away from the
complex naviform strategy toward one that emphasized opposable-platform core systems
and the use of sickle blades declined in favor for lighter and smaller projectile points
(Simmons 2007).
One model for the collapse of the PPNB focuses on human induced
environmental degradation as a result of overuse of local environments. Acquisition and
clearing of land for agricultural purposes and the over exploitation of resources for fuel
and building materials have led to deforestation of the local environment. Wet
precipitation regimes would have contributed to the degradation by eroding away the
topsoils and thus severely impacting the agricultural productivity in these deforested
areas (Simmons 1997). The cultural decision to manipulate or manage goat herds would
have heavily restricted the natural environment’s ability to rebound/recover from the
deforestation. Goats would have fed off of the young shoots and trees before the
36
vegetation could have gotten a strong foothold on recovery. An indicator of this in the
archaeological record would be the increased reliance on domesticates as forest-dwelling
wild game populations declined (Twiss 2003). This would have resulted in agricultural
areas being depleted of their rich organic top soils by the end of the PPNB, and led to the
abandonment and dispersal of people from the larger agricultural villages (Rollefson and
Kohler-Rollefson 1989; Rollefson and Simmons 1987, Rollefson 1996; Simmons 2007).
Regardless of the variable or extent of the collapse of the PPNB sites, it must be
noted that the southern Levant did have some sites that continued to exist well after the
LPPNB. Sites such as `Ain Ghazal and Wadi Shu’eib continued to be occupied well after
the abandonment period in the LPPNB into a transitional period referred to as the PrePottery Neolithic C and into the PN (Rollefson and Kohler-Rollefson 1989; Rollefson
1997; Simmons 1997, 2007).
In summary, social life in the PPN appears to have centered increasingly on
smaller domestic groups rather than the entire community. There is tantalizing evidence
that corporate groups existed at some level within the larger community and acted to
some degree of autonomy (Twiss 2003). Increasing reliance on domesticated plants and
animals and increased population led to social transformations and possible evidence for
the emergence of social and economic inequalities.
Environmental and Cultural Context of the Wadi Faynan Region
The catchment of Wadi Faynan (Figure 2.2) forms a transect about five km wide
running for some 15 km westward from the rim of the Jordanian Plateau around 1500 m
above sea level to the floor of Wadi Arabah and the rift valley at about sea level. The
37
main wadi today is degraded step desert, arid and largely denuded of vegetation. As the
wadi cuts through the plateau escarpments, the channels of the three main feeder
tributaries, Wadi Dana, Wadi Ghwair, and Wadi Shayqar are in places well watered and
comparatively well vegetated. The Wadi Faynan today is part of the Dana Nature
Reserve of Jordan’s Royal Society for Conservation of Nature and used mainly by
“nomadic” Bedouin herders. The confluence of three wadis, Wadi Ghwair (Ghuwayr),
Wadi Dana, and Wadi Shayqar, meet to form the Wadi Faynan. The area has a very
diverse environment, with an altitudinal variation from c. 30m above sea level in Wadi
Faynan to the limestone uplands c.1200m above sea level on the edge of the Jordanian
plateau, combining both Mediterranean and arid zone regions. This area has various
microenvironments, partly reflecting its geological diversity. Rainfall in the Faynan
desertic zone varies from a monthly mean of 0-0.1 mm from June to September, rising to
only 17mm a month in December and January, although flash floods can occur as rainfall
on the plateau is more than 200mm a year. In Faynan the topography largely consists of
a series of flat and broad wadi bottoms and terraces. When traveling eastwards up the
wadis, the topography becomes very rugged as they become narrow gorges with few
areas suitable for either cultivation or habitation. Before reaching Jordanian Plateau, the
topography becomes varied and spectacular, with steep hills and cliffs (Simmons and
Najjar 2002, 2003, 2006).
Archaeological work in the Wadi Faynan area has taken place for over a century.
Initial visits by pioneering scholars such as Lagrange, Musil, Frank, Glueck and Kind
established the importance of the area, particularly in relation to mining and early
Christian history (Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007). More recently, Raikes, King, and
38
MacDonald conducted survey work, while the German Mining Museum at Bochum
conducted a project to examine the mining history of the area (Barker et al. 1999;
Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007). Adjacent to Faynan, Adams and Levy direct a
substantial field project dedicated to later prehistory (Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007;
Twiss 2003).
Despite the extent of archaeological activity, very little was known about early
prehistoric settlement in the Wadi Faynan region until recently. Survey work by the
Centre for Field Archaeology (CFA), Edinburgh University, had identified and sampled
numerous archaeological sites within the Dana Reserve, part of the Faynan area (Barker
1997, 1998, 1999). Some artifact scatters were thought to be Middle Paleolithic in date
but the earliest dated settlement in the region is the PPNB site of Ghwair I. Up until
1996, no major concentration of pre-PPNB material had been identified within the
Faynan (Twiss 2003).
Despite this lack of existing evidence, the study area appeared to provide
considerable potential for addressing issues in Paleolithic, Epi-Paleolithic and early
Neolithic archaeology of the Levant. Surveys elsewhere in Jordan and in similar
landscapes to the study area had identified sites from all of these periods (Simmons 2007;
Twiss 2003). Key relevant sites are summarized below
Wadi Faynan 16
Wadi Faynan 16 (WF16) is a PPNA site located in the juncture between Wadi
Faynan and Wadi Ghwair in southern Jordan (Finlayson and Mithen et al. 2007). The
site was initially recorded during a field survey of the Dana-Fayna-Ghuwayr Early
39
Prehistory project and subsequently excavated by Steven Mithen and Bill Finlayson
during the 1996-2002 field seasons (Mithen 2003; Mithen et al. 2000). WF16 lies about
60 km southwest of the current southern most tip of the Dead Sea and about 500 meters
west of the PPNB site Ghwair I.
Three trenches (Trench 1, 2 and 3) were excavated as a means of evaluating the
site and to secure material to address the questions with regards the paleoenvironment.
Surface features consisted of a dense chipped and coarse stone artifact scatter, and
several stone features. Mithen and Finlayson’s excavations have documented typical
PPNA characteristics at WF16 such as the presence of circular dwellings, lithic
assemblages defined by microliths and the large frequency el-Khiam points, and burials
similar in type to those found at Jericho (Mithen et al. 2000). Calibrated radiocarbon
dating suggests an occupation of WF16 spanned from 10,190 + 50 ~ 9,400 +50 BP.
The material remains include a rich array of shell and stone beads, carved objects,
and pieces of worked bone. Floral remains suggest a wide range of plant foods and
environments were exploited, ranging from upland coniferous woodlands, to broad leaf
and gallery forest, and steppe. A few of the seeds were identifiable and belong to the
Brassicaceae family, legumes (cf. Astragalus/Trigonelly type), and a few pulses from the
Vicieae tribe (Mithen et al. 2000). During the analysis it was not possible for them to
ascertain whether the pulses were wild or domestic peas, lentils, or vetches. The
assemblage also contained evidence of wild fruits such as Pastacia sp. (pistachio) and
Ficus sp. (fig) (Mithen et al. 2000).
The faunal assemblage from WF16 contained teeth, distal limb bones and long
bone fragments of aurochs or Bos primigenius (8% NISP) and equids of Equis sp. (1%
40
NISP)(Carruthers and Dennis 2007). Other wild mammals identified were foxes (Vulpes
vulpes 8% NISP) and cats (Felis sp. 2% NISP). The analyses of the bird bones suggest a
relatively open habitat surrounding the site. Interestingly there are no butchery marks on
the bird bones and the highest frequency of birds in the assemblage is raptors, especially
buzzard represented by a large number of phalanges. Game birds have a low frequency
in the assemblage and appear to be slightly exploited (Rielly 2007).
Significantly, WF 16 faunal assemblage is dominated by Capra sp. remains (78%
NISP) (Carruthers and Dennis 2007), instead of gazelle that typically dominate other
PPNA sites (Davis 1985; Clutton-Brock 1979; Tchernov 1980, 1994). Since the local
environment surrounding WF 16 and Ghwair I is relatively rocky terrain and the habitat
preference for gazelle is typically steppe environments, it is perhaps not surprising that
the inhabitants were exploiting locally available resources resulting in a higher frequency
of caprines over gazelle (Mithen 2003; Carruthers and Dennis 2007). Based on the low
frequency of recovery of elements such as the skulls, vertebrae, and hoofs in the
assemblage, Mithen and Finlayson (Mithen et al. 2000) have concluded that the initial
butchery was conducted off site and meat-bearing elements were transported back to
WF16.
Complementing the taxonomic findings is evidence of smaller stature and the
mortality profiles constructed for the goat remains (Mithen et al. 2000). A large portion
of the individuals present appears to be immature represented by unfused long bones
(48%) (Carruthers and Dennis 2007). While not all zooarchaeologists would necessarily
agree, Carruthers and Dennis (2007) suggest that the epiphyseal fusion data may be
indicative of a herding economy rather than a hunting economy since hunting economies
41
tend to have mortality profiles that are more random based on encounter, whereas
herding economies tend to be characterized by a mortality profile favoring the slaughter
of immature individuals. This has led to the conclusion that the inhabitants at WF 16
were practicing some level of herding or at least cultural manipulation of goats during the
PPNA period (Carruthers and Dennis 2007; Mithen et al. 2000).
WF16 is also significant for the patterns of breakage, damage and wear identified
on the lithic points that suggest a reduced emphasis on hunting activities (Mithen et al.
2000). Less than a third of the el-Khiam projectile points displayed evidence of being
utilized as projectiles. The majority of the points were used as perforators and drill-bites.
Mithen and Finlayson (Mithen 2003) propose that the PPNA inhabitants focused on
intensive manufacturing activities such as the working of reeds, woods, hides, stone, and
other materials. Combining such intensive activities with the substantial quantity of
ground stone recorded at the site, WF16 emerges as a sedentary village possibly
inhabited year round.
Wadi Fidan I
The village of Wadi Fidan 1 (WFD I) sits on top of a small outcrop of rock, about
100 m in diameter, in the middle of a gorge in southern Jordan (Twiss 2007). Using
chipped stone typologies and radiocarbon samples the occupation of WFD I has been
confidently placed in the LPPNB (LPPNB: 8300 ~ 7900 BP) (Twiss 2007). WFD I site
is rich in architecture and has remarkable preservation of artifacts, especially the organic
materials. Initially the site was describe in 1980 by T.D. Raikes in his survey of the
Wadi Fidan and major excavations were undertaken at the site beginning in 1999 by the
42
Jabal Hamrat Fidan Regional Archaeology Project under the direction of the University
of California, San Diego and the Department of Antiquities of Jordan (Twiss 2003).
The faunal assemblage from WFD I is quite large with some 12,855 bones
analyzed. Of these, 4% belonged to Capra and another 7% were classified as belonging
to goats. In addition, about 3% where lumped into a category defined as remains from
sheep/goat/gazelle, and another 4% from a category that included sheep / goat / gazelle /
cervids. An additional 64% were identified as coming from sheep/goat sized animals.
Given that there are only 13 bones were identified as gazelle, and perhaps 2 from cervids,
Twiss (2003) feels there is a high probability that the overwhelming majority of these
bones came from sheep or goats. In sum, caprines may have contributed up to 82% of
the bones in the assemblage. Of the rest, 9% could be identified as belonging animals
about the size of cattle. Gazelles, leporids, equids, canids, lizards, and possibly pigs and
deer each contributed less than 1% of the bones in the assemblage.
Based on Twiss’ (2003) findings, the villagers of WFD I appear to have relied
primarily on caprines and many of the specimens appear to have been slaughtered
between the ages of 2 to 3 1/2 years old, suggesting they were procured after they had
completed most of their growth, but before they reached full maturity (Twiss 2007).
Based on sexing of pelvis fragments as well as on measurements, Twiss (2003) also
found that the female caprines outnumber males in the assemblage by a ratio of
approximately 3 to 2 and thus possibly implying some minor form of cultural
manipulation. Interestingly, cattle also made up a portion of the meat diet, contributing
about 9% of the bones in the assemblage. As with the caprines, there does seem to have
been a pattern of preference for young animals at the threshold of being fully grown.
43
Twiss (2003) found that no other large species seems to have contributed significantly to
their diet, thus implying that the people of WFD I chose to narrowly focus on caprines
and cattle almost exclusively while the inhabitants of contemporaneous sites continued to
eat significant quantities of wild meat.
Twiss (2003) also found that the bones in the WFD I assemblage are
representative of all areas of the body in roughly equal proportions and concluded that
there is a strong possibility that villagers were not slaughtering or hunting the animals far
from the site and then hauling the entire animal over some distance. Rather, the animals
were likely killed quite close to the village itself. In addition, Twiss (2003) utilized the
low bone fragmentation levels and the low frequency of butchery marks in the
assemblage to conclude that the inhabitants of Wadi Fidan were not overly concerned
with extracting every possible nutrient from the animals. These low levels suggested that
the people of WFD I were clearly not desperate to get all of the meat off of the bones or
to extract the marrow from them (Twiss 2003). While many of the bones in the
assemblage do bear marks of burning, almost all of the burned bones are burned equally
across their entire surfaces, which suggest that they were exposed to the heat after they
had been defleshed as part of the discard process, or even post-depositional (Twiss 2003,
2007).
Ghwair I
The settlement of Ghwair I initially was investigated by M. Najjar in 1993 (Najjar
1994). Subsequent to that study, a joint investigation between the University of Nevada,
Las Vegas (UNLV) and the Jordanian Department of Antiquities was conducted between
44
1996 and 2001 (Powell and Gervasoni 2000; Simmons and Najjar 1996, 1998a, 1998b,
1999, 2000). The excavation at Ghwair I throughout the years has demonstrated that this
relatively medium size village (3 acres) was occupied in the early stages of the PPNB
between ca. 8880 ~ 8,390 BP (10,033/9,542 to 9,510/9,285 cal. BP) (Simmons 2007).
Although only five areas have been excavated, substantial artifact, fauna, and plant
assemblages have been acquired due to the outstanding preservation (Powell et al. 2003).
Ghwair I is around 500 m east of WF16 and situated on a hillside at an elevation
of 290-320 m with a spectacular view of Wadi Feinan. Today, the area is a degraded step
desert, with unstable soils and little vegetation. Ghwair I is bounded by high cliffs to the
south and east, Wadi Ghwair to the north, and erosional cuts to the west and south.
A limited geomorphological study was conducted at Wadi Ghwair by Rolfe
Mandel and identified Wadi Ghwair’s role in the arid tributary system that drains into
Wadi Feinan from steep bedrock exposed upland to the west. Vegetation is sparse and
concentrated around water sources within the wadis or near springs. Previous research
and preliminary observations indicate at least five geomorphic surfaces ranging in age
from Pleistocene to late Holocene (Barker et al. 1998, 1999; Barker 2000). Most of the
western third of the site is associated with an alluvial fan that formed at the mouth of a
small, high-gradient wadi that joins Wadi Ghwair from the south (Mandel 1998). A lobe
of the fan extends out into the high Pleistocene terrace. The PPNB horizon at Wadi
Ghwair 1 is sealed beneath about 1 meter of stratified fan deposits on the western edge of
the site. Most of the eastern two-thirds of the site is associated with colluvial apron that
formed at the foot of the valley wall. The northern third of the site is associated with a
high Pleistocene terrace underlain by gravel-rich alluvium (Upper Ghuwayr Beds). The
45
PPNB horizon is sealed beneath a very thin veneer (less than 40 cm) of slope wash that
covers the terrace surface.
The 1996-2000 field investigations also included a general study of the flora,
which will be used to provide a more complete economic picture of Ghwair I. Some of
the preliminary results from the botanical flotation samples at Ghwair I suggest the
presence of cultivated barley, pea, and emmer (Powell et al. 2003; Simmons and Najjar
2006). The results of the charcoal analyses do not show the degraded vegetation of
today. Most of the charcoal belongs to Phoenician Juniper and Pistachio. In addition, the
wood used for building purposes at Ghwair I appears to belong to these two species.
Some of the charcoal belonged to willow (Salix sp.), an indication for the fresh water and
perennial stream of Wadi Ghwair. This suggests that the environment may have been
more humid, with less temperature extremes, than today.
A limited pollen, phytolith, and starch analyses at Ghwair I has noted incredible
variety in the samples (Neef 2003). The pollen diagram from the 1999-2000 excavation
season is characterized by moderately abundant levels of the aster family in the local
vegetation (Powell et al. 2003; Scott 2002a, 200b). The recovery of moderately large
quantities of Cheno-am pollen raises the question of use of these greens and/or seeds in
the diet (Scott 2002a, 2002b). These plants produce small seeds relatively high in protein
and lower in carbohydrates than many other seeds, such as those of the grass family.
Plantain has been present in all of the samples from this study and appears to be of the
local vegetation.
The recovery of a variety of starches, particularly from washes on groundstone,
attests to the grinding starchy foods, which appear to have included seeds, roots, tubers,
46
and mustard. Fairly sparse tree pollen is present, including Pine, Pistachio, Cypress, and
Olive. These are probably reflective of the Mediterranean forest on the plateau land
above the Wadi Faynan and higher up Wadi Dana. Vegetation in the pollen record for
Ghwair I appear to have been mixed between steppeland and remnants of plateau
vegetation. The flora is considerably richer during the PPNB occupation represented by
these samples. While inconclusive, these results suggest that several different
microenvironments were exploited along the wadi and on the slopes.
Architecturally, Ghwair I follows the general pattern of a PPNB village, but with
some major distinctions. The original investigation in 1993 revealed a deep sequence of
well-preserved architecture that has been identified as Area I for reference purposes. A
renewed study of Area I exposed a series of detailed architectural structures characterized
by small rooms that are sectional and appear to have adjacent passageways (Ladah 2003;
Powell and Gervasoni 2000; Simmons 2007; Simmons and Najjar 1999). Rooms exhibit
a wide range of variability and many are not symmetrical. In addition to the expected
room blocks, there is a D-shaped room with a possible altar and a large rectangular room
with several niches surrounded by bins (Ladah 2003; Simmons and Najjar 2000). In
total, eight bins were excavated in various multiple arrangements, with red plaster floors
extending up the walls in some of the structures. One of the bins contained a cache of
points that were significantly different from the projectile points recovered thus far at
Ghwair I (Powell 2001). In addition, one other feature that is unique is set of stairs in
one of the room complexes of Area I, suggesting that the architecture was multistory.
Also, there is a large stair-like feature in an outdoor area located in Area I. Immediately
47
in front of these stairs is a hard packed surface that could have served as an "outdoor
theater" or public area (Simmons and Najjar 2000).
Both chipped and ground stone artifacts were abundant and included small cups, a
possible phallic representation, "game" boards, tokens, stone palettes with pigment
remaining, and possibly stone weights used in grinding activities (Simmons and Najjar
1999). Also, there were three adult burials and one child buried in a crude cobble-lined
grave within the structural tumble of Area I (Simmons and Najjar 2000).
In Area II there is a highly complex architecture exhibiting more than thirty
separate walls and building episodes. At depths of 3.6 m, excavations uncovered a floor
with an intact work area. Within this area, researchers recorded a hearth, flat stones, insitu ground stone, and mat impressions that will eventually aid in assessing the floor type
(Ladah 2003; Simmons and Najjar 1999).
Other studies at Ghwair I exposed a section of Area III that contained an ash pit
with no architecture. Although the ash pit was too small (1.5 m thick) to be the primary
refuse area for the entire PPNB settlement, a PPNA-style point (el Khiam) and a large
number of bladelets were recovered from the area (Powell 2001). Continued
investigations have led to the exposure of a stratified series of at least three floors that are
plastered (Simmons and Najjar 1999).
In Area IV of Ghwair I, there is a rather large architectural complex (Najjar
1994). One of the excavated rooms contained a sub-floor burial and a cache of goat and
cattle skulls lying on the plastered floor, as well as two caches of finely produced blades,
polishing stones, and several malachite pendant blanks (Simmons and Najjar 2000). The
burial is especially intriguing, consisting of an infant (9-12 months old) in a flexed
48
position, with the skull intact. The infant was adorned with a mother of pearl ornament
around its neck. While sub-floor burials are common in the PPNB, they are usually
decapitated adults, not children or infants (Powell and Simmons 2000). There also are a
limited number of adult burials throughout the site that are unusual in that they are buried
in crude cobble-lined graves in structural tumble and retain their craniums. These burials
have provided valuable insight into the social mechanisms of Ghwair I. The infant burial
suggests some form of ascribed status had emerged at Ghwair I by the PPNB.
Area V is located mid-site and the surfaces of two 5x5 m units were cleared in
anticipation of additional investigations. There appears to be abundant amount of
architecture based on these limited exposures. Area VI is located between Areas III and
IV and was investigated with the aid of ground penetrating radar. The results of this
study suggest considerable depth and/or major wall features in the area. Based on this
information, excavations were carried out on one 5x5 m unit to test these results.
Although not fully excavated, the results were positive, as a large and deep wall was
exposed.
Both chipped and ground stone are abundant at Ghwair I. The chipped stone
artifacts of Ghwair I reflected a typical PPNB blade-dominated assemblage. More than
60,000 artifacts have been recovered, with tools representing approximately 5.4% of all
chipped stone (Powell and Gervasoni 2000). Projectile points dominate chipped stone
tools. Sickles and other implements also are common, and bladelets are plentiful. The
most frequent tool classes excluding retouched flakes and blades were as follows:
projectile points (N=453), microliths (N=218), piercing tools (N=192), notches (N=120),
tanged (N=103), scrapers (N=70), and sickle/glossed (N=59). These tool classes
49
combined account for 45.62% of the recovered tool population. The chipped stone
summary analysis conducted on all five areas did little to discern any real differentiation
within the site. In every case the most prominent chipped stone artifact class recovered
was the tertiary blade. This reinforces the initial conclusion of Ghwair I being a bladebased technology. One interesting note by Gervasoni (2000) was the high concentration
of secondary flakes recovered in Areas 2, 3, 4 and 6, with area six showing a higher
percentage of secondary flakes over tertiary.
Within all five areas, excluding chips and chunks, the most dominant classes were
similar. These include tertiary blades and flakes, bladelets, tools, and secondary flakes.
Bladelets, dominant in the overall lithic summary, were significant in the individual lithic
array for each area. The proportion of bladelets within each area was never less than 5%,
with a minimum of 5.8% in Area 1 and maximum of 12.5% in Area 2 (Gervasoni 2000).
The uniform occurrence of bladelets in each area again raises the issue regarding a PPNA
component in a presumably 'pure' PPNB site. If this profusion of bladelets was more
area specific, perhaps some explanation could be forthcoming. However, since it is
uniform over the entire site, this phenomenon appears to be the rule rather than the
exception thus suggesting no PPNA component despite the close proximity to WF16
(Powell and Gervasoni 2000).
One other interesting development is the low proportion of cores in each area.
The percentage of cores range from 0.7% in Area 2 to 1.3% in Areas 1 and 6. It seems
unlikely that 567 cores, total for the site, could produce 48,388 chipped stone
implements. Cores are not adequately represented in the lithic summary, and this paucity
of cores seems to be dispersed evenly over all five areas. A concentration of the cores in
50
one or two areas could have suggested a workstation or production area, but the even
distribution leads itself to a more self-sufficient family unit explanation (Gervasoni
2000).
Within tools, projectile points comprise an unusually large number. They account
for some 28% of the restricted tool assemblage, which omits “retouched pieces.” A total
of 472 points were recovered and analyzed, 152 complete and 320 broken (Powell 2001).
An examination of the points, using formal attributes, classified them according to the
detailed morphological typologies derived from previous studies, such as Mortensen
(1970), Gopher (1994), and Eighmey (1992). With a few exceptions, the projectile
points are consistent with previously recorded types for PPNB assemblages. The
majority are Byblos variants, dominating the entire point assemblage at 70 percent
(Powell 2001). This trend is consistently reflected in each individual area of the site
excavated.
Other types of projectile points encountered included El-Khiam projectile points
that are traditionally associated with the earlier Pre-Pottery Neolithic A phase. Their
frequency at Ghwair I was low (1%) and may be associated with a nearby PPNA site,
Site WF 16, or they could represent a technological continuity that extends into the
PPNB. Based on currently available radiocarbon dates, there is no evidence for a PPNA
occupation at Ghwair I.
One interesting facet of the assemblage is the presence of what was provisionally
termed “miniature” projectile points, manufactured on bladelets; similar artifacts are
noted by Gopher and others, but usually in reference to Pottery Neolithic contexts
(Powell 2001). At Ghwair I, there were 63 “miniature” Byblos points, representing 19%
51
of all Byblos points found, as well as miniature Jericho and ‘Ain Ghazal points, each
comprising 15% of their respective types.
Exploring the significance of bladelets and miniature points at Ghwair I, Powell
and Simmons (2000) found that aside from the projectile points, microliths (defined as
tools manufactured on bladelets) are the second predominant diagnostic tool class present
at Ghwair I, at approximately 13% of all tools. Wilke and Quintero (1995) have
demonstrated that bladelets are by-products of the specialized naviform technology used
during the PPNB. However, at Ghwair, the dominance of bladelets in the overall
chipped stone tally and the presence of microliths possibly represents a conscious choice
by the Neolithic inhabitants to utilize bladelets as a key production blank for their tools.
Another aspect of the projectile points worth mentioning is the presence of what
was provisionally termed “Ghwair points” for discussion purposes (Powell 2001). All
twenty-two were found in a cache on the floor of a small room. These Ghwair points are
manufactured on long, thin blades produced from high quality raw materials found
locally.
A closer examination of the morphological attributes of these artifacts revealed
the statistical significance in their size when compared to the other projectile points in the
assemblage. In addition, all of the Ghwair points exhibit considerable skill in their
manufacture. This raised questions concerning individual specialization at the site. The
Ghwair points were prepared and struck from the core in a fashion that requires little or
no retouch to achieve the point, an extremely practical and efficient method of
production. The Ghwair points have no significant retouch along the cutting edge, which
varies from marginal to abrupt in the regular sample of projectile points from Ghwair.
52
The “Ghwair points” were too fragile to be functionally used as projectile per se.
One could argue that they were intentionally manufactured in this form as an
intermediate step that would then be reduced to a functional point similar to the regular
sample of projectile points. If that were the case, however, we would not expect to find
the labor intensive modification on the tang if it was to be reduced to a smaller size and
form. While not advocating a new typology based on size variation, they concluded that
current typologies used to define projectile points primarily by overall morphology and
hafting area tend to mask significant aspects of their attributes. Random variations occur
in projectile points over time and space as they do in most other cultural and natural
phenomena. However, since this artifact class has traditionally been considered
functionally homogenous, other perspectives such as manufacture or social significance
tend to be under- emphasized in projectile points from the Levant. Clearly one area of
future inquiry is in the realm of ceremonial or social function for the Ghwair points.
Little direct evidence exists concerning the paleoenvironment or human-induced
ecological deterioration at Wadi Ghwair. It is clear, however, that while Ghwair I may
be located in a marginal environment, its rich flora, fauna, material culture, and hints of
complex social development all attest that it was not a rural outlier. Thus it appears that
the Neolithic occupation and adaptations of southern Jordan were quite distinct from that
of the other adjacent portions of the Levant.
53
CHAPTER 3
GHWAIR I: ANALYTICAL METHODS
The faunal preservation at Ghwair I was poor due to the high moisture content of
the matrix and resulted in heavy fragmentation of the assemblage. During excavation, a
random sample of twenty percent of the sediments excavated was screened (¼ inch
mesh) and all of the faunal remains were separated and bagged according to their
provenience. For each bag, provenience information included its area, level and feature
number (FN), and unit supervisor information for reference. The bags were processed
and packaged for shipment back to the field lab and eventually shipped to Lemba Field
Project Research Center in Cyprus (LFPRC) for the analysis stage under the direction of
Dr. Paul Croft.
Where appropriate and feasible, complete elements were photographed in-situ and
field consolidated for transport. The study of the faunal remains was carried out at the
LFPRC and examined using standard zooarchaeological methods outlined in the
literature (Grayson 1984; Klein and Cruz-Uribe 1984; Reitz and Wing 2008). The
identification phase consisted of recording the primary data for each bone specimen. This
included taxonomic identification, total number of fragments, specimen count, element
represented by specimen, portion of element present, side, age based on epiphyseal
fusion, degree of burning, natural taphonomic factors (encrustation, weathering, etc.), and
pathologies. In addition, other surface modifications present (e.g., rodent or carnivore
gnawing) were also recorded. Specimens not identified to element represented but were
distinguishable to taxonomic class as mammals were separated into size categories: small
54
mammals, medium-sized mammals, and large-sized mammals. During this analysis,
other classes were not separated into size categories. Caprines were separated into lower
taxonomic levels whenever possible using reference collection and published criteria by
Boessneck (1969), Buitenhuis (1995), Payne (1968), Prummel and Frisch (1986), and
Rowley-Conwy (1998). Animal aging and sexing follows Boessneck (1969), Silver
(1969), and Thomas (1988) criteria when possible. Where preservation allowed,
measurements were taken following the guidelines established by Angela von den
Driesch (1976).
Taxonomic Identification
The faunal remains were analyzed and assigned to the lowest taxonomic level
whenever possible. While a few of the specimens were identified to the species level,
given the capabilities of the analyst, the majority of the fragments were identified to more
general taxonomic classes or to size categories. Genus and species identifications
remained the ideal goal throughout the analysis.
Taxonomic identifications under Croft’s direct supervision were made using the
comparative collection housed at the LFPRC facility and osteological manuals and
zoological species guides (Harrison and Bates 1991, Gilbert 1990, 1996; Lawrence 1951;
Olsen 1964, 1968, 1979). Specimens were only identified to a particular taxon if they
could be unquestionably assigned to it on the basis of morphological features found
through comparison with reference specimens after all possible identifications were
excluded by the same procedure.
55
Identification was a multi-step process delineating what element was represented
and the lowest taxonomic level it belonged to. During the analysis, a standard zoological
classification hierarchy scheme was utilized: Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family,
Genus, and Species. Class identification included the sorting of the faunal assemblage
into mammal, fish, bird, reptile and amphibian remains and typically was undertaken
during the initial sort of the assemblage. Taxonomic identification during this process
was based on morphological features, age, and sex. For vertebrate specimens, the
element represented and the side was recorded.
During the taxonomic identification stage, attempts were made to identify all
fragments of the larger mammals (Bos, Gazella, Sus, and Caprines), but excluded ribs
and vertebrae with the exception of the atlas, axis and sacrum. In addition, teeth
fragments represented by less than 50% of the original specimen were excluded for larger
species, whereas less abundant smaller animals any identifiable fragments were counted.
With some of the bird and small mammal specimens, identification of family or genus
level was beyond the scope of the reference collection at LFPRC. In these cases,
identification was attained with the aid of Croft’s experience and published zoological
criteria when possible. Specimens that were only identifiable mammals were grouped
into general categories based on their size. Vertebrae and ribs were mainly included in
these categories. If the specimen was not identified to class, then it was classified as
unidentified fragment (UID). Once taxonomic identification was established, the
symmetry and portion of each element present was noted.
While trying to identify specimens to the lowest taxonomic level possible, caution
was exercised as not to over-identify specimens as suggested by Twiss (2003) during her
56
analysis of Neolithic Wadi Fidan 001. Given the high frequency of Caprines
(Ovis/Capra), and, to a lesser degree, Gazelle in the assemblage, only definitive
morphological indicators of taxonomic identity were considered when delineating
caprines and gazelle to genus and species taxonomic levels (Boessneck 1969; Payne
1969; Rowley-Conwy 1998; Zeder and Lapham 2006). Because there is great difficulty
in delineating sheep from goat bones, some researchers lump them into one category,
Caprines, during their analyses even though they are very different in terms of behavior
and archaeological significance (Twiss 2003).
Total Number of Fragments
Total Number of Fragments (TNF) was used to assess the relative abundance of
the bone fragments. Use of this quantification measure facilitates summarizing the entire
assemblage including skeletal parts not identifiable to element represented or to
taxonomic category. This included long bone fragments and splinters.
Element Representation
Element representation refers to the type of skeletal parts represented by the
specimens in the assemblage. While an element is an atomically complete bone or tooth
and are the easiest to identify, most of the elements in the Ghwair I assemblage were
fragmentary due to cultural and non-cultural processes. Therefore, each fragment is
considered a specimen of the element that it represents. Because of the fragmentary state
of the assemblage, great care was taken to note any diagnostic morphological
characteristics that facilitated the identification and classification of the specimen’s
57
condition as: Complete, Minor Damage, ca. 50%, Fragmented. It is common to
distinguish and document the different body parts and completeness within each
taxonomic class based on the fairly constant shape and number of the specimens within
each grouping. Even in the case of fragmentary elements, there may be enough
diagnostic morphology retained by the specimen to allow for identification (Twiss 2008).
The Frequency of Taxa
Relative frequencies of taxa in assemblages is most commonly employed to
compare animal use through time and space, to identify activity areas, and evaluate the
relative importance of taxa within a group’s subsistence strategies (Reitz and Wing
2008). I used Number of Identified Specimens (NISP), Minimum Number of Individuals
(MNI), and Weight and Biomass estimates (Grayson 1984; Reitz and Wing 2008) during
the study of the Ghwair I assemblage to record the skeletal parts preserved and estimate
relative frequency of taxa.
The NISP or Number of Identified Specimens is a method used to calculate the
relative abundance of any taxon within the faunal assemblage (Lyman 1994). NISP was
used when the fragments could be assigned to a general taxonomic category or a size
category and identified to skeletal element represented. All of the identified bone and
teeth fragments within each taxon are added together to determine the frequency of the
fragments for each animal present in the assemblage (Grayson 1984; Stiner 1994).
Because components can be fragmentary or articulated, skeletal parts are counted as
separate NISP units regardless of their condition. NISP gives each identified specimen
an individual numeric number for that animal within a overall count of all specimens in
58
the assemblage and delineates the taxon’s frequency in the overall assemblage. As
Stiner (1994) points out, this application of NISP is well suited for inter-assemblage
comparisons when bone fragmentation is proportional and faunal assemblages are
comparable.
There are some inherent shortcomings with using the NISP method (Grayson
1979, 1984; Reitz and Wing 2008). Most notably are the assumptions that the bones
being counted are representative of the overall population, and that all bones are equally
affected by taphonomic processes. Since it is difficult to establish an association between
bone fragments and individual animals, NISP fails to control for interdependence and the
degree of fragmentation. NISP also fails to account for differential fragmentation among
different taxa as a product of size, mineral density, and recovery techniques or biases,
such as screen size (Reitz and Wing 2008). Finally, NISP values are affected by cultural
decisions such as processing and transport of animals for consumption/use that affects the
specimen counts. Larger animals are possibly field dressed or processed in order to
facilitate the transport of targeted areas of meat back to use/consumption areas, while
smaller animals are more likely to transported whole.
Since NISP represents only the number of fragments identified to particular taxon
and does not directly consider the differences between taxon in size and in meat weight,
some researchers have combined this technique with MNI to provide a more complete
assessment of relative dietary importance of various species. While NISP attempts to
calculate the maximum number of bone fragments on a site, MNI establishes the
minimum number of animals represented for a particular taxon. By taking into
consideration differences in age, sex, and size for each specimen, the most abundant
59
element represented for each taxon is delineated and used to determine MNI or the least
number of animals that are present for a given taxon. MNI effectively corrects for the
differential number of bones found in different classes of animals and accounts for
complete skeletons.
When using MNI, it is important to recognize some of the inherent weakness with
the method (Grayson 1984; Reitz and Wing 2008). Differential success in identification
of elements due to size, density, and morphological characteristics will make some
elements more readily identified than others and leads to overemphasizing the relative
dietary significance of some taxa (Grayson 1984). MNI is also influenced by the manner
in which data from the archaeological record are aggregated during analysis into units or
levels. In small samples, MNI of smaller taxon are emphasized over larger ones since
large and small taxa are treated as equally important in dietary terms, despite the
difference in kilograms of meat provided by each (Grayson 1984). During the analysis of
the material from Ghwair I, both NISP and MNI calculations were used in order to take
advantage of the best of both methods without ignoring their weaknesses.
Additional quantification tools, bone weight and biomass, can be employed to
make estimates of biomass to compensate for problems encountered with MNI. They
provide information on the quantity of meat supplied by identified animals. Unlike the
other methods, these methods are based on the biological premise that the weight of bone
is correlated with the amount of flesh attached to it. Body size and body weight can be
determined from the size of a bone specimen, since a specific quantity of bone represents
a predictable amount of tissue or the quantity of biomass for the skeletal mass recovered
rather than the total original weight of the individual animal (Reitz and Scarry 1985).
60
This technique provides a balance to NISP and MNI methods. Biomass counters the
problem of interdependence since it accounts for the presence/absence of partial and
complete skeletons (Reitz and Wing 2008). It does not rely on thoroughness or
assemblage composition and fragmentation has no real affect on the analysis. In order to
use this analytical method, it does require that each bone be weighed individually.
Biomass calculations were made utilizing the allometric equation:
Y=aXb
In this equation, X is the skeletal weight, Y is the quantity of meat or total live weight, b
is the constant of allometry (the slope of the line), and a is the Y-intercept for a log-log
plot using the method of least squares regression and the best fit line (Lyman 2008; Reitz
and Wing 2008).
We cannot assume a direct relation between the relative frequency of the animals
in the faunal sample and their relative frequency in the living populations in the
landscape surrounding the site, far less their relative importance in the subsistence,
economic or social system of the human population. Nevertheless, the calculation of
relative frequency provides the starting point for the process of reconstruction of
subsistence and economy. While quantification techniques like MNI, NISP, Weight and
Biomass are subject to sample size bias, Grayson (1984) suggests a sample size of at least
200 individuals for reliable interpretation since small samples frequently will generate a
short species list with undue emphasis on one species in relation to others. Since the
materials from Wadi Ghwair I meets these minimums, the data therefore represents a
61
reasonable view of the subsistence activities practiced at Ghwair I, but still should not be
viewed as indicative or representative of all the diverse activities that occurred there.
Minimum Number of Elements
Minimum Number of Elements (MNE) is a derived measure to delineate the
minimum number of skeletal elements necessary to account for the specimens under
study in the fauna assemblage. Several methods have been suggested to determine MNE
(Bunn and Kroll 1986; Klein and Cruz-Uribe 1984; Lyman 2008; Marean and Spencer
1991; Morlan 1994). Klein and Cruz-Uribe (1984:108) record each specimen as a
fraction of the element represented. All recorded fractions are summed to estimate the
MNE for a category of skeletal part. This method was utilized during this study, but it
should be noted that this procedure fails to take into account anatomical overlap. As
suggested by Atici (2007:153-154), a combination of Morlan’s definition of discrete
features or landmarks (1994) and Bunn and Kroll’s (1986) manual overlap method would
have produced a better degree of standardization in estimating the MNE values and
limited the double counting and inflating of the element numbers that can occur with
Klein and Cruz-Uribe method (Atici 2007). MNE values were used in assessing
taxonomic abundance, skeletal part abundance, and body part distributions.
Minimum Animal Units
Minimum Animal Units (MAU) is calculated by dividing MNE values for each
anatomical part or portion by the number of times that part or portion occurs in one
complete skeleton (Binford 1978, 1981, 1984). This skeletally standardizes the observed
62
MNE counts to individual skeletons. Typically, dividing each of the MAU by the value
of the one element with the greatest observed MAU value and then multiplying each by
100 standardize each MAU values. Once calculated, each of the %MAU are ranked by
value and used with bone density values to explore taphonomic histories and sources of
bone loss.
Age Determination
Since different economic and social strategies based on age and sex will result in
different animal slaughter patterns, determination of the age at death is a technique
commonly used in faunal analyses. The determination of the age at which an animal died
or was slaughtered, is important because it provides data critical to the study of animal
husbandry and agricultural economies (Twiss 2003). Age determination or age at death
patterns are determined by evaluating the relative size and characteristics of the bone,
tooth wear, and long bone epiphyseal fusion states (Reitz and Wing 2008). During this
study, age determination was made where possible in the Wadi Ghwair I assemblage by
evaluating the relative size and characteristics of the bone and the degree of fusion of
long bone epiphyses. Unfortunately, the assemblage did not contain sufficient numbers
to reconstruct age at death patterns from mandibular tooth wear for any of the species
present in the assemblage.
Age at death determinations are typically based on long bones in mammals that
have one or more epiphyseal ends, or on dental evidence such as a mandible having both
the fourth premolar and one or more molars. When working with mammalian long bones
and epiphyseal ends, the process of epiphyseal fusion is based on general developmental
63
morphology. There are typically three key growth areas in mammalian long bones: the
diaphysis and the epiphyses on both ends. These growth areas as separated by cartilage
that is progressively ossified as the epiphyses “fuse” to the diaphysis. The fusion of
elements occurs at a relatively consistent sequence within a particular taxon (Reitz and
Wing 2008:72).
By noting which epiphyses are fused and which are not, the sequence of bone
fusion can be used to determine the relative age of the animal at death. As a word of
caution, it must be noted that the age at which epiphyseal fusion occurs can also be
influenced by diet, environmental factors, and variation within different breeds of the
same species and affect age determination. Even with this variation, the age, process,
and sequence are consistent enough to serve as an indicator of relative age.
During this study, the outlines on epiphyseal fusion from Schmid (1972) and
Silver (1970) were followed and the fused/unfused condition of long bone epiphyses
were recorded whenever possible for mammals, especially for Caprines. Once the age at
death was determined for each individual bone, the demographic structure of the species
or taxonomic group was constructed since mortality data gleamed by age determination
profiles are an invaluable guide to the nature of subsistence strategies.
As Twiss (2003) noted, such techniques provide important information on
systems of animal husbandry and their focus on intensive meat production and secondary
byproducts. For example, with intensive meat production strategies, the group
concentrates on killing off surplus young males as soon as they reached a satisfactory
sub-adult weight, whereas groups focusing on secondary byproducts such as a wool
64
economy would find it important to retain both adult males and females since the adult
male has a heavier fleece than the female (Twiss 2003).
Sex
Where possible, sex identification was determined during the analysis of the
Ghwair I assemblage. Different husbandry strategies will result in the slaughter of
particular groups of animals in a herd, defined not simply by age but by sex.
Unfortunately, the fragmentary nature of most faunal samples means that individual
bones can rarely be sexed. For this analysis, it was attempted to determine sexual groups
within the slaughtered population using size measurements taken from individual bones
or epiphyses based on the principal sexual dimorphism. It should be noted, however, that
the size of an animal reflects a number of factors apart from sex, such as health and
nutrition, resource stress, and population gene pool (Reitz and Wing 2008).
Bone Modifications
There are many physical, chemical, and biological processes that modify bones
and affect interpretations of faunal assemblages. Besides identifying alterations resulting
from natural processes, it is important to identify modifications resulting from cultural
activities. The bones were examined to ascertain bone modifications, butchery patterns
and species-specific mortality profiles (Grayson 1984). During the analysis of the
Ghwair I assemblage, modifications observed on the elements were noted and reported
using the following criteria:
65
1.
“Cut” category is modifications defined as small incisions across the
surface of the bone. They have a characteristic “V” shape with grooved
walls and striations parallel to the long axis.
2.
“Hacked” category is associated with modifications that have a deep, nonsymmetrical “V” shape that lacks striations.
3.
“Burned” are associated modifications reflecting contact with heat. Bones
were recorded “Burned” only if they exhibited distinctive charring or
scorch marks that were detectable. Experiments have shown that it often
takes extreme temperatures to produce burn marks when cooking bones.
Size, density, temperature, and type of cooking influence the appearance
of burn marks on bones (Pearce and Luff 1994). So the classification of
bones as “Burned” in the Wadi Ghwair I assemblage should be viewed as
a conservative identification since there may have been other bones in the
assemblage not recorded.
4.
“Pierced” as evident by the fragments being pierced or punctured by
canine teeth
5.
“Gnawed” is apparent by specific gnawing patterns or groves left on the
surface of the bone.
6.
In addition, each element was examined for discoloration due to contact
with carnivore gnawing, pathologies, and manufacturing activities (Reitz
and Wing 2008).
66
Horizontal and Vertical Clustering of Fauna
Counts of the numbers of teeth, bones, and fragments were grouped first by
arbitrary level and then by 5 x 5 meter units to gauge the frequency distribution per unit.
These results were combined with a measurement of bone weights per 5 x 5 meter unit
plotted on a site map. Counts of bones bearing cut marks, burning, or green fractures per
unit were combined with the spatial data to evaluate possible behaviors at faunal spatial
aggregations.
Study Implications
The foregoing methodology was constructed to identify the subsistence strategy and
ecology at Ghwair I. The faunal analysis allows for inferences to be made regarding
taxonomic diversity in the faunal assemblage, the proportions of body parts in the
sample, and economic complexity of the inhabitants at the settlement. The completed
data from this study were utilized for environmental reconstruction, economic modeling,
and determining whether the inhabitants at Ghwair I practiced broad-spectrum faunal
exploitation, as previously suggested (Powell 2001). The investigation undertaken in this
study attempts to reconstruct the full range of human activities and modes of subsistence
that were practiced at Ghwair I. In addition, another area of interest is the determination
whether the occupants of Ghwair I relied primarily on Caprines for animal protein and if
their subsistence strategy reflects a focus on meat or a focus on the secondary bi-products
of the animals exploited. Such an investigation adds to our understanding and
appreciation of the “wealth” of the ecological community at Ghwair I. A diversity of
resources is indicative of a more abundant and rich economy, while a restricted range
could suggest a more marginally based economic structure (Twiss 2003).
67
CHAPTER 4
TAXONOMIC IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS
OF THE FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGE
The PPNB is associated with the increased reliance on both plants and animals.
From the onset, it is important to recognize that taphonomic processes and cultural
factors severely attenuate the faunal assemblages over time and in turn bias the resulting
data sets used to reconstruct the past economic lifeways. Given these limitations, the
bones recovered from Ghwair I are recognized as being just a small representation of the
original skeletal material from which they are derived and provide us with a limited
“snapshot” of the animals that interacted or were exploited by the past inhabitants. Still,
our understanding of the complex economic developments within these confines are still
extremely important in understanding the long process of domestication and dependence
on herds as an adaptive strategy for survival in the arid southern Levant.
During this study, the total amount of faunal material recorded and analyzed
consisted of 32,626 bone fragments (weight = 69,906 grams), coming from Areas I
through VI that were excavated during the 1996 ~ 2000 field seasons. Table 2 presents
the general characteristics of the assemblage and includes basic quantitative summaries
of the total number of fragments (TNF), bone weight, and biomass for each taxonomic
category. The color of the cortical bone surface and fracture surfaces are generally dark
brown to dark gray and heavily encrusted. The overall state of preservation of the faunal
material is generally poor with a high degree of fragmentation. As such, the percentage
of the nonidentified bones was very high (ca. 88.6%). The majority of the specimens not
68
identified to “Element Represented” were at the minimum attributed to the taxonomic
class Mammal (FN = 28,918; weight = 40,294.9g) and suggest that the recovery methods
utilizing only ¼ inch screening techniques at Ghwair I were biased in favor of medium to
larger mammals during excavation. This type of recovery bias typically results in smaller
animals, particularly microfauna and birds, being under represented in the bone
assemblage (Reitz 1985, 2008).
As noted earlier, Number of Identified Specimens (NISP) is utilized when
fragments could be identified to element and a taxonomic level. Minimum Number of
Individuals (MNI) is a derived secondary data technique used to address relative
abundance in the Ghwair I assemblage (Lyman 1994). The extent to which the Ghwair I
faunal assemblage’s NISP and MNI actually represents all taxon that contributed
economically is impacted and dependent on environmental and cultural factors. Critical
cultural factors that impact NISP include cultural decisions such as transport, butchering,
distribution of meat, cooking, disposal, and utilization of elements as tools (Reitz and
Wing 1999). It should be noted that it is within this framework of biases and constraints
that NISP and MNI were utilized in the analysis of the faunal assemblage at Ghwair I.
The NISP counts for taxon and skeletal elements represented in the Ghwair I
assemblage are presented in Table 3. Of the TNF (Total Number of Fragments = 32,626)
analyzed, 3,037 fragments were identified to skeletal element and assigned to a general
taxonomic level. Several 5x5 meter units from the site were excluded from further
analysis since they were specifically exploratory in nature to delineate architecture and
probed surface levels during the excavation phase. The resulting sub-assemblage was
69
utilized as a basic analytical unit to address the relative abundance of specimens (NISP
and MNI).
Of the identified specimens, 78% belonged to Capra taxon. Morphological
indicators or diagnostic features/landmarks typically used to identify to the two taxa to
genus level were not represented on the specimens to facilitate differentiate these
specimens specifically as either sheep or goats. An additional 7.5% of the identified
bones came from gazelle (Gazella), thus suggesting that the overwhelming majority of
medium mammal bones probably came from sheep/goats. Of the identified large
mammal specimens, 5.1% were identified to aurochs (Bos primigenius). During the
study, it is noteworthy that 3.1% was identified at the taxonomic level as Aves or lower
level within the class of Aves. In addition, 2.2% was identified at the taxonomic level as
fox (Vulpes sp.). The remaining identified taxa in the assemblage contributed less than
1% each to the overall assemblage. The more abundant mammalian macrofaunal species
and Aves are reviewed below.
Equidae
Equid remains represented 1.4 % (NISP = 42) of the total NISP of the Ghwair I
assemblage and a MNI = 3 based on epiphyseal fusion and identified side data. Several
species of wild equids are found in the southern Levant during the Pleistocene/Holocene
transition: Equus hemionus (onager), Equus ferus (wild horse), Equus africanus or asinus
(African wild ass), and Equus hydruntinus (European wild ass) (Uerpmann 1987). It
remains unclear which species are present in the Ghwair I assemblage since there is
overlap in geographical distribution of the species and the lack of key morphological
70
indicators (i.e., teeth) in the assemblage, thus making it extremely difficult to definitively
identify the specimens to species.
Both E. africanus/asinus and E. hemionus have tentatively been identified at `Ain
Ghazal and at Ba’ja (von den Driesch and Wodtke 1997, 2004). The osteometric trend
observed is that Ghwair I equids are slightly larger than those found at WFD 001 (Table
4). Both onagers and African wild asses are herd animals and prefer arid zones with
hillocks to use for surveying the landscape and as shelters from the heat of the day (Twiss
2003).
The majority of the identified bone fragments in the assemblage are from the feet
and the forelimbs (Tables 5 and 6), with no cranial fragments in the assemblage. This
may imply that the inhabitants only transported nutritionally higher portions to the site
for processing, but sample size renders this weak speculation at best. The absence of
axial elements is primarily based on the bias that the analyst introduced by excluding the
axial fragments during the analysis.
The trend that the equids at Ghwair I were on the larger end of the size scale also
suggested by comparison with equid remains found in later assemblages from the
southern Levant during the LPPNB and PPNC (Table 4). This is speculative at best
given the inadequate sample size. From the mortality profile for Equidae long bone
epiphyseal fusion data, there appears to be an even age distribution (Table 7) or
exploitation pattern of a wild species hunted rather than a targeted age of development
pattern reflected in mortality profiles of culturally managed species. The mortality
profile reflects that all animals survived past 12 months, 82% past 30 months, and 77%
past 42 months.
71
Table 2. Ghwair I Faunal Assemblage: Total Number of Fragments by Taxon
Taxonomic ID
Assignment
Mammalia (Indeterminate)
Erinaceidae
Canis sp.
Hyaena hyaena
Vulpes vulpes
Felis sp.
Equidae
Bos primigenius
Caprine
Capra sp.
Gazella sp.
Sus scrofa
Dama mesopotamia
Lepus cf. capensis
Rodentia
Number of
Fragments (NF)
29,589
6
4
1
69
11
42
157
2088
280
229
21
2
15
7
Wt (g.)
Biomass (kg.)
40294.9
1.4
4.0
1.0
58.6
13.0
2035.1
8013.0
17518.4
666.7
1081.1
173.8
3.0
13.0
3.4
367.05
0.036
0.092
0.026
1.026
0.265
24.988
85.786
173.438
9.153
14.141
2.729
0.071
0.265
0.079
Aves (Indeterminate)
Alectoris chukar
Anatidae
Accipitridae
Columba cf. livia
Coracias garrulus
Corvus sp.
56
8
2
17
6
1
3
16.9
0.8
0.2
2.0
0.4
0.1
0.4
0.268
0.017
0.005
0.038
0.009
0.001
0.009
Reptilia (Indeterminate)
11
2.8
0.039
Amphibia (Indeterminate)
1
2.0
0.015
32,626
69,906
679.546
Total:
72
Table 3. Ghwair I Taxonomic Distribution by % NISP.
Taxon
NISP
% NISP
Erinaceidae
Canis sp.
Hyaena hyaena
Vulpes vulpes
Felis sp.
Equidae
Bos primigenius
Caprine
Capra sp.
Gazella sp.
Sus scrofa
Cervidae
Lepus cf. capensis
Rodentia
6
4
1
69
11
42
157
2,088
280
229
21
2
15
7
0.2
<0.1
<0.1
2.3
0.4
1.4
5.2
68.8
9.2
7.5
0.7
<0.1
0.5
0.2
Aves
Alectoris chukar
Anatidae
Accipitridae
Columba cf. livia
Coracias garrulus
Corvus sp.
56
8
2
17
6
1
3
1.8
0.3
<0.1
0.6
0.2
<0.1
0.1
Reptilia
11
0.4
1
<0.1
Amphibia
Totals:
3,037
100.0
73
Table 4. Comparative Equidae measurements from selected PPN sites.
Measurement
Site
Era
N
Astragalus (GB)
WFD 001
LPPNB
1
47.2
`Ain Ghazal LPPNB-PPNC
4
Ghwair I
MPPNB
WFD 001
LPPNB
Astragalus (GH)
Phalanx II (Gl)
Mean
SD
C.v.
49.0~50.5
49.8
0.7
1.4
2
54.2~56.9
55.5
1.9
3.4
1
48.0
`Ain Ghazal LPPNB-PPNC
4
46.0~53.0
49.4
1.7
3.4
Ghwair I
MPPNB
2
54.8~55.9
55.4
0.8
1.4
WFD 001
LPPNB
3
35.0~38.0
37.0
1.7
4.6
Ba’ja
LPPNB
2
37.0~40.8
38.9
2.7
6.9
`Ain Ghazal MPPNB-LN
9
36.5~43.0
39.5
2.5
6.3
Ghwair I
1
42.6
MPPNB
Range
Modified after Twiss 2007. Measurements follow von den Driesch (1976): GB-Greatest
Breadth; GH-Greatest Height; Gl-Greatest length)
Table 5. Equidae body parts/NISP distribution from Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
0
0
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
0
0
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
15
36
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
5
12
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
22
52
42
100
Total
74
Table 6. Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Equidae.
Element
One
Complete
Equidae
Cranium
Mandible
Atlas
Axis
Cervical
Thoracic
Lumbar
Rib
Sternum
Scapula
Humerus prox.
Humerus distal
Radius prox.
Radius distal
Ulna prox.
Ulna distal
Carpals
Metacarpus prox.
Metacarpus distal
Pelvis
Femur prox.
Femur distal
Tibia prox.
Tibia distal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Metatarsus prox.
Metatarsus distal
Phalanx 1
Phalanx 2
Phalanx 3
1
2
1
1
5
18
6
36
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
14
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
MNE
Expected *
3
6
3
3
15
54
18
8
3
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
42
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
12
12
12
MNE
Observed
%
Survival
MAU
%
MAU
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
2
3
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
5
3
2
0
2
2
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
16.67
33.33
50.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
33.33
16.67
0.00
83.33
50.00
33.33
0.00
16.67
16.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.50
0.50
1.00
1.50
1.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.50
0.00
2.50
1.50
1.00
0.00
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.60
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.40
0.20
0.00
1.00
0.60
0.40
0.00
0.20
0.20
0.00
* Note: MNE Expected based on Klein and Cruz-Uribe Method (1984:108)
75
Table 7. Epiphyseal Fusion Data for Equidae long bone specimens at Ghwair I.
Stage
Elements
Fused
Unfused
<12 months
phalanx 2 proximal
2
0
distal humerus
proximal radius
pelvis
distal tibia
distal metapodia
phalanx 1 proximal
2
4
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
proximal humerus
distal radius
ulna
proximal femur
distal femur
proximal tibia
calcaneus
1
1
0
0
1
1
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
12~30 months
30~42 months
Total
18
4
Note: Epiphyseal fusion timing after Davis (1980) and Silver (1970).
Bos primigenius
During the analysis of the Ghwair I assemblage, Bos primigenius was found to
represent 5.2% of the total NISP (NISP = 157) and a MNI = 4 based on epiphyseal fusion
and the specimen’s side data. The majority of the specimens identified were
appendicular, primarily represented by long bones and the lower limbs (Table 8 and
Table 9). Modern day breeds of cattle in the Middle East are the result of a long
selection process that started around 8,000 years ago and ultimately led to domestication
(Twiss 2003). The wild progenitor of the domestic cattle was the extinct aurochs, Bos
76
primigenius. The geographical distribution of the aurochs was quite widespread in the
Middle East and included the areas of the southern Levant.
Even though Bos primigenius is very adaptable, it was essentially an animal that
favors woodland vegetation with open grasslands, marshy areas, and alluvial plains that
had a large supply of water (Ducos, 1991; Uerpmann 1987). As far as the process of
domestication is concerned, there is some debate about the period and area in which
domestication first occurred. In general, it is suggested that cattle were introduced into
the area in domesticated form at a later time than in the northern regions. Domestication
is clearly present during the PPNC (8100~7600 BP) components of the southern Levant
(Twiss 2003). Horwitz et al. (1999) and Helmer (1989) have argued that the beginning
of cattle domestication occurred even earlier during the PPNB at sites such as Ras
Shamra on the Syrian coast and Abou Gosh in Palestine. Overall, data from earlier sites
in the region, such as Nasta and Khirbet el Hammam, generally show a minor reliance on
cattle with an NISP under 4% during the Late PPNB (Becker, 2002; Peterson, 2004).
Similarly, data from MPPNB site of Beidha reflected a similar pattern of minor reliance
with a reported NISP of 3.1% (Hecker, 1982).
Focusing on sites near Ghwair I, like Wadi Faynan 16 (WF 16), Bos primigenius
bones represent 8% of the NISP for the PPNA faunal assemblage (Carruthers and Dennis,
2007). As noted by Twiss (2007), this is close to the mean frequency (9.9%) of aurochs
found at sites at lower elevations of the Jordan Valley. Additionally, Carruthers and
Dennis (2007) found that the majority of the bones were appendicular, primarily
represented by long bones and the lower limbs. Based on their findings, they concluded
that the inhabitants of nearby WF 16 hunted and butchered aurochs offsite and
77
transported only meat-bearing bones back to WF16 for final preparation and
consumption, referred to as the “schlepp effect” (Perkins and Daly 1968). Theoretically,
human hunters tend to carry only parts of their prey back to their home base worth the
labor investment to transport at a distance when compared to the return or yield of the
investment, the payoff. The "schlepp effect" is linked to both the size of the animal
slaughtered and the distance between procurement and the consumers home (Perkins and
Daly 1968). The assumption that is lighter and more nutritious parts of animals are
transported to consumption and processing sites, while less nutritional and heavier axial
skeletal elements tend to be at kill or butchering sites. In addition to the proportions of
appendicular bones noted, Carruthers and Dennis (2007) also found that their mortality
profiles indicated that primarily juvenile individuals were targeted by the inhabitants of
WF16 based on analysis of epiphyseal fusion data.
At WFD 001, located less than 10 km from Ghwair I and WF16, Twiss’s (2007)
analysis of the faunal assemblage has revealed that there was a significant increase in
reliance on aurochs (13.1%) during the LPPNB component. She attributed the higher
proportions of cattle to local ecological factors, such as relatively moister environment
that would naturally support a higher carrying capacity.
Based on the relative frequency of Bos primigenius specimens identified in the
assemblages at WF16, Ghwair I, and WFD 001, it seems likely that relatively moister
micro-environment existed to some degree in or near Wadi Fidan/Wadi Ghwair/Wadi
Faynan during the PPNA and PPNB that naturally supported far more cattle than did
other areas in the arid south of the southern Levant. Additionally, high numbers of cattle
may also be linked to some form of human manipulation or control rather than hunting.
78
Unfortunately, the Ghwair I assemblage size and the extent of fragmentation prevented
me from addressing the domestication status of cattle at the site definitively.
In the Ghwair I assemblage, cattle seem to be similar in size to cattle found in
later assemblages from the southern Levant during the LPPNB and PPNC (Table 10). In
addition, the variety of skeletal elements represented in the Ghwair I assemblage (Table
8), following the line of reasoning offered by Twiss (2007) and Carruthers and Dennis
(2007), suggest that the cattle were processed at the site. The even distribution of
identified body parts, even with the analyst bias against axial fragment identification,
implies that cattle possibly lived in close proximity to Ghwair I and could suggest further
that the inhabitants were practicing some form of cultural control or management to
encourage that close proximity (Twiss 2007).
Table 8. Bos primigenius body parts/NISP distribution for Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Horncore, cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
13
8
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
3
2
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
37
24
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
32
20
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
72
46
157
100
Total
79
Table 9. Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Bos primigenius.
Element
One
Complete
Bovid
Horn
Cranium
Mandible
Atlas
Axis
Cervical
Thoracic
Lumbar
Rib
Sternum
Scapula
Humerus proximal
Humerus distal
Radius proximal
Radius distal
Ulna Proximal
Ulna distal
Carpals
Metacarpus proximal
Metacarpus distal
Pelvis
Femur proximal
Femur distal
Tibia proximal
Tibia distal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Metatarsus proximal
Metatarsus distal
Phalanx 1
Phalanx 2
Phalanx 3
2
1
2
1
1
5
13
6
26
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
12
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
8
MNE
MNE
Expected* Observed
8
4
8
4
4
20
52
24
104
4
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
48
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
32
32
32
3
1
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
4
2
3
0
0
2
1
5
3
2
0
2
2
3
3
6
4
3
0
10
8
6
%
Survival
MAU
37.50
25.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
25.00
37.50
0.00
0.00
25.00
12.50
10.42
37.50
25.00
0.00
25.00
25.00
37.50
37.50
75.00
50.00
37.50
0.00
31.25
25.00
18.75
1.50
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
1.00
1.50
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.50
0.42
1.50
1.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.50
1.50
3.00
2.00
1.50
0.00
1.25
1.00
0.75
* Note: MNE Expected based on Klein and Cruz-Uribe Method (1984:108)
80
%
MAU
0.50
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.67
0.33
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.33
0.17
0.14
0.50
0.33
0.00
0.33
0.33
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.67
0.50
0.00
0.42
0.33
0.25
Table 10. Comparative Bos primigenius measurements from selected PPN sites in the
southern Levant.
Measurement
Site
Era
N
Range
Mean
SD C.v.
Astragalus (Bd)
Nahal Hemar
`Ain Ghazal
Basta
WFD 001
`Ain Ghazal
Ghwair I
MPPNB
M-LPPNB
LPPNB
LPPNB
PPNC
MPPNB
2
1
8
7
2
2
51.8~56.1
48.0
45.5~59.4
42.1~49.5
47.0~50.0
47.6~55.0
53.9
3.04 5.6
48.9
46.1
48.5
51.3
4.7
2.4
2.1
5.2
9.6
5.2
4.3
10.1
Jericho
Nahal Hemar
`Ain Ghazal
Basta
WFD 001
`Ain Ghazal
Ghwair I
PPNA/PPNB
MPPNB
M~LPPNB
LPPNB
LPPNB
PPNC
MPPNB
1
2
1
8
9
2
4
80.85
83.0~84.5
76
70.9~89.2
58.7~81.6
76.0~80.0
74.1~81.3
83.75
1.1
1.3
74.5
72.2
78.0
77.4
6.3
6.5
2.8
3.8
8.5
9.0
3.6
4.8
Phalanx I (Bp)
Beidha
`Ain Ghazal
Basta
WFD 001
`Ain Ghazal
Ghwair I
MPPNB
M~LPPNB
LPPNB
LPPNB
PPNC
MPPNB
12
3
13
17
2
4
29.8~40.3
32.0~37.0
31.7~45.7
27.5~40.0
28.2~31.0
34.3~38.8
34.6
35.0
35.4
34.1
29.6
35.65
3.0
2.7
3.5
3.9
2.0
2.13
8.7
7.7
9.9
11.4
6.8
5.97
Phalanx II (Bp)
Basta
`Ain Ghazal
`Ain Ghazal
WFD 001
Ghwair I
LPPNB
LPPNB
LPPNB/PPNC
LPPNB
MPPNB
12
4
5
14
5
30.6~37.7
30.0~38.5
29.5~35.0
29.3~36.8
30.8~38.9
34.2
34.4
32.1
32.6
34.3
2.5
4.2
2.4
1.4
3.11
7.3
12.2
7.5
4.3
9.0
MPPNB
LPPNB
LPPNB
LPPNB/PPNC
LPPNB
MPPNB
10
3
2
4
6
1
67.4~79.3
59.1~91.7
71.5~95.0
58.0~78.0
74.2~81.5
71.1
73.6
74.8
83.3
63.4
78.3
3.6
16
17
9.8
3.2
4.9
21.4
20.4
15.5
4.1
Astragalus (GL1)
Phalanx III (DLS)
Nahal Hemar
Basta
`Ain Ghazal
`Ain Ghazal
WFD 001
Ghwair I
(Modified after Twiss 2007)
81
Table 11. Epiphyseal fusion data for Bos primigenius long bone specimens at Ghwair I.
Stage
Elements
Fused
Unfused
< 12 months
pelvis
scapula
0
6
0
1
distal humerus
proximal radius
phalanx 1 proximal
phalanx 2 proximal
2
6
10
8
3
0
0
1
distal tibia
metapodia
phalanx 1 proximal
phalanx 2 proximal
2
6
2
3
3
8
0
0
proximal humerus
proximal ulna
distal ulna
distal radius
proximal femur
distal femur
proximal tibia
calcaneus
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
0
0
2
1
0
1
1
12~24 months
24~36 months
36~48 months
Total:
48
24
Note: Epiphyseal fusion timing after Davis (1980) and Silver (1970).
The mortality profile for Bos bones identified suggest an expected age
distribution (Table 11) or exploitation pattern that targeted the species at a specific age of
development. The mortality profile reflects 86% surviving past 12 months, 87% past 24
months, 54% past 36 months, and only 27% past 48 months.
82
Caprines and Capra sp.
The occupants of Ghwair I appear to have relied primarily on caprines based on
their relatively high NISP frequency in the assemblage at 78% of the total NISP and a
MNI = 60 based on epiphyseal fusion and identified side data. Of the specimens
identified as caprines, 280 (MNI = 21) were identifiable to the genus Capra, which is the
probable taxon represented by most of the specimens identified as caprine based on the
absence of any specimens specifically being identified to the genus Ovis.
Currently, our understanding of the geographical distribution of Capra in the past
and present suggest the possibility of two species inhabiting the region around Ghwair I.
Because of parapatric distribution, the Capra ibex (Ibex) inhabiting the lower elevational
zones of Wadi Araba to Dead Sea and Capra aegagrus (Bezoar goat) higher up on the
Jordanian Plateau (Tchernov and Bar-Yosef 1982). The transitional location of Ghwair I
between these two zones would have possibly facilitated the exploitation of either species
or both by the inhabitants at Ghwair I. Delineation of the two species typically focuses
on soft tissue and horn cores. Since only seven horn core fragments were recovered from
the Ghwair I faunal assemblage, specimens identified within the assemblage to the genus
of Capra were recorded as Capra sp. to encapsulate both species as adopted by
Carruthers and Dennis (2007) at WF16.
Behaviorally, the ibex inhabit rocky and steep mountain terrain and has adapted
well to climbing with great agility in these settings. In the wild, it usually lives in small
herds comprised of three to six individuals and follows an older male (Harrison and Bates
1991). Ibex have been observed in the Sinai following an east-west transect while
grazing during the day, starting on eastward facing slopes and ending on southwesterly
83
slopes by evening, as an adaptation to extreme temperature swings in higher elevations as
the sun sets (Baharav and Meiboom 1982). In addition, ibex shelter in the evenings in
locations that have crevices between large rocks to absorb stored solar radiation that is
being emitted in an effort to combat the rapid drop in air temperature which occurs in the
evenings.
Ibex adults feed on annual forbs or non-wooded, broad leaved plants that have a
high nutrient value during the winter and then shift towards shrubs and wilted annuals
during warmer seasons. The high nutrient values of forbs during the winter correlate
with the mating season and birth rates. Rutting season typically occurs during the
autumn months between October and November, followed typically by birthing of a
single kid after six months of gestation (Hakham1985). Following birth, there is a
maternal nutritional investment for six months and the kids live in nursery bands with
females and subadult individuals exploiting a home range approximately one km2. Ibex
birthing rates are heavily dependent on rainfall and the subsequent availability of
vegetation (Harrison and Bates 1991).
Bezoar goats have also adapted to rocky terrain and are quite agile in rocky ledges
and ridges, with a great sense of balance and the ability to leap. Their herd patterns in the
wild range from solitary to herds numbering in the hundreds, being led by an old male
member. Older males inhabit the higher elevations during the summer months, while
females and their young are found on the lower ridges. During winter months, the herd
aggregates back together in the lower elevations to exploit resources in bushier biotic
zones, sometimes as low as sea level. Bezoar goats feed primarily on mountain grasses,
shoots of small species of oak and cedar, and various berries (Harrison and Bates 1991).
84
While similar patterns in gestation and suckling have been observed between Bezoar and
Ibex goats, there seems to be a noteworthy difference in reproductive strategy and
investment. Bezoar females have one to three kids per litter and the young seem to stay
with the mother for more than one year.
The identification of basic faunal subsistence patterns practiced by the inhabitants
at Ghwair I, based solely on the relative frequencies of taxa, is focused on the
exploitation of caprines given their overwhelming contribution of bone in the
assemblage. This raises important questions with regards the notable reliance on
domesticates as opposed to wild species and the relative levels of reliance on goats as
opposed to other areas where sheep were domesticated and utilized. Domesticated goats
were utilized earlier in the area than sheep, but recent studies have challenged the notion
that there would not have been any sheep in the PPNB faunal assemblages (Henry 2003).
Within the Ghwair I assemblage, there were no clear indications for the presence of
sheep in the specimens identified to species level.
Given the transitional zone of Ghwair I within the natural distribution of Ibex and
Bezoar goats, the exploitation of Capra as a protein source would be a reasonable
subsistence strategy for the inhabitants. Based on the village size, labor investment into
public works, and permanence of the architecture at Ghwair I, the possibility of cultural
manipulation or domestication should be considered even in absence of key elements
containing morphological indicators in the assemblage. Interestingly, no evidence has
been offered for age selective culling or herd management of Capra ibex in the southern
Levant during the PPNB (Horwitz 1993; Horwitz and Ducos 1998, Zeder and Hesse
2000; Wasse 2000). Given our current understanding of the behavioral patterns of ibex
85
and the lack of evidence for ibex ever being domesticated in the archaeological record,
the Ghwair I Capra sp. specimens are probably dominated by Capra aegagrus remains,
although the possibility of both species being exploited is not ruled out.
Since domesticated goats have been documented and shown to have been the
dominant species in other faunal assemblages from the southern Levant during the
LPPNB, the prevalence of goat remains at Ghwair I fits well with the regional
subsistence patterns. While high proportions of goats have been taken as evidence for
domestication elsewhere in the southern Levant, it should be noted that 78% of the bones
from the nearby PPNA site of Wadi Faynan 16 are identified as wild goats, Capra sp.
(either aegagrus or ibex) (Carruthers and Dennis 2007). Therefore, it seems that the
proportions of goat remains at Ghwair I is indicative of some degree of herd management
already developing in the area.
Although body size is a highly problematic marker of animal domestication
(Zeder 2001), it is still commonly used line of evidence. Table 12 compares Ghwair I's
Capra measurements against measurements from goats from other PPN and LN sites in
the region. It is interesting that the pattern observed by Twiss (2003) concerning the
mean sizes of Capra at WFD 001 were relatively similar to the means at other sites
where domesticated goats were identified and dominated the assemblages, such as Ba’ja
and LPPNB/PPNC/LN `Ain Ghazal, is reflected earlier during the MPPNB at Ghwair I.
This possibly suggests that most of the goats might have been culturally manipulated or
managed to some level in addition to wild goats or ibexes (Capra aegagrus/ibex) being
present. This pattern resembles the one seen later at other LPPNB sites. The Ghwair I and
WFD 001 goat/ibex remains are slightly larger than those from PPNA Faynan 16, which
86
may be attributable to ecological amelioration from the PPNA to the PPNB, or perhaps to
closer genetic links between PPNB domestic populations at different sites (Twiss 2003).
Given the established relative frequencies of skeletal parts in a complete single
individual (Table 15), this analytical tool can be used to assess the completeness of the
fauna and predict what should be found in the assemblage if taphonomic processes have
not resulted in the removal or differential destruction of certain kinds of bones, and as
Lyman (1994:223) notes, sampling and recovery processes have not failed in recovery of
certain types of skeletal parts. Documenting frequency of skeletal parts in relation to
their nutritional and density values is usual as an analytical tool in inferring the
mechanisms involved in their modification and identifying the agent(s) or processes
responsible for accumulation (Lyman 1994:189). Analysis of differential survivorship of
skeletal parts was performed by comparing expected and observed MNE values and
recording the calculated percentage of survival (% Survival) along with their density and
economic values for the principal taxa, Caprines, and for Capra sp.
Caprine body parts based on NISP for the assemblage are presented in Table 13
and their skeletal elements and % Survival are presented in Table 17 and in Figure 1.
The percent survivorship of Caprine skeletal parts along with their density values are
presented in descending order in Table 17 after Atici (2007).
From these data, it is apparent that all skeletal elements are represented in the
assemblage in varying proportions. Astragali, distal tibiae, scapulae, pelves, and crania
are represented in proportions 50 percent or higher of the expected. In contrast, nine
skeletal part categories are represented in proportions of less than 20 percent. Given the
fact that low-density elements such as distal femur, distal radius, proximal tibia, axis and
87
Table 12. Comparative Capra measurements from southern Levant PPN and LN sites.
Measurement
Humerus (Bd)
Humerus (BT)
Radius (BFp)
Astragalus (Bd)
Site
Faynan 16
Era
PPNA
N
3
Range
25.9~30.2
Mean SD C.v.
28.1 2.14 7.6
Beidha
I
8
30.9~36.4
34
1.6
4.8
Beidha
II-III
124
26.0~43.8
33.5
3.6
10.9
Beidha
IV-V
113
25.5~45.0
32.8
3.7
11.2
Beidha
VI-VIII
45
27.7~39.8
32.2
2.6
8.2
WFD 001
LPPNB
51
29.3~42
34.9
3.6
10.3
Ghwair I
MPPNB
12
29.2~38.0
33.3
2.6
7.8
`Ain Ghazal
M-LPPNB
26
29.0~42.0
33.5
3.4 10.1
Ba'ja
LPPNB
24
28.0~36.5
32.7
2.5
7.6
WFD 001
LPPNB
55
28.9~39.6
33.5
3.0
9.0
`Ain Ghazal
PPNC
18
28.0~38.5
33.3
3.1
9.3
Ghwair I
MPPNB
11
27.6~38.2
32.8
2.9
8.8
WFD 001
LPPNB
35
25.3~38.8
31.7
3.1
9.8
`Ain Ghazal
LPPNB
8
28.5~38.0
33.3
3.7
11.1
Ba'ja
LPPNB
11
28.8~34.5
30.7
1.8
5.9
`Ain Ghazal
LN
6
30.0~38.0
34.8
2.9
8.3
Ghwair I
MPPNB
15
29.2~37.6
33.5
2.7
8.1
Faynan 16
PPNA
4
17.6~18.0
17.8
0.15 0.8
`Ain Ghazal
M-LPPNB
34
17.0~24.0
20.8
1.85 8.9
Ba'ja
LPPNB
12
17.5~22.0
20.1
1.47 7.3
WFD 001
LPPNB
61
15.6~22.4
19.24 1.57 8.2
`Ain Ghazal
PPNC, LN
27
16.0~28.8
20.2
2.49 12.3
MPPNB
13
17.7~23.7
20.2
1.6
Ghwair I
(Modified after Twiss 2007)
88
7.9
Table 13. Caprine body parts/NISP distribution for Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Horncore, cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
289
24
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
72
3
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
421
20
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
514
24
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
829
39
2125
100
Total
Table 14. Capra sp. body parts/NISP distribution for Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Horncore, cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
10
3
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
10
3
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
104
37
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
19
7
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
142
50
285
100
Total
89
Table 15. Frequency of major skeletal elements in a single mature skeleton
Element
Bovid/Cervid
Horn
2
Cranium
1
Mandible
2
Atlas
1
Axis
1
Cervical
5
Thoracic
13
Lumbar
6~7
Rib
26
Sternum
1(6)
Scapula
2
Humerus proximal
2
Humerus distal
2
Radius proximal
2
Radius distal
2
Ulna Proximal
2
Ulna distal
2
Carpals
12
Metacarpus proximal
2
Metacarpus distal
2
Sacrum
1(4~5)
Pelvis
2
Femur proximal
2
Femur distal
2
Tibia proximal
2
Tibia distal
2
Astragalus
2
Calcaneus
2
Metatarsus proximal
2
Metatarsus distal
2
Phalanx 1
8
Phalanx 2
8
Phalanx 3
8
(Modified after Lyman (2008:228) Table 6.4)
90
Equid
Suid
1
2
1
1
5
18
6
36
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
14
2
2
1(5)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
2
1
1
5
14~15
6~7
28~30
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
16
8
8
1(4)
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
16
16
16
Table 16. Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Caprines.
Element
One
MNE MNE
%
Complete
(Exp.)* (Obs.) Survival
Bovid
Density
%
MAU MAU MGUI
Horn
2
78
8
10.26
0
4.00
Cranium
1
78
12
15.38
0
12.00
Mandible
2
78
14
17.95
0.55
7.00
Atlas
1
39
10
25.64
0.11
10.00
Axis
1
39
9
23.08
0.14
9.00
Cervical
5
195
0
0.00
0.13
0.00
Thoracic
13
507
0
0.00
0.24
0.00
Lumbar
6
234
0
0.00
0.22
0.00
Rib
26
1014
0
0.00
0.25
0.00
Sternum
1
39
0
0.00
0.22
0.00
Scapula
2
56
27
48.21
0.33
13.50
Humerus prox.
2
56
8
14.29
0.13
4.00
Humerus distal
2
78
39
50.00
0.34
19.50
Radius prox.
2
78
23
29.49
0.36
11.50
Radius distal
2
78
33
42.31
0.21
16.50
Carpals
12
468
46
9.83
0.48
3.83
Metacarpus prox.
2
78
43
55.13
0.55
21.50
Metacarpus distal
2
78
19
24.36
0.44
9.50
Pelvis
2
78
23
29.49
0.26
11.50
Femur prox.
2
78
30
38.46
0.28
15.00
Femur distal
2
78
55
70.51
0.22
27.50
Tibia prox.
2
78
18
23.08
0.16
9.00
Tibia distal
2
78
77
98.72
0.36
38.50
Astragalus
2
78
7
8.97
0.63
3.50
Calcaneus
2
78
34
43.59
0.58
17.00
Metatarsus prox.
2
78
45
57.69
0.68
22.50
Metatarsus distal
2
78
13
16.67
0.39
6.50
Phalanx 1
8
312 194
62.18
0.55
24.25
Phalanx 2
8
312
89
28.53
0.40
11.13
Phalanx 3
8
312
43
13.78
0.30
5.38
* Note: MNE Expected based on Klein and Cruz-Uribe Method (1984:108)
91
0.10 1.03
0.31 12.87
0.18 43.60
0.26 18.68
0.23 18.68
0.00 55.33
0.00 46.49
0.00 38.90
0.00 100.00
0.00 90.52
0.35 45.06
0.10 37.28
0.51 32.79
0.30 24.30
0.43 20.06
0.10 13.43
0.56 10.11
0.25 8.45
0.30 81.50
0.39 80.58
0.71 80.58
0.23 51.99
1.00 37.70
0.09 23.08
0.44 23.08
0.58 15.77
0.17 12.11
0.63 8.22
0.29 8.22
0.14 8.22
Table 17. % Survivorship of Caprine Skeletal Parts, along with their density values
(Lyman 1994) and arranged categorically and in descending order after Atici (2007).
Skeletal Elements
Density Category
% Survival
Metatarsus proximal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Phalanx 1
Metacarpus proximal
Mandible
Carpals
Metacarpus distal
Phalanx 2
Metatarsus distal
0.68
0.63
0.58
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.48
0.44
0.40
0.39
High
57.7
9.0
43.6
62.2
55.1
17.9
9.8
24.4
28.5
16.7
Tibia distal
Radius proximal
Humerus distal
Scapula
Phalanx 3
Femur proximal
0.36
0.36
0.34
0.33
0.30
0.28
Medium
98.7
29.5
50.0
48.2
13.8
38.5
Pelvis
Rib
Thoracic vertebra
Femur distal
Sternum
Lumbar vertebra
Radius distal
Tibia proximal
Axis
Humerus proximal
Cervical vertebra
Atlas
Cranium
Horncore
0.26
0.25
0.24
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.21
0.16
0.14
0.13
0.13
0.11
-
Low
29.5
0.0
0.0
70.5
0.0
0.0
42.3
23.1
23.1
14.3
0.0
25.6
15.4
10.3
92
Figure 1. % Skeletal Parts in the Ghwair I Assemblage for Caprines after Atici (2007).
93
% MAU
Bone Density
Figure 2. Scatter plot showing the relationship between bone density and % MAU for
Caprine.
% MAU
Bone Density
Figure 3. Scatter plot showing the relationship between bone density and % MAU for
Capra sp.
94
Table 18. Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Capra sp.
Element
Horn
Cranium
Mandible
Atlas
Axis
Cervical
Thoracic
Lumbar
Rib
Sternum
Scapula
Humerus prox.
Humerus distal
Radius prox.
Radius distal
Carpals
Metacarpus prox.
Metacarpus distal
Pelvis
Femur prox.
Femur distal
Tibia prox.
Tibia distal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Metatarsus prox.
Metatarsus distal
Phalanx 1
Phalanx 2
Phalanx 3
One
MNE MNE
%
Complete
(Exp.)* (Obs.) Survival
Bovid
2
1
2
1
1
5
13
6
26
1
2
2
2
2
2
12
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
8
42
21
42
21
21
105
273
126
546
21
42
42
42
42
42
252
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
42
168
168
168
6
2
1
3
7
0
0
0
0
0
18
0
30
24
13
0
0
3
9
4
0
0
0
39
38
1
1
12
4
26
14.29
9.52
2.38
14.29
33.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
42.86
0.00
71.43
57.14
30.95
0.00
0.00
7.14
21.43
9.52
0.00
0.00
0.00
92.86
90.48
2.38
2.38
7.14
2.38
15.48
Density
N/A
N/A
0.55
0.11
0.14
0.13
0.24
0.22
0.25
0.22
0.33
0.13
0.34
0.36
0.21
0.48
0.55
0.44
0.26
0.28
0.22
0.16
0.36
0.63
0.58
0.68
0.39
0.55
0.40
0.30
%
MAU MAU
3.00
2.00
0.50
3.00
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.00
0.00
15.00
12.00
6.50
0.00
0.00
1.50
4.50
2.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
19.50
19.00
0.50
0.50
1.50
0.50
3.25
* Note: MNE Expected based on Klein and Cruz-Uribe Method (1984:108)
95
0.15
0.10
0.03
0.15
0.36
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.46
0.00
0.77
0.62
0.33
0.00
0.00
0.08
0.23
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.97
0.03
0.03
0.08
0.03
0.17
Table 19. % Survivorship of Capra sp. skeletal parts, along with their density values
(Lyman 1994) and arranged categorically and in descending order after Atici (2007).
Skeletal Elements
Density
Category
% Survival
Metatarsus proximal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Phalanx 1
Metacarpus proximal
Mandible
Carpals
Metacarpus distal
Phalanx 2
Metatarsus distal
0.68
0.63
0.58
0.55
0.55
0.55
0.48
0.44
0.40
0.39
High
2.4
92.9
90.5
7.1
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
2.4
2.4
Tibia distal
Radius proximal
Humerus distal
Scapula
Phalanx 3
Femur proximal
0.36
0.36
0.34
0.33
0.30
0.28
Medium
0.0
57.1
71.4
42.9
15.5
9.5
Pelvis
Rib
Thoracic vertebra
Femur distal
Sternum
Lumbar vertebra
Radius distal
Tibia proximal
Axis
Humerus proximal
Cervical vertebra
Atlas
Cranium
Horncore
0.26
0.25
0.24
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.21
0.16
0.14
0.13
0.13
0.11
-
Low
21.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
31.0
0.0
33.3
0.0
0.0
14.3
9.5
14.3
96
Figure 4. % Skeletal Parts in the Ghwair I Assemblage for Capra sp.
97
atlas preserved well even with the analyst bias against axial fragment identification,
suggest that it is not likely that the pattern documented at Ghwair I can be attributed only
density-mediated bone destruction. If bone destruction were density dependent, we
would expect the pattern to be biased against low-density bones and dominated by highand medium-density bones.
The relationship between bone density values and % MAU values for Caprines
were assessed for their degree of correlation through a scatter plot (Figure 2) and the use
of Spearman’s rank correlation statistic (Spearman’s rho) to determine whether there is a
real correlation between the bone density and % MAU and its statistical significance.
The Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient value is 0.146, indicating weak positive
correlation, but not statistically significant (Sig. (2-tailed)=0.507; N=23).
For comparative purposes, the elements identified to a lower taxonomic level of
Capra sp. were also analyzed for their % Survival as presented in Tables 18 and 19, their
% survivorship in skeletal parts graphically represented in Figure 3.
Table 19 presents the % survivorship of Capra sp. skeletal parts and their density
values in descending order. There is a higher rate of bone loss and a lower rate of bone
survivorship for Capra sp. in comparison to the data for Caprines, but this particular
pattern may be an artifact of the sample size and the analyst’s ability to distinguish
morphological characteristics in delineating Caprines specifically. Small sample size and
other complex phenomena, such as recovery biases, may better explain the pattern
observed rather than density-mediated attrition. What is interesting to note is the over
representation of astragali and calcanei, both of which can be attributed to the
98
compactness and hardness of the bone and the distinguishable characteristics present to
make lower level taxonomic assessments.
The relationship between bone density values and % MAU values for Capra sp.
were also assessed for the degree of correlation through a scatter plot (Figure 4) and the
use of Spearman’s rank correlation statistic. The Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient
value is -0.549, indicating moderate negative correlation that is statistically significant
(Sig. (2-tailed)=0.023; N=17), but in light of the forgoing discussion, this may be more a
consequence of sample size and analytical bias.
Epiphyseal fusion patterns indicate significant caprine mortality between the ages
of 2 and 3 years (Tables 20 and 21). Specimens identified as caprines show 91% survival
at 10 months and 69% survive past the 10 to 30 months stage, but only 35% past the 30
to 36 month stage, and 21% survive past the 36 to 42 months (subadult stage). Capra sp.
specimens indicate that 97% of animals survived past the age of 10 months, 82% past the
10 to 30 months stage, 63% past the 30 to 36 months stage, and no evidence present in
the assemblage for identified specimens past 36 to 42 months (subadult stage). Based on
the epiphyseal fusion data presented, many of these animals were slaughtered before they
reached full maturity. Bones from all areas of the body were found in roughly equal
proportions, suggesting they were slaughtering in or quite close to the settlement itself
and were optimizing for highest return on meat. When emphasis is placed on meat
production, slaughter in the late second or third year typically provides the highest meat
return for feed cost (Twiss 2003). However, it is also consistent with a focus on
exploitation of secondary products such as milk and hair in addition to meat.
99
Table 20. Epiphyseal fusion data for Caprine long bone specimens from Ghwair I.
Stage
Elements
Fused
Unfused
< 10 months
distal scapula
distal humerus
proximal radius
10
57
41
4
3
3
phalanx 1 proximal
phalanx 2 proximal
distal tibia
distal metacarpal
distal metatarsal
distal metapodial
120
64
70
17
11
15
33
16
27
10
3
42
calcaneus
distal radius
proximal femur
proximal ulna
14
19
20
8
29
35
22
28
distal femur
proximal humerus
proximal tibia
11
3
14
69
10
28
10~30 months
30~36 months
36~42 months
Total
494
362
Note: Epiphyseal fusion timing after Davis (1980) and Silver (1970).
100
Table 21. Epiphyseal fusion data for Capra sp. long bone specimens from Ghwair I.
Stage
Elements
Fused
Unfused
< 10 months
distal scapula
distal humerus
proximal radius
16
30
27
1
1
0
phalanx 1 proximal
phalanx 2 proximal
distal tibia
distal metacarpal
distal metatarsal
distal metapodial
9
3
0
3
1
3
1
1
0
0
calcaneus
distal radius
proximal femur
proximal ulna
24
8
4
2
13
7
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
10~30 months
2
30~36 months
36~42 months
distal femur
proximal humerus
proximal tibia
Total
130
28
Note: Epiphyseal fusion timing after Davis (1980) and Silver (1970).
Gazella sp.
Within the Ghwair I assemblage, 229 specimens in that were identifiable
taxonomically to Gazella sp., which represents about 7.5% of the total NISP in the
assemblage and a MNI = 5 based on epiphyseal fusion and identified side data.
Currently, three species of gazelle have been recovered from archaeological sites in the
southern Levant that have been temporally and contextually assigned to the Neolithic
101
Period: Gazella gazella (Palestine or Mountain Gazelle), Gazella subgutturosa (Persian
or Goitered), and Gazella dorcas (Dorcas Gazelle) (Becker 1991; Martin 1998, 2000).
Gazella gazella is typically an inhabitant of the highlands in the western and
southern periphery of the Arabian Peninsula. Their geographical span encompasses the
Judean Desert to central Lebanon, as well as the Transjordan Mountains and from Syria
down to Petra (Uerpmann 1987). There appears to be a correlation in the geographical
distribution of Gazella gazella and the biogeographical distribution of the acacia tree
(Harrison and Bates 1991). As for Gazella dorcas, it is typically a desert dweller
geographically dispersed in the Negev, Wadi Araba, and the area down and around the
Dead Sea (Uerpmann 1987). Tchernov et al. (1987) have argued that Gazella dorcas
possibly expanded into arid zones of the Levant comparatively recent from northeast
Africa after the PPNB. Gazella subgutturosa prefers steppic and semi-desertic
environments found in western and northern Persia and southern Central Asia. These
three species are not thought to mix, although their geographical distribution and range
overlap (Harrison and Bates 1991; Martin 1998).
The primary morphological feature to reliably differentiate the three species
osteologically is their horncores. The Ghwair I assemblage was problematic to securely
speciate the eleven specimens identified as Gazella sp. due to their preservation and
fragmentation. In addition, there are differing opinions on Gazella subgutturosa being
native to the southern Levant and there are issues with some of the identifications made
and published for Neolithic assemblages in the southern Levant (Becker 1991; Martin
1998; vonDriesch and Wodtke 1997). Given the current issues, the Ghwair I specimens
were assigned to Gazella sp. following Twiss’s (2003) analysis at WFD 001.
102
Table 22. Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Gazella sp.
Element
Horn
Cranium
Mandible
Atlas
Axis
Cervical
Thoracic
Lumbar
Rib
Sternum
Scapula
Humerus prox.
Humerus distal
Radius prox.
Radius distal
Ulna prox.
Ulna distal
Carpals
Metacarpus prox.
Metacarpus distal
Pelvis
Femur prox.
Femur distal
Tibia prox.
Tibia distal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Metatarsus prox.
Metatarsus distal
Phalanx 1
Phalanx 2
Phalanx 3
One
Complete
Cervid
MNE
Expected*
MNE
Observed
2
1
2
1
1
5
13
6
26
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
12
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
8
10
5
10
5
5
25
65
30
130
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
60
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
40
40
40
4
3
3
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
3
7
3
0
0
0
2
6
6
8
3
6
6
4
2
6
22
10
7
%
Survival
MAU
40.00
60.00
30.00
40.00
60.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
70.00
0.00
0.00
30.00
70.00
30.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
60.00
60.00
80.00
30.00
60.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
60.00
55.00
25.00
17.50
2.00
3.00
1.50
2.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.50
0.00
0.00
1.50
3.50
1.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
3.00
3.00
4.00
1.50
3.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
3.00
2.75
1.25
0.88
* Note: MNE Expected based on Klein and Cruz-Uribe Method (1984:108)
103
%
MAU
0.50
0.75
0.38
0.50
0.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.88
0.00
0.00
0.38
0.88
0.38
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.75
0.75
1.00
0.38
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.75
0.69
0.31
0.22
Table 23. Gazella sp. Body Part/NISP distribution for Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Horncore, cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
29
13
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
14
6
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
39
17
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
59
25
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
91
39
232
100
Total
Table 24. Epiphyseal fusion data for Gazella sp. long bone specimens from Ghwair I.
Stage
<6 months
Elements
Fused
Unfused
pelvis
scapula
2
5
2
2
distal humerus
proximal radius
distal tibia
distal metapodia
phalanx 1 proximal
phalanx 2 proximal
5
3
7
12
25
10
0
0
1
4
2
1
12~36 months
36~48 months
proximal humerus
1
0
distal radius
2
4
ulna
1
0
proximal femur
3
4
distal femur
4
3
proximal tibia
5
1
calcaneus
2
2
Total
85
26
Note: Epiphyseal fusion timing after Davis (1980) and Silver (1970).
104
Similar to Carruthers and Dennis (2007) findings during the analysis of WF16
assemblage, the small number of identifiable gazelle remains and the body proportions
(Table 22 and Table 23) represented in the Ghwair I assemblage should be noted. The
local ecology and very presence of gazelle in the assemblage suggest that gazelle were
available to the inhabitants of Ghwair I at some level very early on to exploit as a protein
source, yet it was a minor source compared to caprines (NISP % 7.5). The body
proportions of gazelle suggest that processing of gazelles occurred locally at Ghwair I.
It has long been argued that Natufian and early PPNA cultural periods are
characterized by the over-exploitation of gazelle and eventually led to a reliance of
caprines and ultimately their domestication during the PPNB (Tchernov 1993). Yet,
WF16 is a PPNA assemblage characterized by a small number of gazelle remains and
recent surveys during the Dana-Faynan-Ghwair project (Finlayson and Mithen 2003)
have not identified any preceding Natufian sites (Carruthers and Dennis 2007) in the
area, thus suggesting it is highly unlikely that reliance on caprines at Ghwair I arose
exclusively, if at all, from earlier periods of over-hunting of gazelle by the inhabitants.
The mortality profile for gazelle at Ghwair I reflect the expected age distribution (Table
24) for exploitation of wild species hunted with 36% surviving past 6 months, 89% past
36 months, and 56% past 48 months.
Sus scrofa
Other taxa present at Ghwair I include specimens identified as Sus scrofa that
made up less than 1% of the total NISP and an MNI = 2 based on epiphyseal fusion and
siding data (Tables 25 thru 27). Sus scrofa are found throughout the steppe and broad105
leaved forest regions that contain dense thickets and reed areas along perineal streams
and marshes. During winters mainly takes up residence in the oak forest on the hill slopes
of higher elevations (Harrison and Bates 1991). As noted by Twiss (2003), no pig
remains have been definitively identified as domestic in PPNB assemblages from the
southern Levant and only a few incidences at sites with PPNC components.
As presented in Tables 25 and 26, the body parts identified from the Ghwair I
assemblage come from the appendicular and cranial portions of the animal. The sample
size is too small to completely understand the role pigs played in the subsistence strategy
at Ghwair I and their relationship with humans. The mortality profile (Table 27) is not
conclusive given the small sample size. But the distribution of body parts and presence
of cranial parts suggest that wild boar might have been locally available enough to
facilitate transport back to the village for processing. Given the temporal sequence of
Ghwair I, it is highly likely that the remains were those of wild boar.
Table 25. Sus scrofa body parts/NISP distribution from Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
6
28
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
1
5
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
3
14
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
7
33
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
4
20
21
100
Total
106
Table 26. Skeletal Elements, Portions, and Survivorship for Sus scrofa.
Element
One
Complete
Suid
MNE
Expected*
MNE
Observed
%
Survival
MAU
%
MAU
Cranium
Mandible
Atlas
Axis
Cervical
Thoracic
Lumbar
Rib
Sternum
Scapula
Humerus prox.
Humerus distal
Radius prox.
Radius distal
Ulna prox.
Ulna distal
Carpals
Metacarpus prox.
Metacarpus distal
Pelvis
Femur prox.
Femur distal
Tibia prox.
Tibia distal
Astragalus
Calcaneus
Metatarsus prox.
Metatarsus distal
Phalanx 1
Phalanx 2
Phalanx 3
1
2
1
1
5
15
7
30
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
16
8
8
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
16
16
16
2
4
2
2
10
30
14
60
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
32
16
16
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
16
16
32
32
32
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
50.00
25.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
25.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.25
0.00
0.00
50.00
50.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.13
6.25
0.00
1.00
0.50
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.13
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.13
0.00
1.00
0.50
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.13
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
0.13
0.00
* Note: MNE Expected based on Klein and Cruz-Uribe Method (1984:108)
107
Table 27. Epiphyseal fusion data for Sus scrofa long bone specimens from Ghwair I.
Stage
<9 months
Elements
Fused
0
Unfused
0
9~30 months
pelvis
scapula
distal humerus
proximal radius
distal fibula
distal tibia
calcaneus
distal metapodia
phalanx 1 proximal
phalanx 2 proximal
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
30~42 months
proximal humerus
0
0
distal radius
0
1
proximal ulna
0
0
distal ulna
0
0
proximal femur
0
2
distal femur
0
2
proximal tibia
0
0
proximal fibula
0
0
Total:
2
9
Note: Epiphyseal fusion timing after Davis (1980) and Silver (1970).
Other Taxa
Several specimens are identified to the Family Canidae and represent less than
1% (NISP = 4) of the total NISP and a MNI = 2. These specimens morphologically
resemble Jackal (Canis aureus) but are conservatively assigned to the taxon Canidae. In
addition, the Ghwair I assemblage included specimens identified as Vulpes vulpes that
represented 2.3 % (NISP = 69) of the total NISP and a MNI = 2 based on epiphyseal
fusion and represented 2.3 % (NISP = 69) of the total NISP and a MNI = 2 based on
108
epiphyseal fusion and identified side data (Table 28). The red fox is widely distributed,
and is found in virtually all of the southern Levant and is a remarkably adaptable
omnivore. They are found in almost all available types of habitats, but prefer habitats
with diverse flora (Fox 2003). They are primarily nocturnal and subsist on small birds,
reptiles, and mammals. It has been noted that they have been known to consume figs,
grapes, fruits, and insects (Harrison and Bates 1991).
Other taxon of indentified included a specimen belonging to the family
Hyaeniadae and identified as Hyaena hyaena. The striped hyaena represents less than 1%
(NISP = 1) of the total NISP from Ghwair I assemblage and a MNI = 1. Striped hyaena
remains have been found in several other Neolithic assemblages and have a modern
geographical range in the region today (Twiss 2003) and typically are opportunistic
omnivores feeding on animal carcasses, insects, reptiles, fruits, and even vegetable matter
(Harrison and Bates 1991).
Another taxon present and identified in the Ghwair I assemblage is Felis sp.,
which represented less than 1% (NISP = 11) of the total NISP of the Ghwair I
assemblage and a MNI = 3 based on epiphyseal fusion and identified side data (Table
29). The felid remains at Ghwair I could be either Felis silvestris or Felis margarita.
Both have a geographical distribution in the southern Levant that includes Wadi Ghwair.
Two antler fragments possibly used as hammerstones in lithic production, were
identified to the taxonomic level of Cervidae (Family) and represent less than 0.1%
(NISP = 2) of the total NISP of the Ghwair I assemblage and a MNI = 1. The specimens
were too small and lacking key indicators to identify to a lower taxonomic level by the
analyst.
109
A few specimens were identified as Lepus cf. capensis and account for less than
0.5 % (NISP = 15) of the total NISP of the Ghwair I assemblage and a MNI = 2 based on
epiphyseal fusion and identified side data (Table 30). The hare is a versatile mammal
found in a wide variety of habitats with sufficient vegetation to support life. They are
mainly nocturnal in the southern Levant partly attributed to climatic conditions and
difficulty of concealment from predators in the general terrain (Harrison and Bates 1991).
Local environmental factors influencing nocturnal behavioral patterns may have limited
their exploitation for meat and their skins either through formal hunts (Twiss 2003) or
chance encounters during agricultural activities commonly referred to as “garden”
hunting.
Table 28. Vulpes vulpes Body Part/NISP distribution for Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
8
11
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
7
10
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
16
23
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
10
14
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
30
42
71
100
Total
110
Table 29. Felis sp. Body Part/NISP distribution from Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
1
9
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
2
18
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
4
37
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
3
27
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
1
9
11
100
Total
Table 30. Lepus Body part/NISP distribution from Ghwair I.
Body Part
Element
NISP
%NISP
Head
Cranium, mandible, teeth, & hyoid
0
0
Axial
Vertebrae, ribs, and sternum
0
0
Forelimb
Scapula, humerus, radius, and ulna
5
33
Hindlimb
Innominate, femur, tibia, fibula, and patella
6
40
Feet
Carpal/tarsal, metapodials, and phalanges
4
27
15
100
Total
111
The microfaunal remains at Ghwair I comprised 33 fragments and represented
0.11% of the total NISP. Most of the bones retrieved were fragmentary and unidentified
to specific lower taxonomic levels. The fragments identified as Erinaceidae were
mandibular teeth and distal humerus fragments (NISP = 2). The distal breadth
measurements for the humerus and the fusion data were used to establish an MNI = 2.
The specimens identified as Rodentia consisted of 7 bone fragments (NISP = 7) and a
MNI = 2 based of the fusional data recorded for the femurs. Their presence in the
assemblage may be more intrusive or commensurable in nature. The remains of
identified as Amphibia (NISP = 1; MNI=1) and Reptilia (NISP = 11; MNI=2) consisted
primarily of vertebrae, long bone shaft fragments, and two mandible fragments.
Aves
A total of 93 specimens were identified to element and taxonomically to Aves or
to a lower taxonomic group within Aves, representing 3.1% of the total NISP and MNI =
13. Within this grouping, specimens that were identified to the taxonomic level of Aves
represented 1.8% of the total NISP and a MNI = 4. In addition, 37 specimens (NISP =
37, MNI = 9) were identified to lower taxonomic levels. Columba cf. livia (NISP = 6,
MNI = 1) is a graminivorous species that occupies a variety of climatic zones, but prefers
nesting in rock faces and ledges in areas with daily access to water, such as the
mountains of the Rift Margins and in the Rum Desert (Andrews 1995). The chukar
partridge, Alectoris chukar, was identified in the assemblage (NISP = 8, MNI = 2).
Chukars are typically found in the open country in the rift margins and on hill and
mountain slopes with access to water daily. The presence of Roller and Crow, Coracias
112
garrulus (NISP = 1, MNI = 1), and Corvus sp. (NISP = 3, MNI = 2), in the assemblage
suggest preferred habitat of open country with hollow trees for nesting.
The two specimens of Anatidae (NISP = 2, MNI = 1) suggest that aquatic and
semi-aquatic group of birds played a minor role in the economic strategy of the local
community at Ghwair I. Due to the biogeographical location of Ghwair I on the AfroEurasian migration route, migratory birds were expected in the assemblage. Among the
migrants, Accipitridae (NISP = 17, MNI = 2) would be present in the area during
migration periods. Today, raptors are present along the Jordan Valley during migration
periods and come down to rest, roost, and prey (Tchernov 1994).
Bone Modifications
As noted before, the faunal assemblage was examined to ascertain specific bone
modifications. Overall, only a few bones showed evidence of butchery (N=3; >0.01%). Nor
were there large amounts of burned bone (N=161; 5.3%). Those bones that displayed evidence
for burning were equally across their entire surfaces, which suggest that they were exposed to the
heat after they had been defleshed. It is also very possible that the burning of the Ghwair I bones
was part of the discard process, or even post-depositional and entirely unintentional. Other bone
modifications noted were 5.6% gnawed, 20.2% encrusted, and 1% showed evidence of being
worked.
113
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Local Exploitations and Environmental Implications
The majority of species present in the Ghwair I assemblage can be found in the
region today. Within the assemblage, mammals clearly dominate the recovered bone
fragments (See Tables 1 and 2). Most of the fragments were merely identified
taxonomically as medium-large mammal (Mammalia Indeterminate) and comprised some
88% of the bone fragments (NF). These medium-large bone fragments accounted for
about 54% of the potential biomass in the Ghwair I assemblage. Other medium-large
mammal bone specimens were identified to element represented and to a specific lower
taxonomic level that included caprines (Caprines and Capra sp.), aurochs (Bos
primigenius), gazelles (Gazella sp.), and equines (Equus sp.) as the most prevalent
among the identified (NISP = 2796; %NISP = 92%; %Biomass = 45%).
Caprines dominate the identified mammalian sub-assemblage (NISP = 2368; %
Biomass = 27%), of the identified taxon. Within this group, there are elements present
that could be distinguished as goat (Capra sp. NISP = 280; % NISP = 9.2%), but none of
the caprine remains where identified to sheep (Ovis). Given the published data for other
PPNB sites in the region (Henry et al. 2003; Twiss 2003, 2007; Wasse 2001, 2002), it is
interesting that there is no evidence to indicate that sheep were present or mixed in the
herds at Ghwair I. Since none of the other species in comparison seems to have
contributed significantly to their diet based on this analysis, it appears that the people of
Ghwair I chose to consume goats almost exclusively among the medium-large mammals.
114
Gazelle (NIISP = 7.5%; % Biomass = 2.1%) contributed the next significant
portion of the identified remains. Despite a primary focus on caprines, the local
environment in and around Ghwair I supported suitable habitat for gazelle and suggest
they may have been readily accessible. The importance of cattle relative to the other
mammal remains (NISP =157) is suggested by their potential biomass contribution of
85.786 kg. In the assemblage this represents 13% of the total potential biomass available.
The other mammals identified such as pig, hare, hedgehog, canids, rodents, and
foxes contributed 4.4% of the identified specimens in the assemblage and suggest a
variety of microenvironments accessible to Ghwair I. The identified small animals may
well have been important to subsistence strategy at Ghwair I, but their resolution may
have been masked by differential recovery biases. In any event, the subsistence strategy
at Ghwair I reflects a narrow focus on the meat of caprines.
As previously noted, 93 specimens were identified to element and taxonomically
as Aves or to a lower taxonomic group within Aves, representing 3.1% of the total NISP
and MNI = 13. Additionally, 37 specimens (NISP = 37, MNI = 9) were identified to
lower taxonomic levels. Columba cf. livia (NISP = 6, MNI = 1) is a graminivorous
species that occupies a variety of climatic zones, but prefers nesting in rock faces and
ledges in areas with daily access to water, such as the mountains of the Rift Margins and
in the Rum Desert (Andrews 1995). The chukar partridge, Alectoris chukar, was
identified in the assemblage (NISP = 8, MNI = 2) and is typically found in the open
country of the rift margins and on hilly slopes that have adequate access to water sources.
The presence of Roller and Crow, Coracias garrulus (NISP = 1, MNI = 1), and Corvus
sp. (NISP = 3, MNI = 2), in the assemblage suggest preferred habitat of open country
115
with hollow trees for nesting. Complementing these data was the presence of Anatidae
(NISP = 2, MNI = 1) that suggests aquatic and semi-aquatic group of birds played at least
a minor role in the economic strategy of the local community. Due to the
biogeographical location of Ghwair I on the Afro-Eurasian migration route, migratory
birds were expected in the assemblage. Among the migrants, Accipitridae (NISP = 17,
MNI = 2) would be present during migration periods similar to modern day raptors that
rest, roost, and prey along the Jordan Valley during their migrations. (Tchernov 1994).
Supplementing the faunal data are the results from the botanical floatation
samples from Ghwair I indicating that the inhabitants cultivated barley (Hordeum sp.),
pea (Pisum sativum) and emmer wheat (Triticum diccoccum)(Neef 2003). In addition,
the results from the charcoal analyses did not suggest a biotic regime of degraded
vegetation regime that is present today. Rather, most of the charcoal belongs to
Phoenician Juniper (Juniperus phoenicea) and pistachio (Pistacia cf. atlantica) and the
wood used for building purposes at Ghwair I appears to belong to these two species.
Within the sample, quite a lot of charcoal belonged to a species of willow (Salix sp.) that
thrives in riverine forest along riverbanks, thus an indication for the presence of a
perennial water source at Wadi Ghwair during Ghwair I’s occupation (Danin 1983:121).
Taken together, these data support the presence of a relatively wetter environment that
may have been somewhat more humid and experiencing less temperature extremes than
present today.
Data from several pollen, phytolith, and starch samples from Ghwair I were
analyzed (Cumming 2002a, 2002b, 2002c). Aster family was moderately abundant in the
local vegetation and also included olives, palms, mustards, sedges, legumes, and mints,
116
characterizes the samples. Recovery of moderately large quantities of Cheno-am pollen
implies utilization of these greens and/or seeds in the diet. They typically produce small
seeds that are relatively high in protein and lower in carbohydrates than many other
seeds, such as those of the grass family.
Plantain (Plantago psyllium) pollen was also observed in the samples from the
groundstone washes, suggesting the possibility of processing the plantains by the
community. Plantain pollen is not readily transported by the wind, so it would be
considered a more localized resource in its distribution (Cummings 2002c:8). Recovery
of a variety of starches particularly from washes on ground stone, attests to grinding
starchy foods, which appear to have included both seeds and roots or tubers. Fairly sparse
tree pollen is present, including pine, pistachio, cypress, and olive, in the assemblage and
reflective of the Mediterranean forest that are restricted more upslope toward the plateau
region above the Wadi Faynan and in Wadi Dana today.
Of interest are the results of the samples (Samples 189 and 190; 25N/05E Level
4b) that were taken from two Caprine teeth. Polylobate phytolith, Pinus pollen, and 25
starches that belong to Apiaceae (root) family and some that represent a form of generic
grass vegetation in Sample 189 (Cummings 2002c). In addition, lenticula starch
consistent with those produced by Horeum (barley) implying hat the Caprine diet
included at least barley, other grass seeds, roots and/or tubers.
The vegetation in the record reflects an environment mixed between steppeland,
populated with Aster, Cyperaceae (sedge family), Erodium, Geranium, Liliaceae,
Plantago, Poaceae, and Rumex, and evidence of a more Plateau vegetation mix
containing Juniperus, Pistachio, and Quercus (oak). It is apparent that the flora is
117
considerably richer during the PPNB then it is today based on these samples. While the
Cheno-am points to a possible desiccated desert component containing Cheno-am,
Tamarix, and Ephedra species, these results suggest that several different
microenvironments were being exploited along the wadis and the slopes by the
inhabitants of Ghwair I.
It is within reason that the animal economy of Ghwair I was significantly
determined by the local environmental situation. It is important to note that Ghwair I is
about 400m from PPNA WF16 and has similar assemblage composition of cattle (Ghwair
I = 8%NISP, WF16 = 8%NISP), but distinctly more gazelle (Ghwair I = 7.5%NISP;
WF16= >1%NISP) than WF16 (Carruthers and Dennis 2007). The inhabitants at Ghwair
I exploited multiple environments in the local wadis and along their slopes, but it seems
they located their hunting efforts slightly differently than their PPNA predecessors at
WF16 given the increase in gazelle during the PPNB.
Such a change in economic strategy possibly reflects socioeconomic shifts
mitigated by an increased focus on the production secondary by-products during the
PPNB, thus limiting the number of goats available for use as a protein source, or the
inhabitants at Ghwair I may have reverted to supplementing their protein source with
gazelle due to local ecological degradation.
Based on the macrofaunal assemblage at Ghwair I, ecological degradation or an
overgrazed environment is not suggested. The faunal remains reflect a pastoral animal
economy focused heavily on goat herding, supplemented with exploitation of gazelle,
aurochs, and a range of other wild species. The aurochs identified in the Ghwair I
118
assemblage would have required access to grasses that would have not been readily
available if the area was overexploited or degraded.
In addition, we would expect the diversity of wild animals species to be low for
some species to be underrepresented in the assemblage if the local environment had
degraded, but this is not the case given that the range of wild species identified in the
assemblage reflects a diverse biotic regime. Wild boars found in the assemblage favor
moist forest and shrub lands, whereas the equids and gazelles favor more steppe
ecological niches. The flora and fauna data do not suggest that the area in and around the
community of Ghwair was deforested or overgrazed during its occupation. Additionally,
the low occurrence of butchering marks can possibly indicate the inhabitants at Ghwair I
were not facing resource stress or overly concerned with extracting every possible
nutrient from the animals.
Social Implications
The analysis of the faunal data suggests that the inhabitants of Ghwair I made a
deliberate choice to rely on goats over other animal resources. They choose not to
consume large amounts of meat from wild animals such as aurochs, gazelles, wild boars,
or wild equids. Yet their presence in the faunal assemblage indicates their availability to
the community as a resource, even if they were only utilized on a limited bases. As noted
by Twiss (2003) at WFD 001, this has social implications. Culturally manipulated or
domesticated herds are viewed more as property given their considerable investment of
labor, cost, and other goods by their owners in the form of herd maintenance and growth
(Twiss 2003). Hunters value cooperative labor and shared resource access, whereas
119
herders favor “ownership” of resources (Russell 1998). Wild animals can be viewed as
“communal resources” given the value hunting groups place on cooperative labor and
shared resource access (Twiss 2003).
From a social-economic perspective, the slaughter of animals represents a careful
cost/benefits analysis. Prestige and fulfillment of ritual/social obligations can weigh
heavily in decisions regarding when to slaughter, criteria for which individuals to
slaughter, and the assessment of the benefits gained by utilization of the meat and/or
secondary by-products, prestige, or fulfillment of ritual/social obligations (Twiss
2003:356). The consumption of goats at Ghwair I also suggests the inhabitants were
possibly mitigating the household or household group’s needs since goats can be eaten at
the household level without substantial consideration given to storage and herds can be
built up relatively fast.
The choice to exploit larger mammals, such as Bos primigenius, has a different
set of cost/benefits motivations. Twiss (2003) suggests larger mammals, such as Bos
primigenius, cannot practically be consumed at the household level without some form of
storage or preservation given the volume of meat supplied by one individual. If they are
herded or culturally manipulated, they represent an even greater investment in time and
resources. As the community grew and social inequality became more evident, feasts
would have become increasingly important in building and maintaining social solidarity
(Twiss 2003:373).
As suggested by Twiss (2003), utilizing Bos primigenius would facilitate binding
individuals together into social units at a communal level, thus creating a cooperative
relationship and fostering social alliances between community segments. Value with
120
regards to prestige and publicly mitigated power relations would be assigned to Bos
primigenius for these benefits given the investment and cost of consuming at a communal
level (Hayden 2001).
Although evidence for animals as an indicator of prestige or wealth is ambiguous
at Ghwair I, there are some implications that access to aurochs was not equally
distributed across the community. When assessing the distribution of Bos primigenius
across the excavation units at Ghwair I, we find 43% of the identified Bos primigenius
specimens at Ghwair I were from Area IV. This is interesting given recent analysis of
the architecture at Ghwair I during the PPNB at Ghwair I by Ladah (2003).
Ladah (2003) suggest that more formal mechanisms for integrating the entire
community had already been developed as reflected in the built environment. At Ghwair
I there is delineated public space in the form of communal functioning buildings,
courtyards with public stairs, and special purpose structures. One such special purpose
structure is Room 44 located in Area IV. The room contained a cobbled lined pit in the
western corner at the bottom of which was a large flat slab lining. In addition, the room
was plastered and in the NE corner there was a subfloor burial of a nine-month-old
infant. Around the infant’s neck was a mother of pearl necklace or earring (Simmons and
Najjar 2003). Directly above the infant burial on the overlying plaster floor there was a
cache of four caprine skulls and one Bos primigenius skull including a very well
preserved horn core. The context of these skulls and the horn core suggests they were
dedicatory cache to the infant burial and imply social complexity had emerged to the
level of ascribed status since infant burials in general were rare during the Early
121
Neolithic. The burial and the associated cache of animal skulls suggest the inequality
within the community was heredity based.
With the emergence of social differentiation and inequalities, egalitarian social
structure would be broken down and the inequality would have become more
pronounced. Some individuals or household groups would have had relatively more
wealth, prestige, and authority in the community. Ritual complexity would have been a
prime mechanism to initiate the social change and this possibly is reflected in the
dedicatory offerings and function of the special purpose structures, like Room 1 in Area I
delineated by Ladah (2006:162). Feasting may have enabled households or individual to
promote themselves while enhancing their status and facilitating their gain of power
within the community. Such gains would have required constant renegotiation through
additional communal feasting activities.
Implications of Economic Adaptation at Ghwair I
While making an assessment of the extent to which economic adaptations were a
local event structured to meet the community’s needs, the nature of production, and the
focus of their economic system at Ghwair I, other facets of the culture can be explored.
Evidence for social organization and complexity may be gleamed through the
consideration of food and the extent of differential access that household groups had to
particular animals.
Intensification in the classic sense increases output. Methods are diverse, and
include modifications to the environment to improve the landscape, shorter fallow
periods, movement to areas with resources that have higher productivity potential, and
122
the adoption of higher yield resources or the necessary technologies to maximize
(Boserup 1965). None of these are readily apparent in the archaeological record for the
PPNB in the southern Levant. Rather, increased production is more likely to have been
achieved through specialization.
A strategy to increase production in an effort to maintain self-sufficiency results
in greater emphasis being placed on risk minimization. Communities operating within a
more regional system may increase total output potentially at the expense of selfsufficiency and increased risk by focusing on a single or few species that produce the
highest yield (Crabtree 1996). Specialization needs to go beyond basic strategies coping
with local ecological constraints to meet household demands and evidence for specialized
surplus production of exchangeable goods. There would be increasing divergence in the
proportions of animal taxa between villages in differing environmental zones (Gamble
1981). Those in more forested or wetland areas would focus on species such as pigs,
fish, waterfowl, and forest game. Villages with access to more open grasslands would
place more emphasis on aurochs, equids, caprines, and grassland game. When low
production yields are encountered, dependency relationships between a distant
coordinating authorities can become evident in the archaeological record (Zeder 1991).
While the inhabitants at Ghwair I did focus on goats, their focus seems more of an
adaptation to a species that fares better in drier, more open areas such as goats and an
increased procurement strategy that focused on gazelle. This emphasizes that the
inhabitants were utilizing a diverse array of adaptations to produce reliable yields in an
effort to meet their needs. It appears they chose to exploit a diverse range of plants and
animals from a wide range of biotic zones in the area. Interestingly, there is no evidence
123
for degradation of the environment at Ghwair I, nor evidence of a countered dependency
relationship between a distant coordinating authority/village. A similar pattern has been
documented at other sites in the area such as Basta, Beidha, Faynan 16, and WFD 001
(Becker 1991; Carruthers and Dennis 2007; Twiss 2003; Wasse 2001).
At Ghwair I, animals consumed reflect proportions of herds maintained locally
and adapted to local ecological conditions. We find that the inhabitants at Ghwair I were
practicing a form of herd security (Dahl and Hjort 1976; Redding 1981) with most of the
goats being slaughtered within the respective subadult periods evident from the a large
off-take of individuals between six months and two years of age (Tables 20 and 21).
Unfortunately, due to the low sample size for the teeth and pelvic girdle, no sexing data is
available for the assemblage and age determination is minimal at best given that it is
based only on epiphyseal data of the long bones in the Ghwair I assemblage. Even so a
trend in the fusional data reflects a pattern of culling subadults between two and three
years of age that drastically deviates from mortality profiles for wild goats (Twiss 2003).
The species representation and fusional profiles for age reflect a generalized strategy
favoring herd security, with most of the animals being slaughtered within the respective
subadult periods for each species, typical of meat-maximization herd structure.
Conclusions
Understanding PPN environmental adaptations, subsistence patterns, and
lifestyles in the southern Levant is pivotal in investigating the consequences of the
human transformation from the exploitation of wild resources to the production of food
through domestication. At the most fundamental level, this dissertation provides a
124
comprehensive zooarchaeological investigation of the archaeological faunal evidence
from Ghwair I, a Pre-Pottery Neolithic B community in southern Jordan, in order to
explore local fauna exploitation patterns and refine our understanding of the
community’s social and economic systems at a local level and add to our current
understanding of the spatial organization, village life, and the eventual abandonment of
villages at the end of the PPNB.
The investigation undertaken in this study attempted to reconstruct the full range
of human activities and modes of subsistence that were practiced at Ghwair I and to make
a determination whether the occupants of Ghwair I relied primarily on goats for animal
protein. Such an investigation adds to our understanding and appreciation of the
“wealth” of the ecological community at Ghwair I. A diversity of resources is indicative
of a more abundant and rich economy, while a restricted range could suggest a more
marginally based economic structure (Twiss 2003).
The research was designed to address the following questions: (1) What were the
economic strategies and adaptations utilized at Ghwair I during the PPNB? (2) Was
Ghwair I an autonomous village structured to meet local subsistence demands and
focused on self-sufficiency and risk mitigation, or was it part of a regional system
focused on supporting larger sites within this “system”? (3) What role did subsistence
strategies play in social organization of the community at Ghwair I?
Based on the results of zooarchaeological analysis and the extensive
archaeological research done at Ghwair I, the following conclusions can be drawn with
reference to community at Ghwair I during the PPNB:
125
1)
The macrofaunal assemblage at Ghwair I reflects a pastoral animal
economy focused heavily on goat herding, supplemented with exploitation of
gazelle, aurochs, and a range of other wild species.
Within the Ghwair I assemblage, there were no clear indications for the
presence of sheep in the specimens identified to species level. Given the
transitional zone of Ghwair I within the natural distribution of Ibex and Bezoar
goats, the exploitation of Capra sp. as a protein source would be a reasonable
subsistence strategy for the inhabitants.
Since domesticated goats have been documented and shown to have been
the dominant species in other faunal assemblages from the southern Levant
during the LPPNB, the prevalence of goat remains at Ghwair I fits well with
the regional subsistence patterns. While high proportions of goats have been
taken as evidence for domestication elsewhere in the southern Levant, it was
noted that 78% of the bones from the nearby PPNA site of Wadi Faynan 16 are
identified as wild goats, Capra sp. (either aegagrus or ibex) (Carruthers and
Dennis 2007). Therefore, it seems that the proportions of goat remains at
Ghwair I is indicative of some degree of herd management already developing
in the area.
At the same time, the small number of identifiable gazelle remains and the
body proportions (Table 22 and Table 23) is notable in the assemblage. The
local ecology and very presence of gazelle in the assemblage suggest that
gazelle were available to the inhabitants of Ghwair I at some level very early
on to exploit as a protein source, yet it was a minor source compared to
126
caprines (NISP % 7.5). The body proportions of gazelle also suggest that
processing of gazelles occurred locally at Ghwair I.
Also of interest is the relative frequency of Bos primigenius specimens
identified in the assemblages at WF16, Ghwair I, and WFD 001, implying a
moister micro-environment existed to some degree in or near Wadi
Fidan/Wadi Ghwair/Wadi Faynan during the PPNA and PPNB that naturally
supported far more cattle than did other areas in the arid south of the southern
Levant. Additionally, high numbers of cattle may also be linked to some form
of human manipulation or control rather than hunting.
In addition, the cattle found at Ghwair I seem to be similar in size to cattle
found in later assemblages from the southern Levant during the LPPNB and
PPNC (Table 10). The variety of skeletal elements represented in the Ghwair I
assemblage (Table 8), following the line of reasoning offered by Twiss (2007)
and Carruthers and Dennis (2007), suggest that the cattle were processed at the
site. The even distribution of identified body parts, implies that cattle possibly
lived in close proximity to Ghwair I and could suggest further that the
inhabitants were practicing some form of cultural control or management to
encourage that close proximity (Twiss 2007). No evidence for ecological
degradation or an overgrazed environment is suggested by the data.
2)
The inhabitants of Ghwair I made a deliberate choice to rely on goats over
other animal resources available in their environmental zone. The presence of
wild animals such as aurochs, gazelles, wild boars, and equids in the
assemblage indicates their availability to the community as a resource, even if
127
they were only utilized on a limited bases or for special occasions.
3)
Increasing social complexity and differentiation within the community is
implicated by the unequal distribution and access to aurochs across the
community. Larger mammals, such as Bos primigenius, cannot practically be
consumed at the household level without some form of storage or preservation
given the volume of meat supplied by one individual. If they are herded or
culturally manipulated, they represent an even greater investment in time and
resources. As the community grew and social inequality became more evident,
feasts would have become increasingly important in building and maintaining
social solidarity (Twiss 2003:373). This further suggests that wild aurochs
were possibly utilized as a feasting resource at Ghwair I to build and maintain
community solidarity.
4)
The presence and location of a cache of several goat skulls and one Bos
primigenius skull, including a very well preserved horn core, suggests their use
as dedicatory items for the associated infant burial. This implies a level of
social complexity at Ghwair I that included ascribed status and possibly
implies that inequality within the community was heredity based.
In sum, this investigation confirms that Ghwair I was a developed and socially
complex community and provides researches with data to explore new ideas about human
adaptations during the PPNB in the southern Levant.
128
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, R.
1991 The Wadi Fidan Project, Jordan. Levant 24:181-183.
Algaze, G.
1986 Monentum Toward Empire in Early Mesopotamian Society, PhD dissertation,
Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, University of Chicago.
1989 The Uruk Expansion: Cross-Cultural Exchange in Early Mesopotamian
Civilization. Current Anthropology 30:571-608.
Alley, R. B., J. Marotzke, W. D. Nordhaus, J. T. Overpeck, D. M. Peteet, R. A. Pielke Jr.,
R. T. Pierrehumbert, P. B. Rhimes, T. F. Stocker, L. D. Talley, and J. M. Wallace
2003 Abrupt Climate Change. Science 299:2005-2010.
Almogi-Lubin, A, C. Hemieben, D. Meischner, and H. Erienkeuser
1991 Paleoenvironmental Events During the Last 13,000 years in the Central Red Sea
as Recorded by Pteropoda. Paleoceanography 6:83-98.
Armitage, P. and J. Clutton-Brock
1976 A System for Classification and Description of Horn Cores of Cattle from
Archaeological Sites. Journal of Archaeological Science 3:329-348.
Arnold, J.E.
1995 Social Inequality, Marginalization, and Economic Process. In Foundations of
Social Inequality, edited by T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, pp. 87-103.
Plenum, Press, New York.
Arz, H.W., F. Lamy, J. Oatzold, P.J. Muller, and M. Prins
2003 Mediterranean Moisture Source for an Early-Holocene Humid Period in the
Northern Red Sea. Science 300:118-121.1
Asouti, E.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: The Contribution of Subsistence Archaeology to
Generating Supra-Regional Models for Understanding Near Eastern
Neolithisation. Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 23-24.
Atici, A. L.
2007 Before the Revolution: A Comprehensive Zooarchaeological Approach to
Terminal Pleistocene Forager Adaptations in the Western Taurus Mountains,
Turkey. Harvard University, Boston Massachusetts.
129
Baharav, D.
1974 Notes on the Population Structure and Biomass of the Mountain Gazelle, Gazella
gazella gazella. Israel Journal of Zoology 23:39-44.
1980 Habitat Utilization of the Dorcas Gazella in a Desert Saline Area. Journal of Arid
Environments 3:161-167.
1981 Food Habits of the Mountain Gazelle in Semiarid Habitats of Eastern Lower
Galilee, Israel. Journal of Arid Environments 4:63-69.
1983a Observation on the Ecology of the Mountain Gazelle in the Upper Galilee, Israel.
Mammalia 47:59-69.
1983b Reproductive Strategies in Female Mountain and Dorcas Gazelles (Gazella
gazella and Gazella dorcas). Journal of Zoological Society of London 200:445453.
Balasse, M., S. H. Ambrose, A. B. Smith, and T.D. Price
2002 The Seasonal Mobility Model for Prehistoric Herders in the South-western Cape
of South Africa Assessed by Isotopic Analysis of Sheep Tooth Enamel. Journal
of Archaeological Science 29:917-932.
Balasse, M., A. B. Smith, S. H. Ambrose, and S. R. Leigh
2002 Determining Sheep Birth Seasonality by Analysis of Tooth Enamel Oxygen
Isotope Ratios: The Late Stone Age Site of Kasteelberg (South Africa). Journal of
Archaeological Science 30:205-215.
Banning, E. B.
1998 The Neolithic Period: Triumphs of Architecture, Agriculture, and Art. Near
Eastern Archaeology 61/4: 188-237.
Barker, G.W.
2000 Farmers, Herders and Miners in Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan: A 10,000-year
Landscape Archaeology. In The Archaeology of Drylands: Living at the Margin,
edited by G.W. Barker and D. Gilbertson, pp. 63-85. Routledge, New York.
Barker, G. W., O. H.Creighton, D.D. Gilbertson, C. O. Hunt, D. J. Mattingly, S. J.
McLarens, and D.C. Thomas
1997 The Wadi Faynan Project , Southern Jordan: A Preliminary Report on the
Geomorphology and Landscape Archaeology Levant 29:19-40.
Barker, G. W., R. Adams, O. H.Creighton, D.D. Gilbertson, J.P. Grattan, C.O. Hunt, D.J.
Mattingly, S. J. McLarens, H.A. Mohammed. P. Newson, T.E.G. Reynolds, and D.C.
Thomas
1998 Environment and Land Use in the Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan: The Second
Season of Geoarchaeology and Landscape Archaeology (1997). Levant 30:5-25.
130
Barker, G. W., R. Adams, O. H.Creighton, D. Crook, D.D. Gilbertson, J.P. Grattan, C.O.
Hunt, D.J. Mattingly, S. J. McLarens, H.A. Mohammed. P. Newson, C, Palmer, F.B.
Pyatt, T.E.G. Reynolds, and R. Tomber
1999 Environment and Land Use in the Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan: The Third
Season of Geoarchaeology and Landscape Archaeology (1997). Levant 31:255292.
Barlow, K.
2002 Predicting Maize Agriculture among the Fremont: An Economic Comparison of
Farming and Foraging in the American Southwest. American Antiquity 67:65-88.
Barton C. M., and M. P. Neeley
1996 Phantom Cultures of the Levantine Epipaleolithic. Antiquity 70:139-147.
Baruch, U., and S. Bottema
1991 Palynological Evidence for Climatic Changes in the Levant ca. 17,000-9,000 B.P.
In The Natufian Culture on the Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R. Valla,
pp. 11-20. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.
Bar-Yosef, O.
1981 The Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period in the Southern Levant. Prehistorie du Levant.
Pp. 551-569. Paris: Colloque International C.N.R.S. No. 598.
1990 The Last Glacial Maximum in the Mediterranean Levant. In Prehistoire du
Levant, edited by J. Cauvin and P. Sanlaville, pp. 389-408. Centre National de la
Recherche Scientifique, Paris.
1998 The Natufian Culture in the Levant, Threshold to the Origins of Agriculture.
Evolutionary Anthropology, vol. 6, Issue 5, pp. 159-177.
2002 Natufian: A Complex Society of Foragers. In Beyond Foraging and Collecting:
Evolutionary Change in Hunter-Gather Settlement Systems, edited by B. Fitzhugh
and J. Habu, pp. 91-149. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: Targets of Current Research in Southwestern Asia.
Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 24-27.
Bar-Yosef, O. and A. Belfer-Cohen
1989a The Levantine “PPNB” Interaction Sphere. In People and Culture in Change,
edited by I. Hershkovitz. Pp. 59-72. British Archaeology Review, International
Series. 508(i). BAR: Oxford.
1989b The Origins of Sedentism and Farming Communities in the Levant. Journal of
World Prehistory 3:445-498.
1991 From Sedentary Hunter-gatherers to Territorial Farmers in the Levant. In
Between Bands and States, edited by S.A. Gregg, pp. 181-202. Occasional Papers
9. Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University,
Carbondale, Illinois.
1992 From Foraging to Farming in the Mediterranean Levant. In Transitions to
Agriculture in Prehistory, edited by A.B. Gebauer and T.D. Price, pp. 21-48.
Monographs in World Archaeology No.4, Prehistory Press, Madison Wisconsin.
131
2002
Facing environmental crisis. Societal and Cultural Changes at the Transition from
the Younger Dryas to the Holocene in the Levant. In The Dawn of Farming in
the Near East, edited by R.T.J. Cappers and S. Bottema, pp. 55-66. Studies in
Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence and Environment 6. Berlin: Ex
Oriente.
Bar-Yosef, O., A. Gopher, E. Tchernov, and M. E. Kislev
1991 Netiv Hagdud: An Early Neolithic Village Site in the Jordan Valley. Journal of
Field Archaeology 18:405-24.
Bar-Yosef, O. and R. Meadow
1995 The Origins of Agriculture in the Near East. In Last Hunters, First Farmers: New
Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture, edited by D. Price and
A. B. Gebauer, pp. 39-94. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.
Baruch, U., and S. Bottema
1991 Palynological Evidence for Climatic Changes in the Levant ca. 17,000-19,000
B.P. In The Natufian Culture in the Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R.
Valla, pp.11-20. Archaeological Series 1. International Monographs in
Prehistory, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Becker, C.
1991 The Analysis of Mammalian Bones from Basta, A Pre-Pottery Neolithic Site in
Jordan: Problem and Potential. Paléorient 17:59-75.
Belfer-Cohen, A.
1989 The Natufian Graveyard in Hayonim Cave. Paléorient 14:297-308.
1991 The Natufian of the Levant. Annual Review of Anthropology 20:167-186.
Belfer-Cohen, A. and O. Bar-Yosef
2000 Early Sedentism in the Near East: A Bumpy Ride to Village Life. In Life in
Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and
Differentiation, edited by I. Kuijt. Pp.19-37. Kluwer/Plenum Press, New York.
Bender, B.
1981 Gatherer-Hunter Intensification. In Economic Archaeology Towards an
Integration of Ecological and Social Approaches, edited by A. Sheridan and G.
Bailey. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 96. Oxford.
Benz, M.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: The Emic View: Social Questions of the
Neolithisation of the Near East. Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 27-28.
132
Bettinger, R.L.
1987 Archaeological Approaches to Hunter-Gatherers. Annual Review of Anthropology
16:121-142.
1991 Hunter-Gatherers Archaeological and Evolutionary Theory. Plenum Press, New
York.
Betts, A.
1989 The Pre-Pottery Neolithic Period in Eastern Jordan. Paléorient 15:147-153.
Bienert, H.D. and Gebel, H.G.K.
1998 Archaeological Excavations at Late PPNB Ba’ja: A Preliminary Report on the 1997
Season. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan XLII:75-90.
Binford, L.R.
1978 Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.
1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter-gather Settlement Systems and
Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45:4-20.
1981 Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. Academic Press, New York.
Bleed, P.
1986 The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons. American Antiquity 51:737-747.
Boessneck, J.
1969 Osteological differences between sheep (Ovis aries Linne) and goat (Capra hircus
Linne). In Science in Archaeology, edited by D. Brothwell and E. Higgs. Praeger,
New York.
1971 Osteological Differences between Sheep (Ovis aries) and Goat (Capra hircus). In
Science in Archaeology: A Survey of Progress and Research, edited by D.R.
Brothwell and E.S. Higgs, 2nd ed. enlarged and revised, pp. 331-358. Praeger
Publishing, New York.
Boessneck, J., H.H. Muller, and M. Teichert
1964 Osteologische Untersheidungsmerkmale zwischen Scaf (Ovis aries) und Ziege
(Capra hircus). Kuhn Archiv 78 (½). Pp. 1-129.
Boserup, Ester
1965 The Conditions of Agricultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change
Under Population Pressure. Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago.
Broughton, J.M.
1994 Declines in Mammalian Foraging Efficiency During the Late Holocene, San
Francisco Bay, California. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 13:371-401.
133
Byrd, B.F.
1989 The Natufian: Settlement Variability and Economic Adaptations in the Levant at
the End of the Pleistocene. Journal of World Prehistory, 3/2: 159-197.
1994 Public and Private, Domestic and Corporate: The Emergence of the Southwest
Asian Village. American Antiquity 59(4):639-666.
2000 Households in Transition: Neolithic Social Organization within Southwest Asia.
Pp. 63-98 in I. Kuijt (ed.), Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social
Organization, Identity, and Differentiation. Kluwer Academic/Plunum
Publishers.
Byrd, B.F. and C.M. Monahan
1995 Death, Mortality, Ritual, and Natufian Social Structure. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 14:251-287.
Campbell, P.
1997 A Note on Growing Season Food Habits of Mountain Gazelles and Nubian Ibex
in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Arid Environments 36:705-709.
Cannon, M. D.
2001 Archaeofaunal Relative Abundance, Sample Size, and Statistical Methods.
Journal of Archaeological Science 28:185-195.
Carruthers, D.B and S.J. Dennis
2007 The Mammalian Faunal Remains. In Finlayson, B. and S. Mithen (ed.)
The Early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan: Archaeological Survey
of Wadi Faynan, Ghwuwayr and al-Bustan an Evaluation of the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic Site of WF16. Wadi Faynan Series 1, Levant Supplementary Series 4.
Oxbow Books, Park End Place, Oxford.
Cauvin, Jacques
2000 The Birth of the Gods and the Origins of Agriculture. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Church, R. R., and R .L. Lyman
2003 Small Fragments Make Small Differences in Efficiency When Rendering Grease
From Fractured Artiodactyl Bones By Boiling. Journal of Archaeological Science
30:1077-1084.
Churcher, C.S.
1994 From the Natufian Level at Jebel Es- Saaïdé (Saaïdé II), Lebanon. Paléorient 20,
2: 35-58.
134
Clutton-Brock, J.
1971 The Primary Food Animals of the Jericho Tell From the Proto-Neolithic to
Byzantine Period. Levant 3:41-55.
1978 early Domestication and the Ungulate Fauna of the Levant During the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic Period. In The Environmental History of the Near and Middle East
Since the Ice Age, edited by W.C. Brice, pp.29-40. Academic Press, New York.
1979 The Mammal Remains from the Jericho Ell. Proceedings of the Prehistory
Society 45:135-157.
Clutton-Brock, J. Dennis-Bryan, K. Armitage, P. L., and P.A. Jewell
1990 Osteology of the Soay Sheep. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History)
Zoology 56(1) pp. 1-56.
Corbet, G.B., and J.E. Hill
1986 A World List of Mammalian Species. 2nd Edition. London: British Museum
(Natural History).
Cope, C.
1991 Gazelle Hunting Strategies in the Southern Levant. In The Natufian Culture in
the Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R. Valla, pp.341-358. Archaeological
Series 1. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Crabtree, P. J.
1987 Identifying Specialized Agricultural Production in the Archaeological Record: A
Response to Wells. Journal of Field Archaeology 14:241-243.
1990 Zooarchaeology and Complex Societies: Some Uses of Faunal Analysis for the
Study of Trade, Social Status, and Ethnicity. Archaeological Method and Theory
2:155-205.
1996a Production and Consumption in an Early Complex Society: Animal Use in
Middle Saxon East Anglia. World Archaeology 28(1):58-75.
1996b The Wool Trade and the Rise of Urbanism in Middle Saxon England. In Craft
Specialization and Social Evolution: In Memory of V. Gordon Childe, edited by
B. Wailes, pp. 99-105. The University Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Croft, Paul
1998 Animal Remains: Discussion. In Lemba Archaeological Project, Cyprus Volume
II.1B: Excavations at Kissonerga-Mosphilia 1979 - 1992, edited by E. Peltenburg,
pp. 295-316. Jonsered and Edinburgh.
Cummings, L.S
2002a Pollen, Starch, and Phytolith Analyses at Ghwair, 1999-2000 Field Season. Paleo
Research Institute Technical Report 00-42. Report on file, Department of
Anthropology and Ethnic Studies, University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas,
Nevada.
135
2002b Pollen, Phytolith, and Starch Analyses of Granding Stones from A Pre-Pottery
Neolithic B Site, Wadi Feinan, Jordan. Paleo Research Institute Technical Report
00-68. Report on file, Department of Anthropology and Ethnic Studies,
University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada.
2002c Pollen, Starch, and Phytolith Analyses at Ghwair I, Jordan. Paleo Research
Institute Technical Report 99-30. Report on file, Department of Anthropology and
Ethnic Studies, University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Driesch, A.
1976 A Guide to the Measurements of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites.
Harvard University, Peabody Museum Of Archaeological and Ethnology Bulletin
No. 1.
Danin, A.
1988 Flora and Vegetation of Israel and Adjacent Areas. In The Zoogeography of
Israel, edited by Y. Yom-Tov and E. Tchernov, pp. 129-157. Dr. W. Junk
Publishers, the Hague.
Davis, S.
1981 The Effect of Temperature Change and Domestication on the Body Size of Late
Pleistocene to Holocene Mammals. Paleobiology 7:101-114.
1983 The Age Profiles of Gazelles Predated by Ancient Man in Israel: Possible
Evidence for Shift from Seasonality to Sedentism in the Natufian. Paléorient
9:55-62.
1991 When and Why Did Prehistoric People Domesticate Animals. In The Natufian
Culture in the Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R. Valla, pp.381-390.
Archaeological Series 1. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
1996 Measurements of a Group of Adult Female Shetland Sheep Skeletons form a
Single Flock: A Baseline for Zooarchaeologists. Journal of Archaeological
Science 23:593-612.
DeGusta, D., and E. Vrba
2003 A Method for Inferring Paleohabitats from the Functional Morphology of Bovid
Astragali. Journal of Archaeological Science 30:1009-1022.
Deniz, E. and S. Payne
1982 Eruption and Wear in the Mandibular Dentition as a Guide to Ageing Turkish
Angora Goats. In Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological
Sites,edited by B. Wilson, C. Grigson and S. Payne, pp. 155-206. vol. 109.
B.A.R., Oxford.
Ducos, P. and L. R. Kolska Horwitz
1998 The Influence of Climate on Artiodactyl Size During the Late Pleistocene-Early
Holocene of the Southern Levant. Paléorient 32:229-247.
136
Echegaray, J. G.
1966 Excavations en la Terraza de El Khiam (Jordan). Madrid: Casa Espanola de
Santiago en Jerusalem.
Eder, James
1984 The Impact of Subsistence Change on Mobility and Settlement Pattern in a
Tropical Forest Foraging Economy: Some Implications for Archaeology.
American Anthropologist, 86(4):837-853.
Eshed, V., A. Gopher, T. Gage, and I. Hershkovitz
2004 Has the Transition to Agriculture Reshaped the Demographic Structure of
Prehistoric Populations? New Evidence from the Levant. American Journal of
Physical Anthropology 124:315-329.
Edwards, P.C.
1989 Problems of Recognizing Earliest Sedentism: the Natufian Example. Journal of
Mediterranean Archaeology 2/1:5-48.
Fagan, B.
2005 A Brief History of Archaeology: Classical Times to the Twenty-First Century.
Pearson Prentice Hall: New Jersey.
Field, J.
1994 Rainfall Patterns and Landscape Changes in Wadi Ziqlab, Jordan. Pp. 257-259 in
Archaeology and Environment: A Fragile Coexistence. Proceedings of the 24`
Annual Chacmool Conference, edited by R. Jamieson, S. Abonyi and N. Mirau.
Calgary: Archaeological Association of the University of Calgary.
Finlayson, B., and S. Mithen
1999 The Dana-Faynan-Ghuwayr Early Pre-History Project Second Interim Report
1998 Field Season. Manuscript on file, Center for Field Archaeology, University
of Edinburgh.
Finlayson, B. and S. Mithen (ed.)
2007 The Early Prehistory of Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan: Archaeological Survey
of Wadi Faynan, Ghwuwayr and al-Bustan an Evaluation of the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic Site of WF16. Wadi Faynan Series 1, Levant Supplementary Series 4.
Oxbow Books, Park End Place, Oxford.
Fish, S. And P. Fish
1994 Prehistoric Desert Farmers of the Southwest. Annual Review of Anthropology,
23:83-108.
137
Fish, P. And S. Fish
1996 Gender and Status in the Hohokam Pre-Classic to Classical Transition. American
Anthropologist, 98(4):803-817.
Gamble, C.
1979 Surplus and self-sufficiency in the Cycladic subsistence economy. In Papers in
Cycladic prehistory, edited by J. L. Davis and J. Cherry, pp. 122-134. Institute of
Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.
1981 Social control and the economy. In Economic Archaeology : Towards an
Integration of Ecological and Social Approaches, edited by A. Sheridan and G.
Bailey, pp. 215-229. vol. 96. B.A. R., Oxford.
1982a Animal husbandry, population and urbanisation. In An Island Polity: The
Archaeology of Exploitation in Melos, edited by C. Renfrew and M. Wagstaff, pp.
161-171. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
1982b Leadership and "surplus" production. In Ranking, Resource and Exchange:
Aspects of the Archaeology of Early European Society, edited by C. Renfrew and
S. Shennan, pp. 100-105. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Garrard, A.D.
1932 A New Mesolithic Industry: The Natufian of Palestine. Journal of Royal
Anthropological Institute 62:257-269.
Garrard, A., D. Baird, S. Colledge, L. Martin, and K. Wright
1994 Prehistoric Environment and Settlement in the Azraq Basin: An Interim Report on
the 1987 and 1988 Excavation Seasons. Levant 26:73-109.
Gebauer, A.B., and T.D. Price
1992 Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory. Monographs in World Prehistory 4.
Madison: Prehistory Press.
Gebel, H.G
2002 The Neolithic of the Near East: An essay on Apolycentric Process and Other
Research Problems. In: A.Hausleiter,S.Kerner, B.Müller-Neuhof (eds.), Material
Culture and Mental Spheres. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 293: 313-324.
Münster, Ugarit-Verlag.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: There Was No Center: The polycentric Evolution of
the Near Eastern Neolithic. Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 28-32.
Gebel, H.G., Hermansen, B.D., and Jensen C.H. (eds.)
2002 Magic Practices and Ritual in the Near Eastern Neolithic. Studies in Early Near
Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 8. Berlin: Ex Oriente.
138
Gebel, H.G., M. Mutheisen, H.J. Nissen
1988 Preliminary Report on the First Season of Excavations at Basta. In The
Prehistory of Jordan: The State of Research in 1986 Part I, edited by A.N.
Garrard and H.G. Gebel, pp. 101-134, Bar International Series 396(i), Oxford,
England.
Getty, R.
1975 Sisson and Grossman’s The Anatomy of the Domestic Animals. 5th Edition. 2
Volumes. Philadelphia, London and Toronto: WB Saunders Co.
Gervasoni, J.
2000 A Chipped Stone Characterization of Ghwair I: A Neolithic Village in Southern
Jordan. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology and Ethnic Studies,
University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Goldberg, P.
1986 Late Quaternary Environmental History of the Southern Levant. Geoarchaeology
1:225-244.
Gopher, A., and Gophna, R.
1993 Cultures of the Eighth and Seventh Millennia BP in the Southern Levant: A
Review for the 1990s. JWP 7:297-352.
Goring-Morris, N. and A.B. Belfer-Cohen
1998 The Articulation of Cultural Processes and Late Quaternary Environmental
Changes in Cisjordan. Paléorient 23(2):71-93.
Grant, A.
1982 The Use of Tooth Wear as a Guide to the Age of Domestic Ungulates. In Ageing
and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, edited by B. Wilson, C.
Grigson and S. Payne, pp. 91-108. vol. 109. B.A.R., Oxford
Grayson, D. K.
1984 Quantitative Zooarchaeology. Academic Press, Inc., New York.
Gregg, S.A.
1988 Foragers and Farmers: Population Interaction and Agriculture Expansion in
Prehistoric Europe. Pp. 21-35. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
Gremillion, K. J.
2002 Foraging Theory and Hypothesis Testing in Archaeology. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 21:142-164.
139
Grigson, C.
1969 The Uses and Limitations of Differences in Absolute Size in the Distinction
between the Bones of Aurochs (Bos primigenius) and Domestic Cattle (Bos
taurus). In The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals, edited by
P. J. Ucko and G. W. Dimbleby, pp. 277-294. Duckworth, London.
1974 The Craniology and Relationships of Four Species of Bos. 1. Basic Craniology:
Bos taurus L. and its Absolute Size. Journal of Archaeological Science 1:353379.
1975 The Craniology and Relationships of Four Species of Bos. 2. Basic Craniology:
Bos taurus L. Proportions and Angles. Journal of Archaeological Science 2:109128.
1976 The Craniology and Relationships of Four Species of Bos. 3. Basic Craniology:
Bos taurus L. Sagittal Profiles and Other Non-Measurable Characters. Journal of
Archaeological Science 3:115-136.
1978 The Craniology and Relationships of Four Species of Bos. 4: The Relationship
between Bos primigenius Boj. and B. taurus L. and its implications for the
Phylogeny of the Domestic Breeds. Journal of Archaeological Science 5:123-152.
1982a Sex and Age Determination of some Bones and Teeth of Domestic Cattle: A
Review of the Literature. In Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from
Archaeological Sites, edited by B. Wilson, C. Grigson and S. Payne, pp. 7-24.
vol. 109. B.A.R., Oxford.
1982b Sexing Neolithic Domestic Cattle Skulls and Horn Cores. In Ageing and Sexing
Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, edited by B. Wilson, C. Grigson and S.
Payne, pp. 25-36. vol. 109. B.A.R., Oxford.
Halstead, P., P. Collins, and V. Isaalidou
2002 Sorting the Sheep from the Goats: Morphological Distinctions between the
Mandibles and Mandibular Teeth of Adult Ovis and Capra. Journal of
Archaeological Science 29:545-553.
Harrison, D. L., and P. J. Bates
1991 The Mammals of Arabia. Harrison Zoological Museum Publication. England:
Harrison Zoological Museum.
Hayden, B.
1988 Nimrods, Piscators, Pluckers, and Planters: The Emergence of Food Production.
Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9:31-69.
1992 Models of Domestication. In Transitions to Agriculture in Prehistory, edited by
A.B. Gebauer and T.D. Price, pp. 11-19. Monographs in World Archaeology No.
4, Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin.
1995 A New Overview of Domesticaiton. In Last Hunters, First Farmers: New
Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture, edited by T. D. Price
and A. B. Gebauer, pp. 273-299. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.
140
Heath, A.
1976 Rational Choice and Social Exchange: A Critique of Exchange Theory.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Henry, D. O.
1975 Fauna in Near Eastern Archaeological Deposits. In Problems in Prehistory:
North Africa and Levant, edited by F. Wendorf, pp.379-385. Southern Methodist
University, Dallas.
1986 The Prehistory and Paleoenvironments of Jordan: An Overview. Paléorient
20/2:59-84.
1989 From Foraging to Agriculture: The Levant at the End of the Ice Age.
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
1991 Foraging, Sedentism, and Adaptive Vigor in the Natufian: Rethinking the
Linkages. In Perspectives on the Past. Theoretical Biases in Mediterranean
Hunter-Gatherers Research, edited by G.A. Clark, pp. 353-370. University of
Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: Assessing the Degree of Supra-Regional
Homogeneity in Cultural Elements within the Near Eastern. Neo-lithics, 2004(1):
32-33.
Henry, D.O., C. Cordova, J.J. White, R.M. Dean, J.E. Beaver, H. Ekstrom, S. Kadowaki,
J. McCorriston, A. Nowell and L. Scott-Cummings
2003 The Early Neolithic Site of Ayn Abū Nukhayla, Southern Jordan. Bulletin of the
American Schools of Oriental Research No. 330 (May, 2003), pp. 1-30. The
American Schools of Oriental Research.
Hermansen, Bo Dahl
2003 Supra-Regional Concepts I: Introductory Remarks. Neo-lithics. 2003(2):32-33.
Hillard, K. and K. Hill
1992 The Evolutionary Ecology of Food Acquisition. In Evolutionary Ecology and
Human Behavior, edited by E. A. Smith and B. Winterhalder, pp. 167-201.
Aldine De Gruyter, New York.
Hillman, G. C., Colledge, S., and D. Harris
1989 Plant Food Economy During the Epi-Paleolithic Period at Tell Abu Hureyra,
Syria: Dietary Diversity, Seasonality and Modes of Exploitation. In Foraging and
Farming: The Evolution of Plant Exploitation, edited by G. C. Hillman and D.R.
Harris, pp.240-66. Unwin Hyman, London.
Hillson, S. W.
1990 Teeth. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
141
Hole, F.
2000 Is Size Important: Function and Hierarchy in Neolithic Settlements. In Life in
Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and
Differentiation, edited by I. Kuijt. Pp.191-209. Kluwer/Plenum Press, New York.
Horwitz, L. K., C. Cope, and E. Tchernov
1991 Sexing Bones of Mountain Gazelle (Gazella gazella) Form Prehistoric Sites in the
Southern Levant. Paléorient 16:1-11.
Horwitz, L. K., E. Tchernov, P. Ducos, C. Becker, A. Von Den Driesch, L. Maritn, and A
Garrard
1999 Anima Domestication in the Southern Levant. Paléorient 25:63-80.
Ioannidou, E.
2003 Taphonomy of Animal Bones: Species, Sex, Age, and Breed Variability of Sheep,
Cattle, and Pig Bone Density. Journal of Archaeological Science 30:355-365.
Kafafi, Z.
1982 The Neolithic of Jordan (East Bank). Unpublished PhD dissertation, Freien
Universitat, Berlin.
Kahila Bar-Gal, G., P. Ducos, and L. Kolska
2003 The Application of Ancient DNA Analysis t Identify Neolithic Caprinae: A Case
Study from the Site of Hatoula, Israel. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology
13:120-131.
Keegan, W.
1986 The Optimal Foraging Analysis of Horticultural Production. American
Anthropologist, vol. 88, no.1:92-107.
Kenyon, K. M.
1956 Excavations at Jericho 1956. PEQ 88:67-82.
1957 Digging Up Jericho. New York: Frederick A. Praeger.
1970 Archaeology in the Holy Land. New York: Praeger Publishers.
Kirkbride, D.
1966 Five Seasons at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic Village of Beidha in Jordan. PEQ 98:561.
1968 Beidha: Early Neolithic Village Life South of the Dead Sea. Antiquity 42:263274.
Kislev, M. E. and O. Bar-Yosef
1988 The Legumes: The Earliest Domesticated Plants in the Near East? Current
Anthropology 29:175-179.
142
Klein, R. G. and K. Cruz-Uribe
1984 The Analysis of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.
Klevezal, G. A. and N. I. Shishlina
2001 Assessment of the Season of Death of Ancient Human from Cementum Annual
Layers. Journal of Archaeological Science 28:481-486.
Kohler-Rollefson, L
1989 Changes in Goat Exploitation at `Ain Ghazal Between the Early and Late
Neolithic: A Metric Analysis. Paléorient 15:141-146.
Kohler-Rollefson, L., W. Gillepsie, and M Metzger
1988 The Fauna from Neolithic `Ain Ghazal. In The Prehistory of Jordan. The State
of Research in 1986, volume 2, edited by D.A. Garrard and H. Gebel, pp. 423430. British Archaeological Reports, International Series 396 (ii). Oxford.
Kuijt, I.
1996 Negotiating Equality through Ritual: A Consideration of Late Natufian and PrePottery Neolithic A Period Mortuary Practices. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology 15(4):313-363.
1997 Interpretation, Data, and the Khiamian of the South-Central Levant. Neo-Lithics:
Southwest Asian Lithic Research 3:3-6.
2000 People and Space in Early Agriculture Villages: Exploring Daily Lives,
Community Size, and Architecture in the Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic. Journal of
Anthropological Archaeology 19:75-102.
2001 Meaningful Masks: Place, Death, and the Transmission of Social Memory in
Early Agricultural Communities of the Near Eastern Pre-Pottery Neolithic. In
Social Memory, Identity, and Death: Intradisciplinary Perspectives of Mortuary
Rituals, edited by M.S. Chesson. American Anthropological Association,
Archaeology Division, Vol.10. American Anthropological Association,
Washington, D.C.
Kuijt, I. (ed.)
2000 Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and
Differentiation. Kluwer Academic/Plunum Publishers.
Kuijt, I. And N. Goring-Moris
2002 Foraging, Farming, and Social Complexity in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic of the
Southern Levant: A Review and Synthesis. Journal of World Prehistory Vol. 16,
No. 4:361-440.
143
Ladah, R.
2006 The Social Implications of the Architecture at PPNB Ghwair I. Master’s thesis,
Department of Anthropology and Ethnic Studies, University of Nevada at Las
Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Landon, D.B.
1993 Testing a Seasonal Slaughter Model for Colonial New England Using Tooth
Cementum Increment Analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 20:439-455.
Layton, R., R. Foley, and E. Williams
1991 The Transition between Hunting and Gathering and the Specialized Husbandry of
Resources: A Sociological Approach. Current Anthropology 32:255-274.
Legge, T.
1972 Prehistoric Exploitation of the gazelle in Palestine. In Papers on Economic
Prehistory, edited by E. S. Higgs, pp.119-124. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
1996 The Beginning of Caprine Domestication in Southwest Asia. In The Origins and
Spread of Agriculture and Pastoralism in Eurasia, edited by D. R. Harris, pp.
238-262. London: Smithsonian Press.
Linares, O. F.
1976 Garden Hunting n the American Tropics. Human Ecology 4(4):331-49.
Lieberman, D.E.
1998 Natufian “Sedentism” and Importance of Biological Data fro Estimating Reduced
Mobility. In Seasonality and Sedentism: Archaeological perspectives from Old
and New World Sites, edited by T.R. Rocek and O. Bar-Yosef. Cambridge, MA:
Peabody Museum Bulletin, No 6, pp. 75-92.
Lieberman, D. E., T. W. Deacon, and R. H., Meadows
1990 Computer Image Enhanced and Analysis of Cementum Increments as Applied to
Teeth of Gazella gazella. Journal of Archaeological Science 17(5):519-33.
Loreille, O., J. Vigne, C. Hardy, C. Callou, F. Treinen-Claustre, N. Dennebouy, and M.
Monnerot
1997 First Distinction of Sheep and Goat Archaeological Bones by the Means of their
Fossil mtDNA. Journal of Archeological Science 24:33-37.
Lyman, R. L.
1987 On the Analysis of Vertebrate Mortality Profiles: Sample Size, Mortality Type
and Hunting Pressure. American Antiquity 52(1):125-142.
1994 Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
144
2003
2008
The Influence of Time Averaging and Space Averaging on the Application of
Foraging Theory in Zooarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science 30:595610.
Quantitative Paleozoology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Mainland, I. L.
1998 Dental Microwear and Diet in Domestic Sheep (Ovis aries) and Goats (Capra
Hircus): Distinguishing Grazing and Fodder-fed Ovicaprids using a Quantitative
Analytical Approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 25:1259-1271.
Marean, C.W. and L.M. Spencer
1991 Impact of Carnivore Ravaging on Zooarchaeological Measures of Element
Abundance. American Antiquity 56:645-658.
Martin, L.
1999 Mammal Remains from the Eastern Jordanian Neolithic, and the Nature of
Caprine Herding in the Steppe. Paléorient 25(2):87-104.
Miller, N.F.
1992 The Origins of Plant Cultivation in the Near East. In The Origins of Agriculture:
An International Perspective, edited by C. W. Cowan, and P. J. Watson, pp. 3958. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Mithen, S., B. Finlayson, A. Pirie, D. Carruthers, and A Kennedy
2000 New Evidence for Economic and Technological Diversity in the Pre-Pottery
Neolithic A: Wadi Faynan 16. Current Anthropology, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 655-663.
Moore, A.
1985 The Development of Neolithic Societies in the Near East. Advances in World
Archaeology, edited by F. Wendorf and A.E. Close, pp.1-69. Academic Press, New York.
Morlan, R.E.
1994 Bison Bone Fragmentation and Survivorship: A Comparative Method. Journal of
Archaeological Science 21:797-807.
Morrison, K. D.
1994 The Intensification of Production: Archaeological Approaches. Journal of
Archaeological Method and Theory 1(2):111-159.
Mortenson, P.
1970 A Preliminary Study of the Chipped Stone Industry from Beidha. Acta
Archaeologica 41:1-54.
145
Munro, N.
1999 Small Game as Indicators of Sedentization during the Natufian Period at
Hayonim Cave in Israel. In Zooarchaeology of the Pleistocene/Holocene
Boundary, edited by J.C Driver. British Archaeological Reports, International
Series 800. Oxford.
2004 Zooarchaeological Measures of Hunting Pressure and Occupation Intensity in the
Natufian: Implications for Agricultural Origins. Current Anthropology Volume
45, Supplement, pp. S5-S33.
Munro, N. and G. Bar-Oz
2005 Gazelle Bone Fat Processing in the Levantine Epipalaeolithic. Journal of
Archaeological Science 32 (2005) 223-239.
Munson, P. J.
2000 Age-correlated Differential Destruction of Bones and its Effect on Archaeological
Mortality Profiles of Domestic Sheep and Goats. Journal of Archaeological
Science 27:391-407.
Nadel, D.
1997 The Chipped Stone Industry of Netiv Hagdud. In An Early Neolithic Village in
the Jordan Valley, Part l: The Archaeology of Netiv Hagdud, edited by O. BarYosef and A. Gopher, pp. 71-144. Cambridge: American School of Prehistoric
Research Bulletin, Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology.
Najjar, M.
1994 Ghwair I, a Neolithic Site in Wadi Feinan. In The Near East in Antiquity:
Archaeological Work of National and International Institutions in Jordan, edited
by Susanne Kerner, pp. 75-85. Vol. IV. Amman: A1 Kutba.
Neef, R.
2003a Plant Remains from PPNB Ghwair. Report on file, Department of Anthropology
and Ethnic Studies, University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada.
2003b Overlooking the Steppe-Forrest: A Preliminary Report on the Botanical Remains
from Early Neolithic Göbekli Tepe (southern Turkey). Neo-lithics 2003(2):1315.
Neeley, M. P.
1997 Assigning Meaning to Lithic Variability in the Epipaleolithic of the Southern
Levant. Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe. University
Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
Nelson, M.
1991 The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and
Theory, Vol. 3, edited by M.B. Schiffer, pp. 57-100. University of Arizona Press,
Tucson.
146
Nesbitt, M.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: Can We Identify a Centre, A Region, or a SupraRegion for Near Eastern Plant Domestication. Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 38-40.
Olsen, S. J.
1960 Post-Cranial Skeletal Characters of Bison and Bos. Harvard University, Papers of
the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 35 (4).
1964 Mammal Remains from Archaeological Sites: 1. Southeastern and Southwestern
United States. Harvard University, Papers of the Peabody Museum of
Archaeology and Ethnology 56 (1).
1968 Fish, Amphibian, and Reptile Remains from Archaeological Sites. Harvard
University, Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 56 (2).
1972 Osteology for the Archaeologist: No. 3 The American Mastodon and the Wooly
Mammoth; No. 4 North America Birds: Skulls and Mandibles. Harvard
University, Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 56
(3,4).
Pichon, J.
1991 Les oiseaux au Natoufien, avifaune et sédentarité. In The Natufian Culture in the
Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R.Valla, pp.371-380. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: International Monographs in Prehistory.
Powell, D. F.
2001 Alternative Perspectives of Projectile Point Variability During the Levantine
Neolithic. Master’s Thesis, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Powell, D. F. and J. Gervasoni
2000 A Brief Note on the Projectile Points from Ghwair I, Jordan. Neo-Lithics:
Southwest Asian Lithic Research 3/99:1-3.
Powell, D.F., A. Simmons, P. Croft, and M. Nijjar
2003 Environmental Adaptations and Impacts at Wadi Ghwair I. Paper presented at the
68th Annual Meeting of the Society of American Archaeology, Milwaukee
Wisconsin.
Powell, D.F., A. Simmons, and M. Nijjar
2000 Alternative Perspective of Projectile Variability During the Levantine Neolithic.
Paper presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the Society of American
Archaeology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Payne, S.
1968 A Metrical Distinction Between Sheep and Goat. In The Domestication and
Exploitation of Plants and Animals, edited by P.J. Ucko and G.W. Dimbleby.
Duckworth, London. Pp 295-306.
147
1973
1985
1987
Kill-off Patterns in Sheep and Goats: The Mandibles from Asvan Kale. Anatolian
Studies 23:281-303.
Morphological Distinction Between the Mandibular Teeth of Young Sheep Ovis,
and Goats Capra. Journal of Archaeological Science 12:139-147.
Reference Codes for Wear States in the Mandibular Check Teeth of Sheep and
Goats. Journal of Archaeological Science 14:609-14.
Payne, S. and G. Bull
1988 Components of Variation in Measurements of Pig Bones and Teeth, and the Use
of Meausurements to Distinguish Wild from Domestic Pig Remains.
Archaeozoologia 2:27-66.
Price, T. D.
1995 Social Inequality at the Origins of Agriculture. In Foundations of Social
Inequality, edited by T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, pp. 129-151.
Plenum, Press, New York.
2000 Lessons in the Transition to Agriculture. In Europe’s First Farmers, edited by
T.D. Price, pp. 301-318. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge United
Kingdom.
2002 Beyond Foraging and Collecting: Retrospect and Prospect. In Beyond Foraging
and Collecting: Evolutionary Change in Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems,
edited by B. Fitzhugh and J. Habu. Kluwer/Plenum Press, New York.
Price, T.D. and A.B. Gebauer
1995 New Perspectives on the Transition to Agriculture. In Last Hunters, First
Farmers: New Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture, edited
by D. Price and A. B. Gebauer, pp. 3-20. School of American Research Press,
Santa Fe.
Prummel, W., and H. J. Frisch
1986 A Guide for the Distinction of Species, Sex and Body Side in Bones and Sheep
and Goat. Journal of Archaeological Science 12:139-147.
Pumpelly, R.
1908 Explorations in Turkestan: Expedition of 1904. Prehistoric Civilizations of Anau:
Origins, Growth, and Influence of Environment. Smithsonian Institute.
Washington, DC.
Rafferty, J.E.
1985 The Archaeological Record on Sedentariness: Recognition, Development, and
Implications. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8:113-156
Redding, R. W.
1981 Decision Making in Subsistence Herding of Sheep and Goats in the Middle East.
Dissertation, University of Michigan.
148
1992
Egyptian Old Kingdom patterns of animal use and the value of faunal data in
modeling socioeconomic systems. Paléorient 18(2):99-107.
Renfrew, Colin
1982 Socio-economic change in ranked societies. In Ranking, Resource and Exchange:
Aspects of the Archaeology of Early European Society, edited by C. Renfrew and
S. Shennan, pp. 1-8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
1986 Introduction: Peer Polity interaction and Socio-political Change. In Peer Polity
Interaction and Socio-Political Change, edited by C. Renfrew and J.C. Cherry,
pp. 1-19. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge United Kingdom.
Rosenberg, M.
1990 The Mother of Invention: Evolutionary Theory, Territoriality, and the Origins of
Agriculture. American Anthropologist 92:399-415.
Rowley-Conwy, P.
1995 Wild or Domestic? On the Evidence for the Earliest Domestic Cattle and Pigs in
South Scandinavia and Iberia. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 5:115126.
1998 Improved Separation of Neolithic Metapodials of Sheep (Ovis) and Goats (Capra)
from Arene Candide Cave, Liguria, Italy. Journal of Archaeological Science
25:251-258.
Redman, C.L.
1984 The Rise of Civilization. Pp. 89-139. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman
Reitz, E. J.
1982 Vertebrate Fauna From Four Coastal Mississippian Sites. Journal of
Ethnobiology. Vol. 2,No.1.
1985 A Comparison of Spanish and Aboriginal Subsistence on the Atlantic Coastal
Plain. Southeastern Archaeology 4(1): 41-50.
Reitz, E. J., and C. M. Scarry
1985 Reconstructing Historic Subsistence with an Example from Sixteenth-Century
Spanish Florida. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The Society for Historical Archaeology,
Special Publication Series, Number 3.
1990 Herbs, Fish, Scum, and Vermin: Subsistence Strategies in Sixteenth-Century
Spanish Florida. In Columbian Consequences, Archaeological and Historical
Perspectives on the Spanish Borderlands East, edited by D. Hurst Thomas,
pp.343-354. Smithsonian Press, Washington, D.C.
Reitz, E. J., and E. S. Wing
2008 Zooarchaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology. Second Edition.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
149
Renfrew, Colin
1986 Introduction: Peer Polity Interaction and socio-political Change. In Peer Polity
Interaction and Socio-Political Change, edited by C. Renfrew and J.C. Cherry, pp
1-19. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge United Kingdom.
Rindos, David
1984 The Origins of Agriculture: An Evolutionary Perspective. Academic Press, Inc,
New York.
Rollefson, G.O.
1983 The 1982 Excavations at 'Ain Ghazal: Preliminary Report. ADAJ 27:115.
1989 The Late Aceramic Neolithic of the Levant: A Synthesis. Paléorient 15/1:168173.
1998 The Aceramic Neolithic of Jordan. In The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan,
edited by Donald O. Henry, pp. 102-126. BAR International Series 705. Oxford:
B.A.R.
1999 The Aceramic Neolithic of Jordan. In The Prehistoric Archaeology of Jordan,
edited by Donald O. Henry, pp. 102-126. Oxford: BAR International Series 705.
2000 Ritual and Social Structure at Neolithic `An Ghazal. In Life in Neolithic Farming
Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation, edited by I.
Kuijt. Pp.165-190. Kluwer/Plenum Press, New York.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: A Reconsideration of the PPN koine: Cultural
Diversity and Centralities. Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 46-48.
Rollefson, G. O., E. B. Banning, B.F. Byrd, Z. Kafafi, I. Kohler, D. Petocz, S. Rolston,
and L. Villiers
1984 The Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Village of 'Ain Ghazal (Jordan) Preliminary Report
of the 1982 Excavation Season. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient Gesellschaft
116:139-83.
Rollefson, G., M. Forstadt, and R. Beck
1994 A Preliminary Typological Analysis of Scrapers, Knives, and Borers from 'Ain
Ghazal. In Neolithic Chipped Stone Industries of the Fertile Crescent: Studies in
Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment, edited by H.G. Gebel
and S. K. Kozlowski, pp. 445-466. Ex Orient, Berlin.
Rollefson, G. and H. G. Gebel
2004 Towards New Frameworks: Supra-Regional Concepts in the Near Eastern
Neolithization. Neo-Lithics 1/04. Pp. 21-22.
Rollefson, G., and I. Kohler-Rollefson
1989 The Collapse of the Early Neolithic Settlements in the Southern Levant. In People
and Culture in Change, edited by I. Hershkovitz. Pp. 73-89. British Archaeology
Review, International Series. 508. BAR: Oxford.
150
1993
PPNC Adaptations in the First Half of the 6th Millennium B.C. Paléorient 19:3342.
Rollefson, G., Z. Kafaf, and A. Simmons
1990 The Neolithic Village of 'Ain Ghazal, Jordan: Preliminary Report on the 1988
Season. BASOR Supplement 27:95-116.
1992 Early Neolithic Exploitation Patterns in the Levant: Cultural Impact on the
Environment. Population and Environment 13:243-254.
Rollefson, G. and A. Simmons
1984 The Neolithic Village of 'Ain Ghazal, Jordan: Preliminary Report on the 1984
Season. In Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research Supplement 24,
pp. 145-164.
Schmid, E.
1972 Atlas of Animal Bones. Elsevier, Amsterdam, London, New York.
Schmidt, Klaus
2003 The 2003 Campaign at Göbekli Tepe (southeastern Turkey) Neo-Lithics
2003(2):3-8.
Schneider, H. K.
1974 Economic Man: The Anthropology of Economics. Sheffield Publishing Company,
Salem, Wisconsin.
Shennan, S.
1993 Commodities, Transactions, and Growth in the Central-European Early Bronze
Age. Journal of European Archaeology 1:59-72.
Silver, I. A.
1971 The Aging of Domestic Animals. In Science in Archaeology: A Survey of
Progress and Research, edited by D.R. Brothwell and E.S. Higgs, 2nd ed. enlarged
and revised, pp. 283-302. Praeger Publishing, New York.
Simmons, A.
1980 Early Neolithic Settlement and Economic Behavior in the Western Negev Desert
of the Southern Levant. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Methodist
University, Dallas.
1997a Ecological Changes During the Late Neolithic in Jordan: A Case Study. In The
Prehistory of Jordan II. Perspectives from 1997, edited by H.G.K. Gebel, Z.
Kafafi, and G.O. Rollefson, pp. 309-318. Studies in Early Near Eastern
Production, Subsistence, and Environment 4. Berlin, ex oriente.
151
1997b Villages on the Periphery: Neolithic Adaptations at Ghwair I, Southern Jordan.
Proposal to the National Science Foundation.
2007
The Neolithic Revolution in the Near East: Transforming the Human Landscape.
University of Arizona Press.
Simmons, A., and M. Najjar
1996 Current investigations at Ghwair I, a Neolithic village in Wadi Faynan, southern
Jordan. Neo-Lithics: Southwest Asian Lithic Research 2/96:6-7.
1998a Al-Ghuwayr I, A Pre-Pottery Neolithic Village in Wadi Faynan, Southern Jordan:
A Preliminary Report of the 1996 and 1997/98 Seasons. Pp. 91-101 in the Annual
of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan XLII.
1998b Preliminary Report of the 1997-98 Ghwair excavation season, Wadi Feinan,
southern Jordan. Neo-Lithics: Southwest Asian Lithic Research 1/98:5-7.
1999 Preliminary Field Report of the 1998-1999 Excavations at Ghwair I, a PrePottery Neolithic B Community in the Wadi Feinan Region of Southern Jordan.
Neo-Lithics 1/99: 4-6.
2000a Preliminary Report of the 1999-2000 Season at the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
Settlement of Ghwair I, Southern Jordan. Neo-Lithics: Southwest Asian Lithic
Research 1/00:6-8.
2000b Villages on the Edge: Regional Settlement Change and the End of the Levantine
Pre-Pottery Neolithic. In Life in Neolithic Farming Communities, edited by I.
Kuijt, pp. 211-230. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
2001 Core and Periphery Models During the Neolithic-Is the Analogy Appropriate?
Appropriate?” In Studies in the History and Archaeology of Jordan VII, 143-147.
Amman: Department of Antiquities.
2003 Ghuwayr I, Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Settlement in Southern Jordan: Report of the
1996-2000 Campaigns. In Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, Vol.
47, 407-430. Amman: Department of Antiquities.
2006 Ghwair I: A Small, Complex Neolithic Community in Southern Jordan. Journal
of Field Archaeology, Vol. 31, Pp. 79-95.
Simmons, A., G. Rollefson, Z. Kafafi, and K. Moyer
1989 Test Excavations at Wadi Shu'eib, a Major Neolithic Settlement in Central
Jordan. Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 33:27- 42.
Simmons, A., G. Rollefson, I. Kohler-Rollefson, R. Mandel, and Z. Kafafi
1988 'Ain Ghazal: A Major Neolithic Settlement in Central Jordan. Science
240(4848):35-39.
Skerritt, G. C. and J. McLelland
1984 An Introduction to the Functional Anatomy of the Limbs of the Domestic Animals.
John Wright and Sons Ltd., Bristol.
152
Smith, B.
1995 The Emergency of Agriculture. New York: Scientific American Library.
2001 Low-Level Food Production. Journal of Archaeological Research 9:1-43.
Stekelis, M.
1973 The Yarmukian Culture of the Neolithic Period. The Magnes Press, Hebrew
University, Jerusalem.
Stiner, M. C.
1991 Human Predators and Prey Mortality. Boulder and Oxford: Westview Press, Inc.
1994 Honor Among Thieves: A Zooarchaeological Study of Neanderthal Ecology.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
2002 On in-situ Attrition and Vertebrate Body Part Profiles. Journal of Archaeological
Science 29:979-991.
Stiner, M.C., N.D. Munro, T.A. Surovell, E. Tchernov, and O. Bar-Yosef
1999 Paleolithic Growth Pulses evidence by Small Animal Exploitation. Science
283:190-194.
Stutz, A. J.
2002 Polarizing Microscopy Identification of Chemical Diagenesis in Archaeological
Cementum. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:13271347.
Tchernov, E.
1991 Biological Evidence for Human Sedentism in Southwest Asia During the
Natufian. In The Natufian Culture in the Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R.
Valla, pp.315-340. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
1994 An Early Neolithic Village in the Jordan Valley, Part l: The Fauna of Netiv
Hagdud. American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 44, Peabody Museum
of Archaeology and Ethnology. Cambridge, MA.
1998 Are Late Pleistocene Environmental Factors, Faunal Changes and Cultural
Transformations Causally Connected? The Case of the Southern Levant.
Paléorient 23,2:209-228.
Thomas, R. N. W.
1988 A Statistical Evaluation of Criteria Used in Sexing Cattle Metapodials.
Archaeozoologia 2:83-92.
Thompson, J.R.
2001 Faunal Analysis of the Upper Paleolithic Sites of Thalab al_Buhayra and `Ain alBuhayra in the Wadi al-Hassa, South-Central Jordan. Master’s Thesis, Iowa
State University.
153
Twiss, Katheryn
2002 Goats Galore: Faunal Remains from a Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Site in the
Southern Levant. Paper presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the Society of
American Archaeology, Denver.
2003 They Were What They Ate: Food and the Construction of Social Identity in the
Neolithic of Southern Jordan. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
2007a The Zooarchaeology of Tel Tif’dan (Wadi Fidan 001), Southern Jordan.
Paléorient 33(2):127-145.
2007b The Neolithic of the Southern Levant. Evolutionary Anthropology 16(1): 24-35.
2008 Transformations in an Early Agricultural Society: Feasting in the Southern
Levantine Pre-Pottery Neolithic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology,
27:418-442.
Uerpman, H. P.
1987 The Ancient Distribution of Ungulate Mammals in the Middle East: Fauna and
Archaeological Sites in Southwest Asia and Northeast Africa. Wiesbaden,
Reichert.
1996 Animal Domestication- Accident or Intention? In The Origins and Spread of
Agriculture and Pastoralism in Eurasia, edited by D. R. Harris, pp. 227-238.
London: Smithsonian Press.
Unger-Hamilton, R.
1991 Natufian Plant Husbandry in the Southern Levant and Comparison with That of
the Neolithic Periods: The Lithic Perspective. In The Natufian Culture I the
Levant, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and F.R. Valla, pp.483-520.
Valla, F.R.
1995 The First Settled Societies-Natufian (12,500~10,200 B.P.). In The Archaeology
of Society in the Holy Land, edited by T. Levy, pp. 169-189. Leicester University
Press, London.
van Loon, D.
1978 Small-Scale Pig Raising. Garden Way Publishing, Vermont.
Vierra, B. J.
1995 Subsistence and Stone Tool Technology: An Old World Perspective. Arizona
State University Anthropological Research Papers No. 47, Tempe, Arizona.
Voight, M.
2000 Catal Höyük in Context: Ritual at Early Neolithic Sites in Central and Eastern
Turkey. In Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity,
and Differentiation, edited by I. Kuijt. Pp.253-293. Kluwer/Plenum Press, New
York.
154
von den Driesch, A.
1976 A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites.
Peabody Museum Publications, Cambridge, MA.
Wallerstein, I.
1974 The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the
European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Academic Press, New York.
Wasse, A.
2001 The Wild Goats of Lebanon: Evidence for Early Domestication? Levant 33:2133.
2002 Final Results of an Analysis of the Sheep and Goat Bones from `Ain Ghazal,
Jordan. Levant 34:59-82.
Watkins, Trevor
2003 Supra-Regional Concepts I: Developing Socio-Cultural Networks. Neo-lithics.
2003(2):36-37.
Watson, P.J.
1995 Explaining the Transition to Agriculture. In Last Hunters, First Farmers: New
Perspectives on the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture, edited by T. D. Price
and A. B. Gebauer, pp. 21-37. School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.
White, L.
1949 The Evolution of Culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wilcox, G.
2004 Supra-Regional Concepts II: Last Gathers/First Cultivators in the Near East:
Regional and Supra-Regional Developments. Neo-lithics, 2004(1): 51-52.
Winterhalder, B. and E.A. Smith
2000 Analyzing Adaptive Strategies: Human Behavioral Ecology at Twenty-five
Years. Evolutionary Anthropology 9:51-72.
Woodman, C.
2005 An Analysis of Ground Stone Artifacts from Ghwair I, A Pre-Pottery Neolithic B
Site in Southern Jordan. Master’s thesis, Department of Anthropology and Ethnic
Studies, University of Nevada at Las Vegas, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Wright, K. I.
2000 The Social Origins of Cooking and Dining in Early Villages of Western Asia.
Proceeding of the Prehistoric Society 66:89-121.
Zeder, M. A.
1991 Feeding Cities: Specialized Animal Economy in the Ancient Near East.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.
155
1999
Animal Domestication in the Zargos: A Review of Past and Current Research.
Paléorient, 25:11-25.
2001 A Metrical Analysis of a Collection of Modern Goats (Capra hircus aegargus and
C. h. hircus) from Iran and Iraq: Implications for the Study of Caprine
Domestication. Journal of Archaeological Science 28:61-79.
2006a Archaeological Approaches to Domestication Animal Domestication. In Zeder,
M.A., Bradley D. Emshwiller, E., and Smith, B.D. (eds.). Documenting
Domestication: New Genetic and Archaeological Paradigms. Pp. 171-189,
Berkeley: University of California Press.
2006b Reconciling Rates of Long Bone Fusion and Tooth Eruption and Wear in Sheep
(Ovis) and Goat (Capra). In D. Ruscillo (ed.) Ageing and Sexing Animals from
Archaeological Sites. Pp. 87-118, Oxford: Oxbow Press.
Zeuner, F.
1957 Stone Age Exploration in Jordan, I. Palestine Exploration Quarterly: 1754.
Zohary, D., and M. Hopf
1988 Domestication of Plants in the Old World: The Origin and Spread of Cultivated
Plants in West Asia, Europe and the Nile Valley. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
156
VITA
Graduate College
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Doss F. Powell, Jr.
Degrees:
Bachelor of Arts, Anthropology, 1998
The University of Georgia, Athens Georgia
Master of Arts, Anthropology, 2001
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Special Honors and Awards:
UNLV Graduate Research Competition, First Place, April 2000
Phi Theta Kappa, International Honors Society
Who’s Who Among American Junior Colleges
Publications:
“Fort Irwin’s Cultural Resources Program: Priorities, Protocol, and Praxis- Issues
in Seamless Management of the California Desert. Co-authored with Darrell
Gundrum, Margarita Grable, and Jennifer Mitchell.
“Wonders of a Neolithic Village: Ghwair I, Jordan”. Graduate Research
Competition Forum, UNLV, Las Vegas, Nevada, April 22, 2000.
“Alternative Perspective of Projectile Variability During the Levantine Neolithic”.
Co-authored with Dr. Alan Simmons. Society of American Archaeology
Conference, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 7, 2000.
A Brief Note on the Projectile Points from Jordan. Co-authored with John
Gervasoni. Pp. 1-3 in Neo-Lithics 3/99.
Dissertation Title:
Environmental Adaptations at Neolithic Ghwair I: As Seen From a
Zooarchaeological Perspective.
Dissertation Examination Committee:
Chairperson, Alan Simmons, Ph.D.
Committee Member, Barbara Roth, Ph.D.
Committee Member, Ahmet Levent Atici, Ph.D.
Graduate Faculty Representative, Andrew Bell, Ph.D.
157